Well played, Jim.

Here's an N3N parked next to my N2S. I've got to get some time in that N3N so I can report back on the differences.

IIRC the Navy used N3Ns on floats to teach introduction to Float Planes up through the 60s.

Please educate me. What is the difference between the two?

Rgs patrick

N3N was built by the Naval Aircraft Factory. All Alum parts in the Fus and wing structure.
Stearman built by the Stearman Aircraft Company. Steel tube Fuselage with wood wings.
Both Trainers, N3N was only used by the US Navy.

N3N is the box the Stearman came in...

N3N was built by the Naval Aircraft Factory. All Alum parts in the Fus and wing structure.
Stearman built by BOEING. Steel tube Fuselage with wood wings.
Both Trainers, N3N was only used by the US Navy.

One nice thing about the Stearman is that you can buy just about any part you might need from a couple of sources. I'm not sure about parts availability for the N3N. They were built at the Naval Shipyard not far from where I live. If you ever get a chance to look at the inside of one, take a peak. It's quite unique. Both planes are extremely rugged.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Air ... actory_N3N

Old thread resurrection. Id appreciate an education on N3N-3 ownership and operation. I'd like to specifically address the TCDS prohibition on intentional spins when it's seems the Navy was A OK with performing intentional inverted spins, to include producing a video that can be found on YouTube.

In short how do they handle and can I do spins or not?

Thanks Corey

Was the TCDS produced for the Navy or the CAA? Is there a NATOPS manual for it?

N3N was waaay before the NATOPS program was introduced. There would have been a flight manual but it was pretty rudimentary back then. I don’t have the history but typically the Navy would have tested and accepted the airplane. CAA not involved.

EDIT: Link to TCDS https://drs.faa.gov/browse/excelExterna ... 60C38.0001

If it came into the civilian registry the same as the Navy’s T-34Bs, than the answer is that no one was willing to pay for the testing to remove the limit. Ex-USAF T-34As are fully aerobatic, ex-Navy are not (legally). It has nothing to do with how the military flew them and everything to do with how they were civilian certified.

P.S. if it’s experimental-exhibition you can fly it like the Navy legally.

Perhaps a more succinct question.

Is there a possible way to have a certified standard category N3N-3 and legally be able to provide a CFI spin endorsement in it? Or fly a basic aerobatic routine that includes a spin?

I don't know the answers to Corey's questions - though I suspect the answer is no - but it's a very interesting airframe. I've looked at them a few times and they are significantly different than a Model 75 Stearman. A bucket of bolts isn't far off as they are largely bolted together and the use of angle iron instead of tubing is not just interesting it has advantages...

The Wright motor isn't as commonplace as a Continental (or a Lycoming for that matter) but they are great engines.

The market value of N3N's is not what a similar Stearman would bring either. There were several for sale last year and I know of one in a museum which is though not on the market.