Warbird Information Exchange

Did the P-26 replica built a few years back ever get flown?

Yes, but it apparently hasn't flown since becoming part of Yagen's collection.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkJYOJj0EU4

Shame that a certain group of aircraft seem to not be on the flying list but I understand the situation given the cost, lack of pilot experience, etc.

P-26
I-15BIS
I-16
I-153
LA-9
Mig-3
Fiat G.46
Me-208

Does anyone know any other aircraft that came to the museum flyable and they have yet to be flown?

_________________
Keep Em' Flying,
Christopher Soltis
Dedicated to the preservation and education of The Sikorsky Memorial Airport

CASC Blog Page: http://ctair-space.blogspot.com/
Warbird Wear: https://www.redbubble.com/people/warbirdwear/shop

Chicks Dig Warbirds.......right?

There were also a pair of P-26 replicas being built by Tim O'Connor, but he unfortunately passed away last fall. I hope someone can carry on Tim's dream of finishing these.

https://www.peashooter.net/

_________________
Matt

Okay, here's the deal. Wasn't that P-26 slightly smaller than 100%? Say 85%. Anyway, when you scale down a warbird they typically are much harder to fly, much harder to land, and in some cases don't fly anything like the original design. Also, the re-sale price is a fraction of what a 100% sized replica will bring, even an unfaithful reproduction. It's a beautiful aircraft to look at and photograph.
Now on the I-15bis, I-16. I-153; When these were purchased they were all flyable. The word I got from one of the museum's pilots is that no one had the guts to fly them. They are very difficult and strange compared to Western European designs. They are also rare combat survivors and there is a valid argument for not risking these rarest of airplanes.
The LA-9 and Mig-3. I believe these were restored and flown in Russia. What I was told was that the Russian standards to airworthiness are somewhat different than how we restore aircraft here. There's not a 100% confidence in their work. My dad had one of the first five Yak- 52's imported into the U.S. At that time the story was that you could get anything in Russia signed off as overhauled with a bribe of two liters of vodka. So, we put a factory fresh engine on our YAK-52. Our Romanian built example was well built. That being said, the LA-9 and Mig-3 are super rare survivors, and there's a strong argument for not flying them based on their rarity.
The Fiat G-46. There was one that was flown to Oshkosh every year for many years and later Rudy Frasca restored one with a radial engine. MY guess why it isn't flown is rarity of engine and spare parts. It's supposed to be a nice flying aircraft.
The ME-208 (NORD 1101 Ramier) We bought the flyable example owned at that time by Jon Silberman, His mechanic at the time , Jaybo Hinyub strongly advised against flying it and we trucked it home with spare engines and parts. My dad had flown and liked the one owned by Ray Martin of Miami. Ray had re-engined it with a turbocharged Piper PA-31 engine and it flew great. The problem with the design is 1) Hollow steel prop and because of corrosion, there are none to be found. 2) Complex hydraulic system including landing gear that requires expensive expertise. 3) The Renault 6Q-10 engine has no spare pars or anyone rebuilding them at this time. So, for the cost to get this airplane flying again you could just buy another warbird!

Sorry to drag a P26 thread off on a tangent but...

The La9 was restored in New Zealand for the OFMC at Duxford, UK. It flew pretty extensively in NZ and UK, so I don't think there's any real doubts about its airworthiness. Had the pleasure of seeing it several times and it was quite a performer, very much in the SeaFury/Bearcat bracket.

As for the I-15bis, I-153 and I-16, I've only heard of the I-16 being tricky (weak landing gear, poor forward view, etc). The other two are supposedly really nice to fly, there used to be a Russian owned I-15bis kept at Duxford and it used to put on some stellar performances.

I'm only an enthusiast so don't take my word as gospel, but the biplanes are reputed to be a lot more manageable than the I-16.

As for rarity, all the Russian types with the exception of the La-9 are pretty much new built within the last couple of decades. They have original ID's but are basically new build, so treating them as "last surviving relic" is a bit unjustified. They were restored/built just a few years ago to be flown.

Just my views anyway.

Back in the 1990s I had opportunity to visit some of the aviation museums in Russia, and saw a couple of the recovered I-16/I-153 wrecks. These were literally badly rusted small parts. These may well not have been the same aircraft as restored in NZ, but I agree with LysanderUK that those redone in NZ are likely to be much more data-plate-reproductions than the real things.

Can anybody provide more information on the originality of the Russian aircarft in the US? Do the I-16/153 aircraft have original engines of the appropriate types? Do these include any original structural pieces (I assume there would be some original parts, such as instruments).

_________________
Kevin McCartney

I think the Yagen P-26 is more like 97 percent size, the builder says "near 100 percent":
http://www.rareplanes.com/mc/projects.html



-

_________________
http://www.biplanerides1.com/

Tim (R.I.P) was building full size P-26s.

Saludos,


Tulii

_________________
Why take the best part of life out of your life, when you can have life with the best part of your life in your life?

I am one of them 'futbol' people.

Will the previous owner has pics of this double cabin sample

GOOD MORNING, WELCOME TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Press "1" for English.
Press "2" to disconnect until you have learned to speak English.

Sooooo, how am I going to know to press 1 or 2, if I do not speak English????

The Polikarpovs were (re)built in Russia for Tim Wallis in New Zealand. These are the ones now in the US and Europe. They had new-build wooden structures, using some original metal parts IIRC, and were fitted with An-2 engines. I believe the propellers were based on An-2 hubs modified to take 2 blades.

Yes, the Polikarpov types all have An-2 engines (copy of Wright R1820), but it's important to say that these engines are pretty much exactly the same as those used in the original I-15, I-16 etc, so they are close to authentic. IIRC, the prop hubs are four blade An-2 hubs with two of the sockets "bunged" and the blades are cropped and reprofiled An-2 as well.

I believe both the Fiat G.59s flying are Merlin powered. Rudy Frasca's G.46 has a Vedeneyev radial fitted, plenty of them to be found in Yak 50s, Sukhoi 26s, etc, etc...

I could be wrong here but I think the statement is in reference to the fact that the aircraft is not 100% scale (accurate) in its method of construction rather than not 100% scale in size.

From a few years ago at Warbirds Over the Beach, I was told by one of the mechanics that the P-26 doesn’t fly b/c the airplane wasn’t exactly built for any type of “stress.” If you see it close up, the skin is wrinkled all over the place...surprising for an airplane with relatively few hours on it. The Mig 3 apparently has poor metallurgy in one of the MLG legs, that being the main concern I heard. As far as the LA-9 goes, they supposedly had the cannon coming to fit to the aircraft...not sure if that’s just to make it a more accurate static or what??? I’ve seen older videos of the LA-9 when it was in NZ, and it looks like quite a performer! If I remember correctly, I think MAAM owns the (only?) substantial remains of an LA-5 as well. Hoping I can go back this year!

And back to the original thread, I hope these P-26 reproductions get finished...looked like the guy was doing amazing work. I followed the build as I did with the San Diego Aerospace one with great interest.

_________________
I'm looking for that buried Corsair(s) that I can dig up, pressure wash, and fly!