Warbird Information Exchange

When Scott was here last month, I went thru my old photos and came across the photos I had taken when we were having the P-64 painted.
The plane had all ready had a going over with brass brushes and MEK before it was flown to the paint shop. This is the same P-64 that is now in Thialand.
PREP WORK









BASE COLOR





LAYING OUT THE MARKINGS



FINISHED





As it is painting in Thialand


A funny story about when the Thia's brought the plane to Oshkosh, after they shut down, I went over to look it over, I was confronted by a flunky that was trying to shoo me away saying "don't touch, we restore, don't touch". I looked at him and said, BS, you repainted it, I helped to build it. I then asked him if he could see the printing on the 100lb practice bomb, as I had my back to it, he said he could, I said good, follow me, and I recited every line that was on the bomb, I knew it, because I painted it.
After that, I could look all I want.

Matt
Thanks for the pictures, especially the ones of Carl, I have lots of great memories of sitting under SJ's wing at Reno with him.
Norm

Excellent photos, Matt! This is certainly the most accurate copy I have ever seen, but to keep the record straight, for those who are not aware, this is a conversion of (I believe) an SNJ. There is only one real P-64 in existence, and that is the pride of the EAA Museum at Oshkosh, Wisconsin.

Doug

Looks like Harvard side panels and aft fuselage (square baggage door). Is that right Matt?

Gary

A quick search came up with ex Bu27560, c/n 88-12956, NX30CE, making it an SNJ-4. The NA-68, aka P-64, had rectangular baggage doors, so I'm sure this was just one more attempt at accuracy.

Doug

It was that plane in name only. The P-64 started out as a truck load of parts, and never was a complete aircraft. Some of the things we did and used were a cowling from a HU-16, T-28 prop, R-1820, Wildcat wheels, was added a 2nd oil cooler under the baggage compartment, engine and smoke oil tanks in rear fuselage, as well O2 bottles. 3ft were cut from each wing. Operational centerline shackle, could be used for a 55 gal drop tank or practice bomb.
The last year Carl was at Oshkosh, we had a chance to crawl over the EAA P-64 and take alot of pictures, and we were in the planning stages for building the most accurate replica yet. We discovered the P-64 had a SNJ-2 wing center section and tail cone, and Yale outer wings. By the end of Oshkosh, we had all ready located the major parts needed, unfortunatly, less than 6 months later, we lost Carl in a T-6 accident.

The P-64 is still around, I have been trying without success to get in contact with the museum that had th eplane to see if they would like to have the jigs and drawings I have.

I remember seeing this in Oshkosh ages ago.

_________________
-Al Sauer
http://www.flickr.com/photos/spookythecat

Was there not a more suitable accurate - looking prop available? Aren't there a few 'stock' T-6s (SNJs) with 1820s?

Matt, thanks very much for the 'parts list' description for the pseudo P-64. During my research into the 'heavyweight' section of the NA-16 family, I have received several excellent photos from Dick Phillips and Bill Larkins, but this thread has really given me an insight into the history of this specific aircraft.

cheers
Doug

[quote="famvburg"]Was there not a more suitable accurate - looking prop available? Aren't there a few 'stock' T-6s (SNJs) with 1820s?

There are no stock SNJs with a 1820, it is a larger diameter engine. There are a few with geared R-1340s, one is Rick Hosking's N5287N, he flys out of Leeward Air Ranch.

As far as a more suitable looking prop, we went with what we did for 2 reasons. 1) we has ALOT more ponies than a stock T-6, 1425 vs 600, we could not go above half throttle until the tail was in the air, otherwise the plane would take off from the runway sideways.
2) GROUND clearance, if we did not have a square tip prop, we would have one after the first take off, well, maybe not square, but it would be a Q-tip prop.

What was the original round-tipped type of prop the P-64 had, similar to a DC-3 type? What sort of ground clearance did it have? I recall seeing a pic of somebody's T-6 some time back that in the caption was claimed to be powered by an 1820. I think it had a bigger rudder, too.

The original had a round tip prop, but the original started out with 800hp, and ended with 1000hp. We had 1425, and the square tip was the bes way to give us ground clearance and harness the power.

There is a plane that is flying with a SNJ-2 rudder, but it has a geared 1340. You can tell at a glance if it had a 1820 on the nose, there is a big difference.
We had a strange occurance because of the larger Diameter engine. When doing the high speed testing, one of the front canopy side panels was sucked out of the frame. The larger engine caused a low pressure area to form right at the front canopy.

So, just what sort of 'high speed' does that thing get with 1420 horses?? And climb rate?

It was over 310mph when the canopy panel left, and as far as rate of climb, lets just say, from a standing stop to 5000ft, a Bearcat did not stand a chance of keeping up with it, that was from Jim Fause, who flew it from Deervalley to Galvaston, he had alot of bearcat time in the navy.

A couple of quick notes on the NA-16 heavyweights: The P-64 (the real one) used the front canopy and sliding section from the O-47, so it was quite different from the AT-6/SNJ/Harvard canopies. The NA-44, the progenitor of all of these big-engined, heavy firepower types, served with us here in Canada and while serving at #1 Instructors School at Station Trenton in southern Ontario, easily outflew students trying to best it in Hurricanes. It out turned, out dove and out climbed the fighters, with its R-1820.

Doug