Sun May 20, 2007 10:08 am
TBM 
Sun May 20, 2007 1:11 pm
Great respones guys! I really like the broad spectrum of aircraft that have been listed so far. 
What about a S-2, or an C-131? If where going to talk on the muti engine side. But they kinda getcha on the operating cost side, but I guess it all depends on what you as "owner" would want to spend. Keep ideas coming.
Scott.......
What about a S-2, or an C-131? If where going to talk on the muti engine side. But they kinda getcha on the operating cost side, but I guess it all depends on what you as "owner" would want to spend. Keep ideas coming.
Scott.......
Sun May 20, 2007 3:46 pm
On the twin side Twin Beech seems like a good value all around I have almost ended up with a couple of projects but decided we have enough things sitting around not being restored already .
Some good information about this from Vintage Aircraft in Stockton, CA who know about as much as anyone in the world about the Twin Beech. If you are seriously interested in one I would recommend contacting them.
http://www.twinbeech.com/considerations ... _a_twi.htm
If you want something with all the neat toys as a bomber but as low cost to fly as about any warbird twin then an AT-11 is about as cool as they come but they are not as affordable to purchase or easy to come by as other Twin Beech models but once you get past the purchase price you still have the operational costs of a Twin Beech.
The S-2 is relatively cheap to purchase but as I recall the engines are really expensive to replace and overhaul. Also not as cheap to fly as a Twin Beech. I have seen flying Lodestars for sale as cheap as 100K for what looked like a pretty nice aircraft but operational cost again going to be more than a Twin Beech.
.
Some good information about this from Vintage Aircraft in Stockton, CA who know about as much as anyone in the world about the Twin Beech. If you are seriously interested in one I would recommend contacting them.
http://www.twinbeech.com/considerations ... _a_twi.htm
If you want something with all the neat toys as a bomber but as low cost to fly as about any warbird twin then an AT-11 is about as cool as they come but they are not as affordable to purchase or easy to come by as other Twin Beech models but once you get past the purchase price you still have the operational costs of a Twin Beech.
The S-2 is relatively cheap to purchase but as I recall the engines are really expensive to replace and overhaul. Also not as cheap to fly as a Twin Beech. I have seen flying Lodestars for sale as cheap as 100K for what looked like a pretty nice aircraft but operational cost again going to be more than a Twin Beech.
Sun May 20, 2007 5:07 pm
So you have to use the "relic of the Cold War" excuse to clasify them as wardbirds, but if you want a round engine, a military "vibe", and ramp parking at any airshow, I don't think you can beat a Yak or CJ in value. The Yak especially is way more manuverable than a T-6, costs 1/3 to 1/2 as much, and parts are ultra-cheap and readily available.
The Yak-50 (single seat, pure aerobatic version of the Yak-52) has the same power-to-weight ratio as a P-51...with 400 hp and a 3-blade prop they can go from brakes off to 5000 ft in under 2 minutes.
http://www.russianaeros.com/products.htm is a pretty good site on the Russian birds.
If you want to carry all your buddies along, I agree a Beech 18 derivative is the best value in twins. Dozens of those are still flying freight every night around the country.
The Yak-50 (single seat, pure aerobatic version of the Yak-52) has the same power-to-weight ratio as a P-51...with 400 hp and a 3-blade prop they can go from brakes off to 5000 ft in under 2 minutes.
http://www.russianaeros.com/products.htm is a pretty good site on the Russian birds.
If you want to carry all your buddies along, I agree a Beech 18 derivative is the best value in twins. Dozens of those are still flying freight every night around the country.
Last edited by DB2 on Sun May 20, 2007 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sun May 20, 2007 5:14 pm
I would love to get my hands on a twin beech. I always thought there was something just classy about them.
Sun May 20, 2007 9:39 pm
What about the C-47? Can't you get one with reasonable engine and prop times for about $200K.? A freight pilot told me the C-47 is cheaper to operate and maintain per mile than a twin Beech. True?
The TBM is a good deal, a lot of people like the R-2600 engine. Take all your friends and you can even add a second cockpit with flight controls.
The Yaks( all of them) and Sea Fury's are a "buy" IMO for the bucks.
The O-2 is a buy at current prices. The Air Repair new L-19's for $135,000 is a a good deal at that price. Compare to a Cubmasters 180 hp. Cub or a Husky that cost $50,000 more and are fabric covered. I've flown all three and the all metal, historic, L-19 is the best for the money.
The TBM is a good deal, a lot of people like the R-2600 engine. Take all your friends and you can even add a second cockpit with flight controls.
The Yaks( all of them) and Sea Fury's are a "buy" IMO for the bucks.
The O-2 is a buy at current prices. The Air Repair new L-19's for $135,000 is a a good deal at that price. Compare to a Cubmasters 180 hp. Cub or a Husky that cost $50,000 more and are fabric covered. I've flown all three and the all metal, historic, L-19 is the best for the money.
Mon May 21, 2007 11:06 pm
A freight pilot told me the C-47 is cheaper to operate and maintain per mile than a twin Beech. True?
I don't know any DC-3(or C-47) operator's all that well but I would guess that would be false. The DC-3 burns twice the fuel, cruises slower, and has a lower rate of climb than a Beech D18. Also it takes hangar twice as large to house it. Maybe considering the amount of payload you can haul it would be more "efficient" thus more profitable to haul cargo in a C-47 but to fly as a warbird I don't see it being cheaper unless you carry lots of folks in a DC-3 that are paying their own freight and if you are doing that very often most likely your insurance is going to be higher too.
Tue May 22, 2007 8:03 am
Aero Trader has a B29 parts kit just sitting around for 1.5 mil
Tue May 22, 2007 2:30 pm
Yes Ryan , all good points. I was talking to a couple of freight pilot's several years ago, when BE-18's were having a lot of accidents in the freight business. They were comparing their Basler reconditioned DC-3 to the old freight dog 18's common at the time. I beilieve they meant quantity of freight and annual inspections and cost of spare parts.
this being a warbird forum, yes the BE-18, At-11, C-45, etc. would cost less than half the expense to keep polished or have painted, take up less than half the hangar space, faster cruise speed at lower fuel burns, equals less time on the engines and overall less maintenance. Many of the BE-18 variants are certificated for up to 11 people on board. The C-47 can carry more people but why?
I left the AT-11 off my list which with some of them fetching $400k is a "Sell" in my book and there are plenty of not too bad C-45's and late model 18's in the 100K to $225K. range which are a "buy" , IMO. THe Beech 18 is one of the best airplanes ever built! HappY!
this being a warbird forum, yes the BE-18, At-11, C-45, etc. would cost less than half the expense to keep polished or have painted, take up less than half the hangar space, faster cruise speed at lower fuel burns, equals less time on the engines and overall less maintenance. Many of the BE-18 variants are certificated for up to 11 people on board. The C-47 can carry more people but why?
I left the AT-11 off my list which with some of them fetching $400k is a "Sell" in my book and there are plenty of not too bad C-45's and late model 18's in the 100K to $225K. range which are a "buy" , IMO. THe Beech 18 is one of the best airplanes ever built! HappY!
Wed May 23, 2007 4:16 pm
Beech 18 was the last good airplane that Beech built!!! Well guys there have been some good response to what your opinions on an affordable Warbird would be. I'm kind of surprised no one mentioned a Stearman or N3N. I do like the Yak-52, but I’m afraid I’m too fat to fit in one!
Scott.......
Well guys there have been some good response to what your opinions on an affordable Warbird would be. I'm kind of surprised no one mentioned a Stearman or N3N. I do like the Yak-52, but I’m afraid I’m too fat to fit in one!
Scott.......