I always wished I had the rest of this photo. Any quesses as to what the whole story is?



------------------



[This message has been edited by davebowers (edited July 13, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by davebowers (edited July 13, 2004).]

Just when you think you've seen it all as far as custom Barths go........

It and the trailer were built for a team of traveling midget acrobats. They slept in the MH (six in the bunks and two in the dinette up front) and the trailer was their gym to keep in practice between circuses. Quite often they would see a group of vehicles and perform and pass the hat afterward.

It had a unique power assist to get up steep grades. The gym/trailer had a treadmill that could be connected to the axle to allow seven of the midgets to exercise and help get up the hill at the same time. One of them was a former engineer for Wright Aeronautical Corporation and was responsible for the PRT on the R-3350.

The setup was later sold, as the seven midgets who were on the treadmill wanted to steer, too, and prevailed on the Wright engineer to design a system whereby they could both power and steer. In true Wright fashion, he came up with a design, but testing uncovered serious design defects. Both the drive assist and steering were removed and a repower up front took care of the hills, but they didn't have as much fun as they used to, so they sold it and joined Monty Python just before the program went off the air.

[This message has been edited by bill h (edited July 14, 2004).]

Dave, with the way the window is on the trailer, being up high, I'd bet this was a rig made to show horses. The 5er is probably a horse trailer and the coach may be just used for changing attire and eating. Just my guess. BTW...my auction is a week from Weds. & we'll be heading to the CG the week of the 26th. can't wait can't wait can't wait can't wait can't wait can't wait !

------------------

Mark & LeAnna
1973 Barth 25 L
402 cid
P30 Chassis

Bill H You are too much. The size of the rig looks to be about the same size as our Barth Vader. Twenty-two feet. I went out and started that thing up yesterday. My son wants to use it at a wedding and park outside where the wedding will be preformed. That way he can have a couple beers and not worry about getting a DUI. I think that is a good use of a Barth. I was trying to find some of the water wetter at the local car parts place and they don't have it. Any ideas? Dennis

Bill, would you be kind enough to give us a complete technical explanation of the design defects that caused this project to be scrapped. I'm not competent to explain the science involved here, but I understand they had an alternator belted to the power assist drive axle, in order to provide some regenerative capacity running downhill. The engineer used a double-male extension cord to connect the coach and trailer, which resulted in a heretofore unknown operation of the "dark sucker" effect. This, in turn fried all the electronics in the system and burned the engineer's eyebrows off. He was asked to duplicate the system, but couldn't do it, having ginned up the original design during a bout with a particularly potent batch of "B.C. bud."

Dennis, do you have a Pep Boys nearby? That is where I buy mine.

Or:

http://store.summitracing.com/default.asp?target=esearch.asp&N=110&Ntk=KeywordS earch&Ntt=wetter

Roy, you're getting ahead here. The double ended male inversion loop technology was not
available at that time. Wright PRT technology was all mechanical, using a fluid coupling and bevel gears. In this particular iteration, the bevel gears were replaced with a chain drive, making use of off the shelf parts. The design defect you inquire about was the elimination of the Wright fluid clutch. The original Wright PRT used a Dynaflow fluid coupling, but production of Dynaflows ceased in the late fifties. So the system was designed with a direct coupling. This worked fine up the hills, but as the coach crested the hill and began gaining speed downhill, the seven midgets who were powering the treadmill (unaware that the hill had been crested) were thrown in a yelling, thrashing ball of humanity at the rear of the trailer by the rapidly accelerating treadmill. The engineer first provided periscope so they could see the crest of the hill, then redesigned the drive coupling with a sprag clutch to prevent the wheels driving the treadmill, but the midgets would have none of it. Concurrently, he devised a steering mechanism to allow the treadmill-runners to steer as they powered the drive axle, but they could not agree on who would steer. The engineer purchased several tandem bicycles to train the midgets in the concept of one steering and two powering, but they would have none of it. He finally threw up his arms and went to work for Airbus in France. In concert with a French engineer named Chauchat, he developed the concept of trimming the aircraft longitudinally by having the (coach only) passengers move from front to rear to level the aircraft in flight rather than by using drag-producing trim tabs. In later development stages of the Airbus, the idea was refined to transfer fuel from the wing tanks to a tail tank to control the center of gravity, thereby eliminating the need for inconveniencing (coach)passengers.

But your idea of hybrid technology is a good one. Perhaps we could resurrect the concept. We need go no farther back in history than the 1910 and the U boats for our inspiration. Spin a generator to drive a motor. If it took the automotive industry that long to embrace the concept, we can do it without fear of embarrassment for being a little late, too.

[This message has been edited by bill h (edited July 14, 2004).]

Bill, Chauchat should have stayed with designing machne guns. No wonder one of the first fly-by-wire Airbuses went down when the control system failed.

But that duo were not the first to use the concept of shifting passenger weight for longitudinal trim. (Here we spiral down into the realm of fact)

I knew an airline pilot many years ago who had a hobby business buying and selling used airplanes. In hog heaven with all the surplus military aircraft after WW II, he bought a surplus C-47 and couldn't find anyone to fly the right seat when he brought it home.

He elected to do it solo, and on the way he had to pee. The john in the C-47 was way in the back, which created a longitudinal trim problem. He set the trim to fly tail heavy, engaged the autopilot, and, as the aircraft nosed over, he dashed to the rear.

