Hello All,

I have a question for all of you. What do you think of the Great Planes AT-6 .40 ARF. Is it good for a first warbird? Let me know your experiences with this plane as well as the construction of the plane. Any improvements that you should make while putting it together.

Thanks.

No. It's a very poor replica. Lines ,Canopy, cowl and the whole thing are not even close. If you want a T-6 which is real close, get the Kyosho

Hi,

I built and flew a GP Texan with a Magnum .80 4 stroke. It was a beautiful plane and flew very well. The only problem I had with it was landing. I ripped the gear out 3 times, and I never did feel comfortable landing her. I always got the "big hop" on landing. The gear mount is very weak as well. I ended up selling it on the "bay".

The purists will say that this plane is not to scale, and they are probably right, but it is an awesome looking and flying plane!

Scott

In your post you said the Kyosho is a more accurate representation of AT-6. How does is the construction, materials, flying characteristics of the Kyosho?

Thanks.

RDmoore,

IMO,For a few more bucks go with the Hanger 9 AT-6, change the gear wire, and have fun.

I had GP 40 size AT-6.... Fun.... but a pain to takeoff, and land. Sold it on ebay to a pylon racer.

Kyosho was a fiberglass fuselage. It's like a miniature of the real thing. The GP and the Hangar 9 are identical cheap third rate replicas. As far as the retracts, I always apply extra epoxy to the mounts as you would all retracts. it flew great but they are naturally tail heavy and you will have to add nose weight.

I think its disgusting that hangar 9 or GP would invest in design and R&D and turn out nothing more than the efforts of a stik.

So Cyclic,
Can you tell us all what you really think of GP and Hanger 9..

Try Decaf....[sm=lol.gif]

Kyosho? Great little 40 size AT-6 ... just hope you never need replacement parts because IF they are available, they are VERY expensive. How about a wing set for $10 less than the total cost of the ARF?

Hanger9? Again, a great 60 size AT-6 ... as long as you have the money to go with the bigger engine and the extra bucks for a good retract servo. Plus you'll have to deal with the factory "wobbley" retracts or spend the money to put in some good replacements.

GreatPlane? Again and again, a great little 40 size AT-6. Put a cheap OS 46AX or a Saito 72 or 82 and standard servos with fixed gear and you have a great "beater". For the money, this is your best bet. They all fly great and they all land like a Texan. For your first warbird? Maybe the Hanger9 T34 Mentor? I don't know. Any warbird is going to land "hotter" than most other planes. Taildragger, maybe the Texan. Trike, maybe the Mentor.

For those that prefer a dead nuts, scale AT-6 like Cyclic requires, you had better not start with an ARF anyway. Get you a great set of plans, get one of the laser cutters to cut you parts ... and spend the next 12 to 18 months to reproduce a warbird worthy of the full scale original. But personally, I love all of my non-scale, non-worthy birds But maybe I should sell them since they are such crappy representations

That was sugar coated! They fly fine. I just really dislike the way some of these distributors design these planes. It's like a 3 year old showing you a picture he just drew up. You don't know what the heck it is but he calls it a boat! If they are going to go through the trouble to bring us a plane, at least make it look real. A fair amount of them are are more "sport, than sportscale. If they can design a canopy for a T-6 with a few braces on it, whay can't they design it the right way with the same amount as did Kyosho.

I am far from being a Kyosho fan. I had problems with mine. They are overpriced .40 size planes but they are at least closer to scale than most others.

RD,

I have owned and flown both the GP AT-6 and the H9 T-34 Mentor. By far the GP AT-6 is a nicer looking better flying plane. The only thing it doesn't do well is knife edge flight. GP didn't do a great job with the construction of the kit in comparison to top shelf ARF's of today. It does take some time to put the kit together clean. Never-the-less, if you have built ARF's before you shouldn't have any problems. I put a remote glow starter on mine and a fuel dot which took some time to line up with the cowl. Measure twice cut once! The firewall is recessed on the plane and with an inverted engine placement I have to take the cowl off and loosen the engine mount to replace the glow plug. Also a reason why I put on a remote glow starter.

