AT-6 or T-6? It's AT-6

[Matt Gunsch]

I am done with this subject and this site as well, another one who works on and restores warbirds is gone

[muddyboots]

OH FFS!

[Randy Haskin]

I am done with this subject and this site as well, another one who works on and restores warbirds is gone

All that because people don't agree with your position on this?

YGBSM.

C'mon, dude...that's the way my 2-year-old handles disappointment and disagreement. That's not how adults do it.

[Saabmeister]

I am done with this subject and this site as well, another one who works on and restores warbirds is gone

Ahahahaha, you've gotta be kidding me. You're leaving because some people disagreed with your opinion on the designation and name of an aircraft? Grow some thicker skin pal.

[Stoney]

I don't like the name, but I'm staying.

[Tulio]

Would it help a little, if we agreed that we should honor people, and recognize the role of airplanes?

Saludos,


Tulio

[famvburg]

Just realized I made a typo when I typed OS2U. I meant O2U. I edited my post but it still shows OS2U in posts where mine is quoted. Sorry 'bout that.

[quote="famvburg"]"Mentor II" might be one thing, but "T-34" would be out of sequence. Not that something like that has stopped DoD before. Mentioning heritage names tho, & jumping both manufacturers & service branch, but Vought's Corsair lineage is not right. Technically, the Corsair should have been the Corsair II & the A-7 should have been the Corsair III since Vought's O2U was named Corsair originally. I guess they wanted everyone to forget that.

[famvburg]

T-28 would be out of sequence, too, & there was a T-28E, as the YAT-28E.

shoulda called it the T-28 E or F maybe?

[famvburg]

I'm not all that familiar with Curtiss' bipes, but ISTR many of them, tho designated differently, were just variants of the same design(?). Also, wasn't the P-36 called a Mohawk? We all know the P-40 was the Warhawk, which at least makes them separate from just "Hawk". As for the P-60 & P-62, I don't think I ever saw names on them.

"Mentor II" might be one thing, but "T-34" would be out of sequence. Not that something like that has stopped DoD before. Mentioning heritage names tho, & jumping both manufacturers & service branch, but Vought's Corsair lineage is not right. Technically, the Corsair should have been the Corsair II & the A-7 should have been the Corsair III since Vought's OS2U was named Corsair originally. I guess they wanted everyone to forget that.

Well then what would you do with Curtis Hawks for cryin' out loud?
PW-8, P-1, P-2, P-3, P-4, P-5, P-6, P-11, P-14, P-15, P-19, YP-17, P-20, P-21, P-22, P-23 P-36, XP-37, P-40, P-60 and P-62

The P-36 should have been the Hawk XVII?

[famvburg]

Geez, touchy aren't you?

I am done with this subject and this site as well, another one who works on and restores warbirds is gone

[shrike]

I'm not all that familiar with Curtiss' bipes, but ISTR many of them, tho designated differently, were just variants of the same design(?). Also, wasn't the P-36 called a Mohawk? We all know the P-40 was the Warhawk, which at least makes them separate from just "Hawk". As for the P-60 & P-62, I don't think I ever saw names on them.

It's a running joke on Curtiss' lack of imagination when naming aircraft. As far as the company was concerned, if it was a fighter, it was a Hawk, ground attack was a Shrike, observation was a Falcon. The USArmy didn't do 'official' names until WWII, using the manufacturers own name if it mattered. The British used names, and the US adopted some of them, which is why the North American 'Apache' ended up being the "Mustang" in all but the A-36 variant. The published factory name may have been why the Luftwaffe referred to them as 'Indianer'

[Jack Cook]

Texan.......be it a new one or a old one........I'll go for a ride!!!

[agent86]

T-28 would be out of sequence, too, & there was a T-28E, as the YAT-28E.

shoulda called it the T-28 E or F maybe?

My friends chuck and John who owned C&J sales in Camarillo owned both(only 2) YAT 28 airframes.Know the plane well.ever seen one in person?seen em both .I only knew them as the YAT -28.oops,my mistake.been around a few T-28's.wrenched on more than one in Camarillo too.
Youre wrong Matt.wrench turners still are here.I like your posts,please dont leave

Last edited by agent86 on Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[planeoldsteve]

The last trainer was the T-45, so how do we go from 45 to 6, were there 61 trainer models that I don't know about ?

You get there exactly the same way you get from F-107 to F-4.

Thank McNamara
F-110 "Spectre"
F-111 "Aardvark"
F-117 "Nighthawk'

Steve

[DocThrock]

We tell folks that we have a 1942 AT-6D Texan. It's sort of a bastard, like most "T6"s. Many parts changed up over the years, some due to damage. Still has the gun cowls (and many patches), hope to put faux guns back in some day. Anyway, our plane is a TEXAN. It was made in TEXAS. It is named TEXAS TWISTER. The N number ends in TX.

Having said that, somehow along the line it got painted as an SNJ?!?!

And it has a HARVARD canopy?

So maybe our plane isn't a TEXAN any more?

We tell people it was a gunnery trainer (which in fact it was), so the designation is ATTACK TRAINER - 6D.

Anyway, it is a hoot to fly, whatever you call it.

What bugs me is doing a google search on T6 TEXAN and I get about 40 pages of Texan II stuff and have to sift through for the venerable radial trainer stuff.