Did we ever fly the T-6 Texan/Harvard?

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I ask this because I found this on one of my favourite Microsoft Flight Sim sites:

http://library.avsim.net/sendfile.php?Location=AVSIM&Proto=file&ImageID=382832

The description says it's for an Airfix model kit.

If we did, what was it used for?  Was it one of "those [darn]ed little yellow airplanes" dropping depth charges/bombs that the Kriegsmarine Admiral referred to?

[VNY]

I ask this because I found this on one of my favourite Microsoft Flight Sim sites:

http://library.avsim.net/sendfile.php?Location=AVSIM&Proto=file&ImageID=382832

The description says it's for an Airfix model kit.

If we did, what was it used for?  Was it one of "those [darn]ed little yellow airplanes" dropping depth charges/bombs that the Kriegsmarine Admiral referred to?

No, as it was still the advanced trainer at the time.  Squadron 35 had 6 of those at one point.  That group of aircraft still operates together but the got fed up with CAP and left to form their own organization.

[LSThiker]

The little red and yellow airplanes were mainly Fairchild 24s or Stinson 10s.  Unfortunately, I cannot view the link as it asks for a login, but there is a picture of CAP emblems on T-6s.  Some websites state that it is a WWII picture taken in Texas, but others say it is a picture taken by Sq 35 as referenced by VNY.  Did we officially ever have T-6s?  No, the closest we got were T-34 Mentors for SAR missions.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

The little red and yellow airplanes were mainly Fairchild 24s or Stinson 10s.  Unfortunately, I cannot view the link as it asks for a login, but there is a picture of CAP emblems on T-6s.  Some websites state that it is a WWII picture taken in Texas, but others say it is a picture taken by Sq 35 as referenced by VNY.  Did we officially ever have T-6s?  No, the closest we got were T-34 Mentors for SAR missions.

Low-wing T-34's for SAR?  That must have been an absolute devil for the observer/scanner.

[lordmonar]

http://www.airfields-freeman.com/CA/Airfields_CA_SanFernan.htm

Go almost to the bottom of the page.....a photo of several T-6's with CAP tail flashes.

[rugger1869]

http://www.airfields-freeman.com/CA/Airfields_CA_SanFernan.htm

Go almost to the bottom of the page.....a photo of several T-6's with CAP tail flashes.

That's good stuff!

[sardak]

Here's a picture of one of those T-6s from Sqdn 35 in action: http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=17720.msg322309#msg322309

Mike

[PHall]

The little red and yellow airplanes were mainly Fairchild 24s or Stinson 10s.  Unfortunately, I cannot view the link as it asks for a login, but there is a picture of CAP emblems on T-6s.  Some websites state that it is a WWII picture taken in Texas, but others say it is a picture taken by Sq 35 as referenced by VNY.  Did we officially ever have T-6s?  No, the closest we got were T-34 Mentors for SAR missions.

Low-wing T-34's for SAR?  That must have been an absolute devil for the observer/scanner.

Actually they were pretty good. The back seat is aft of the trailing edge of the wing.

[Mitchell 1969]

I ask this because I found this on one of my favourite Microsoft Flight Sim sites:

http://library.avsim.net/sendfile.php?Location=AVSIM&Proto=file&ImageID=382832

The description says it's for an Airfix model kit.

If we did, what was it used for?  Was it one of "those [darn]ed little yellow airplanes" dropping depth charges/bombs that the Kriegsmarine Admiral referred to?

No, as it was still the advanced trainer at the time.  Squadron 35 had 6 of those at one point.  That group of aircraft still operates together but the got fed up with CAP and left to form their own organization.

I remember both Squadron 35 and 135 flying T-6's (135 was an offshoot of 35).  But I thought all of them were member owned. I've never been able to get anyone to say with certainty that "CAP had T-6s").

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

http://www.airfields-freeman.com/CA/Airfields_CA_SanFernan.htm

Go almost to the bottom of the page.....a photo of several T-6's with CAP tail flashes.

They had "Bug Smashers" (Expeditors) too?  Wow.

I noticed the part about the filming of "Baa Baa Black Sheep."  Inaccurate as can be compared to Pappy Boyington's book, but still one of the Must-See-TV shows of my grade school years back in the '70s.  I couldn't get enough of those Corsairs.

