Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:05 PM - Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang CJ-6 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
2. 12:07 PM - Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang CJ-6 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
3. 12:33 PM - Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang CJ-6 (DaBear)
4. 12:48 PM - Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang CJ-6 (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD)
5. 01:08 PM - Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang CJ-6 (jblake207@comcast.net)
6. 05:05 PM - Re: Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang CJ-6 (Roger Kemp)
7. 07:52 PM - Re: Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang CJ-6 (Dave Laird)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang |
CJ-6
Roger that Bear... I guess it depends on the size of the human really. :-) I
know you are tall, but I believe most of your height is in your legs, mine is
in the torso.
Sat in them both. 52 had more headroom for me. With the special canopy, I am
sure you are correct! You know more about CJ's than most folks around.
Actually there is more room in my 50 than a 52... truly. That said, I also moved
the 50 seat back a few inches and tilted it a tad to make it even better.
I'm up for being told what really makes a "better formation" aircraft. I think
it has a lot to do with personal perspectives really. You put a MTV9-250/260
prop on just about anything, and you have an instant air brake with makes formation
somewhat easier. I have flown the 50 formation IFR in the goo counting
rivets, and other than a Suke, I think it is the best at every darn thing,
formation included, it just doesn't have the legs.
Take care,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DaBear@damned.org
Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2015 3:59 PM
Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] Yak-List: Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang
CJ-6
Mark,
I've owned the Yak-52 and the CJ6, the 52 does NOT have a bigger cockpit
than the CJ6. Maybe you meant to say the 50. BTW, with the rudder
peddle mods and the malcom hood, you would fit in the CJ6. The CJ6 is
a completely different airplane when the M14p is added and i have roughly 300 hours
in the Yak-52 (2 years ownership), and 600-900 hours in the Stock CJ6 and
M14P(f) CJ6 respectively. The CJ6 is a much better
formation plane then the 52, the 52 is a much better acro plane. In my
not so humble opinion.
Bear
On 12/26/2015 3:05 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
> --> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Having 900 hours in a T-34B, and 1000 or so in a YAK-50 (but none in a CJ-6 I
am sad to report), I will say this.
>
>
> The T-34 has much more room, has a fairly high Vne, and uses all American parts
(thus they are available), but they are not cheap, the FAA is keeping a close
eye on them after a wing off light came on during that incident where some
idiots were teaching dog-fighting skills to wanna-be's in airframes with many
many thousands of hours on them yanking well over the max G limit of +6/-4 (at
the time). That required one of several different kinds of spar mods and inspections.
>
>
> They are EASY to fly, have 3 axis trim and with 50 gallons have a decent range.
The controls are balanced well, and include anti-servo's on the control surfaces.
Many have engines upgraded to 520 or 550's with 3 bladed props. Needed,
because with the stock 470, they were pretty much a dog at 2950 pounds gross.
They will do aerobatics, but they do not maintain energy (when stock), and
you have to constantly be aware of your degrading energy state. Many rudders
have been sorta bent by folks doing snaps at too high an entry speed, and a
lot of them have magnesium control surfaces, which need to be hawked carefully
for corrosion. Some of have been re-skinned to aluminum. By the way, inverted
flight in a T-34 is limited to something like 15 seconds. They use a dry sump
engine and a 3 gallon oil tank. The oil is not returned to the tank when
inverted and if you are not careful and roll upright after too long inverted without
reducing to idle, you can actually do amazing!
t!
> hings to the prop... like have it come off.
>
>
> The landing gear is tough, hard to hurt, and will take huge amounts of punishment.
I saw one landed in a plowed field with no damage. They are extremely
stable for formation flying and have excellent vis. Basically the T-34 will always
be my most favorite airplane to own, overall....but that comes at a pretty
darn steep price.
>
>
> I'd say the aerobatic capability of the CJ is in the same ball-park as the T-34.
Cockpits are MUCH smaller, but can be modified. Both are trainers and had
the same goals in mind, so their design features are on a par with each other.
The CJ-6 is by FAR the more beautiful aircraft, and MUCH cheaper to own, and
... hey, it's got a radial! Like the T-34, the CJ is also somewhat underpowered,
but is a stable formation platform.
>
>
> But to continue ... there are the YAK's and also the SU-29 if you have money.
The SU-29 beats them all in my opinion. Again, small cockpits, but has range
and will rip your lips off. It is the Ferrari of two seaters until you get
to heavy iron and it does better aerobatics than anything else discussed.
