Warbird Information Exchange

North American AT-6/SNJ/Harvard "Texan" would be my choice. I've owned a couple and flown others and I think they fit your guidelines if the owner is involved in some of the maintenance. Basically, it is a two-place warbird that is aerobatic and great for formation flying. If you can fly a Texan well, you can fly most any single-engine warbird, including fighters. My 2 cents.

Randy

Good question the way you posed it...lots of different possibilities here, but the one that I have had the most fun in & would seem to be the most affordable would be a Stearman. I was lucky to go supersonic while in the USAF, have ridden in a couple of WW11 fighters and the Dauntless, but I now understand why some interviewed vets said that they did not care if they never flew in anything else but the Stearman. Fuel burn is comparativley low and they are a pretty simple flying machine.

it seems i didnt read the question properly .
so a normal persons warbird.
a boomerang
simple systems (it shares the same linage as the t6) it's still a fighter .
it's unique to Australia (altho there is a very nice replica in the us)
mechanical maintenance should be to expensive as it uses a dc3 motor plenty of experience with local work shops.
and i allready have a nice colour scheme in mind for it .

Stearman or a T-6.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

Yak-18T.

Seats 4 full sized people and bags, is aerobatic with 2, goes places at a decent speed. Plus, you can put a Western cockpit into it pretty easy. What's not to like?

My choice would be the Vought OS2U Kingfisher. I would love to operate one on floats but they were used as fixed gear aircraft on anti submarine patrols. Pratt and Whitney R-985 is a well known and supported engine. Can carry at least two maybe three. It would be very unusual at air shows though admittedly there are not that many float plane airshows. Plus in my dreams I would fly it over every surviving US battleship for photo ops with the ships name painted on.

_________________
"I can't understand it, I cut it twice and it's still too short!" Robert F. Dupre' 1923-2010 Go With God.

I have to agree with ww2John on the Navion. His reasons are enough for me. Hugh

_________________
My father was a a/c armorer 7th aaf 318FG 73FS

While an A-26C would be a dream I have to say an O-2A. The visibility with a high wing would be nice plus i'm all for having a second engine just in case. After getting to fly in a Navion last fall I can say that'd be a nice little plane as well.

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

Very good question. I like the part about being realistic... haha

For me and my current budget, I think all I could afford would be a Stearman. Like mentioned by others, the fuel burn isn't too bad, maintenance is simple, and I think I could handle fabric work when required.

Though not as sporty as fighter, I bet I could have one heck of a great time flying it. There's something about flying low and slow that is just soooooo... enjoyable.

------------

If I was ever financially able to move one step up, into the T-6/fighters range I'd like to have a P-40 because they are beautiful airplanes, and more unique than say a Mustang or a Spitfire.

But... cough cough, if I could only barely afford to be in that category of airplane I'd figure on getting a Harvard/T-6 (or P-51 with a little more coin) because of the extreme wealth of knowledge there is about the type as well as what I can only assume is the biggest network of parts and systems specialists for the Harvard and P-51, versus a P-40, Spit, Hurricane, etc.

If I were to win the Lottery I think I'd still get a P-40. I image I'd be very happy with one!

Cheers,

David

http://flickr.com/photos/guilhermemtorr ... 525009382/

I wish this rare Corsair would come home.

_________________
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?

Hmmm, once I get to fly a couple maybe then I could decide.

The SBD Dauntless has a reputation as a pleasant aircraft to fly, doesn't seem like it would be too hard to keep up, has room for a friend and is perhaps the U.S. Navy aircraft of greater historic signficance than any other. Battle of Midway....'nuff said!

This Hurricane. I have heard a lot of great things about the performance of the Hurricane and its handling. Roald Dahl flew one, and that alone made them my favorite fighter from a very early age. They are absolutely beautiful, and this is the newest one money can buy

When I think of "warbird", I think of something that had guns at one time.
There are other choices posted here that don't fit my "image" of a warbird...so: since I can't afford a P-38...

A Beech Staggerwing. I love the look of that airplane. It'll carry 4 people and baggage. I have no idea what the fuel burn is. I have no idea what the maint. costs/problems would be. I don't care. I want it anyway.

Mudge the aesthete

_________________
Land of the free because of the brave

P-36 Hawk because they are simple for a fighter And subposedly they fly very nice.
Or a Allison powered mustang because I've herd that Allisons burn less gas and require less maintenance.