[4fhoward]

I seem to remember from the old level one video of a BT-13 and a T-6 with the prop and triangle painted on the sides.  There was also "NY group" on the side of the plane.  The prop and triangle were not a sticker on the tail they were in place of the stars and bars.
If anyone still has the level one video could view it

[a2capt]

It must have recently rained for this photo, that ramp area looks like a dump.







As for a group that got "fed up", with CAP? I can see the Wing getting fed up with them Too much avgas to run those things.  Things change. We're not an excuse to manage your flying club.

According to Ron Stearns, “By the very early 1960s, the [CAP] squadron grew to near 25 T-6/SNJ/Harvard aircraft, five T-28s and three C-45s.”

.. There are barely that many aircraft in the whole wing now. Somehow that had to be member owned.

[PA Guy]

I ask this because I found this on one of my favourite Microsoft Flight Sim sites:

http://library.avsim.net/sendfile.php?Location=AVSIM&Proto=file&ImageID=382832

The description says it's for an Airfix model kit.

If we did, what was it used for?  Was it one of "those [darn]ed little yellow airplanes" dropping depth charges/bombs that the Kriegsmarine Admiral referred to?

No, as it was still the advanced trainer at the time.  Squadron 35 had 6 of those at one point.  That group of aircraft still operates together but the got fed up with CAP and left to form their own organization.

I remember both Squadron 35 and 135 flying T-6's (135 was an offshoot of 35).  But I thought all of them were member owned. I've never been able to get anyone to say with certainty that "CAP had T-6s").

All of the T-6s, T-28s were member owned.  Remember, back then member owned aircraft greatly out numbered corp aircraft and flew most of the missions.

[PA Guy]

It must have recently rained for this photo, that ramp area looks like a dump.







As for a group that got "fed up", with CAP? I can see the Wing getting fed up with them Too much avgas to run those things.  Things change. We're not an excuse to manage your flying club.

According to Ron Stearns, “By the very early 1960s, the [CAP] squadron grew to near 25 T-6/SNJ/Harvard aircraft, five T-28s and three C-45s.”

.. There are barely that many aircraft in the whole wing now. Somehow that had to be member owned.

The Sqdn 35 HQ was a dump. It consisted of several Quonset Huts with lots of bamboo planted around them. They also had their own AVGAS storage tank and pump in an isolated part of the airport. They also had their own flight line just outside their HQ buildings Their T-6s guzzled gas and the oil level was 5 gals.

[flyboy53]

Did you guys notice the CAP C-45/Beach 18 in the one photo? That's really cool!

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Did you guys notice the CAP C-45/Beach 18 in the one photo? That's really cool!

I did notice the C-45 Expeditors, which I called "Bug Smashers" in a previous post.

The Royal Canadian Air Force and Royal Canadian Navy Reserves flew them...the RCAF guys had to go from the F-86 to the C-45.  Talk about daggers!

From this:


to this:


I think the "Bug Smasher" nickname may have originated with our northern neighbours...referring to the aircraft going so slow that it smashed bugs on the windshield.

I think that the AF used them post-WWII mostly as "hacks" with ANG units.

Anyway, I thought CAP units were not allowed to operate multi-engine birds(?)

[a2capt]

When I joined at the end of 2001, while member owned aircraft were still pretty much usable, there were some members that .. well, lets say that, I want to say it was an Aerostar, and several people were signed off as mission scanners after a few flights, and others of us got to ride in a Bell 47 on occasion when visiting the same flight line.. on weekends when training was going on. Stuff just kinda happened.

[Eclipse]

Anyway, I thought CAP units were not allowed to operate multi-engine birds(?)

There's no prohibition, in fact 60-1 has verbiage about multi-engine qualification.
They just aren't practical for CAP, since the number of average Joe-Sixers with multi engine rating is pretty
slim, not to mention they are expensive to maintain, expensive to run, and since cross-country transport
is a rarity in CAP, don't really fit the mission.

As to member-owned aircraft, clearly the credit CAP took, not to mention the "BITD Comfort" of old timers
was based on member-owned A/C.  Word is a unit we had up North had 15 aircraft in and of itself - member owned.

You might as well take credit for "member owned cars", while you're at it.

