Best warbird to own

I don't know enough to find the right aircraft.

Look in the classifieds under Piper / L-4.

Ship of dreams!

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Hey Dan,
Have you seen this one, restored here in Brazil?
http://www.abaac.com.br/L-4.jpg
Vicente

"Cub Driver" escreveu na mensagem
...
Look in the classifieds under Piper / L-4.
Ship of dreams!
all the best -- Dan Ford

In article , Cub Driver
wrote:

Look in the classifieds under Piper / L-4.

(You beat me to it, Dan.)
I recommend any "L-bird"... easy to fly, cheap to insure, sips fuel and
oil.

"EDR" wrote in message ...
In article , Cub Driver
wrote:

Look in the classifieds under Piper / L-4.

The L-17 is a nice one. Howver it's not acrobatic (neither is the L-4 for that matter).
That was one of his requirements.

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...

"EDR" wrote in message
...
In article , Cub Driver
wrote:

Look in the classifieds under Piper / L-4.

The L-17 is a nice one. Howver it's not acrobatic (neither is the L-4
for that matter).
That was one of his requirements.

Prime piece http://www.jerrychristian.com/birddog51.htm

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 14:11:45 -0500, "Ron Natalie"
wrote:


"EDR" wrote in message ...
In article , Cub Driver
wrote:

Look in the classifieds under Piper / L-4.

The L-17 is a nice one. Howver it's not acrobatic (neither is the L-4 for that matter).
That was one of his requirements.

Glad you pointed that out.

In article ,
EDR writes:
In article , Cub Driver
wrote:

Look in the classifieds under Piper / L-4.

(You beat me to it, Dan.)
I recommend any "L-bird"... easy to fly, cheap to insure, sips fuel and
oil.

There are a lot of options in that area, too. If an L-4 or L-5 (Cub
on steroids - the Stinson L-5's rather a bit roomier, more powerful,
and can haul a bit more, but isn't as much fun to fly as a Cub) is a
bit too cold & drafty, give an L-19 a try. There are others, as well
- When Army Aviation went through an explosive expansion during the
Korean War, they chose teh L-19 as the main Liason/Observation
airplane, but Cessna couldn't build them fast enough, so the Army also
bought a whole radt of Aeronca 7 Champs (L-16), and Piper Super Cubs
(L-18 and L-21). Even teh Navion (L-17) will do, if you want to bring
teh family along.

If you're looking for aerobatics, the best choice for a light airplane
would probably be a T-34A or T-34B. Most of teh stucture is Beech
Bonanza/Debonair (The conventionally tailed Bonanza), they're
aerobatic, 2 seats, tricycle gear, etc. Unfortunately, they're so
much fun, and relatively practical to fly, that the purchace price is
sky high. A Bf 108 would be rather neat, or one of the French Nord Bf
108 followons.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

Peter Stickney wrote:

A Bf 108 would be rather neat, or one of the French Nord Bf
108 followons.

When I bought my Maule, TAP had an ad for a 108 for the same price. It was a
hard choice.

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money prolonging
the problem.

IIRC, unless you're dealing with a trainer type, a "Letter of
Authorization" is required to fly the more powerful & faster types,
whether they are over 12,500 lbs. or not & an L of A is essentially a
Type Rating. You don't get "typed" in a military aircraft except for
cases where it has a civil version. Why avoid a Type or L of A anyway?

In article ,
wrote:

IIRC, unless you're dealing with a trainer type, a "Letter of
Authorization" is required to fly the more powerful & faster types,
whether they are over 12,500 lbs. or not & an L of A is essentially a
Type Rating. You don't get "typed" in a military aircraft except for
cases where it has a civil version. Why avoid a Type or L of A anyway?


Is that in the FARs anywhere? I've "heard" that but haven't found any
proof.

With a hi-perf/complex/tailwheel endorsement I should be able to hop in
a Mustang and go around the patch..legally. Not smart, but legal.

As I understand the LOAs or for those a/c in which a type rating would
be required but no civil variant exists.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html