Hey; it is a cat

Fancy seeing you here

Now I understand why they had 5 guys with really big fire extinguishers standing around those planes when they started them. Throw in a over size shotgun shell and we have a party.

Truely a point about machines. You are worried when they did not pee/bleed/leak if you knew their seals did so., as you knew (if you were any good) that they had run out of such fluid if they stopped leaking. Otherwise you were a sham artist that just didn't care or was to stupid to know. Nothing like seeing a vehicle smile at you, saying it was ready, before you got on and fired it up.(except one other thing, the same thing)LOL

@@chrisperrien7055 Most the machines back in those days had rope seals on the shafts instead of rubber seals, I'm not sure when the last year was that Chevy small blocks had rope seals for the rear main bearing seal but I distinctly remember in the 80's when I worked in a garage and we had an original owner '72 Impala that we worked on that had the original engine in it and I had to roll a new rope seal in the rear main bearing once because the one in it was beyond just marking it's spot. Also at the same time I had a girlfriend who had an early/mid 80's Cutlass with a 3.8 ltr engine in it that had a rope seal in the timing cover I had to replace. Even then today's modern rubber that's used in seals is light years better than the rubber used in them just 30 to 35 years ago, that's why you hardly see newer cars that have a big oval shaped stain underneath them on the road where they get parked every day, look in a family photo album that has pictures of kids playing out in front of houses from the 70's and you'll see those big oval shaped oil stains on the road where dad parked his car after he got home from work.

f22 too

Haven’t you ever seen the movie...Flight of the Phoenix?

@@JRbaldy yes

@@JRbaldy where the German guy rebuilds the plane? I dont recall them starting it with shotgun shells

@@bubble_bass9716 That is exactly what they did, part of the tension in the film was due to them running short of starting cartridges :)

I grew up with that sound. My grandfather was an ag pilot for 70 years and both of his Grumman Ag cats were radials. Matter of fact the same company made his planes that made this wildcat.

@@ADITADDICTS Grummann designed the Wildcat, but the FM-2 version was manufactured by the Eastern Aircraft Division of General Motors.

@@jayshaw63I was trying not to get too much into details here but yes the FM-2 was a direct copy of the XF4F-8. More power and had to adjust the tail and I think elevators as well. Lots of torque in the PW. Even though these were outdated and outpaced by the Corsairs, Hellcats and soon to arrive P-51s and P-47s the navy still flew these for anti-ship/submarine patrols off their smaller "jeep" carriers until the end of the war.

@@ADITADDICTS Look up the FM-2's kill ratio. You might be surprised at how it compares to those other fighters. It could out climb a Hellcat below 10,000 feet.

@@jayshaw63 Will do.

Of course you would be here Tao. it has to do with shotguns, so you are there. keep up the good work!

lol

***** does this give you any ideas on what do do with a shotgun

No, I just like old airplanes. haha

***** The Wildcat is a cool one.

Is that a cartridge storage box inside the engine compartment?

I assume that was a flywheel starter whining away before the Big Bang. I'm not sure I fully understand how this system worked despite your well informed explanation. Was the shell used to engage the flywheel and give the whole thing a boost in the process?

falconeaterf15 I would think that the whining sound is a oil pump pressurising the engines lubrication system, or alternately a fuel pump raising pressure, both needed for pre start. The bang is effectively a air start system in this case a "shotgun" cartridge for a Coffman starter.

Thank you for the information I had always wondered how these worked!

falconeaterf15 fuel pump

i've had several air force guys say you start worrying when they stop leaking....that means they are empty.

Do you remember the movie Flight of the Phoenix? They used the same starting system in that. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/d92JraR3nsi-fH0.html

That's what it was designed for

Invented by Chuck Norris

Many old generators and tractors used the same starter

Yeah. Most likely to shoot a friendly :P

Very loose tolerances inside engine and having cylinders at the 6 oclock position for all that fuel and oil to collect in. If a radial engine has sat for any length of time you need to remove the spark plugs from the lower cyl and hand rotate engine to force all the collected liquids out of the cylinders or you will hydraulic lock the engine (bad).

The original movie, Flight of the Phoenix, with Jimmy Stewart has a scene using this method to start the engine on the Phoenix.

That was a great movie. I watched it as a kid on a TV during a Saturday matinee. Then, of course, Hollywood had to "redo" what was already a perfect movie using bozos from today's Hollywood (de)generation. They were on a trend there for awhile, remaking movies like True Grit, etc.@@shauny2285

Curien247 a cat that you need a shotgun to wake up

ask the Japanese pilots that fell to it...if you could.

