If my dad was still alive, I'd get both the C3 and the Curtiss Pusher. He had both. He'd have them ready for me to fly in short order. Joe? Craig? Rafael? roger

I'll be darn! Here's my Dad's registration from about 9 years earlier. He was 20 years old at the time. The Zekley was a 3 cylinder. My Dad said it blew cylinder off frequently. So you always had bailing wire wrapped around all three heads to secure them. roger
Roger-I'm getting corrected everytime I discover another link.The actual spelling is Szekely and I found an article on the Ole Rhinebeck site of a woman setting an altitude record of 16,800 feet in a Taylor H-2 Cub with the 30hp version in 1937.Richard in OH trying to wrap my head around how long it would take to get to 16,800 feet with a 30hp engine and the Poobah and Tacky thermaling to get over the next ridgeline with a 65hp Continental
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 3:34 PM Richard Murray <murra...@gmail.com> wrote:
Roger-Thanks!!!Spelling Zekely correct and adding SR3 produced results from WikipediaRichard in OH who thinks he might have seen one of these sell at auction several years ago in New York state.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 3:29 PM Roger Anderson <11...@comcast.net> wrote:
I'll be darn! Here's my Dad's registration from about 9 years earlier. He was 20 years old at the time. The Zekley was a 3 cylinder. My Dad said it blew cylinder off frequently. So you always had bailing wire wrapped around all three heads to secure them. roger
On January 15, 2019 at 2:22 PM Richard Murray <murra...@gmail.com> wrote:
Roger-You sparked a question. Was the Zekley a 3 or 4 cylinder engine? I could find nothing except a mention of the name with Lanape in an RC forum post.Richard in OH looking for Zekley information to satisfy his curiosity.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 3:12 PM Richard Murray < murra...@gmail.com> wrote:
Roger-NC623V was deregistered in 1948
NC13089 set the following records:
You think they were sucking on any oxygen up there...or just toughing it out. The C2 I see made it to 70.5 mph. I remember our C3s were right at 64 mph TAS max. roger
I've seen these posted and actually talked to some of the antique guys down here about the Curtiss. I know it makes me a bit of a traitor, but I want one of those! Hey, ABCs. Aeronca, Bellanca...Curtiss! :D As a note, don't tell antique guys there is a Curtiss Pusher for sale. They get super excited. Apparently the "Curtiss Pusher" is a 1911 airplane. This is a "Junior". They were very particular about that.This one has been up for sale for a while. I saw it kicking around for sale on Facebook. Apparently this guy is a dealer and is selling off planes from an estate. The antiquer near me advised me against buying this one because he just wants too much for it for the shape it's in. He said at that price it should be flying. Also, it is registered as experimental exhibition, but there are ones out there with the 65 that are standard category, so I'm not sure why this one isn't. That being said, if I was local to the plane I may feel differently.LucyN4009B"Rudolph"
side note --- for tax purposes, some aircraft are registered as "exhibition" since in some areas (county, state, whatever) -- they are taxed or registered at a much lower rate than standard categoryback when I was underwriting aviation, I found that California was one of these, then later on, when acting as an aircraft judge at Arlington fly-in, I wondered why some craft were requested to be judged when they were clearly not in competition for Grand Champion (or even a Workmanship award) -- one owner politely mentioned that showing the tax guy the "Judge Me" prop card with the judges' initials on it, proved that the aircraft WAS being exhibited ....if I remember correctly, it was at about 10% of the "usual" tax/registration rate .. don't know if that is still in effectCandy, who still misses the Champ