>
>
> The YAK-52 has slightly bigger cockpits than the CJ, but less fuel. Slower than
the CJ-6, but with comparable pilots will eat the CJ-6 alive in a dog fight,
simply because it has more energy and is designed for it. It is a tractor
of a Russian airplane. Has some spin characteristics that need to be experienced
with an instructor, but not anything dangerous once you learn what's up.
It was built to be an advanced trainer, meaning advanced aerobatics. It will
even do tumbles.
>
>
> So if you ever think of getting serious about aerobatics, or dog-fighting, etc.,
etc., the YAK-52 is really the best choice. It can go cross country, but
with more fuel stops and as I said is slower than the CJ. If you're a tall guy
that likes a roomy cockpit and does not want an Experimental Category aircraft,
the T-34 is the best choice. The CJ is middle ground in all catagories.
It does everything, but is simply not the BEST at everything, but again, I think
it is one of the best looking aircraft out there, and if I could fit into the
darn thing, would probably own one, but with an M-14 installed!
>
>
> Single seaters like the 50, 55, 26, 31, etc., are a whole different category
so need not be mentioned.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> p.s. I will always LOVE the electric landing gear with manual
> emergency crank in the T-34 better than the pneumatic mess in the CJ's
> and Yaks. Simple and reliable and nothing LEAKS! :-)
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] on behalf of skyjockey
> [mixxalot@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2015 11:35 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Yak-List: Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52
> or Nanchang CJ-6
>
>
> I need to fly in a CJ6 and T34 to make the decision!
>
> --------
> warbird and lover of all things that go fast and upside down!
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=451416#451416
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or |
Nanchang CJ-6
You're right about every single thing except kicking ass in the CJ-6A. Of course
you might be talking about taking on a Cessna 150, in which case it would
be a close contest, but I think you'd win!
Happy New Year Old Man!
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cjpilot710@aol.com
Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 12:26 AM
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: Yak-List: Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang
CJ-6
I love this bickering about airplanes!!! For those guys who learn to fly in the
T-34 - - - well you know the old saying "No matter how ugly, your first lover
is always the one you thought the most beautiful". Its' cockpit is to big.
You tend to rattle around in it. To this day I love the Champ. ALL VERSION of
it. And I love the B-24 and think the B-17 over rated. And I love the Storch!
Shit I just don't enough time for all the airplanes I love. I don't love
a 51. I don't love the B25, - - - to hard to pull the props though. I loved
the 777 and 747SP. I didn't love the 767-100 (piece of crap), but her big
sister 767-300 was the one airplane I could grease on no matter what! I love
the 747-400- - - -had great bunks! I always wanted to fly a Connie, and a DC6.
I got to familiar with a DC-3, but a Loadmaster would be interesting.
Well here is to a great New Year fellow listers. May your airplane dreams come
true.
"Oh give me a CJ-6 A.
And send me into the fray
With guns and panache
I'll kick any ass!
Yes give me a CJ-6 A "
;-)
Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
In a message dated 12/27/2015 2:36:15 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dabear@damned.org
writes:
Remember to fly in both the stock CJ6 and one with an M14p upgrade. They
are different
Randy DeVere
> On Dec 27, 2015, at 11:49, skyjockey <mixxalot@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks guys, great tips. I am looking to buy a place next year and my
plane in same time period. Since I scuba dive Florida is great place for that
if you can handle the humidity and bugs and dodge the many tstorms. For aircraft
purchase, I still need to experience a CJ and T34. Another option is a Yak
52TW or Yak52 with extended fuel tanks for longer range.
>
> --------
> warbird and lover of all things that go fast and upside down!
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=451435#451435
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ========================; nbsp; (And Get Some AWESOME FREE to
find Gifts nbsp; List k you for p; -Matt Dralle, List
======================== e ties Day ================================================
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ================================================
- List Contribution Web Site sp;
==================================================
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang |
CJ-6
Mark, sir you have to come sit in my CJ. I'm tall in the body as my legs are
only 34 inseam and when sitting at a table with other pilots, I'm usually looking
over most folks head. That said, you may be right for what you sat in or
the parachute in the seat. I'm just wondering if the seat was truly down all
the way, it has 3 settings.