A wild cat you might say.

One might even say, a hellcat?... I'll just leave then, shall I.?

REALLY !

Yes, that was beautiful!

+Tom Pauls Not too early. The huge J-75 on the F-105 was started with powder cartridges driving a turbine geared to the accessory section. The same starter could also be driven by an external start cart (Gas Turbine Compressor), and for a time the high cost of the cartridges led to use of GTC's previously used to start the J-57s on F-100 aircraft. The start carts proved unable to provide sufficient flow to start the larger engine consistently without risk of a stagnated start and possible engine damage, so the use of start cartridges resumed. This was in the period 1961-1963, and I don't know what practices developed subsequently for the J-75. I do know that the later development of large turbofan engines led to the requirement for two or even three large start carts, usually diesel engine driven, operating in parallel to start an engine when the on-board APU was not available to supply sufficient air flow.

B 57's were cartridge started .. quicker and less electronics to go wrong

SR-71 employed something similar too

@@ZaHandle Actually, those were initially started with support carts having twin Buick (later Chevy) V8's. These were coupled directly to the turbine until it spooled to about 4500 RPM, then they pulled the interface off. Later, the turbines were converted to air start.

How cool is this fucking video and the comments …amazing.

Funny you say that because the first time I ever saw anything like this was in the remake of that movie.

It was also my first time seeing it!. Richard Attenbouroh laughing hystericly when he found out about the Model Plane Builder

There's still farm tractors in use to-day that use this style of starting.

Mark Lee Yep, same here. Flight of the Phoenix. I always wondered what was up with that. I didn't know if it was just Hollywood bullshit, but I guess it is a real thing.

Yes. I remember.

That’s where both versions of Flight of the Phoenix (Dennis Quaid in the 2nd) got it wrong. The shell gasses never enter any of the engine cylinders.

@@jimm3093 yes but turning a piston engine over, igntion off, while holding full throttle and wide open choke will clear them if its flooded

@@Isnt-it-Lovely is that what happened when Jimmy Stewart and Dennis Quaid sacrificed a shell? Both the P&W R2800 (Stewart version) and the R4360 (Quaid version) exhibited massive combustions. Where those compression ignitions that combusted flooded fuel? I remember them priming the fuel lines in both versions by turning the props by hand. I don’t know if they overprimed both engines.

@@jimm3093 thats probably more for movie magic. Cartridge start isn't as violent as people would like to think if the engine doesn't start. so you need something going on to build suspense. add a large bang so people understand that a cartridge has been spent and viola classic movie scene. Back to the original point though, If it doesn't start. (especially twice) Now you have a 46L double wasp(Or a 72L corncob), with wet fouled plugs gotta dry them somehow.

LOL. One of my favorite movies, not the remake. But after reading the replies to your comment, I see Hollywood was playing fast and loose with the truth for dramatic license. Still a great movie. "Start pulling Mr. Dorfman."

As did my uncle, whe was in the RNZAF serving as groundcrew.

Exactly !

royallhawaii *sweeter

1946nimrod host vessel

ᗒ╬ᗕ1112223333111ᗒ╬ᗕ i can imagine where you are gonna put shell ...

Well... it's been 2 years... you alright? Or did you actually try it?

@@marcoscosta2318 in his ass?

@@LNERMallard Well...

@@savagetuner2404 No response... I think he went through with it. 🙁

In the 70's, at William Tell, Tyndall AFB, I saw an RB47 Canberra cartridge start on both engines. That was cool!!

Think you mean B57; B47 was an entirely different plane.

The shotgun starter system worked great on the crowded deck of a WWII aircraft carrier. No heavy, unreliable battery in the aircraft, no stud cart.

Run 50 or 60 in the winter.

@@alswann2702 in Florida it's 50 in the winter the problem is it sneaks up on you then 70 becomes 90 light a sterno can and get a cup of coffee.

winkerdude Vvcx vhgo m

Well there's a huge FOD risk right there..

dieselyeti FOD affects jets much more than prop planes.

True, but it's the cardinal rule in aviation (esp naval aviation too I'd think)

Your father wasn't too bright but you don't have to promote the fact...

