I identified my choice as the following.
JDK Wrote:
Why?
JDK,
I guess the answer is, I find the fact that there aren't any flying and that what little I know of it, is that it's very challenging to fly, compelling. In that regard, it's alot like the Yale. Also a lot of good men prepared for bigger and more important multis in this weird little art deco trainer.
Although I haven't responded to the "If you could own a Mustang (or whatever other airframe) would you own" threads, I generally could own most any of the types that are mentioned, but, while the really common ones are appealing, none of them are desireable enough to me to aquire one. I like them all and would enjoy flying any of them, but to have them long term I think you have to have a bigger interest than just the way they fly. The whole "status symbol" thing is virtually meaningless to me at this point, I have more respect and admiration for the difficultly of flying a PT-22 well than making a low pass in the P-51 or Corsair, but it's hard to compare them exactly, particularly because I have only flown the types I have purchased. I generally don't fly other peoples airplanes.
The more I think about the warbird community and the longer I am involved, the more I am attracted to the less common types. I really like the AT-9 and the Mauler, because they are rare. The O-47 really appeals to me for the same reason. Probably quite a while down the road before I get the bug for a Walrus though.