Titan T-51 Mustang, 75% scale fighter.

[Weirdguy]

I picked up the latest issue of Kitplane magazine in the supermarket based on the cover article of a T-51 mustang, by Titan.



Now, I am not really one to judge, but the plane looks like a lot of fun, yet their is always that bit of me that dismisses it as being a bit silly.  Only a real mustang is a real mustang, and a scaled down kit plane is just asking for people to ridicule it.

Yet, if I could afford it I might want one.

Hell, the most interesting part about them is they use car engines form Suzuki and Honda.

But then again I have dreams of building my own 1-to-1 scale Panzer 38T or Panzer-III out of lightweight materials like plywood on a square metal tube frame, and justify it by taking it to all of the big paintball tournaments.

What do you guys think.  Is it a bit of a laugh, or is it something you would want?

[Tupac]

Get a Thunder Mustang. The Titan Mustang isn't much faster than a Cessna 172, and it can't carry 4 people.

[WWhiskey]

Call me when they start building THUNDER JUGGS!!!!

[saggs]

I've kind of follow the kit plane industry as I'm interested in one myself someday.

The Titan Mustang is really underpowered (when built per plans with a Rotax 912), to me it's like the folks who put a Ferrari body kit on a Pontiac Fiero.  For a 2 seat tandem kit plane you'd be much better off with a RV-8.  The RV has more performance in every respect, and it's safer (fixed gear, thousands built)  

And if you want more performance then the RV-8 in a tandem, look at the F1 Rocket EVO.

The Thunder Mustang IS a high performance kit, can easily be built to outperform the original with either a V8 or V12 engine.  Problem is those kits are no longer in production, and the prices for the existing kits are astronomical.  Last time I looked (over a year ago) there where rumors they where selling the molds and tooling to someone who was going to start production again, but I don't think it ever happened.

Personally I want to build a Super Cub.  Unfortunately all of the decent Super Cub kits cost 3 times what the "go fast aluminum" kits cost.  

EDIT: Looking at Titan's website, the Suzuki or Honda V6 engine option is new.  Last time I looked a Rotax 912 was the only factory option.  While the V6s would certainly give it more acceptable performance, you then run into all the issues involved with running a liquid cooled auto engine in an aircraft (radiator, PSRU, intake heat, etc).  I know auto conversions have been successfully flown a lot, but I personally would feel much more comfortable with an aviation designed engine.  If someone where to built a 3/4 scale mustang kit utilizing proven Lycoming or TCM powerplants, then I'd get excited.  But even with that, you still have the worry of retract gear.

[VonMessa]

I've kind of follow the kit plane industry as I'm interested in one myself someday.

The Titan Mustang is really underpowered (when built per plans with a Rotax 912), to me it's like the folks who put a Ferrari body kit on a Pontiac Fiero.  For a 2 seat tandem kit plane you'd be much better off with a RV-8.  The RV has more performance in every respect, and it's safer (fixed gear, thousands built)  

And if you want more performance then the RV-8 in a tandem, look at the F1 Rocket EVO.

The Thunder Mustang IS a high performance kit, can easily be built to outperform the original with either a V8 or V12 engine.  Problem is those kits are no longer in production, and the prices for the existing kits are astronomical.  Last time I looked (over a year ago) there where rumors they where selling the molds and tooling to someone who was going to start production again, but I don't think it ever happened.

Personally I want to build a Super Cub.  Unfortunately all of the decent Super Cub kits cost 3 times what the "go fast aluminum" kits cost.  

EDIT: Looking at Titan's website, the Suzuki or Honda V6 engine option is new.  Last time I looked a Rotax 912 was the only factory option.  While the V6s would certainly give it more acceptable performance, you then run into all the issues involved with running a liquid cooled auto engine in an aircraft (radiator, PSRU, intake heat, etc).  I know auto conversions have been successfully flown a lot, but I personally would feel much more comfortable with an aviation designed engine.  If someone where to built a 3/4 scale mustang kit utilizing proven Lycoming or TCM powerplants, then I'd get excited.  But even with that, you still have the worry of retract gear.

Scratch-build.  Cheaper

[ToeTag]

http://www.radialrocket.com/

[saggs]

Scratch-build.  Cheaper

Yup...  and I do have the skills that I could scratch build one.

Trouble is the time, probably would take 3-4 times longer to scratch build, then if you got a kit with a fuse all welded up, and pre-fabbed wing ribs, spars etc.  Vs.  Cutting, notching, welding all that tubing... cutting, forming, deburring each wing rib, etc.

I actually understand part of why the Super Cubs cost more.  There is a lot more labor involved in welding up a 4130 tube fuselage, then a semi-monocouque fuse like in the RVs.

I actually believe that it's cheaper to buy a junker certified Cub, strip it down and rebuild/recover it, then to do one of the kits.  CubCrafters wants $66K for their kit, Dakota is similar, Backcountry (formerly Turbine Cubs) is the cheapest, but still near $50K.   There is the Bearhawk Patrol kit which is cheaper, but it's not really a Super Cub.

[phatzo]

Call me a Spitdweeb but....

http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/

they just moved from Brisbane to Cisco Texas



the V8 is a beast

http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/V8%20Engine.htm

[VonMessa]

Yup...  and I do have the skills that I could scratch build one.

Trouble is the time, probably would take 3-4 times longer to scratch build, then if you got a kit with a fuse all welded up, and pre-fabbed wing ribs, spars etc.  Vs.  Cutting, notching, welding all that tubing... cutting, forming, deburring each wing rib, etc.

I actually understand part of why the Super Cubs cost more.  There is a lot more labor involved in welding up a 4130 tube fuselage, then a semi-monocouque fuse like in the RVs.

I actually believe that it's cheaper to buy a junker certified Cub, strip it down and rebuild/recover it, then to do one of the kits.  CubCrafters wants $66K for their kit, Dakota is similar, Backcountry (formerly Turbine Cubs) is the cheapest, but still near $50K.   There is the Bearhawk Patrol kit which is cheaper, but it's not really a Super Cub.

I am in the process of scratch-building a Bearhawk 4-place.  Actually met Bob Barrows last summer at his place in VA.

[Bodhi]

Get a Thunder Mustang. The Titan Mustang isn't much faster than a Cessna 172, and it can't carry 4 people.

When you compare the costs of the average Thunder Mustang and what people are putting into the high end versions, you can almost make the jump to a real Mustang.

[flight17]

Personally I want to build a Super Cub.  Unfortunately all of the decent Super Cub kits cost 3 times what the "go fast aluminum" kits cost.  

build your own. We had to get another wing for ours due to an accident and the entire wing structure structure of spars and ribs was only $2000. We had all the other hardware from the other wing though.

[Babalonian]

When you compare the costs of the average Thunder Mustang and what people are putting into the high end versions, you can almost make the jump to a real Mustang.

truth

[LLv34_Camouflage]

I want one of these:



http://www.roland-aircraft.de/Mer109/galerie/

Camo

[Kenne]

I want one of these:

(Image removed from quote.)

http://www.roland-aircraft.de/Mer109/galerie/

Camo

so do it, but i want mine with propellor blades 

[eagl]

I'd want to buy something the size of the titan mustang if it had at least 500hp, was designed for better than 6+ / -3.5 Gs, and had some real performance (looking for 300 kts at least).  A 75% mustang with a 1000hp PT6 turbine would be a hoot.