> 1 <

Author Message

tempest1944


Members


  Online status  

 
Posts: 11
Location: Comox, British Columbia
Occupation: Aviation Systems Technician
Age: 39

#6158 2012-09-27 GMT-5 hours    
Something I've noticed here....why is it that a lot of Dakota photos are labelled as CC-129s? They were built as C-47s. The RCAF ones were known as such for about two decades, until the "unification" of the Canadian Forces in 1968-1970. Soo my question is...why have the designation "CC-129" available, unless the plane is painted in post-unification markings? Not a whole lot of people would recognize the designation, as DC-3/R4D/C-47/C-53 are much more well known.

I just see C-47 is being more accurate, since CC-129 was a post-1970 designation.

Josh

Author Message

Grimmi


Photographers
See my 3,104 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 81
Location: LSMP
Occupation: IT
Age: 44

#6159 2012-09-28 GMT-5 hours    
Just for info - he meant this one:

View large    View medium
Click here for medium size photo!

Photo © Sven Zimmermann


After his comment to the picture I was searching the net but had not found yet an correct answer - but on airliners it's stated as Douglas C-47A Dakota 3 (DC-3). When I was uploading the picture, the Registration was already on database and I just taken that as it.

also on airliners you can read about the history:
Quote
ZA947 (cn 10200) This Dakota belongs to the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight and was originally manufactured in 1942 for USAAF, but in September that year was transfered to Royal Canadian Air Force, there served until 1971. Until winter 2010-11 worn livery of Dakota from No. 267 "Pegasus" Squadron from years 1943-44. Presently wears marking of Dakota Mk.III serial FZ692, nicknamed "Kwicherbichen" operated during Normandy Invasion by No. 233 Squadron from RAF Blakehill Farm, Wiltshire.


http://www.airliners.net/photo/UK---Air/Douglas-C-47A-Dakota/2001274/&sid=2d6c7d65dd7056d7ec66d91be6a5e22d

Maybe the type occured from his service in canada ?

Muuuuhhh - welcome in the land of milk and chocolate

Author Message

tempest1944


Members


  Online status  

 
Posts: 11
Location: Comox, British Columbia
Occupation: Aviation Systems Technician
Age: 39

#6160 2012-09-30 GMT-5 hours    
The designation CC-129 was therefore used only for a max of 3 years of the plane's service life. In my books, unless it was a Canadian licence-built version (a la Canadair CF-104, CF-86, etc.), it should go by the designation all other countries know it as.

The Canadian Forces Air Command (used to be RCAF, now is RCAF) has had a....slightly amusing habit of re-designating types, ever since 1968. CF-116 (F-5 Freedom Fighter), CF-188 (F-18 Hornet), CC-177 (C-17 Globemaster), CC-129 (C-47), CP-140 (P-3 Orion), etc. Mind you, the CP-140 Aurora is the only canadian designated aircraft to be re-named, too.

my air force is silly sometimes...

Author Message

DDGboy


Members


  Online status  

 
Posts: 1
Location: Tweed Heads South NSW
Occupation:
Age:

#7533 2020-06-02 GMT-5 hours    
Here's something on this subject I made last year, triggered by yet again having to Google a Canadian designation to confirm what it actually was from memory!

https://www.airfighters.com/datas/users/8495-1.jpg

Author Message

admin


Administrators
See my 79 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 2185
Location: S.F. Bay Area, CA
Occupation: Webmaster
Age:

#7534 2020-06-06 GMT-5 hours    
Looking through the database we have 74 photos of that one particular CC-129 belonging to one registration. What's the exact designation it should be for this exact aircraft: ZA947?

-Ray

This is the oldest I've ever been.

Author Message

mark_munzel


Photographers
See my 952 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 53
Location: Vancouver
Occupation: Dad (plus some engineering to pay the bills)
Age: 50

#7540 2020-07-03 GMT-5 hours    
As a fellow Canadian, I'm in agreement with tempest1944. I would have ZA947 in the database as a Dakota Mk.III.

Tempest1944, a couple of bits of trivia:

- The Aurora isn't the only aircraft to receive a new name in Canadian service. Officially, "CF-5" is the name for the CF-116 and "CF-18" is the name for the CF-188. However, absolutely nobody outside of Ottawa cares what the official designations are, so even in DND paperwork "Freedom Fighter" and "Hornet" have become accepted. And does anyone else call an AW.101 a "Cormorant?"

- In addition to a wonky designation system, we have wonky serials. The first three digits are the designation and the last two are sequential numbers. But some serials have five digits and some have six, and in six-digit serials the fourth digit seems almost random: 1 for CP-140s, 6 for CC-144s, 9 for CH-149s, 7 or 9 for CF-188s... Why? So the last four digits of each serial will be unique to each airframe. There's only one 2944 (a CC-129), only one 2803 (a CT-142), only one 8782 (a CF-188), etc.

If you want to set your head spinning, look online for a copy of "The Aircraft of the Canadian Armed Forces" by Jeff Rankin-Lowe and Andrew Cline, published in the mid-1990s. In addition to listing every aircraft that had a CAF designation to that time, it explains the methods behind the apparent madness in designation and serial assignments.

> 1 <