No, but he faced Focke-Wulf FW-200 Condors in them. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/Focke-Wulf_Fw_200C_Condor_in_flight.jpg Don't be fooled here, the Condor wasn't that agile but it sure was packed with defensive guns. Brown flew from "escort carriers" during the battle for the Atlantic, where their duty was to hunt submarines and long distance maritime patrol planes such as the Condor. The Wildcat performed brilliantly from those and to show you what Brown was facing, here's a picture of one such carrier, note the Wildcats and Swordfish torpedo bombers stored in the open since there were no below-deck hangars www.royalnavyresearcharchive.org.uk/ESCORT/images/Ships/Striker_A.jpg

Don't be so sure, one of the things Brown had to do as test pilot was to fly captured German planes which included the Fw-190 and the BF109 and his knowledge about those planes saved countless lives as his reports gave the fighter pilots plenty of pointers on what to go for when faced with either of those German fighters. Or the zero for that matter since he flew that one as well. To give you an idea how big an authority Brown was: the lend-lease agreement which supplied the British with American made planes included the notorious Curtiss SB2C Helldiver. After flying it, it was Brown's opinion that the Helldiver was totally unsuited for carrier use, let alone anything else. And the Admiralty listened to what Brown said and thus the Helldiver never went into British service. As far as Brown was concerned, those pilots and deck crew who said that SB2C stood for "Son of a Bitch Second Class" had his profound sympathy. But Brown praised the Wildcat for it being an easy to fly and forgiving plane which also could score a knockout punch. As for how easy a FW-200 Condor was to shoot down, I guess he could tell you from experience, experience you do not have.

Well, since you're on KZfaq already, just type in "Captain Eric Winkle Brown" and just listen to what the man has to say.

shanepinfist The Wildcat didn't perform as badly against the Zero as history documentaries tend to make out: the Zero was undoubtedly the better of the two, but the F4F wasn't helpless against it. The Brewster Buffalo on the other hand... Well it did okay against Italian biplanes in the middle east, but flying it against anything else was essentially suicide.

Ah yes the Brewster Buffalo. The Royal Netherlands East Indies air force operated them in Asia at the recommendation of the British who figured that more advanced planes like the Hawker Hurricane (!) would have been overkill. The method behind that madness? The fact that the high command were assured by spies that the Japanese Air force were "Nothing to worry about." Also given the fact that the Brewster had been rejected from US use since the Wildcat had surpassed it, made that it was cheaper to buy since those planes had been put into production to supply foreign forces like the RAAF (Australia), RNEEAF (Dutch east India) and the RAF. To make matters worse, the engines that were supplied with the Buffaloes were De-rated Wright Cyclone engines which overheated, yet the planes themselves were heavier because of the naval equipment still being fitted. And the final nail in the coffin: the machine guns were prone to jamming. Many Buffalo pilot to his frustration found that although a Buffalo could turn tighter than a zero, once you'd be on its tail, jamming guns meant that you still couldn't shoot it down. So was the Buffalo a total failure? Not for the Finnish air force it wasn't, because the artic climate meant that the overheating issues that the Wright Cyclone radial had in the Asian theater were not there anymore, add to the fact that the fins found a way to increase reliability of the said engines, meant that their Buffaloes were well liked by the pilots who flew them. Despite everything, even the Buffalo found its niche. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/Brewster_B-339_Buffalo.jpg A Buffalo replica in Dutch colors.

SASQUATCH GAMING kk

SASQUATCH GAMING h

Xx cox b mbbnv Bvcxvszzzzzzxc

I know people that still have old trackers. That start this way.. The damn Cows and horses go ape shit. Not to mention. Never start them during hunting season. They will haul ass 10 miles away..But your neighbor will love you for it.

Not quite. Though the Wildcat couldn't perform with the Zero, it was tough and rugged enough the hold the line at places Midway and Guadalcanal until better aircraft, like the F6F, could replace them. Commander Jimmy Thatch invented the "Thatch Weave" in an F4F to combat the Zero. When flown to its strengths the Wildcat was a brilliant naval aircraft.

CaptainDavage It was, indeed, a brilliant naval aircraft . . . just not as brilliant as the zero.

+Curby Weaver the Zero wasn't brilliant. It was just light weight!

Bay, Lightweight and maneuverable, but the Hellcat could pull away from it and climb at a steeper angle before stalling. Many zeroes followed the Hellcat into a climb thinking it was a Wildcat just to find that cat on its tail on the way down.

No armor or self-sealing gas tanks made it that way. The Japanese traded protection and dive speed for range.

Lots of marriages were started that way.

Well, unless you have a European tractor from back in the day, some of them had shotgun starters. Some of them also used the steering wheel and column for a crank.

It's Independence Day, can't you think American?

