AT-6 or T-28
Looking for my 3rd plane. Currently own a Apprentice S and Extra 300. Warbirds are getting my attention. The Apprentice is getting a bit boring, and Extra 300 too much excitement as I have not flown it once without doing some kind of damage. Really above my skill level.
Anyway looking at a PKZ Trojan T-28 or Art Tech AT-6. Anyone know the pros and cons of each?
I am leaning toward Art Tech as I now own two HH planes already.
Well, ALL AT-6s, Art Tech or not, are killers. This is a plane that absolutely must be flown by the book, on the numbers. In the real thing you have avionics to give you the info you need to survive. In the model you have your less than stellar Mark 1 eyeballs and experience. You DO know where experience comes from, don't you?:D
With an AT-6, angle of attack and airspeed are everything. On takeoff, give it a hair, and I mean a fine hair, too much elevator and she snaps into the ground before you can even see it. Landing approach? You guessed it. There are two kinds of AT-6s, those that have been violently snapped into Terra Firma and those that are about to.
If you are a very experienced and extremely disciplined RC flier, you can gentle these things around the sky, carrying excess airspeed and handling like you would a vial of nitroglycerine. You can survive that way. But one day your brain says "I'm not having any fun." It's a WWII wannabe warbird! A trainer! Let's do something cool." And then you exercise the garbage bag.
Here's a great video showing an extremely well-qualified pilot demonstrating the good, bad and ugly of full size AT-6 stall characteristics. Please heed the warnings of death contained herein!
Here's what happened to a commercial pilot who regularly ferried WWII warbirds from show to show when he let his guard down probably for a couple of seconds on a routine flight in front of the beach at Santa Rosa, Florida.
Models have the same anti-social behavior.
T-28 for sure.
For third plane you can't go wrong with the T-28 as noted by rcers. It's an iconic plane that should be in everyones' squadron at some point. I actually have both and I respectfully disagree with Rockin on this. The Art-tech At-6 is an easy flyer and comes packed with goodies like split flaps, scale like cockpit including 2 pilots, slow, scale acting metal retracts, lights, etc. HK is now selling it and it comes with the SMS sound card as standard. I added the sound card to mine. What a hoot. P&W r1340 9 cyclinder 600hp wasp. The only downside to the Art-tech is their crappy eco-friendly paint job the flakes off. Was hard to match but finally was able. Bought mine from Motion RC when they had them on sale for $130 shipped.
Hey, all Texans get a bad rap on tip stalling into an uncontrollable spin. I actually had the privledge to fly the full scale version a few years ago and had this very same discussion with the owner. More myth than fact if you fly it in "big air". She performs very well, at least mine does and I'm not an expert rc pilot by any stretch. Probably advanced beginner/early intermediate. Scale rolls, standard loops, cubans, etc. Flys like a warbird. You do need to gain proper airspeed on T/O or you'll roll her over on her back as noted. Don't ask me how I know this. I upgraded the motor in mine to a power up 15. Still running 3S. Nice cabin for larger mah lipos. Good users thread over on RCG. I would not discount getting this plane. Would I buy another? You bet.
Hard to compare the two. The AT-6 is a much bigger airplane than the PZ T-28. A tail dragger versus a trike. flaps versus no flaps. retracts versus no retracts. If you're flying off of grass, the Texan will actually ground handle better.
For the T-28, The PZ steerable nose gear plastic turning arm is a regular replacement item. I liked my T-28 alot and over a two year period she later became my experimental platform. Hopped her up to 4S, even converted her to a tail dragger. Then one day, while testing a new "Iceman" gyro, I was 100% focused on the plane's behavior to see how I might adjust the gain, then lost track of my heading when " smack! " Head-on collision with a big ole tree. RIP. I think you can probably fly the T-28 harder than the AT-6. She'll fly tighter manuevers, but again, we're talking apples to oranges here.
So, maybe buy the T-28 first but keep the AT-6 Art-Tech on your list. It too is a winner.
Now mind you if the designer of the model took this into account and made adjustments, it might have a much lessened affinity for that behavior.
For example, my kyosho 50 spitfire has many adjustments to lessen bad behaviors, one being an oversize tail.
But, the only way you'll know that it to fly it and see or talk to someone who has the exact same plane.
I shouldn't say this as I have a '70s vintage partially assembled texan waiting to be finished, but the T-28 looks better too!
BTW I used too much el to do my first loop with my spit, it did the cutest little snap-roll and ended pointing straight-up and motionless.
I immed gave it full down el and cut power as soon as the nose was pointed down, I'll investigate those behaviors at some later date!
I'll jump in on the PZ Trojan band wagon as well.......
Having come from the heli world, then J3 Cubs, to Slow Sticks and the 400 Tiger Moth, the T-28 has been wonderful for me.....!
As mentioned previously, having only flown an older Dynam T-6 (no bells and whistles) 1370mm once, which is abit larger than the PZ T-28, just after having flown the PZ.......I to found it to be less forgiving than The T-28 and more for a pilot familar with low wing war birds (which I was not)......although, I did not find landing either of the them that much different. Both have longer glide length requirements and need plenty of room since thay both come in at stall speeds much quicker (which I'm still growing into) than say a J3, Tiger Moth or similar high wing trainer craft.......
I have a flying buddy who owns the Dynam 1270mm T-28....his ability is at par with mine......he enjoys it as much as I do the PZ.
|All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:42 PM.|
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 WattfFlyer.com
RCU Eflight HQ