Definitely the T-28!
Sat Sep 09, 2006 8:54 pm
Okay, guys 'n dolls, give me a second here while I stick my foot deeply into my mouth...
I'm no expert on the Great WIX Trojan Versus Texan Debate. Heck, I'm not even a pilot. But, even when I *know* I should just sit here and be entertained, I just can't resist tossing in my $0.01 worth (only one cent, 'cuz I really have no bidness even saying a word here).
Based on my completely un-scientific observations at countless air shows over the last 30 years or so:
(1) Sound -- the R-1820 in the T-28 sounds SO much cooler than the Pratt in the T-6, especially when it's throttled-up tight and really hummin'! Zoom-zoom!!!
(2) Sight -- no matter how hard you try, you just can't make a T-6 look THIS totally cool:
(3) Practicality -- there's a lot to be said for having lots of room and comfort, and plenty of trunk space (for your weed and guns, right?).
Someone suggested the venerable T-34 as an alternative to the '28 and the '6. I spent a little back-seat time in a Mentor a few years ago. It was a lot of fun! However... a 300 HP Mentor compared to a Trojan running that oh-so-cool R-1820... no contest! Perhaps I'm biased because our beloved B-17 runs four R-1820s...
Cheers!
I'm no expert on the Great WIX Trojan Versus Texan Debate. Heck, I'm not even a pilot. But, even when I *know* I should just sit here and be entertained, I just can't resist tossing in my $0.01 worth (only one cent, 'cuz I really have no bidness even saying a word here).
Based on my completely un-scientific observations at countless air shows over the last 30 years or so:
(1) Sound -- the R-1820 in the T-28 sounds SO much cooler than the Pratt in the T-6, especially when it's throttled-up tight and really hummin'! Zoom-zoom!!!
(2) Sight -- no matter how hard you try, you just can't make a T-6 look THIS totally cool:
(3) Practicality -- there's a lot to be said for having lots of room and comfort, and plenty of trunk space (for your weed and guns, right?).
Someone suggested the venerable T-34 as an alternative to the '28 and the '6. I spent a little back-seat time in a Mentor a few years ago. It was a lot of fun! However... a 300 HP Mentor compared to a Trojan running that oh-so-cool R-1820... no contest! Perhaps I'm biased because our beloved B-17 runs four R-1820s...
Cheers!
Sat Sep 09, 2006 8:59 pm
So everyone agrees the perfect airplane is the P-64. A Texan with the 1820. Right sounding motor, tailwheel, and make the fat girlfriend drive your golf clubs to the next airport in her Honda. If you find a prettier friend just go to another airport. Simple
Sat Sep 09, 2006 9:13 pm
If I wanted a Piper Chrokee that burns 60 GPH I would have bought a T-28. There is no challenge in that thar plane! 
Nice cans by the way.... OIL CANS!
Nice cans by the way.... OIL CANS!
Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:06 pm
Zulu: I'll be the lone devils's advocate here and tell you that neither are that suitable for first restoration projects. You need to be looking at something much smaller and considerably less expensive for that getting your feet wet. IF the object is to own one or the other as your one flying toy, then you are borderline, and should be looking at a flying aircraft.
Here are a few reasons for what I say:
The T's are large enough that most of the work is going to require at least a second person for virtually anything. You are always going to be trying to find someone to help, unless you have a spare body always hanging around. Something the size of an L-Bird only really requires a second person for hanging wings and controls and a few other items. If you have the shop set up right, even that can be reduced considerably.
The T's are going to hit you hard in the pocket to restore. A rough number is going to be in the area of 100K$ for parts and supplies, and that makes the assumption that your engine and prop are good and only require a teardown inspection and gaskets. An L-Bird might run you 15K$....
Unless you have lots of bucks to throw out to a shop to do some of the harder and more time consuming work, you can bet that you will have at least 2000 manhours into a T before you even think about doing taxi testing. With an L-Bird, you might have 500 hours... With a good IA looking over your sholder, and no major problems or missing parts, one could have an L-Bird stripped, repainted, back in new fabric, rewired and in base coat paint in just a few weekends.
Insurance in a T is going to really rake you over the coals unless you have a lot of flight time. Figure buying a new KIA SUV every year as an insurance payment until you rack up the hours a bit....L-Birds are not as bad, but then again you don't have anywhere near as much invested and therefore don't require as much coverage.
One last bit....With the L-Bird, you can get in the air faster restoration time wise, but you also can fly at least 3 times the hours expense wise compared to the T's.
Restoring is fun and rewarding and I really enjoy turning wrenches, but flying the bird is a heck of a lot more fun.
Here are a few reasons for what I say:
The T's are large enough that most of the work is going to require at least a second person for virtually anything. You are always going to be trying to find someone to help, unless you have a spare body always hanging around. Something the size of an L-Bird only really requires a second person for hanging wings and controls and a few other items. If you have the shop set up right, even that can be reduced considerably.