I've also had people question my ability to sit in a Yak-52 or 52TW and I have
to remind them I owned a 52, I swept the yak award records at the first Manitowoc
gathering. :-)
Randy DeVere
> On Dec 29, 2015, at 14:01, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
>
>
> Roger that Bear... I guess it depends on the size of the human really. :-)
I know you are tall, but I believe most of your height is in your legs, mine is
in the torso.
>
> Sat in them both. 52 had more headroom for me. With the special canopy, I am
sure you are correct! You know more about CJ's than most folks around.
>
> Actually there is more room in my 50 than a 52... truly. That said, I also
moved the 50 seat back a few inches and tilted it a tad to make it even better.
>
> I'm up for being told what really makes a "better formation" aircraft. I think
it has a lot to do with personal perspectives really. You put a MTV9-250/260
prop on just about anything, and you have an instant air brake with makes formation
somewhat easier. I have flown the 50 formation IFR in the goo counting
rivets, and other than a Suke, I think it is the best at every darn thing,
formation included, it just doesn't have the legs.
>
> Take care,
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DaBear@damned.org
> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2015 3:59 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] Yak-List: Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang
CJ-6
>
>
> Mark,
>
> I've owned the Yak-52 and the CJ6, the 52 does NOT have a bigger cockpit
> than the CJ6. Maybe you meant to say the 50. BTW, with the rudder
> peddle mods and the malcom hood, you would fit in the CJ6. The CJ6 is
> a completely different airplane when the M14p is added and i have roughly 300
hours in the Yak-52 (2 years ownership), and 600-900 hours in the Stock CJ6 and
M14P(f) CJ6 respectively. The CJ6 is a much better
> formation plane then the 52, the 52 is a much better acro plane. In my
> not so humble opinion.
>
> Bear
>
>> On 12/26/2015 3:05 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
>> --> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Having 900 hours in a T-34B, and 1000 or so in a YAK-50 (but none in a CJ-6
I am sad to report), I will say this.
>>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or |
Nanchang CJ-6
> Mark, sir you have to come sit in my CJ.
I'd love to!
> I'm tall in the body as my legs are only 34 inseam and when sitting at a table
with other pilots, I'm usually looking over most folks head.
Well then yes! You are like me. I also have a 34 inseam, torso is 44 1/2 inches.
6'6 1/2"
> That said, you may be right for what you sat in or the parachute in the seat.
You're right, it could have easily been seat adjustments.
> I'm just wondering if the seat was truly down all the way, it has 3 settings.
Again...... I'm thinking you must be right.
> I've also had people question my ability to sit in a Yak-52 or 52TW and I have
to remind them I owned a 52, I swept the yak award records at the first Manitowoc
gathering. :-)
I can't fly a 52 .. simply too big, but ya know... I have a lot of BULK too. :-)
Nice way of saying Lard Ass.
Mark
> On Dec 29, 2015, at 14:01, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
wrote:
>
> --> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Roger that Bear... I guess it depends on the size of the human really. :-)
I know you are tall, but I believe most of your height is in your legs, mine is
in the torso.
>
> Sat in them both. 52 had more headroom for me. With the special canopy, I am
sure you are correct! You know more about CJ's than most folks around.
>
> Actually there is more room in my 50 than a 52... truly. That said, I also
moved the 50 seat back a few inches and tilted it a tad to make it even better.
>
> I'm up for being told what really makes a "better formation" aircraft. I think
it has a lot to do with personal perspectives really. You put a MTV9-250/260
prop on just about anything, and you have an instant air brake with makes formation
somewhat easier. I have flown the 50 formation IFR in the goo counting
rivets, and other than a Suke, I think it is the best at every darn thing,
formation included, it just doesn't have the legs.
>
> Take care,
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> DaBear@damned.org
> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2015 3:59 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] Yak-List: Re: First time buyer of a Yak
> 52 or Nanchang CJ-6
>
> --> <dabear@damned.org>
>
> Mark,
>
> I've owned the Yak-52 and the CJ6, the 52 does NOT have a bigger cockpit
> than the CJ6. Maybe you meant to say the 50. BTW, with the rudder
> peddle mods and the malcom hood, you would fit in the CJ6. The CJ6 is
> a completely different airplane when the M14p is added and i have roughly 300
hours in the Yak-52 (2 years ownership), and 600-900 hours in the Stock CJ6 and
M14P(f) CJ6 respectively. The CJ6 is a much better
> formation plane then the 52, the 52 is a much better acro plane. In my
> not so humble opinion.