A member owned a/c might make you feel better numbers-wise, but it isn't a reliable asset in the way CAP
needs it to be, since Joe can just take it home or leave it sitting on the ramp at his whim.

[Eclipse]

When I joined at the end of 2001, while member owned aircraft were still pretty much usable, there were some members that .. well, lets say that, I want to say it was an Aerostar, and several people were signed off as mission scanners after a few flights, and others of us got to ride in a Bell 47 on occasion when visiting the same flight line.. on weekends when training was going on. Stuff just kinda happened.

When I joined, I was given a business card with two sig lines.  Take the scanner ECI test, then one ride you're trainee, second ride you're qual'ed.

End of training.

[Eclipse]

Also, FWIW, I flew a Texan at one of those "Top Gun For A Day" schools.

I have about 4 hours of front-seat stick time, including "combat" with two kills, aerobatics, and formation flying (like tollway close with two other T-6s).

Yes, it was a huge cup of awesome, one of these days I will post the video here.

[rugger1869]

How about today?

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Also, FWIW, I flew a Texan at one of those "Top Gun For A Day" schools.

I have about 4 hours of front-seat stick time, including "combat" with two kills, aerobatics, and formation flying (like tollway close with two other T-6s).

Yes, it was a huge cup of awesome, one of these days I will post the video here.

Sir...I hate you.  I thoroughly loathe you.  I would give one of my more redundant appendages to have done that.

[Mitchell 1969]

It must have recently rained for this photo, that ramp area looks like a dump.







As for a group that got "fed up", with CAP? I can see the Wing getting fed up with them Too much avgas to run those things.  Things change. We're not an excuse to manage your flying club.

According to Ron Stearns, "By the very early 1960s, the [CAP] squadron grew to near 25 T-6/SNJ/Harvard aircraft, five T-28s and three C-45s."

.. There are barely that many aircraft in the whole wing now. Somehow that had to be member owned.

The Sqdn 35 HQ was a dump. It consisted of several Quonset Huts with lots of bamboo planted around them. They also had their own AVGAS storage tank and pump in an isolated part of the airport. They also had their own flight line just outside their HQ buildings Their T-6s guzzled gas and the oil level was 5 gals.

It was a dump. They were mostly great guys, but it was a dump. Some of them seemed to take pride in that.

I took over a cadet squadron that was based at the same airport. We had a decrepit storage shed and limited access to their facility, IF somebody from there showed up in our meeting night to open the door. (Yes, you guessed it - they wouldn't give a key to "their HQ" to anybody else in CAP.)

We opted for our own HQ on the same field. Our objective was simple - make it look the opposite of the other place.

[Max Rockatansky]

The little red and yellow airplanes were mainly Fairchild 24s or Stinson 10s.  Unfortunately, I cannot view the link as it asks for a login, but there is a picture of CAP emblems on T-6s.  Some websites state that it is a WWII picture taken in Texas, but others say it is a picture taken by Sq 35 as referenced by VNY.  Did we officially ever have T-6s?  No, the closest we got were T-34 Mentors for SAR missions.

Low-wing T-34's for SAR?  That must have been an absolute devil for the observer/scanner.

Fun to fly, but, yes, lousy for SAR.  Great flight trainer.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

It is interesting to note that these CAP T-6's were permitted to wear the USAAC star with red centre on the wings.

[Mitchell 1969]

It is interesting to note that these CAP T-6's were permitted to wear the USAAC star with red centre on the wings.

One more time - there is nothing to show that they were "CAP T-6's." They were almost certainly member owned.

[PHall]

It is interesting to note that these CAP T-6's were permitted to wear the USAAC star with red centre on the wings.

One more time - there is nothing to show that they were "CAP T-6's." They were almost certainly member owned.

All of the aircraft flown by this unit were member owned. The CAP insignia on the tail was the version that could be used on member owned aircraft and vehicles.

[RiverAux]

One more time - there is nothing to show that they were "CAP T-6's." They were almost certainly member owned.

A distinction without a real difference for most of CAP history.  Sort of like saying that CAP didn't fly anti-sub missions since they weren't CAP airplanes....

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I guess the decal fooled me.

[PHall]

I guess the decal fooled me.

CAP owned aircraft would have the CAP Seal in all of it's Scotchlite glory on the tail back then.

