Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Bear 360 / Radial engine pod
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:29 am Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

Well danged. Its' a YAK on a Stick!

Gate guards.

Doc



--

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:51 am Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

Where's the ACLU? This is clearly a violation of the Church and State Rule

they are such champions of. Christian symbols on the tails of military

aircraft?! 

Sorry, that is Lithuania. They can do as they like since they are just

finding out what it means to determine your own destiny.

Anyway, this does prove we are the proud owners of economical war birds! Far

cheaper to operate than their T-6 and T-34 cousins (well distant that is). I

dare say, having flown each of the others that ours are way more fun for

sure! Now granted, they are not YAK-3's, 9', 11's, F4U's, P-51's, P-47's,

F-86's, ect, but saying that, I get to go home after a day of flying with

money still left in the checking account knowing I could fly 3.33 hours for

what it would have cost me for one hour had I bought that YAK-9 I was

thinking about. Or 40 hours for one had I had I gone all visceral for that

L-39! I almost bit off on both ( my bride would have probably bitten off

both too had I done so)! The only thing that saved me...runway length! 08A

has 3500 ft with no plans for lengthening and that is where my hanger is. 

Yep, just plan to keep enjoying my economical war bird all the way from the

bank! 

May just have to paint a Cross of Lorraine on the tail to tweak the liberals

though.

Doc



--

jan.mevis(at)informavia.b
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:15 am Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

I made a big mistake, I am verry sorry. Of course the Croix de Lorraine was NOT used by the French Vichy regime, but by the FREE FRENCH. The vice admiral Muselier, born in the region of Lorraine, escaped to England, joined Charles de Gaulle. He ordered the use of the Croix de Lorraine on the allied French airplanes and ships.



And it's absolutely correct that French pilots preferred the Yak 3 for combat on the Russian front.



Jan



--

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:15 am Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

Very true. One of those French Aces lives near here. One of the YAK 9 owners (at Tallassee, Ala) has his 9 painted in the scheme of that squadron.

I have not met the gentleman but Jim Cook has on more than one occasion. Jim is the owner of the YAK 9 I mentioned.

That was another reason for considering owning a 9.

As a mil trainer, the 52 does fall in the war bird category.

Not that we need to split hairs and it really does not make any difference as to will  be flying my YAK as a warbird or for what I fly it for now...fun.

Doc



--

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:36 am Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

Yes, obviously French origin.  But in case you did not know, it is also the 

national markings for the Lithuanian air force.

http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/waf/lith/lithaf2.htm

Dennis



---

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:23 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

What does the DOSSAF have to do with the Lithuanian air force today?

Dennis



---

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:28 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

If I followed my own advice I would stay out of this one.......

But...... 



Your definition of the DOSSAF is fairly accurate.  Members of the DOSSAF

that showed any skill generally went from there into one of two

different directions.  One was competition aerobatics, the other was

military service.  Only the very best of them flew the YAK-50, it was

not available for any Tom, Dick or Harry that came along.  



The DOSSAF was not aimed towards the "youth" of the society, but at

anyone at all that was interested and desired to learn how to fly.  If

you could pass the physical, you were in.  All training from then point

on was free of charge.  The training was fast and furious and not a "joy

ride".  One could easily argue that the DOSSAF was more like the start

of military service rather than saying "preparing them for it".  In a

way, close to the ROTC of our country.  



That said, the YAK-52 trainer was built to a military specification that

called for it to be the primary trainer for all military pilots.  Ever

notice the way the brakes work on a YAK-52?  Go look at almost every

Russian military fighter jet built.  Guess what?  It has the same type

of braking system.  This is not coincidence, this is due to a well

thought out plan.  



So here you have an aircraft built to military specification, by a

Russian firm well known for building military attack and fighter

aircraft, being used as initial and primary training for the majority of

all military pilots.  Yes indeed, I would call the YAK-52 a military

trainer, that was sometimes used to train those that become aerobatic

team members as well.  Comparing the number of pilots who flew it that

went on to fly jet fighters, compared to the number that went into the

aerobatic teams, it CLEARLY was a military trainer.  



That said, on the same token, the YAK-50 would indeed be a STRETCH to

call a military trainer.  A military "anything" for that matter.  Not

too many of the upcoming jet jocks flew it, mostly just the top

aerobatic team members. 



The Soviet military was not set up exactly as was our military.  If you

focus on those very exact differences, you could indeed argue that the

YAK-52 was not "exactly" a military trainer by OUR definitions.  Make no

mistake though, it clearly was a military trainer by THEIR definitions,

no stretch at all.  



Mark Bitterlich 

N50YK



References:  Sergei Boriak; SPETSNAZ and Russian Aerobatic Champion,

Vladimir Yastremski; Master Mechanic, pilot, and Russian Paratrooper.

Of note, Sergei flew my YAK-50 when on the Aerobatic Team out of

Kazakhstan.  



--

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:36 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

Thanks Mark.  Very well put too!

Dennis



---

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:56 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

Ditto. 



Mark Bitterlich

 



--

mark.bitterlich(at)navy.m
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:16 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

You see, this posting clearly defines the issue at hand, which is:  WHAT DEFINES A WARBIRD?  (Thanks John)



The answer is simply that there are MANY definitions, and only your own point of view legitimizes ANY of them.  



