Best warbird to own

Correction: A T-28 does require a LOA letter. A limited licensed P-51D does
not require a LOA letter.
V Lenoch
LOOA

Subject: Best warbird to own
From: (MLenoch)
Date: 11/8/03 5:30 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

Correction: A T-28 does require a LOA letter. A limited licensed P-51D does
not require a LOA letter.
V Lenoch
LOOA


How come no one chose a B-26 Martin Marauder? You guys don't know what good is.
(grin)

Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

On or about 6 Nov 2003 21:45:26 -0800, (Charles
Talleyrand) allegedly uttered:

I'm fantasy shopping for my new warbird or historic aircraft. My
requirements are ...

- Historic value (rare and interesting aircraft)
- Reasonably easy to fly
- No turbines and under 12,500 lbs (no type rating needed)
- Seats two
- Aerobatic
- Easy on the eyes

Mosquito, no question. Reliable, fun to fly, seats two, plus carries
up to 4,000lb of "baggage". Of course finding one to buy could be a
little tricky, but we are talking fantasy here.

---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - Drink Faster

Correction: A T-28 does require a LOA letter. A limited licensed P-51D does
not require a LOA letter.
V Lenoch
LOOA

Vlado,
A big engine 28 requires a letter. The small engine T-28A does not. It's a
HorsePower thing.
Matt Gunsch,
A&P,IA,Private Pilot
Riding member of the
2003 world champion drill team
Arizona Precision Motorcycle Drill Team
GWRRA,NRA,GOA

Gregg Germain wrote:

THREE guys? Wow I'm impressed. Was one in the nose? ;^)

There was a modification of the P-38 that added a passenger seat in the nose.
The troops gave it the nickname "droop-snoot". Since it replaced the guns, it
was not a popular mod with the pilots. The military radio gear lived in a hole
behind the pilot and was quite substantial. Remove that, and you can fit a
rather cramped seat back there.

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

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.

Charles Talleyrand wrote:

I've read three things. The p51 is unstable in pitch with full tanks and the
resulting aft CG, and that a p51 has a high speed stall that's tougher than
most other WWII fighters. And finally the p51 has a higher stall speed
than other contemporary fighters.

The balance problem is caused by the aft fuselage tank. Many Mustangs have had
this removed. In any case, you won't need to fill it unless you're planning a
1600 mile trip. Stall speed in military configuration was about 95, which isn't
out of line with other fighters of the era and is actually a bit lower than the
Bf-109. I've read, however, that the plane doesn't give warning before the stall
and drops the left wing dramatically when it does. Len Deighton claims that few
military pilots three-pointed the Mustang because that gets you too close to the
stall speed. Some years back, I got to watch 52 of these planes land at Sun'n
Fun. Every landing was a wheel landing with the tail slightly low.

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

On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 16:50:42 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote in Message-Id: :

On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 10:39:34 -0600, Alan Minyard
wrote in Message-Id:
:

How about an A-37 (or T-37) Tweety Bird? Two seats, reasonable
handling, not too bad on fuel.

Are these actually available? Do you have any idea of the going
price?

http://www.aircraft.com/listings/for...D=1041145&nh=0
CESSNA T-37C, N37VC, Upgraded Engine 20 SMOH, Complete Restoration,
NAT Audio Panel, Skyforce Display, Full Dual Controls, 400 Knots with
Air. Make Offer , $550,000


http://www.airshow.net/globeaero/
Warbirds
(5) T-37 Dragonflys, Removed from foreign government's inventory, need
complete restoration. $100,000 USD in container.

Great PIREP:
Budd Davisson, Air Progress, October, 1976
http://www.caaviation.com/links/fram...essnaT-37.html
The T-37 is cheap (new copies are being sold by Cessna for around
$350,000.

In article ,
"G.R. Patterson III" wrote:

orary fighters.

The balance problem is caused by the aft fuselage tank. Many Mustangs have
had
this removed. In any case, you won't need to fill it unless you're planning a
1600 mile trip. Stall speed in military configuration was about 95, which
isn't
out of line with other fighters of the era and is actually a bit lower than
the
Bf-109. I've read, however, that the plane doesn't give warning before the
stall
and drops the left wing dramatically when it does. Len Deighton claims that
few
military pilots three-pointed the Mustang because that gets you too close to
the
stall speed. Some years back, I got to watch 52 of these planes land at Sun'n
Fun. Every landing was a wheel landing with the tail slightly low.


I only have 1 hour in a Mustang, but when doing stalls it gave plenty of
warning with the stall occuring at about 81KIAS. We did not however do
any accelerated stalls.

--
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

In article ,
"killfile" wrote:


The P-51 is a little more unforgiving than some other WWII fighters because
of it's high speed laminar-flow wing - this gives it speed and range, at the
cost of a more 'sudden' wing stall and a higher stall speed.

The Spitfire is more forgiving to fly because, due to a design quirk, it's
airframe actually gives a little shudder to warn you you're near a wing
stall state.


I've never flown a Spitfire, but if you miss the buffet on a Mustang you
must be brain-dead.

--
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