[4fhoward]

I was spending some time on the web and found this image of a BT-13 in CAP markings.

http://www.factorydirectmodels.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/vultee-bt-13-valiant-fd10-1618l5.jpg

[Cliff_Chambliss]

I guess the decal fooled me.

CAP owned aircraft would have the CAP Seal in all of it's Scotchlite glory on the tail back then.

Several years ago there was an ex-CAP Cessna L-19 (O-1) based at Georgetown Texas.  The plane still had the CAP Seal on the fin but the guy that owned it had stuck a decal of an Armadillo with a Lone Start Beer over the center covering the prop symbol.  Made for an interesting piece of art.

[Eclipse]

Several years ago there was an ex-CAP Cessna L-19 (O-1) based at Georgetown Texas.  The plane still had the CAP Seal on the fin but the guy that owned it had stuck a decal of an Armadillo with a Lone Start Beer over the center covering the prop symbol.  Made for an interesting piece of art.

Make your own today!
http://www.papertigerarmaments.com/Bird_Dog.html







More cool stuff here...

[LTCinSWR]

Take a look at the 'old style' ES patch; that is a T-34. Years ago, Albuquerque Sr. Sqn. II had T-34s. Not sure when they went away.

[JacobAnn]

Take a look at the 'old style' ES patch; that is a T-34. Years ago, Albuquerque Sr. Sqn. II had T-34s. Not sure when they went away.

I remember a T-34 in WI Wing in the mid 80s.  Only a select few were allowed to fly it.

[LTCinSWR]

I remember a T-34 in WI Wing in the mid 80s.  Only a select few were allowed to fly it.

I suspect that was because it was considered a 'complex single' and after several incidents involving 'ground loops' (especially in O-1 'Birddogs') they started consolidating to the 'tricycle' Cessnas.

[PHall]

The T-34's went away after they were all grounded by an AD for their wing spar.
CAP had been trying to get rid of the T-34's for awhile and this AD was the final nail.

[SarDragon]

We had a T-34 in MEWG in the early '70s. I went away before it did. Never managed to get a ride in it, though.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

It would seem to me that low-wing birds of whatever kind would be bad for spotting missing aircraft, especially given the Mark I Eyeball technology of the time.

[SarDragon]

The T-34s were essentially free, and were great for o-rides.

[AirAux]

Did we possibly fly the T-6's for target towing during WW-II or later??

[bosshawk]

CAWG had a T-34 at San Carlos as late as 94-95.  I had a form 5 in that airplane and flew it a number of times.  The T-34s all got sold when National deemed them too expensive to maintain.

[Private Investigator]

CAWG had a T-34 at San Carlos as late as 94-95.  I had a form 5 in that airplane and flew it a number of times.  The T-34s all got sold when National deemed them too expensive to maintain.

That brings up a good question. What was the cost of T-34 as compared to a C-182, twice as much, triple?

[bflynn]

According to Ron Stearns, "By the very early 1960s, the [CAP] squadron grew to near 25 T-6/SNJ/Harvard aircraft, five T-28s and three C-45s."

.. There are barely that many aircraft in the whole wing now. Somehow that had to be member owned.

Researched the tail number of N7295C - it was never owned by CAP, it was sold from the Navy to a private individual in 1963. 

The one in the front is almost certainly N10602, which was also privately owned and sold in 1973, but the earlier history of the airplane isn't clear.

Cannot find anything on 31960, it's not in the registry.  The number was reissued to a PA-32 in 1978.

Other numbers are incomplete.

[bosshawk]

Question on the cost of flying a T-34: don't remember it as being any more expensive than the 182 that I also flew in CAP.  Flown properly, it had a fuel burn about the same.   I have a Beech Debonair that actually burns less than a 182 and certainly less than a 206.  The T-34 was actually fun to fly: great visibility and highly maneuverable: not too different from my Debonair.  The 34 had more flair to the outsider than a mundane 182 or 206.

Those T-6s that are pictured above were very definitely member-owned.  In fact, there is a guy on CAWG staff right now who owned one of them.

There is a former CAP T-41 based at my home field.  It still has the basic CAP paint job, with no markings.

[Private Investigator]

^ Colonel thank you for sharing sir.  :clap: