Accu-sim T-6 Texan video

[Chunk]

Ex-Portuguese Air Force now flying at Duxford...

I'm going to NEED to have this repaint when the A2A Texan comes out!

[T6flyer]

Yellow bands should be day-glo! And A2A example is a T-6G and not a Harvard Mk.4 as seen here.

Martin

[IanP]

It also has a modern cockpit. Does that mean I won't be putting a wartime RAF Harvard livery on it, if no-one else has by the time I can? Certainly not!

We will (at some point... Certainly not tonight, Lewis is out with his missus! ) have an Accu-Sim T-6G, not a Harvard 4, not a SNJ, only a T-6G with a modern cockpit. It'll still be the closest to a Harvard or a SNJ that we can get as sim pilots, so we'll use what we have, thanks!

Cheers,

Ian P.

[DaveB]

It also has a modern cockpit. Does that mean I won't be putting a wartime RAF Harvard livery on it, if no-one else has by the time I can? Certainly not!

We will (at some point... Certainly not tonight, Lewis is out with his missus! ) have an Accu-Sim T-6G, not a Harvard 4, not a SNJ, only a T-6G with a modern cockpit. It'll still be the closest to a Harvard or a SNJ that we can get as sim pilots, so we'll use what we have, thanks!

Cheers,

Ian P.

I have to agree. If it's there.. lob some paint on it

I just had a look at my shots of Taz Martin and the shot posted above is how she looks. It has to be said though that Duxfords flight line isn't ideal as the sun is always lighting the aircraft on the opposite side to Joe Public

ATB
DaveB

[ThinkingManNeil]

I enjoyed several flights in this wonderful airplane - as well as one of the museum's Harvard Mk. IV's - when I was a member of the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum back in the 1980's and 90's. I don't remember what the Canadian registration marks were, but I do remember someone had applied a small decal onto one of the white stripes of the USAF Stars & Bars on the port side of the fuselage that read "Want a ride? Insert VISA AmEx Mastercard" above a line drawing of a card insertion slot. That always gave me a chuckle...





Here's a pic I took of her beneath a CAVU sky the day after she'd been given a high polish...



N.

[T6flyer]

I have to agree. If it's there.. lob some paint on it

I just had a look at my shots of Taz Martin and the shot posted above is how she looks. It has to be said though that Duxfords flight line isn't ideal as the sun is always lighting the aircraft on the opposite side to Joe Public

ATB
DaveB

What I am trying to say is that the bands should be day-glo and not as seen here. The FAP ones had the orange, this has been painted incorrectly. I run an advisory service for T-6 owners, supplying them with details for paint schemes. 7 British examples are flying in my colours.

Martin

[Mach3DS]

It would be a real pity...A REAL pity, if A2A did all this, only to NOT include an original instrument panel? The modern panel is nice though. The whike bird is beautifully done. I cant imagine it will ship without the authentic panel...that would be a shame indeed. Lets keep the fingers crossed...

[Bomber_12th]

Some more details: http://a2asimulations.com/forum/view...p?f=23&t=52500

[T6flyer]

Personally I think that the panel modelled is authentic to the aircraft involved. Having seen so many examples myself and sat in a lot of them, nothing is original any more. You have to remember that these aircraft are almost 80 years old and so many different versions were created, all with their own different and some times individual touches. The one that we can see in the video, matches the aeroplane flown and I would personally rather see something true to life, rather than something which it is not. I see your point, but believe A2A have done their homework with this and that it reflects both the historic and up to date sides of the story.

To have an original panel, would mean changing the whole airframe, not just the internal model and I truly believe A2A have created the most accurate T-6 to date.

Best wishes,

Martin

[Mach3DS]

Personally I think that the panel modelled is authentic to the aircraft involved. Having seen so many examples myself and sat in a lot of them, nothing is original any more. You have to remember that these aircraft are almost 80 years old and so many different versions were created, all with their own different and some times individual touches. The one that we can see in the video, matches the aeroplane flown and I would personally rather see something true to life, rather than something which it is not. I see your point, but believe A2A have done their homework with this and that it reflects both the historic and up to date sides of the story.

To have an original panel, would mean changing the whole airframe, not just the internal model and I truly believe A2A have created the most accurate T-6 to date.

Best wishes,

Martin

I guess that's true...we're not really talking about an airplane with "standard" components even at the best of times...so many operators so many variants....didn't think of that. Thanks for the enlightenment! Hoping John T. makes the purchase and provides some excellent repaints!

[manfredc3]

Now that is bringing back flightsim memories.

I use to fly this bird made by Alphasim in FS. I added colored smoke, and later flew it in FSX.
Of course, reality wise no where near what A2A is presenting, but for that time (2010 or so) it was a blast.

And yes, awesome flying this bird low in the canyon's.