>
> Bear
>
>> On 12/26/2015 3:05 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
>> --> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Having 900 hours in a T-34B, and 1000 or so in a YAK-50 (but none in a CJ-6
I am sad to report), I will say this.
>>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or |
Nanchang CJ-6
I've got a few hours in a T-34A while at the=C2-Travis AFB Aeroclub (flew
it under the bridge once)=C2-and a few hours in the T-34C at Fort Bragg.
=C2- Clearly the turbine C was Way Mo better, faster, etc=C2-than the A
model.=C2- I'd have to say that the CJ is somewhere between the T-34A an
d C... holds energy longer than the A, but isn't as responsive as the C.=C2
- The CJ will out G both.=C2- Love the T-34; however, with=C2-about 1
000 hours now in the CJ and I wouldn't trade it for either the A or C model
T34... now I might trade for that Champ Pappy mentioned just to recapture
my 16th birthday and get away from the annual medicals.=C2- Plus, I could
land that Champ on the local nude beach... but at this point in life, the
landing would be exciting.
=C2-
Happy New Year my round motor brethren.
=C2-
JB
----- Original Message -----
From: "DaBear" <dabear@damned.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2015 2:30:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] Yak-List: Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or
=C2- Nanchang CJ-6
Mark, =C2-sir you have to come sit in my CJ. =C2-I'm tall in the body a
s my legs are only 34 inseam and when sitting at a table with other pilots,
I'm usually looking over most folks head. =C2-That said, you may be righ
t for what you sat in or the parachute in the seat. =C2-I'm just wonderin
g if the seat was truly down all the way, it has 3 settings.
I've also had people question my ability to sit in a Yak-52 or 52TW and I h
ave to remind them I owned a 52, I swept the yak award records at the first
Manitowoc gathering. =C2-:-)
Randy DeVere
> On Dec 29, 2015, at 14:01, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD <mark.bitter
lich@navy.mil> wrote:
>
.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Roger that Bear... I guess it depends on the size of the human really.
=C2-:-) =C2-I know you are tall, but I believe most of your height is i
n your legs, mine is in the torso.
>
> Sat in them both. =C2-52 had more headroom for me. =C2-With the speci
al canopy, I am sure you are correct! =C2- You know more about CJ's than
most folks around.
>
> Actually there is more room in my 50 than a 52... truly. =C2- That said
, I also moved the 50 seat back a few inches and tilted it a tad to make it
even better.
>
> I'm up for being told what really makes a "better formation" aircraft.
=C2-I think it has a lot to do with personal perspectives really. =C2-Y
ou put a MTV9-250/260 prop on just about anything, and you have an instant
air brake with makes formation somewhat easier. =C2- I have flown the 50
formation IFR in the goo counting rivets, =C2-and other than a Suke, I th
ink it is the best at every darn thing, formation included, it just doesn't
have the legs.
>
> Take care,
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of DaBear@damned.org
> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2015 3:59 PM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] Yak-List: Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52
or Nanchang CJ-6
>
>
> Mark,
>
> I've owned the Yak-52 and the CJ6, the 52 does NOT have a bigger cockpit
> than the CJ6. =C2-Maybe you meant to say the 50. =C2- BTW, with the r
udder
> peddle mods and the malcom hood, you would fit in the CJ6. =C2- The CJ6
is
> a completely different airplane when the M14p is added and i have roughly
300 hours in the Yak-52 (2 years ownership), and 600-900 hours in the Stoc
k CJ6 and M14P(f) CJ6 respectively. =C2-The CJ6 is a much better
> formation plane then the 52, the 52 is a much better acro plane. =C2- I
n my
> not so humble opinion.
>
> Bear
>
>> On 12/26/2015 3:05 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV NAVAIR, WD wrote:
>> --> <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> Having 900 hours in a T-34B, and 1000 or so in a YAK-50 (but none in a C
J-6 I am sad to report), I will say this.
>>
===========
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt Dralle, List Admin.
===========
===========
MS -
===========
e -
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2--Matt Dralle, List Admin.
===========
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang CJ-6 |
Well...alrighty then...fights on fights on at the 3 9 line.
Doc
Sent from my iPad
> On Dec 27, 2015, at 11:26 PM, cjpilot710@aol.com wrote:
>
> I love this bickering about airplanes!!! For those guys who learn to fly i
n the T-34 - - - well you know the old saying "No matter how ugly, your firs
t lover is always the one you thought the most beautiful". Its' cockpit is t
o big. You tend to rattle around in it. To this day I love the Champ. ALL V
ERSION of it. And I love the B-24 and think the B-17 over rated. And I lo
ve the Storch! Shit I just don't enough time for all the airplanes I love.