ERGO:  In order to become the WINNER, or being clearly RIGHT about this topic will require every OTHER person to give in to some single person or group vis-à-vis the way "they" define the word.    



The chance of that happening?  ..... Not likely.   



Moving on, I was dared to say this:  "Clearly, without regard to warbird status, the YAK-50 makes all your other aircraft look like poop anyway".   



That said: DON'T EVER DARE ME DOUG!  Hopefully the readership will take it for what it was worth!    We'll see!  



MGB



--

LawnDart

Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 64

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 3:35 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

It comes down to if someone/organization defines military trainers as

warbirds.  The Yak-52 is definitely a military trainer (only need one

example)

Romanian Air Force

http://www.roaf.ro/en/dotare/iak52_en.php

Scooter

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 155

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:48 pm Post subject: Re: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

Just saw the following on a classifieds website:  CESSNA 150J "WARBIRD" â€¢ $29,000 â€¢ FOR SALE OR TRADE â€¢ A Cessna 150 you can be proud of at any fly-in. Excellent attention to detail. New paint, New interior. This airplane gets attention on any ramp.

jgriffint28(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 6:26 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

The easiest definition of a warbird? Can you park in the warbird section at 

OshKosh. A yak 52 with civilian paint scheme can. A Cessna 150 with military 

paint cannot.

Jim Griffin

---

LawnDart

Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 64

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 6:40 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

It seems to come down to something like Oshkosh.  The term warbird has probably evolved over time.  Once it may have only included the ones who "fired shots".  However over time it has come to cover all aircraft used by a military.  No one would think to exclude the T33, T34, L39, BT13, liasons etc and force them to part in GA at Osh.  If so (if military trainers are included), there is no way the Yak-52 can be excluded, period.   

    [quote][b]

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 7:22 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

Does this mean that the Cessena 182 Mescalero can? 

Doc



--

jgriffint28(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:19 am Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

They can, and have parked at OSH in the past in the Warbird section.

Jim Griffin

---

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 1:10 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

Jim,

Thanks.

Doc



--

HawkerPilot2015

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 503

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:21 pm Post subject: Re: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

While I may not consider my little -50 a warbird, I will put its flying qualities up against any of the big iron. I would also wager that flying the -50 is a lot more FUN. I have flown the P-51 and while it was hyper cool to fly, it was not as much fun. In those types of airplanes, it is more about looks and being cool then just pure fun. Most warbird owners would never consider doing in thier airplanes what we do in ours. 



I would be hard pressed to find a replacement for the -50 without spending serious money. If money were no object, I would have some other birds in the hangar but I still think my daily flyer would be the -50. 



If most "warbird" owners would pull the stick out of their ass, they would accept these airplanes for what they are...cheap, reliable, strong, and tons of fun. That is enough for me. 

(Having said all that, I would give my left nut to fly a P-47 and both nuts to fly a Spit....any Mark but a MK. XIV would be the shit)

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 8:03 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

Screw them. The 50 and the 52 are technically warbirds. Both flown by Russia (USSR). Contra to popular believe civilian aviation did not exist behind the iron curtain. The DOSAFF trained future aviators for the state! There were not privately owned aircraft flown by private pilots during the heyday of these aircraft. Why do you think these instrumentation in these aircraft were set up like they were? Why did they set the low speed jet up to load up the engine on final when you get behind the power curve? 

What civilian aircraft has the instrumentation in it that is set up the same as the follow on jet trainer or the MiG or Sukio fighter. I dare say you are not going to find percent RPM in a single civilian primary trainer on any continent. Nor are you going to find a pressure carburetor setup to load up on base final turn if you get behind the power curve with a sink rate on final. It was so the fleagle would be prepared for that spool up lag time required by that turbofan in the L-29, L-39, MIG 15, MIG 21, MIG 23 or MIG 25  to keep them from bending one of the State's assets. Look at that brake handle you grab every time you get ready to taxi then go look in the MIG 15 through MIG 29 pits (I have not had the opportunity to look at the pit of any of the other newer aircraft in their inventory). What do you see hanging on the side of that stick? 

These aircraft were/are military trainers. The 50 and 52 were flown for the glory of the State not the pleasure of the individual! The pleasure of the individual happened only because that aviator was good enough to make the grade and was allowed to compete for the State or fly in defense/offense of it. Even Aeroflot was a branch of the military/KGB. I repeat, the USSR did not have a civilian general aviation fleet. Not the fleet as we in the western world know it to be. You got to fly an airplane because you served a purpose in the glorification of the State.

These aircraft have every right to be in the warbird category as does any of the French, German, Polish, English, Australian, US, Japanese, or whatever other military trainer does.

Doc



--

cjpilot710(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 8:52 pm Post subject: Bear 360 / Radial engine pod

I'd like to point out the imbricates Aerocoupe was a military "warbird" in  WW2.

  

 It was the first aircraft to ever use JETO.

  

 In truth any aircraft can be used as a "military aircraft".  It all  depends on need.

  

 Just think how nasty a Aercoupe could be against a P-51 if it  were loaded with Sidewinders.

  

 All it takes is intent.

  

 Jim "Pappy' Goolsby



See what's free at AOL.com. 

  [quote][b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 3 of 4

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum