Swiftest of the Swifts

Speed.

There. Now you know why highly modified Swift aircraft — called SuperSwifts by the in-crowd — appeal so strongly to a growing army of loyalists. Swift owners are called Swifters, by the way, a name that sounds like something from a science fiction movie. In a way, that is fitting; those Swifters who are into modifications create timesaving machines.

The Swift, like the Cadet, is a conventional-gear, two-place aircraft crafted in the era when the tailwheel design was the norm. How fast would you expect a World War II-era civilian aircraft to fly, one originally based on the old 105-knot Culver Cadet but reengineered several times since? The answer surprised Pilot photographer Mike Fizer, who wanted to know if an older-model Cessna 172 could be used as a photo platform to take the air-to-air pictures that accompany this article.

According to tests using a handheld GPS, Charlie Nelson's 210-horsepower Swift flies 163 knots. Nelson is president of the Swift Museum Foundation, headquartered at McMinn County Airport near Athens, Tennessee. Even Joe Ranson's 180-hp Swift — also hangared at McMinn — goes 146 knots in high-speed cruise. Ranson is the parts manager for the foundation, which owns the type certificate for the Swift and has an inventory of leftover spare parts. Both of the aircraft began life as slower 1946, 125-hp GC-1B Swifts — 1946 being the year in which most of the Swifts were built. Production stopped in 1951.

Some believe that there are still more sales to be found in the Swift. Before abandoning the SwiftFury seven years ago for lack of $6 million for certification testing, Roy LoPresti had moved the wing forward to reduce drag as part of a complete redesign on a computer. (His efforts had resulted in an impressive number of pre-sales and advance orders.) A test airplane using a 200-hp engine pegged 187 kts at 1,000 feet, according to the test pilot who flew it. Moving the wing required recertification, however. The former Piper Aircraft Company — supporting LoPresti's work at the time but having financial troubles — could not attract investors to complete the recertification.

To avoid recertification, Aviat President Stuart Horn will leave the wing right where it is if he restarts production of the Swift, now planned to occur in 18 months. As you read this, reconditioning of old Swift tooling should be complete so that parts production and sales can begin immediately under license from the Swift Museum Foundation. Aviat Aircraft, located in Afton, Wyoming, builds Pitts, Husky, and Eagle conventional-gear aircraft.

Horn wants to include all of the more popular and previously approved modifications created over the past dozen years, such as modern engine cowlings, stick flight controls, and bubble canopies pioneered by Jack Nagel. Unlike LoPresti, Horn does not plan a redesign. He is keeping a wary eye on proposed changes to the FAA type certification regulations and procedures that could put a crimp in his plans. "The FAA's proposal would require that any change to an existing product undergo recertification to meet the most current airworthiness regulations," said Doug Macnair, AOPA director of aviation standards. It appears that the FAA was taking a shot at the modification of airliners in making the proposal, but the agency may end up inflicting a mortal wound on some light aircraft manufacturers if the proposal is adopted. AOPA is fighting the proposal.

While that battle is going on, Horn is continuing his plans to eventually build a better Swift, one that would allow the enthusiast a quick 200- to 300-nautical-mile day trip and positive-G light aerobatics as well. The aircraft is capable of handling almost six positive Gs, and nearly three negative Gs, present-day owners say.

The engine that he is considering is under development by Lycoming and is a four-cylinder version of the new Lycoming 580 six-cylinder, 300-hp model made for the Cessna 206. At Horn's request, Lycoming promised to look at production of the engine and said that the engine could generate between 200 and 220 hp. Weight should be comparable to that of the present Lycoming IO-360 180-hp engine, however. If Lycoming elects not to produce the new engine, then Horn will consider existing 180-hp and 200-hp engines. Lycoming is sending Aviat a mock-up of the 580 variant — as yet unnamed — for size and fit calculations.

Horn says that when he has finished installing known modifications and tweaking the airframe to reduce drag, he will have an aircraft equal to or better than the modified Swifts flying today. They would, in fact, be good enough to go on the airshow circuit with The SwiftMagic Aerobatic Team. The team has developed an impressive performance using positive-G maneuvers.

Will this factory-produced hotrod end the modification craze for the Swift? Not quite. It has been suggested that all classic aircraft go through a series of stages before the flying public declares them classic. First, the aircraft is abandoned for modern replacements. Then someone notices it has hidden capabilities that are easily brought out with a few modifications. The modifications build in number until someone takes the design as far as it can go, and then owners discover the charm of the original, slower design. That, some observers suggest, is where the Swift stands today. True, many Swift owners, such as former U.S. Marine pilot Pete King of Cabin John, Maryland, have restored the original models.