The T's are going to hit you hard in the pocket to restore. A rough number is going to be in the area of 100K$ for parts and supplies, and that makes the assumption that your engine and prop are good and only require a teardown inspection and gaskets. An L-Bird might run you 15K$....
Unless you have lots of bucks to throw out to a shop to do some of the harder and more time consuming work, you can bet that you will have at least 2000 manhours into a T before you even think about doing taxi testing. With an L-Bird, you might have 500 hours... With a good IA looking over your sholder, and no major problems or missing parts, one could have an L-Bird stripped, repainted, back in new fabric, rewired and in base coat paint in just a few weekends.
Insurance in a T is going to really rake you over the coals unless you have a lot of flight time. Figure buying a new KIA SUV every year as an insurance payment until you rack up the hours a bit....L-Birds are not as bad, but then again you don't have anywhere near as much invested and therefore don't require as much coverage.
One last bit....With the L-Bird, you can get in the air faster restoration time wise, but you also can fly at least 3 times the hours expense wise compared to the T's.
Restoring is fun and rewarding and I really enjoy turning wrenches, but flying the bird is a heck of a lot more fun.
???
Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:32 am
I may have missed this in a previous post but..........
T-28=experimental
AT-6=standard
T-28=LOA and lots of hours
AT-6=tailwheel time and a proper checkout
T-28=stay off the grass
AT-6=land on the grass
T-28=canopy closed
AT-6=canopy open
T-28=$300-500 hamburger
AT-6 $150-200 hamburger
T-28=experimental
AT-6=standard
T-28=LOA and lots of hours
AT-6=tailwheel time and a proper checkout
T-28=stay off the grass
AT-6=land on the grass
T-28=canopy closed
AT-6=canopy open
T-28=$300-500 hamburger
AT-6 $150-200 hamburger
Sun Sep 10, 2006 2:09 am
Serious hat, for one minute (thats the hard one that keeps things from poking into the mushy spots on my skull)
cvairwerks has a very good point. An L bird would be a good place to start. I have a thing for sitting in the front seat, so an L-5 would be one of my first choices. Info, airplanes, projects, ect, can be found here, http://www16.mawebcenters.com/sopa/
Then there is the Birdog. My mentor, before he became an aviation god, used to fly those for the Army. After listening to his stories, the thought of a short appoach, over a treeline, to a short strip, with 60 degrees of flaps, moved something within me. More specifically, moved something on me. I Soooo want to do that when I grow up.
Back to my regular hat (Oakland A's hat, because the A's kick @ss like the T28 does)
I put Jacks very valid points to the team at the O.P. labs. His points are....
AT-6=standard
AT-6=tailwheel time and a proper checkout
AT-6=land on the grass
AT-6=canopy open
AT-6 $150-200 hamburger
After running it through the computers, having focus group sessions, and many conference romm meetings, the team decided...
T-28= Stomps T-6 @ss.
(I left out, the fact that the T28 was made with love. I didn't think it was relevant to the study)(The group also concluded that the T-6 @ss stomping would happen every day of the week)
To answer bdk's point, Doing the break to downwind isn't quite the same in a cherokee......
cvairwerks has a very good point. An L bird would be a good place to start. I have a thing for sitting in the front seat, so an L-5 would be one of my first choices. Info, airplanes, projects, ect, can be found here, http://www16.mawebcenters.com/sopa/
Then there is the Birdog. My mentor, before he became an aviation god, used to fly those for the Army. After listening to his stories, the thought of a short appoach, over a treeline, to a short strip, with 60 degrees of flaps, moved something within me. More specifically, moved something on me. I Soooo want to do that when I grow up.
Back to my regular hat (Oakland A's hat, because the A's kick @ss like the T28 does)
I put Jacks very valid points to the team at the O.P. labs. His points are....
AT-6=standard
AT-6=tailwheel time and a proper checkout
AT-6=land on the grass
AT-6=canopy open
AT-6 $150-200 hamburger
After running it through the computers, having focus group sessions, and many conference romm meetings, the team decided...
T-28= Stomps T-6 @ss.
(I left out, the fact that the T28 was made with love. I didn't think it was relevant to the study)(The group also concluded that the T-6 @ss stomping would happen every day of the week)
To answer bdk's point, Doing the break to downwind isn't quite the same in a cherokee......
Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:00 am
Cant beat the short stack sound of a 1820 at idle............but if I had my choice, would be a pretty yellow 50's vintage SNJ.
????
Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:58 am
Sounds the T-28s Wright makes and corresponding repair bill.........
