AT-6 Texan

[MjTalon]

General characteristics

    * Crew: two (student and instructor)
    * Length: 29 ft (8.84 m)
    * Wingspan: 42 ft (12.81 m)
    * Height: 11 ft 8 in (3.57 m)
    * Wing area: 253.7 ft² (23.6 m²)
    * Empty weight: 4,158 lb (1,886 kg)
    * Loaded weight: 5,617 lb (2,548 kg)
    * Powerplant: 1× Pratt & Whitney R-1340-AN-1 Wasp radial engine, 600 hp (450 kW)

Performance

    * Maximum speed: 208 mph at 5,000 ft (335 km/h at 1,500 m)
    * Cruise speed: 145 mph (233 km/h)
    * Range: 730 miles (1,175 km)
    * Service ceiling: 24,200 ft (7,400 m)
    * Rate of climb: ft/min (m/s)
    * Wing loading: lb/ft² (kg/m²)
    * Power/mass: hp/lb (kW/kg)

Armament

    * Provision for up to 3× 0.30 in (7.62 mm) machine gun

Development

The T-6 originated from the North American NA-16 prototype (first flown on April 1, 1935) which, modified as the NA-26, was submitted as an entry for a USAAC "Basic Combat" aircraft competition in March, 1937. The first model went in to production and 180 were supplied to the USAAC as the BC-1 and 400 to the RAF as the Harvard I. The US Navy received 16 modified aircraft, designated the SNJ-1, and a further 61 as the SNJ-2 with a different engine.

A further 92 BC-1A and three BC-2 aircraft were built before the shift to the "advanced trainer" designation, AT-6, which was equivalent to the BC-1A. The differences between the AT-6 and the BC-1 were new outer wing panels with a swept forward trailing edge, squared-off wingtips and a triangular rudder, producing the definitive Texan appearance. After a change to the rear of the canopy, the AT-6 was designated the Harvard II for RAF/RCAF orders and 1,173 were supplied by purchase or Lend Lease, mostly operating in Canada as part of the Empire Air Training Scheme.

Next came the AT-6A which was based on the NA-77 design and was powered by the Pratt & Whitney R-1340-49 Wasp radial engine. The USAAF received 1,549 and the US Navy 270 (as the SNJ-3). The AT-6B was built for gunnery training and could mount a .30 in machine gun on the forward fuselage. It utilised the R-1340-AN-1 engine which was to become the standard for the remaining T-6 production. Canada's Noorduyn Aviation built a R-1340-AN-1 powered version of the AT-6A which was supplied to the USAAF as the AT-16 (1,500 aircraft) and the RAF/RCAF as the Harvard IIB (2,485 aircraft), some of which also served with the Fleet Air Arm and Royal Canadian Navy.

In late 1937 Mitsubushi purchased two NA-16's as technology demonstrators and possibly a licence to build more. However the aircraft developed by Watanabe/Kyushu as the K10W1 (Allied code name Oak) bore no more than a superficial resemblance to the North American design. It featured a full monocoque fuselage as opposed to the steel tube fuselage of the T-6 and NA-16 family of aircraft, as well as being of smaller dimensions overall and had no design details in common with the T-6. It was used in very small numbers by the Imperial Japanese Navy from 1942 onwards. The IJA did not operate any, as they had other aircraft that they used for training. After the war the Japanese Air Self Defense Force operated Texans.

The NA-88 design resulted in 2,970 AT-6C Texans and 2,400 as the SNJ-4. The RAF received 726 of the AT-6C as the Harvard IIA. Modifications to the electrical system produced the AT-6D (3,713 produced) and SNJ-5 (1,357 produced). The AT-6D, redesignated the Harvard III, was supplied to the RAF (351 aircraft) and Fleet Air Arm (564 aircraft). Subsequently the NA-121 design with a completely clear rearmost section on the canopy, gave rise to 25 AT-6F Texans for the USAAF and 931, as the SNJ-6 for the US Navy. The ultimate version, the Harvard 4, was produced by Canada Car and Foundry during the 1950s, and supplied to the RCAF, USAF and Bundeswehr.

