Monday 7 December 2009

North Shore Nanchang

North Shore's resident Nanchang CJ 6A ZK-FRU was also outside at North Shore Airfield on Saturday. This particular Nanchang wears an authentic Peoples Liberation Army Air Force scheme with the constructors number on the tail and 01 on the nose, as a registered colour scheme. The 01 is because this was the first Nanchang CJ 6 to be exported out of China. It was registered as VH-NNA in Australia in 1990. It was purchased by Graham Frew of North Shore who flew it to New Zealand in November 2000 and it was first registered on 13/12/00. On 16/2/09 ownership passed to the Nanchang 01 syndicate of North Shore. This aircraft has its own website: http://www.nanchang01.com/

The Nanchang CJ 6 was manufactured in the thousands in China between 1958 and 1966 and the CJ 6A is powered by a Zhuzhou Huosai HS 6 9 cylinder radial engine of 285 HP.

4 comments:

  1. Just a question on your statement "The Nanchang CJ 6 was manufactured in the thousands in China between 1958 and 1966 and ..."

    My understanding is that the Nanchang was built in to the 1980's [at least]... and that ZK-MAO [serial # 4432002] was built in 1987. Maybe that is a later model?

    Always happy to be shown to be wrong... :-)

    Cheers,

    Rodney

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Rodney - I thought you would be interested in a post about a Nanchang. I googled the history and got the dates from this website: www.nanchangaircraft.com/history.shtml but on re-reading it it could be that the armed version the CJ ^B was produced up to 1966.

    I in turn am happy that someone is reading the blog and correcting me!

    ReplyDelete
  3. That might be it... I don't claim to be authorative on this one... [from memory], I think they were building a "westernised" version later on also... that seems like cheating to me :-) ha ha

    I'm always reading your blog - always good. Thanks! Oh yeah - I get a few corrections myself :-)

    Cheers,

    Rodney

    ReplyDelete
  4. nanchang 74 was build in the late 80's i think but may be wrong that they are still building them?? as i say could be wrong

    ReplyDelete