| Windward | 06 May 2008 8:42 a.m. PST |
Does anyone know, if the military C-47s carried armor, self-sealing fuel tanks or any harding over say a standard DC-3? I'm doing some research on the Football War, and wondered if the late war production C-47s where tougher than say an early war DC-3. |
Saber6  | 06 May 2008 9:15 a.m. PST |
|
| jpattern2 | 06 May 2008 10:06 a.m. PST |
Tougher, no, not really. The DC-3/C-47 was (is) an inherently rugged airframe, though. IIRC, fewer than 500 DC-3s were built prior to WWII, while more than 10,000 C-47s of various types were built during and after the war. Most post-war DC-3s were actually de-militarized C-47s. The C-47 differed from the DC-3 primarily in having a large cargo door and a reinforced floor. They did have self-sealing fuel tanks, but I've never heard of armor being fitted to any C-47. Wiki links: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DC-3 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-47 |
Wyatt the Odd  | 06 May 2008 10:08 a.m. PST |
According to Osprey's Combat Aircraft "C-47/R4D Units of the ETO & MTO" most C-47's did not have self-sealing fuel tanks. Some later C-47's & C-53's came with self-sealing tanks. Individual crews added armor to the cockpit area but it wasn't standard by any means. Wyatt |
| jpattern2 | 06 May 2008 10:15 a.m. PST |
Forgot to add, I've read many references to DC-3s being used in the Football War, but in every case they were actually de-militarized C-47s of one type or another. One Salvadoran C-47A ex-USAF Skytrain was converted into a "bomber" of sorts, with 100-pound bombs rolled through a hole cut in the lower fuselage: link |
Wyatt the Odd  | 06 May 2008 10:27 a.m. PST |
I found the reference. On page 49 in the above-mentioned book, it says:
A proposal to fit IX TCC (Troop Carrier Command) aircraft with self-sealing tanks and armor was turned down by 'Hap' Arnold. Only 75 C-47's had been delivered with them in 1942-43 before the weight penalty was considered excessive. Crews were instead authorized body armor and seat pads."
Wyatt |
| jpattern2 | 06 May 2008 11:17 a.m. PST |
I thought more than that had self-sealing tanks, but there you go. |
DontFearDareaper  | 06 May 2008 11:32 a.m. PST |
I guess ol Hap figured that self-sealing tanks weren't going to help the poor C-47 crew if they wound up in the sights of an enemy fighter.  Dave |
| Windward | 06 May 2008 11:38 a.m. PST |
Sadly, looks like Check Your 6! robustness of 2 is correct. If they where not armored Making a C-47 roughly as tough as a standard fighter. While something like a B-25 would have a robustness of 3. |
| Jay Arnold | 06 May 2008 11:41 a.m. PST |
Of course, the passengers don't like putting down their gin and tonics to man the guns, either: picture |
| Windward | 06 May 2008 11:44 a.m. PST |
The C-47s of the Football War where all former US Navy and USAF planes. So I was hoping the military versions where somehow tougher. |
| Windward | 06 May 2008 11:46 a.m. PST |
Historically a FAS C-47 shook off a number of gun runs by a FAH F4U-4 (armed with 6 .50 cals). It was badly shot up but limped across the border and made it back to base. Never to fly again. |
| Sir James | 06 May 2008 4:24 p.m. PST |
D-44? Sorry, couldn't resist. Now you're talking about the C-47 "bomber" from Football Wars, right? If you see him, ask the author about the "wimpy" AA fire from his play-test. :) |
| Corsair | 07 May 2008 3:33 a.m. PST |
The big difference between a DC-3 and a C-47 was the doors. The DC-3 (and a few military variants like the C-53 Skytooper) had passenger doors in the aft starboard fuselage, while the C-47 had the large double doors in the port aft fuselage. Also a lot of the C-47s had plugs in the passenger windows so that embarked troops could poke a rifle barrel out and take potshots at enemy aircraft. The C-47 in WWII also had a glider tow cleat at the end of the tail. The tricky part is for those C-47s snapped up as surplus after the war. Many of them had rebuilds for civilian use ( we have one here locally that was such an airframe). They would receive the airliner type doors in place of the military ones. Corsair |
| Windward | 07 May 2008 1:46 p.m. PST |
Now don't be mean Jim. I was running for my life
|
| OGUKman | 08 May 2008 6:16 a.m. PST |
Having just released a C47 in 15mm AND having a passing interest in the Football War this unusual post caught my eye. Way out of my usual Balliwick. Now all I need is to remember the url of the website I found detailing the Football Air war Colur schemes the lot and I lost it !!! |
| jpattern2 | 08 May 2008 7:59 a.m. PST |
The Air Combat Information Group has a nice page with many of the aircraft schemes: link Good shot of the C-47A here: link |
| Windward | 08 May 2008 8:33 a.m. PST |
The actual colors of the Salvadorian C-47s during the Football War (or as locally referred to as "The Hundred Hours War") where a civilian white over blue over bare metal. link Has some nice photos of the historic colors. You will note the C-47s still have their cargo doors (all the better for pushing bombs out of!) :P FWIW, the LAAHS is an excellent source of info on the Football War, and details about the FAS and FAH forces. |
| OGUKman | 09 May 2008 1:48 a.m. PST |
Thats the one- thanks Windward. |