Talk:Lockheed Model 18 Lodestar

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation / World War II C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	World War II task force

Survivor

Air Marcel Inc is recovering a Lockheed 18 "Lodestar" crashed in 1960 in Canada for restoration. See the website for reference. Tourist.tam (talk) 10:46, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Production numbers

The article quotes a total production of 625, and gives breakdowns for military variants as 211 USAAF, 33 USN (and another 35 transferred). This totals 244 military aircraft, suggesting a civilian production of about 380.

However, the article seems to imply that domestic commercial sales were very limited - "Lockheed found the Lodestar difficult to sell at home" and that overseas sales weren't exactly marvellous; the biggest single order was for about thirty. Unless there was a surge of commercial sales after the end of the war, which I doubt, this just doesn't seem to add up. Anyone have an idea how to reconcile the two? Shimgray | talk | 15:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The production list I have gives 625 aircraft (msn 18-2001 to 18-2625) and three prototypes modified from Lockheed 14s (18-1954, 18-1956 and 18-1957). I will check the totals later and come back. MilborneOne (talk) 17:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I was wondering if the 625 total might perhaps include the civilian L-14s - our article gives 233 of those, though again the number's uncited, and this would seem to be about the right amount to fill the gap. It certainly won't be for armed developments from the L-18 - there were more than 625 in the initial order of Venturas! Shimgray | talk | 18:21, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article has some wrong production numbers! Civvy Model 18s (140) - USAAF (394) - USN (91) which equals 625.MilborneOne (talk) 19:03, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Airworthyness

The L18 seems have suffered from a large number of crashes from engine failure, and even unexplained crashes. The 1948 crash at Lae (PNG) happened when a pilot very experienced with the L18 aborted a landing and then one engine lost power. A flat spin ensued. An L18 carrying three of Australia's cabinet ministers crashed in 1940, while landing at Canberra. Eyewitness said the machine simply slid sideways into the ground during a high speed turn. These all look like a problem with the quoted Vmc and maneuvering speeds. It is likely that these are too low to guarantee controllability. The wing loading is about 40lb/sqft, which was high for 1939 but low for military planes introduced soon after then. A DC-3 has 25lb/sqft loading. A DC-6B is 60lb/sqft. A higher loading requires higher maneuvering speeds and much smaller margins of error. The L18 was trickier to fly than a DC-3, but not as difficult as most post-WW2 machines.210.185.75.105 (talk) 00:08, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have to consider the era - the accident rate was at one of its highest levels between the mid 30's and the late 50's, with a large influx of new pilots into both military and airliner service. If you compare it with other contemporary light/medium transports I would be surprised if it was much higher because it never developed a bad reputation, unlike say the somewhat similarly sized de Havilland Flamingo. - NiD.29 (talk) 05:41, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lockheed Model 18 Lodestar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:22, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]