A model
clipety-clop-clipety-clop (normal sound like an old plow horse)
B,C or D
tick-tock-tick-tock (normal sound like a time bomb) $0
ping-ping-ping $7500
ping-clang-ping $15000
clang-clang-clang-bam-bam-bam $25000
bang-bang-bang $35000
bang-bang-boom-then very quiet $50000+ a/c repair
Sounds a T-28 pilot makes-ding-dong-ding-dong
Over to you OP
A model
clipety-clop-clipety-clop (normal sound like an old plow horse)
B,C or D
tick-tock-tick-tock (normal sound like a time bomb) $0
ping-ping-ping $7500
ping-clang-ping $15000
clang-clang-clang-bam-bam-bam $25000
bang-bang-bang $35000
bang-bang-boom-then very quiet $50000+ a/c repair
Sounds a T-28 pilot makes-ding-dong-ding-dong
Over to you OP
T-6 or T-28
Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:54 pm
Zulu, are you more interested in the nitty gritty of restoration or of having a flying airplane? Are you in the US or UK? What sort of price range? I'd guess a fairly complete plane, but still needing full restoration is about 1/2 price of a flyer.
Sun Sep 10, 2006 4:50 pm
Somehow i'm still leaning toward the T-6.. even though the T-28 looks the biz..
Bill, ideally as a starter, maybe I should go for something even more basic as suggested by others but somehow i don't think i'll b content with flyin an O-1..
I'm in the U.K. I have access to one f/t aeronautical engineer and one ex-RAF p/t. Between us we have decent set of tools and ideal space (old farm building converted for projects).
Ideally yes.. a fairly complete plane which needs full restoration would be the best. crash damaged might not be as ideal as maybe something that needs a super major overhaul... that'll mean less parts to source.
[edit] oh and did i mention neither bird are common here..
Bill, ideally as a starter, maybe I should go for something even more basic as suggested by others but somehow i don't think i'll b content with flyin an O-1..
I'm in the U.K. I have access to one f/t aeronautical engineer and one ex-RAF p/t. Between us we have decent set of tools and ideal space (old farm building converted for projects).
Ideally yes.. a fairly complete plane which needs full restoration would be the best. crash damaged might not be as ideal as maybe something that needs a super major overhaul... that'll mean less parts to source.
[edit] oh and did i mention neither bird are common here..
<<Insert subliminal T-28 message here>>
Sun Sep 10, 2006 7:54 pm
I know of several instances where a guy started out thinking “Restoration with Intent to Fly’. Even though they had the skill set and resources, the desire to have something to fly won out over seeing the project completed in the end. The project was sold and a flyer purchased.
Selling a partially completed project is usually only in the best financial interest of the buyer.
Just another angle to really think about, I suppose.
Selling a partially completed project is usually only in the best financial interest of the buyer.
Just another angle to really think about, I suppose.
T-6 or T-28
Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:12 pm
Being in the UK would likely negate an advantage of the 28, that of having a faster cruise and longer range than the 6. Most places are pretty close there and runways are suitable for the 6. Are there different registration or operational regs between the plane as there are here? The 6 is usually in the standard category in US. If you ever get to the US during airshow season you could probably arrange a ride in either. I know there are Harvards in UK. Have you also considered something a little less involved like a Chipmunk? They handle nice, sort of a "baby Spitfire" and the enclosed cockpit would help in British weather.
Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:56 pm
T-6 powered by Pratt & Whitney, engine very reliable, plane teaches you how to fly and what your feet are for.
T-28 powered by Wight Cyclone, engine great for engine out training, teaches you to look for fields for the next engine failure, teaches what your feet and thumb is for, after the engine out and field training.
T-28 powered by Wight Cyclone, engine great for engine out training, teaches you to look for fields for the next engine failure, teaches what your feet and thumb is for, after the engine out and field training.
T-6 or T-28G
Mon Sep 11, 2006 12:25 pm
Great one about the thumb, Matt wish I had thought of that. Do you know why the Wright Brothers sold their company before the the T-28 engine was made? Would you want your name associated with anything that sounds like that? Let's be fair to the T-28 though, the engine actually has a lot of advanced tecnology. In the interest of economy some new cars like Hondas actually shut off 1/2 the clyinders part time. The Wright has always had this feature, that's the reason they have 2 rows of cylinders. It runs off the front row on Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and the back row on Tue, Thur, Sat. That's why they sound like that . Most of the powerplant failures occur on Sun when the engine gets confused.
???
Mon Sep 11, 2006 1:17 pm
I know we've been bashing Wright engines but just think about it......
R-1820 FM-2 Wildcat, SBD Dauntless, B-17, S-2 Tracket, DC-3. R-2600 A-20, B-25 and all those PBy & PB4Y firebombers.
R-3350 AD, B-29, DC-7, Rare Bear and all Sea Furies re-engined with a real motor!!!
R-1820 FM-2 Wildcat, SBD Dauntless, B-17, S-2 Tracket, DC-3. R-2600 A-20, B-25 and all those PBy & PB4Y firebombers.
R-3350 AD, B-29, DC-7, Rare Bear and all Sea Furies re-engined with a real motor!!!