Congratulating himself for his wisdom, as the aircraft leveled out, he did his duty, and ran forward to find the cockpit door had closed and latched from the inside. The bird was nosing over again, but not being a man subject to panic, he ran back to the john and sat down to ponder his dilemma.

There was a fire ax in the cabin, so he ran forward, pulled it off the bulkhead, gave the door a couple whacks, and dashed back again to the john before the dive became critical.

He repeated this maneuver several times, finally broke the door down, and completed his trip with aplomb.

If the man's still alive, he's been retired for 25 or 30 years, but I bet that tales of his exploits are still told when Northwest Airlines pilots gather to quaff a brew.

I don't ever want anyone to thank me for this website. If it were not for guys like the ones above me on this thread this would be just another MSN group. This is the most fun reading in a long while. This would make a great bathroom book wouldn't it.

Roy, that is a great story. Quibbles and buried humor follow.


I have flown C47s and R4Ds, and I don't remember them being that CG-sensitive, even with the autopilot not engaged. Additionally, the C47 autopilot was a Sperry, which had an input from the VG, which would have kept it level.

However, I think your pilot buddy must have been a great guy to sit around a campfire with. I'll bet the two of you were a riot. I will get some mileage out of that story, myself, with your permission.

And the crash axe was stored in the cockpit, on the right side next to the Aldis lamp, not the cabin.

Most C47s did not have johns. A similar craft, the C117, were passenger aircraft, and had a john in the aft section. I worked on what once was MacArthur's plane, and it had a john that was literally a "throne room". At the time we got it, it had previously been the governor of Georgia's transport, provided by the Georgia Air National Guard. It was on its way to be converted to a Puff.

There is a similar story floating around today, except it involves a third-world airline with only one pilot. Again, most fire axes are in the cockpit.

Of course, by now we have all hear the urban legend of the third world immigrant who bought a motor home, engaged cruise control, and walked back to the john while cruising down the freeway.

Also, all the C47s I was around had a relief tube that ran from the cockpit to the tail cone, allowing the pilot to do the deed without leaving his seat. The pilot's end had a sort of funnel. The hose terminated at the underside of the tail cone with an L-shaped fitting pointing aft. The air stream rushing past the open end of the rearward-facing L-fitting created a small suction to evacuate the tube of its corrosive contents. It was a joke on new pilots to turn the L fitting around so the open end faced forward into the air stream, causing a slight pressure. In practice, the pilot would begin to urinate, filling the tube. Halfway through the process, the contents of the tube would be overcome by the ram air pressure and would be deposited back whence it came. This was particularly disconcerting to the pilot, as we all know how hard it is to stop once started.

An alert ground crew would observe the turned-around L-fitting on arrival, and restore it to its proper orientation before an investigation could be launched, thereby averting any punitive action, or even discovery of the trick, known only to select ground crews. The goonies were moved by a tow bar that attached to the tail wheel axle, so a deft hand could do the deed completely undetected, just as the aircraft rolled to a stop.

I haven't touched a Goonie since the sixties, but I have low friends in high places in the CAF, so call me on it if I am remembering any of this incorrectly, and I will verify. Heck, I need a reason to call one of them, anyway.

Re Chauchat: He actually should have stuck to can-openers. His later endeavors were about as well-designed as his gun. I have an abiding dislike for French products, which predates this decade, by far. The one exception is the Laguiole corkscrew and pocket knife. 12C27 is the only way. Did you know we call the Airbus the "Scarebus"?

OOPS! Thread drift.

[This message has been edited by bill h (edited July 14, 2004).]

Bill, if the relief tube ran from the cockpit to the tail cone, that had to be the longest rubber hose in history. How did they keep it from freezing at altitude, or in the winter?

Anyway, that pee story must have whiskers. I first heard it in 1946, as a 17 year-old hangar rat hanging around the old Bloomington airport outside Minneapolis. Those days the field was just past the edge of nowhere, somewhere near where the "Mall of The Americas" is today.

I didn't hear it from the subject, it was one of many stories about the man that floated around the airport where he had a rag-tag collection of used and antique aircraft which he bought and sold.

The details of the story may be wrong, but from my knowledge of the man I'd wager the substance is true.

Sometime in the 1970s, boating in Canada, I ran into an old acquaintance who had, meantime, become a co-pilot for NWA. I asked him if the fellow was still around. He said, "Yeah, I've flown with him. He's the only man I ever knew who could bring in a DC-10 without using reverse thrust."

Some of the guys who passed around stories in the '40s were known to stretch a point, but this fellow was as straight an arrow as Iever knew. I've no reason to doubt him .

Oh-Kay Dave, we need to take a poll and see how many Barth owners are pilots and/or wrench spinners and see if that had any bearing on why they bought a Barth.

It did with me.

There are quite a few pilots or x-pilots that own Barths. I made mention that I fly a Champ and it seemed that a lot of guys jumped on that. I like the idea that Barths are held together with rivets.

I never got passed soloing a 172 but my first look at my Barth was somewhat aircraft related. Back in my early days of boating {1960 or thereabouts} it was clear to even the untrained eye that there were aluminum rowboats and canoes, and then there were Grumman rowboats and canoes. When you know why things fall apart you start to look for things that won't, like a Barth.

Oh yea, I was going to say a custom car or motorcycle trailer, but the horse idea makes more sense. I've seen a lot of outrageous rigs in my travels that belonged to horse people.

There is a generator in that 5th wheel area. I am guess it's a lunch wagon, or maybe that's because I am hungry right now.

------------------