I don't love a 51. I don't love the B25, - - - to hard to pull the props t
hough. I loved the 777 and 747SP. I didn't love the 767-100 (piece of crap
), but her big sister 767-300 was the one airplane I could grease on no matt
er what! I love the 747-400- - - -had great bunks! I always wanted to fly
a Connie, and a DC6. I got to familiar with a DC-3, but a Loadmaster would
be interesting.
>
> Well here is to a great New Year fellow listers. May your airplane dreams
come true.
>
> "Oh give me a CJ-6 A.
> And send me into the fray
> With guns and panache
> I'll kick any ass!
> Yes give me a CJ-6 A "
> ;-)
> Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
>
> In a message dated 12/27/2015 2:36:15 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dabear@d
amned.org writes:
>
> Remember to fly in both the stock CJ6 and one with an M14p upgrade. They a
re different
>
> Randy DeVere
>
>
> > On Dec 27, 2015, at 11:49, skyjockey <mixxalot@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Thanks guys, great tips. I am looking to buy a place next year and my pl
ane in same time period. Since I scuba dive Florida is great place for that i
f you can handle the humidity and bugs and dodge the many tstorms. For aircr
aft purchase, I still need to experience a CJ and T34. Another option is a Y
ak 52TW or Yak52 with extended fuel tanks for longer range.
> >
> > --------
> > warbird and lover of all things that go fast and upside down!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=451435#451435
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ========================
; nbsp; (And Get Some AWESOME FREE to find Gifts nbsp; List k yo
u for p; -Matt Dralle, List ==========
============== e ties Day ========
==========================
============== - MATRONICS WEB FORU
MS =========================
=======================
- List Contribution Web Site sp; =====
==========================
===================
>
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: First time buyer of a Yak 52 or Nanchang CJ-6 |
Great, fun and truth-filled post, Pappy!
Keep 'em coming!
Sent from my iPhone.
> On Dec 27, 2015, at 11:26 PM, cjpilot710@aol.com wrote:
>
> I love this bickering about airplanes!!! For those guys who learn to fly i
n the T-34 - - - well you know the old saying "No matter how ugly, your firs
t lover is always the one you thought the most beautiful". Its' cockpit is t
o big. You tend to rattle around in it. To this day I love the Champ. ALL V
ERSION of it. And I love the B-24 and think the B-17 over rated. And I lo
ve the Storch! Shit I just don't enough time for all the airplanes I love.
I don't love a 51. I don't love the B25, - - - to hard to pull the props t
hough. I loved the 777 and 747SP. I didn't love the 767-100 (piece of crap
), but her big sister 767-300 was the one airplane I could grease on no matt
er what! I love the 747-400- - - -had great bunks! I always wanted to fly
a Connie, and a DC6. I got to familiar with a DC-3, but a Loadmaster would
be interesting.
>
> Well here is to a great New Year fellow listers. May your airplane dreams
come true.
>
> "Oh give me a CJ-6 A.
> And send me into the fray
> With guns and panache
> I'll kick any ass!
> Yes give me a CJ-6 A "
> ;-)
> Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
>
> In a message dated 12/27/2015 2:36:15 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dabear@d
amned.org writes:
>
> Remember to fly in both the stock CJ6 and one with an M14p upgrade. They a
re different
>
> Randy DeVere
>
>
> > On Dec 27, 2015, at 11:49, skyjockey <mixxalot@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Thanks guys, great tips. I am looking to buy a place next year and my pl
ane in same time period. Since I scuba dive Florida is great place for that i
f you can handle the humidity and bugs and dodge the many tstorms. For aircr
aft purchase, I still need to experience a CJ and T34. Another option is a Y
ak 52TW or Yak52 with extended fuel tanks for longer range.
> >
> > --------
> > warbird and lover of all things that go fast and upside down!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=451435#451435
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ========================
; nbsp; (And Get Some AWESOME FREE to find Gifts nbsp; List k yo
u for p; -Matt Dralle, List ==========
============== e ties Day ========
==========================
============== - MATRONICS WEB FORU
MS =========================
=======================
- List Contribution Web Site sp; =====
==========================
===================
>
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|