A total of 15,495 T-6s of all variants were built.

Shouldn't be hard to model. Similar airframe to the SBD? I would personally like to see this aircraft added in the future hopefully for training purposes as well as TA trainers for ACM/BFM/Wingman tactics/Formations/etc. Would really be a beneficial addition for the new players of Aces High.


 

[AWwrgwy]

Planes being free and unlimited and all and the prospect of death from a novice flying a powerful, high performance aircraft rather slim, I see no need for a "Trainer" nor an unarmed spotter aircraft (off topic  ) when you can take the "real" thing up and train in it.

+10 on presentation though.


wrongway

[Denholm]

Finally a post with some enthusiasm about the request!

The only use I find in an AT-6 Texan would be to share the cockpit in the Training Arena. It might assist trainers in helping new pilots to learn parts of the game more quickly.

[EskimoJoe]

I saw one of those at a ground show up here not too long ago. It was really nice looking (shiny,too!) I wouldn't mind having it added to the game, especially if it comes with a no weapons gun package. I'm tired of telling the new guys .SHOW RV, no not like that.. no! gah..

[1Boner]

A company called North AmericanTop Gun came to New Hampshire a few years ago with a pair of At-6s.

I was lucky enough to go up in one (my brother in the other)

Above 1000 ft. the plane was yours to fly.

They wouldn't let you land or take off, but the rest of the time you took the controls.

A real blast.

But I don't see it being in the AH plane set.

Although I bet Lazs would get alot of kills in it!! ( I think he could shoot me down while he was flying a kite)

http://www.natg.com/    << link to North American Top Gun.

[morfiend]

Sry Blitz,has to see combat at squardon size,all but counts this 1 out.

A few years back a buddy of mine and myself went up in a "havard" texan and a stearman.
I flew the stearman and my buddy said the Texan was stalling so bad he could barely get a pic of me.The stearman had an airspeed of about 65mph at the time....... I drove to the airport faster!

[FYB]

+1

Can't believe I'm agreeing with you Ack, but this would make a fine training plane for TA. Now tutors can have a much needed training plane.

-FYB

[Motherland]

What's wrong with the RV8?

[FYB]

What's wrong with the RV8?

Thats its not a WW2 aircraft. 

-FYB

[BnZs]

Could be interesting, considering the AT-6 was supposedly more difficult to take off and land than the P-51.

[AWwrgwy]

Why can't you train in whatever we have now?  With guns?  They're free.  Wouldn't training in the actual thing you intend to fly be more beneficial?  Hand on with the actual[/] flight model, actual[/] views, and actual[/] responses?


wrongway

[flight17]

i would personally love to have this in the game! ive flown one in RW multiple times. the T-6 is a very stable plane, so the comment about it stalling, he had to have a very low power setting... i flew mine at warbirds adventure in florida, and was allowed to take it off because i had flown with them before, but its a very good plane. its not harder to fly than a P-51. if i can get kills dog fighting with a tbm, im sure the t6 will be able to DF if not even better... there are reports (1 particular one comes to mind that was on history channel in which a SBD took on and shot down 3 Zeros i believe) where SBD's have dog fighted and have won victories, so the T-6 should be able too.

during vietnam and korean, they were used in combat for forward air control aircraft

[Caldwell]

I believe that's the plane that Australian Wirraway was based on and it did see combat and obtained a grand total of 1 enemy kills. 

[Old Sport]

I proposed an idea a while back that would make the AT-6, or any other two seat trainer, a more viable idea.

If there were a ".tutor" dot command to allow either the trainee or the instructor to control the a/c, then a two seat plane might be worth the effort.

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,171473.msg1958543.html#msg1958543

Best.

[frank3]

I haven't seen the Tutor thread yet Cement, that's a good idea!

I remember alot of people screaming on the radio 'HOW DO I TAKE OFF'
The Tutor would be really helpful I think, and would go great along with the T-6