Skip to content

The RC-26

17 May 2017
RC-26B Primary function: Counterdrug. Speed: 288 mph. Dimensions: Wingspan 57 ft.; length 59 ft. 4 in.; width 16 ft. 8 in. Range: 1,380 miles. Crew: Two. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Lance Cheung)

Fairchild RC-26B “Metroliner” with the USAF and the ANG, note the belly pod housing a phased array radar—U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Lance Cheung

6 Comments leave one →
  1. 17 May 2017 01:19

    Our blogger friend, randyjet, has been flying an SA-226 Metroliner out of Houston. His version is freaking labor intensive. Last time he was here, he flew from Houston to TRI in hardball IFR all the way. Landed in a rainstorm, greasing it on like powdering a baby’s behind. Wish I had that skill set, but I don’t have a logbook way up in the five digits either. All steam gauges and no autopilot.

    I am sure the USAF version has a glass cockpit with all the bells and whistles, so it can practically fly itself.

    I am fairly tech savvy, but I am also reasonably certain that if anyone tried to explain all the spyware in that plane to me, my eyes would glaze over, and they might as well be speaking Sanskrit.

    • travelforaircraft permalink*
      17 May 2017 18:05

      Well said…I’d feel like a moron 😉

      • 22 May 2017 01:13

        FWIW, my avatar is a pic of me standing beside Randy’s SA-226.

      • travelforaircraft permalink*
        22 May 2017 18:19

        Unusual aircraft…fitting 🙂

  2. shortfinals permalink
    17 May 2017 14:38

    We had the only flying example of the Nimrod AEW3 at RAF Finningley. When I say it was complex, I mean it was mind-bendingly complex (see below). When the whole program went belly-up, like a dead catfish, we received a request from the Imperial War Museum for the airframe, so it could become a museum exhibit. (Duxford is 107 nautical miles from Finningley). A clearance for a one-off, gear down, ferry flight was requested. It was flatly refused, and the airframe scrapped.

    I guess someone didn’t like the idea of a failure being put on public display?

    • travelforaircraft permalink*
      17 May 2017 14:58

      It’s a shame to have lost that history and an interesting look of an aircraft.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: