| T-6 texan 11 versus pc-9m | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: May 28 2017, 09:00 PM (649 Views) | |
| cyclonus | May 28 2017, 09:00 PM Post #1 |
|
Is the T6 Texan based on the "m" variant of the pc-9?.in the June issue of "model airplane magazine" there is a build /review of a new 1/72 T6 and if if does have the correct "m" tail/spine it would make for an intresting alternative to the oz mods pc-9 which needs erecting to make an irish aircraft. |
![]() |
|
| Dermot | May 29 2017, 12:27 PM Post #2 |
![]()
|
Good question- think you would need to compare fuselage profiles/wing plans etc to see what changes might be needed. I'm not sure what the development history is of the T-6 and others from Pilatus....but probably a thread out there somewhere! I've read there are also differences in the canopy profile & cockpit details between T-6 & the PC-9M. Suppose you could always build as a What if! Der |
|
Gallery of my Completed Builds On the Bench
| |
![]() |
|
| cyclonus | May 29 2017, 02:08 PM Post #3 |
|
True but from what i can see they do sedm to be pretty much the same in shape. |
![]() |
|
| FiSe | May 29 2017, 02:37 PM Post #4 |
|
Heil Mickey!
|
Well, I would start with overall size, although Texan is based on PC-9 it could use different engine, it could have different fuselage length, it could have different wingspan, it could have different proportion ratio, say longer nose or shorter tail... It certainly has more and different inspection panels on the nose than PC-9 and tail set-up is slightly different too, but nothing serious. Canopy, is different and maybe different ejection seats as well as interior layout? ...having said that, build it OOB, paint it two tonne Grey, nobody will notice a thing ![]() Anyway picture worth 1000s words PC-9M ![]() Texan II Edited by FiSe, May 29 2017, 02:47 PM.
|
Filip . . . .![]() | |
![]() |
|
| cyclonus | May 29 2017, 03:21 PM Post #5 |
|
Ah fiddle sticks anyway...sure its close to the m than the a version...true what you say though about people in general not knowing the difference. |
![]() |
|
| Dasike | May 29 2017, 08:12 PM Post #6 |
|
It's 2025 as per the White Paper, the PC-9s must be replaced with new aircraft, at roughly this time due to new NATO requirements, Britain newly rejoined to the EU and trying to rebuild it's damaged infrastructure has been awarded a contract by President Trump in one of his last acts in his second term in office in the US, to build the new Nato trainer, The Texan/Harvard II. (Note this is only possible as due to unknown and not American sabotage. The Swiss have not produced the PC-9 since 2021) Ireland deciding to join the bandwagon orders 10 new aircraft which are currently being constructed in Belfast at the newly restored "Shorts" BAE systems factory. There we go all fixed. Seriously though, the differences are workable and not like trying to convert a Tucano. The only other thing I'd recommend is ask companies to consider a PC-9. It can't hurt to ask
|
![]() |
|
| FiSe | May 29 2017, 10:04 PM Post #7 |
|
Heil Mickey!
|
Well, I wouldn't know too much about those, nonetheless, fuselage section behind canopy looks quite differerently on both machines, much steeper and higher on the Texan, that could cause some trouble to get it right. |
Filip . . . .![]() | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |










all fixed.
3:28 PM Jul 11