# FAA grounds T-34 fleet **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [December 17, 2004, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faa-grounds-t-34-fleet/280347 "2004-12-17T15:21:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faa-grounds-t-34-fleet/280347/1 "2004-12-17T15:21:29Z")
[Full article here](http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2004/041214t34.html). > [@](#): > > The FAA has issued an [emergency airworthiness directive](http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulatory/20042551ad.pdf) [.pdf file] grounding all Raytheon Beech Model 45 aircraft, commonly known as T-34s. The action comes after the in-flight break-up of a Texas Air Aces-operated T-34 last week. The company uses the former military trainers to give customers a taste of mock aerial combat. > > [snip] > > The Texas T-34 that broke up was an early model (serial number G-13). The FAA says that, according to maintenance records, it was in compliance with AD 2001-13-18 R1. That AD was issued after the 1999 in-flight wing separation of another T-34 engaged in mock aerial combat. It calls for various repetitive wing spar inspections. Approved alternate means of compliance (AMOC) can eliminate some of the repetitive inspections. > > In this case, the aircraft owners had satisfied the AD by installing a used Baron wing spar, as allowed under one of the AMOCs. While it was legal to install a used spar at that time, currently only new spars may be installed to satisfy the AD. > > In this accident, the left wing center section failed four inches inboard of the forward wing attach fitting. That’s inboard from the replacement Baron spar, which did not fail. That’s also an area not covered by the existing AD. The FAA reports that there was visual evidence of metal fatigue in other areas not covered by the AD. That’s too bad. The T-34 is one of my favourite airplanes. Indeed, I was fantasizing about having one while I was driving back from Phoenix. It would have made for a much shorter trip than the Jeep! The [T-34 Mentor](http://www.warbirdalley.com/t34.htm) first flew in 1948 and entered service in 1953 as an _ab initio_ trainer for the Navy (T-34B) and Air Force (T-34A), and was basically a development of the Beechcraft Model 35 Bonanza (an airplane that has had its own inflight breakup issues, which have been corrected). It is powered by a six-cylinder Continental engine. The Navy version had a more powerful engine than the Air Force version, and had a little more dihederal in the wings. In 1973 the T-34C Turbo Mentor was added with its Pratt & Whitney turbine engine, and the first student trainied in it in 1978. AFAIK, no ex-military T-34Cs have been sold to the public, but Beechcraft perceived a demand for them and made an unsuccessful attempt to market them in the '80s or '90s. Unfortunately, the price tag of $1.34 million each was too dear and I believe they never sold any. (The last time I looked, in the early-to-mid-1990s, a completely restored ex-Navy T-34B sold at auction at Santa Monica Airport for $250,000.) I hope that Raytheon Beechcraft will find a solution that will keep these pretty little aircraft flying. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faa-grounds-t-34-fleet/280347/2 "2004-12-17T15:50:27Z")
Incredibly, this happened right after the publication of this Smithsonian Air & Space article about several independent efforts to fix the original wing spar problem after Beech essentially punted. Look for yet more Alternative Means of Compliance certification efforts now that a new failure location has been identified. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faa-grounds-t-34-fleet/280347/3 "2004-12-17T15:51:38Z")
Damn, the link disappeared. Here: [http://www.airandspacemagazine.com/ASM/Mag/Index/2005/DJ/svmt.html](http://www.airandspacemagazine.com/ASM/Mag/Index/2005/DJ/svmt.html) ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faa-grounds-t-34-fleet/280347/4 "2004-12-17T15:53:41Z")
> [@Johnny L.A](#): > > In 1973 the T-34C Turbo Mentor was added with its Pratt & Whitney turbine engine, and the first student trainied in it in 1978. AFAIK, no ex-military T-34Cs have been sold to the public… Incidentally, there have been a few turbine conversions undertaken by T-34A or T-34B owners. IIRC, they usually use an Allison engine. ---
**Author:** ![HPL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3da27b/32.png) [@HPL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HPL)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faa-grounds-t-34-fleet/280347/5 "2004-12-17T18:34:03Z")
When I saw this thread, my first thought was “Why would they be flying Russian WW2 battle tanks around in the first place?” ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faa-grounds-t-34-fleet/280347/6 "2004-12-17T19:32:59Z")
> [@Johnny L.A.](#): > > Incidentally, there have been a few turbine conversions undertaken by T-34A or T-34B owners. IIRC, they usually use an Allison engine. T-34c, AKA the [Turbo Mentor](http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/t-34.htm). . ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faa-grounds-t-34-fleet/280347/7 "2004-12-17T19:44:11Z")
> [@Tranquilis](#): > > T-34c, AKA the [Turbo Mentor](http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/t-34.htm). Right: > [@Johnny L.A.](#): > > In 1973 the T-34C Turbo Mentor was added with its Pratt & Whitney turbine engine, and the first student trained in it in 1978. AFAIK, no ex-military T-34Cs have been sold to the public What I was saying is that some T-34A and T-34B aircraft, which were originally delivered with Continental piston engines, have been converted to turbine power by their civilian owners. These conversions are readily recognised by the different vertical stabilizers, lack of, or different profile to the ‘skeg’ under the empanage, and a different profile on the cowling. The military T-34C uses a Pratt & Whitney PT6-25A turbine, but I think the civil conversions use an Allison. ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faa-grounds-t-34-fleet/280347/8 "2004-12-17T19:49:54Z")
Ugh. That’s what I get for not reading carefully. :o ---
**Author:** ![Llama\_Llogophile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@Llama\_Llogophile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Llama_Llogophile)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2004, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faa-grounds-t-34-fleet/280347/9 "2004-12-17T22:21:00Z")
I’ve got about five hours in a T-34, including some aerobatics. I’m beginning to think I dodged a bullet. Nice airplane. Easy to handle, good in acro. Too bad this may be strike three for the type. ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2004, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/faa-grounds-t-34-fleet/280347/10 "2004-12-18T18:14:12Z")
> [@HPL](#): > > When I saw this thread, my first thought was “Why would they be flying Russian WW2 battle tanks around in the first place?” It comes from thousands of hours playing Tony Hawk video games. You start to think you can do any damn thing.