But the modification craze is not quite over, and apparently it will not end even if Aviat mass-produces the ultimate Swift. Merlyn Products in Spokane, Washington, is now developing a Swift with an extended fuselage and a 300-hp engine. The company holds many of the STCs that allow larger engines to be mounted on the Swift. Aviat may end up buying engine mounts from Merlyn, depending on how things go with the new engine that Lycoming is developing.

Engine power in the early Swifts was a source of trouble for inexperienced pilots during takeoff and landing. The All Metal Swift, as it was known, was flight tested in late 1945 with an 85-hp engine; it only looked fast (even though it was fast for its time). The low engine power contributed to a reputation for takeoff accidents. The aircraft required 1,200 feet of runway and needed to stay in ground effect after liftoff to gather speed. Some pilots didn't believe that and either floated into the trees or ran off the runway through the rutabagas. There were also a number of landing accidents because of the short-coupled fuselage. There are only eight Swifts still flying with the 85-hp engine, including three in Canada.

The poor reputation generated by the 85-hp models has stayed with the Swift, although it is undeserved. The AOPA Air Safety Foundation says that there have been 61 Swift accidents in the past 14 years, but only 13 of them involved fatalities. In fact, 31 of the accidents resulted in no injuries at all, and eight additional accidents resulted in only minor injuries.

The factories — Globe Aircraft Company, near Fort Worth, Texas; and the Texas Engineering and Manufacturing Company (Temco), near Dallas — delivered the GC-1B with a 125-hp engine. Safety was improved, but owners wanted still more power. The need for far better engine cooling (not to mention speed) led to shark-like cowlings.

The original toothy cowling is an updraft design. The modified downdraft cowlings on the Swifts owned by Nelson and Ranson are much more efficient at cooling and add knots to the airspeed. Both built their own cowlings. Ranson even enclosed his engine in a plenum chamber to control airflow. Now, no molecule of air goes where it is not wanted.

Greater power has provided a more pleasing performance, especially in the climb. Still, the Swift takes a bit of learning and a bit of technique. Any tailwheel aircraft does. During demonstration flights, both Ranson and Nelson preferred that someone new to the aircraft, such as I am, not do takeoffs, landings, taxiing, or even stalls. Many Swift aircraft have tailwheels that slip into a notch for takeoff, but Nelson and Ranson have retractable tailwheels, and the retraction is more easily accomplished without steering cables.

Most modified Swift aircraft seem always to be at the forward edge of the center of gravity envelope, especially when lightly loaded. Pilots find that they usually can't get the tail low enough for a three-point landing, and most make wheel landings instead.

Both Nelson's and Ranson's aircraft take off in less than 500 feet. Nelson's aircraft had the shortest takeoff run, breaking ground at 461 feet. Ranson claims that his 180-hp Swift keeps up well with the 210-hp models in a climb to 8,000 feet and during the cruise thereafter. Although most Swift aircraft climb best at 90 mph (78 kt), such a speed blocks forward visibility in Nelson's airplane because of the extreme high angle of attack.

Noise levels even after takeoff are high in any Swift, so forget about talking to the pilot or passenger without headsets and an intercom. Once in the air, the SuperSwift is a three-finger airplane. That is, control harmony is smooth and requires light forces; response is quick, like that of an aerobatic trainer aircraft. Spins are prohibited. Globe was anxious to open the production line in 1946 and agreed to prohibit spins as a shortcut in the certification process. However, those who have done them say that the aircraft is gentle in the stall preceding a spin and that it spins normally for the first two turns. After that, watch out. The spin apparently flattens after that. After six turns it takes four more turns to come out, accompanied by blasts of power strategically timed by the pilot.

The demonstration flights didn't get that wild, consisting of steep turns, Dutch rolls, and hands-off stability testing. Pilots must pay special attention to pitch since the aircraft will accelerate rapidly at descent angles so shallow that the neophyte pilot may not notice them. Nelson was able to demonstrate a turn hands-off, while neither climbing nor descending. The proper nose attitude for 60-degree-bank turns was quickly learned.

Overall, the aircraft generates a sense of freedom that comes from speed and quick control response. It's for pilots who fly just for grins. Globe and Temco turned out 1,521 Swift aircraft, but Swift researcher Jim Montague estimates that only 300 are actively flying. FAA records show 733 Swifts registered. Counting those no longer registered, Montague thinks there might be 900 Swifts out there.

Although the SuperSwifts are economical, that has nothing to do with why you would want to own one. It's more of an emotional thing. One owner — when asked about operating costs — looked surprised for a moment and answered, "I just like it. Fuel economy has nothing to do with it." It's not for everyone — just those who like airplanes a lot.

E-mail the author at [email protected].