#9239

[jimh]

On June 22, 1954, my dad wrote a check for a Taylorcraft airframe, serial number 9239, and engine stored in a building in Paducah, KY.
The local FBO operator at the time was to do whatever was necessary to the engine and airframe, recover and paint it, and make it airworthy. And as part of the deal the FBO operator was to teach me to fly and obtain a private pilot's license after it was certified.

The lessons never materialized, and a couple years later the T-craft went down in a farm field in the Madisonville-Henderson area with no fatalities or serious injuries but the airframe was written off as a total loss.
I've never known what became of the wreckage, and I'm wondering if there might still be a record of the accident in FAA archives, or at least 9239's NC number.

What brings me to this inquiry is a Taylorcraft R/C kit (1/4 scale IKON N'wst, 90" w/s) I currently have under construction, and I'd like to number it with the same NC number as 9239.
And hopefully someone here might know if 9239 was resurrected, or if Dad's cancelled check is all that remains.
jimh

[M Towsley]

Re: #9239

Jim,

Unless someone requested a special number in the past for the Taylorcraft, there probably isn't a N9239. I think you may be missing one more number. I checked the NTSB website and it doesn't show up and the FAA registry doesn't show this as current or a past 'N' number.

[jimh]

Re: #9239

Sorry if I have created some confusion, Marty.
9239 is/was the airframe serial number, not the N or NC number at the time.

[flybikefarm]

Re: #9239

Could it have been N39239? George

[jimh]

Re: #9239

Thanks, George, but that is the airframe serial number. At the time I saw it in the building, there was no covering on it.

My best hope would be to somehow unearth the CAA/FAA accident report of a Taylorcraft going down somewhere around the Madisonville area or in western KY in the late '50's.

[flybikefarm]

Re: #9239

Maybe Forest can look it up.

[NC36061]

Re: #9239

The FAA has no record of a Taylorcraft with that S/N

http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/

NTSB records only go back to 1962,

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/index.aspx

so I'm afraid the information is probably unavailable.

[M Towsley]

Re: #9239

Jim,

If I figured this correctly, I used the serial number just ahead of yours and there is a Taylorcraft with serial number 9238 which is N96938 so your old one should have been N96939. There is another Taylorcraft with serial 9240 and its 'N' number is N96940. No current records with the FAA or the NTSB on your aircraft.

[jimh]

Re: #9239

@ NC36061 - Thanks for your links. I expected this to be a really long shot, and yours and everyone's help is much appreciated.


@Taylorcrafter - Marty: Thanks for that bit of information on the N numbers. 9239 should have been certified airworthy sometime in '55 or '56.
I don't recall exactly when the numbers changed from "NC" to "N", but I surmise that it was certified with an NC number, if that would have any bearing. With no record of the plane, that is a moot point.

I find it interesting how the N number is arrived at. Would "96" or "969" designate a/c manufacturer?

jimh

[NC36061]

Re: #9239

The "C" was dropped from registration numbers in the early '50s I would guess. That has no bearing on anything, the rest of the number stayed the same when the "C" was dropped. Actually the FAA still allows the use of "NC" for the sake of authenticity on an airplane that originally had an "NC" number. Registration numbers were/are allotted in blocks to manufacturers, so Taylorcrafts with 39xxx, 43xxx, 95xxx, 96xxx are very common, however the first digits of the registration numbers are not necessarily exclusive to a particular manufacturer.

Marty's deduction of your old airplane's number is likely correct.

[cubby]

Re: #9239

On June 22, 1954, my dad wrote a check for a Taylorcraft airframe, serial number 9239, and engine stored in a building in Paducah, KY.
The local FBO operator at the time was to do whatever was necessary to the engine and airframe, recover and paint it, and make it airworthy. And as part of the deal the FBO operator was to teach me to fly and obtain a private pilot's license after it was certified.

The lessons never materialized, and a couple years later the T-craft went down in a farm field in the Madisonville-Henderson area with no fatalities or serious injuries but the airframe was written off as a total loss.
I've never known what became of the wreckage, and I'm wondering if there might still be a record of the accident in FAA archives, or at least 9239's NC number.

What brings me to this inquiry is a Taylorcraft R/C kit (1/4 scale IKON N'wst, 90" w/s) I currently have under construction, and I'd like to number it with the same NC number as 9239.
And hopefully someone here might know if 9239 was resurrected, or if Dad's cancelled check is all that remains.
jimh

That number N9239S is registered to a 1975 BEECH C-23 Aircraft in Minnesota TO A MR Richard W ROYER according to the US AIRCRAFT REGISTRY OFFICE Member #1103 CUBBY

[M Towsley]

Re: #9239

Cubby,

That is the serial, not the 'N' number. There is no 'S' on the end.

[jimh]

Re: #9239

Thanks, everyone, for your input and assistance. I think now I can replicate the N number with a fair degree of accuracy.

One detail regarding T-craft landing lights - I have seen some photos that didn't show a landing light, and others that appeared that only one wing had the light. Did all have lights, and in one wing or both?
Thanks again.
jimh

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: #9239

Most Taylorcrafts had no landing lights. They are actually kind of rare. I have the base for a Grimes "plug in" light that bolted to the wing spar in the hangar but to use it you had to plug the light into the socket prior to take off. It wasn't very practical in my opinion. It would be easier to make a mount for the wing strut or put one under the fuselage.
Hank

Legalities not being discussed here. ;-)

[M Towsley]

Re: #9239

Jim,

As Hank said, the majority never had leading edge lights landing lights. Some people added them later, but I have only seen a couple in pictures. These planes really weren't flown at night that much. They came wired for wing and tail lights and some people added those but the majority did not.