Out of the box the kit doesn't look like much, but once you get it all together, paint the canopy, and get the decals on it's one sweet looking 40 size ARF. It is really easy to see in the air and it's slow flight characteristics are unreal. You can slow it down to a crawl. Take offs in a cross wind are a challenge and I royally screwed up a take off in those conditions one time. Criticisms of the Kyosho ARF are: if you don't get the two wing halves dihedral perfectly identical it has a nasty tip stalling tendency and just about everyone says the Kyosho AT-6 is tail heavy. Our GP AT-6 with a Saito .72 needed no additional weight to balance with a 2700Mah battery pack under the rear of the canopy. I know that's one heavy pack and overkill on capacity for this plane. The Saito .72 is plenty of power for this plane and flies it nicely.

Get the hobbico .40 size retracts. They are all metal and fit well. The hardest part of the build was bending the retract wire to fit into the wheel wells. They require multiple bends, but once you get them bent your in good shape. I didn't have a vice to bend mine with. That was fun. The hobbico wire is very sturdy. I have had H9 retracts, GP retracts, and the hobbico's are by far the best out of the bunch. The only difference is the GP and H9 have smaller mounting brackets than the hobbico and are lighter. The H9 retracts are crap in my opinion.

Out of all the ARF's my brother and I have built and flown we like the GP AT-6 the most so far.

Give a hollar if you need any help. Good luck.

-Blue

I have this plane. It fly's great but on the ground its a handfull! Mine will ground loop in the blink of an eye. I sloooly accelerate on takeoff. when landing its sometimes under control sometimes not. I wouldnt buy the plane again. Most of the clubs in my area don't even consider this plane a Warbird due to it not being a combat plane but a trainer instead (Advanced Trainer 6) is what it stands for I think. It's a great looking plane in the air with the retracts up. I tore one retract out on my second flight. It was an easy fix and havent had any more trouble since. I think you could do better by picking a different plane. My third plane was a WM Dago Red Mustang and I've been happy with it, but landing is still touchy for me. The AT-6 is known to be a tough plane to handle on the ground due to the landing gear so close together.

Here are my two planes, both are great looking but the Mustang is more forgiving on the ground. Whats nice about the Dago Red is I've entered it into flying competition and could fly it as a warbird or civilian plane.

If the real model takes off and lands like the one in the simulator, I don't think I'll try it. It seems to be nice in the air, but landings are really difficult. Maybe it's just that I'm a poor 'lander'.
Glen

I've been flying my GP AT6 for a couple weeks now and I love it. I have a TT .46 in it.

My only complaint, like others have said, the landing gear setup is JUNK.. I've ripped mine out many times.. I've braced it REALLY well so we'll see how long it lasts.

Yes, its not a great replica but it flys awesome. Ground handling isnt bad. The first few landings may be a chore. This plane does like to fly so you have to bring it in a little hot, not much. Then cut the throttle and let it settle down and give it some up elevator to keep it from nosing over.

I've only been flying for 3 months or so.. I started on a Nexstar, went to a PC9 which unfortunatly crashed (now that was an awesome plane to fly), and then the AT6.. I didn't think it was too big of a jump but everyones skill level is different

I have to say that there are some pretty discriminating flyers here. When you get one of these sport scale birds in the air I think it's pretty hard to tell that thier lines aren't perfect. I have been flying the Hanger nine AT 6 all summer. It is a great flying plane. It's looks great in the air and I get compliments all the time on how great it looks on the ground. I agree that if you are a true scale nut then any ARF is not the way to go. With my job, house, kids etc I don't have the time to devote to a real scale project as most of us don't. The only change I made to the H9 T6 was to replace the landing gear wires with the Robart ones mentioned in other threads. That took care of all of the ground handing problems. I fly off a pretty rough grass field so I know about bad ground handling. I have an old OS 91 four stroke in it and it is a great match. The plane balanced perfectly. It flys great and takes off and lands easily. It's not a trainer so you do need to keep some speed on it comming in. I highly recommend it.