This is the place where the majority of the warbird (aircraft that have survived military service) discussions will take place. Specialized forums may be added in the new future
Tue Aug 25, 2009 10:38 pm
I'm 99% sure that 4,848.5lbs is the empty weight from what I have in front of me. I wrote it down about 10 yrs ago when I was helping with the condition inspection but my handwritting isn't the best. I'm not sure about lead, I'll check the next time I'm out there.
As for the brakes, I can tell you from personel experience that the set up works beautifully. I accidentally got the tail off the ground while standing in place during a run up several years ago. Scared me down about five pounds or so.
Tue Aug 25, 2009 11:11 pm
with a R-1830 on the nose, the engine weight is about 1500lbs, the 1340 was 715 lbs. also the props would be a large weight increase, the T-6 prop is about 180lbs, and the 23e50 is about 450lbs. so there is about a 1050lb increase, and if they increased the oil capacity, to 24 gallons, add another 90lbs.
If they moved the battery, and oil tank to the tail cone, that is a weight shift of about 90lbs (12 gallons) in oil, and another 80lbs for the battery. throw in a smoke system, and that is a bit more weight, but there still should be a good size chunk of lead back there.
I don't have a 6 W&B to play the numbers on, but it would be interesting to see how it comes out.
Wed Aug 26, 2009 7:44 am
As long as people are talking about making a Harvard/T-6/SNJ look more like a Zero, I've always wondered why, with all of the attention to detail, when the TTT a/c were made, why didn't they come up with a more accurate horizontal stab & elevator? Was there a reason they couldn't go to the trouble to mount, say, BT-13 stabs & elevators to give it a more Zero-like tail? BTW, I used a BT-13 tail as an example because they were using BT-13s already & the horizontals would be closer in appearance than stock T-6 horizontals, but there is probably something even closer in shape. Or maybe they could have modified the stock stabs & elevators by adding extensions to give them straight tapers to the tips. I mean these TTT Zeros look so accurate until they peel off & there are the big ol' round T-6 tails. Just wondering.
Thu Aug 27, 2009 8:05 am
With regard to the weight comments . . . to better judge as a comparable to "regular" TORA movie Zeros, the one I own and fly (tail number AI-101, aka TORA 101) has an empty of a bit over 4400 lbs.
CCF4-2064 is a late 1952 CC&F built Harvard IV, with the 140 USG fuel system, plus all of the TTT movie mods, and the geared R1340 engine and 3 bladed prop/spinner. Plus over the years, I've been lucky to be able to add all sorts of goodies like three GPS's, WX, 4 moving maps, Dynon EFIS ADI, Sandel HSI, Aspen terrain gauge, complete backup of regular flight instruments, TruTrak 3 axis autopilot, full JPI EDM700-9C engine/fuel computer, Redline brakes, smoke system, propane/oxygen gas guns, back seat, 70 lb Concorde battery + BatteryMinder in the hell hole (and for CG another 20 lbs of lead back there) . . . et al et al et al.
Doug Jackson
PS--and the best Zero at least in my mind . . . of course . . . mine! lol
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
phpBB Mobile / SEO by Artodia.