Chester Snapdragon McPhisticuff You made a factually erroneous statement. I was merely pointing out gently that it wasn't quite true. I certainly don't fault you for expressing your admiration for a clever design or for America. I hope you will forgive me if you felt I was raining on your parade - that was not my intent. I just have a strong reaction to "Only in (name of country) do you have (object or activity)" because it's almost always not true. Funny you should ask about thinking American, because yesterday I was thinking about how I have a greater fascination with American planes even though I appreciate the designs of planes from other countries, a number of which are arguably better planes than their American counterparts.

well I was just trying to make a funny comment, but you turned it into an argument, so...nahnahnahnah boo boo, I laugh more than you do.

MrRedeyedJedi the dude who posted this made a comment and he said it's 4 gauge

xeno30 Use that shit for hunting and there would be no reason to send it through a meat grinder..

Here ya go kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ecWUp6Znv7W2Y6s.html This is a 4 bore rifle

I think it is 8 gauge. It's a common industrial round or blank.

@@zxggwrt see above comments. Already been found to be 4 guage/bore...which can be used with slugs

No worries---there`ll always be a "motor head" around to kick-start`em...

That's what James Stewart did ( :

in Flight of the Pheonix

Paul Marsh To butcher a quote "if you have to explain the joke, there is no joke"

In the film, he used one cartridge to clear the cylinders out - to the disdain of the other colleagues. watch the film.,..

the other person is just not that intelligent

Amazing what they were able to do with paper, pencil, slide rule and hand machining.

Well your car uses spark plugs so to keep your car running for 1 minute you would need like 50000 shells

@@twanboltze8196 the airplane engine has spark plugs too lol. It uses the single shell to pressure the cylinders on the ignition stroke thus turning over.

The Rolls-Royce Merlin engine used in the British Supermarine Spitfire used the Coffman system as a starter. The Hawker Typhoon also used the Coffman system to start its Napier Sabre engine.

Conrad I thought it was liberals' whining over the pollution spewed by the plane.

SeekingTruth2014 If it wasn't for somebody whining about pollution, we would be living in cities choked with pollution, like many of the shit hole cities around the world.

SeekingTruth2014 Shit Stain

+videoclipits First, I just want to say that ALL cities are shitholes, no matter what. Now that that's out of the way... "...If it wasn't for somebody whining about pollution, we would be living in cities choked with pollution...." No, I think *that* was due to the people who actually went out and tried to *do something realistic and constructive about it*, rather than just bitching, whining, putting bumper stickers on their cars and loafing around KZfaq leaving nasty comments every time they see something that produces a hint of smoke. Those are **whiners**, and they are worthless, for many reasons, including the fact that they are prone to complaining about the pollution produced by one single aircraft that may see flight a few dozen times per year, while at *any given moment* there are several *thousand* Boeing 737's in the air (and that's just 737's), each burning a *few hundred tons* of fuel per hour. As we speak, probably fifty or so container ships on their way across the Pacific with another load of cheap crap from China destined for Walmart (via a whole fleet of diesel trucks), and another fifty headed for China with a load of raw materials so they can produce more stuff (partly because it's cheaper to ship it over the ocean and back again than it is to build it here, and partly because then all the pollution from the industry will be in China instead of here but we can still have all of our worthless gizmos and disposable plastic lawn chairs, AND complain about how much pollution *they* have compared to our ciites...brilliant, isn't it!). Hint, pollution has gone down in US cities in proportion to the industries moving overseas more than from any foolsih and easily avoided environmental laws (which I must admit, DO work to diminish pollution, by the simple expedient of making it cost so much to build things in the US, the factories all move elsewhere. Yay! Nice clean America. Jobs are over-rated anyway....) Next, I'd have to point out that plenty of American cities ARE still choked with pollution, and other countries might be able to cut back as much as we have if they weren't desperate to keep their economies running as it is...not everyone has the fucking luxuries of excess cash that we have to piss away money, and drive away industry for the sake of clean air. The US created its wealth by building locomotives, ships, tanks, aircraft, all in unregulated factories. Now that we've got our money, we can afford to spend a bunch of money forcing pollution controls on everyone (unless they just leave, like I said). Most countries can't afford that, since the US has made it abundantly clear that the most important thing to survival as a state is having a powerful economy; you're as good as fucked without it! (Unless you want to become Uncle Sams little welfare case and do just as he tells you). As it is, I'm sick of people focusing on things like a few people driving muscle cars once in a while, like they make the SLIGHTEST difference from the real, massive sources of CO2 and other pollution. For every guy who drives his Camaro to the movies on Saturday, there are literally 300,000 people commuting 30 miles to work every day in "normal" cars. Yet they would rather just ban driving classic muscle cars, even though they produce a fraction of the pollution due to the simple fact that there are far fewer of them, and they are only driven on special occasions. And I also never hear anyone crusading against Americans who insist of driving a block to the store every time they want something (and who then pay money for gym meberships because they somehow can't "keep that weight off"). On top of all that, a single historical airplane isn't going to register on anyone's scale. Even if it DID pollute like a motherfucker, it'd be worth it because it's history. If everyone in a *single* town decided to walk to the store for *one night* instead of driving, it would more than make up for any pollution created by this living piece of history for an entire year. But, no, it's much better to whine about a couple high visibility issues that don't require much thought or (horrors) trying to convince Americans to walk anywhere instead of driving. Much easier to light the torches and try to get the "polluting monster airplane" grounded. That's much simpler, and it gives you time to *drive* down to the gym to work off a few pounds that you gained eating the food you *drove* to the store to buy. Fucking blind hypocrites. Last but not least, technically, this aircraft is unlikely to spend any of its time flying around in cities, so I seriously doubt that it will contribute the slightest amount towards "choking any cities with pollution" (which undoubtedly you are aware, happens because of all the pollution produced *within* the city, not because of an airplane flying at an airshow ten miles away.

+SeekingTruth2014 I cannot believe that on a completely apolitical video about something as cool and enjoyable as a warbird starting up with an interesting technique, you would bring politics and derision into the conversation. It really speaks to the kind of person you are that you are so willing to take something for all to enjoy and pervert it into a cheap joke meant to ridicule others of a political position that is completely irrelevant to why we are all here. I pity angry people like you.

welshpete12 Yes, somewhat similar. Same company built them but different mechanics.

+welshpete12 If you mean the "Canberra" then yes it is. :)

+welshpete12 Cartridge starters on jet aircraft send the propellant gasses to a turbine starter which is usually the same starter unit used as an air turbine starter on jets that started either way. The B-52 is like this. The engines have one air turbine starter which is powered 3 ways, air supplied by a ground "start cart", by bleed air from an already running engine, or a cartridge. Today, almost everything is bleed air started off of an APU in the plane and the smaller engines can be electric start. Older military planes, some still have cart start for backup, most are APU bleed air or JFS, jet fuel starter, which is a tiny turbine engine that starts the main(s) which is primarily on fighters. The old Canberra had cartridge start capability. The old English Electric Lightning used an Avpin starter. Works in the same way a solid fuel cartridge starter works but burned a liquid fuel called Avpin, which is Isopropyl Nitrate if I remember correctly

+mytmousemalibu thank you for your info .

welshpete12 No problem! I live, eat, breath and sleep aviation!

that was water vapor and combustion byproduct from the gun powder in the shot shell

+Heather Fox The shell wasn't fired before the engine was started. "Yep, it's Avgas. Poring out of the supercharger drain."

@@Tera_Hai I thinka Heather make-a with the joke. Good one Heather!

+justforever96 I don't think it's a sad thing that electric starters are being fitted to them. I'd do that modification to one as well if I bought an old warbird. Then again I wouldn't be doing the airshow circuit either.

+TestECull It took me a long time to even find a video of a shotgun-starter in action, because there are so few of them left. I like to see things the way they really were, to see what the guys in the field had to deal with in real life during the war. They couldn't just push a button and fire their engines up, they had to either bang off several cartridges or hand-crank an inertia starter. And I believe in keeping things as authentic as possible. It's not like they have to start them up every day. Most warbirds don't fire more than a few times a month. Is it really asking so much to have them use a shotgun starter? It was considered a labor-saver when it was invented.

justforever96 I'm one of those nutters that thinks it's a travesty for such vehicles to sit in more or less disuse. These things should be flown regularly, long distance, they should be pushed to their limits and enjoyed to the best of their capability. I certainly would if I ever found myself flush enough to afford a warbird, and if it was one with a shotgun starter it would quickly get a modern electric starter fitted. I would use it much as a normal businessman would use a Learjet.

+TestECull no you wouldn't. You'd realize VERY quickly that you need constant maintenance, and parts are VERY hard to find. And if you can't find them, you have to make them. All types of military aircraft don't live well outside of the military supply chain.

MomedicsChannel But I would. If I was rich enough to afford to buy one like that I'd be rich enough to afford to maintain and repair it as well. Not only that, but I love working on vehicles. I don't care what kind of vehicle it is, I'm happiest if I'm fixing it. I'm well aware warbirds like that are finicky creatures. I don't care. I'd totes use one like a learjet if I was rich enough to afford one.