[YoYo]

Some of new screenies: http://a2asimulations.com/forum/view...p?f=23&t=52500 (modification of frame but perhaps only modern cocpit) :



Heidi again! : ))) (but perhaps no wartime pilot... : ( )





btw. see this - antenna (I dont know its only external gadget or it will be modelled in VC too).

[DaveB]

What I am trying to say is that the bands should be day-glo and not as seen here. The FAP ones had the orange, this has been painted incorrectly. I run an advisory service for T-6 owners, supplying them with details for paint schemes. 7 British examples are flying in my colours.

Martin

I don't know when Taz was painted like this mate but I can't recall her showing anything other than yellow. Owners hey.. you just can't trust em
ATB
DaveB

[Bomber_12th]

That big ADF "football" on the spine of the aircraft was a post-WWII addition, as were the canopies with the missing central framing, so if a WWII-era paint scheme is applied, these will be two items that should be 'checked off' for proper appearance (for those that care about such things) - the spinner was also a very late WWII addition, only seen during WWII on a few AT-6D's/F's/SNJ-6's, and thus the vast majority of WWII-era Texans/SNJ's never had that. With the fully framed canopies fitted, and the ADF antenna and spinner removed, the aircraft will look outwardly very close to a WWII AT-6C/AT-6D/SNJ-4/SNJ-5 (which I'm trilled about!). - For those that haven't yet seen on the A2A forums, I mention this because all of those details will be selectable from the maintenance hangar screen.

The fully clear rear windscreen, as seen in the racer option, was originally introduced in late AT-6 production (seen fitted to AT-6F's and the SNJ-6's), but these still had the earlier fully framed canopies - just one of those things that highlights how so many things changed/varied, not only between AT-6/SNJ/Harvard production, but all of the changes/variables that there have been on any particular airframe in all of the years since original manufacture. All that really matters, is that the basic AT-6/SNJ/Harvard airframe is largely the same no matter what you call it, it's not until you dive into the details that they become so separated. All of the one-offs, racers, or Hollywood modified examples aside, some sources claim that there are no fewer than 260 different sub-types of the AT-6 family, especially if you go all the way back to the root of its design, in the General Aviation company's GA-1 to GA-15 designs. What is considered the prototype of the AT-6, the fixed-gear, open cockpit, NA-16, was flown for the first time on April 1, 1935, powered by a 400-hp R-975 engine.

[IanP]

Personally I think that the panel modelled is authentic to the aircraft involved. Having seen so many examples myself and sat in a lot of them, nothing is original any more. You have to remember that these aircraft are almost 80 years old and so many different versions were created, all with their own different and some times individual touches. The one that we can see in the video, matches the aeroplane flown and I would personally rather see something true to life, rather than something which it is not. I see your point, but believe A2A have done their homework with this and that it reflects both the historic and up to date sides of the story.

To have an original panel, would mean changing the whole airframe, not just the internal model and I truly believe A2A have created the most accurate T-6 to date.

Best wishes,

Martin

The panel is, as A2A always do, an exact replica of the aircraft tested in the real world... Except that it isn't, because the avionics fit is adjustable. If one of the avionics options is to not include any GPS and even better to swap out the modern NAV/COM suite as well, then that would be fine for all intents and purposes. However, I suspect the same as the Cherokee, you'll be limited to having the modern avionics, but the GPS will be removable. To me, as John says, if you give it a full frame canopy and take off the football, I'll be happy.

I already made somewhere for RAF Harvards to fly from (Sutton Bridge) and Terry Boissel has done the same place - he may have done other advanced training stations as well. I just need A2A to release it and me to find enough money to get it.


Ian P.

[rdaniell]

...... I just need A2A to release it and me to find enough money to get it. Ian P.

I'm also wondering when this will be released and if it will be priced above my budget for add-ons.

RD

[Alan_A]

A2A has just set up a dedicated T-6 subforum, so the pace seems to be very fast.

Pricing: the most recent A2A GA aircraft (with Accu-Sim built in, not a separate purchase) have been about $50 each for either FSX or P3D Academic, higher for FSX/P3D Bundles and for P3D Professional. Not clear if the same will be true of the T-6, but noted for whatever it's worth.

With luck, we'll have all the answers soon enough.

[TARPSBird]

The options for canopy framing, prop spinner, and ADF football are a nice feature. I'm definitely in for this plane but I have to ask: Any chance of an option for a Navy SNJ-4C/5C with tailhook and cable guard on the tailwheel?

[T6flyer]

The panel is, as A2A always do, an exact replica of the aircraft tested in the real world... Except that it isn't, because the avionics fit is adjustable. If one of the avionics options is to not include any GPS and even better to swap out the modern NAV/COM suite as well, then that would be fine for all intents and purposes. However, I suspect the same as the Cherokee, you'll be limited to having the modern avionics, but the GPS will be removable. To me, as John says, if you give it a full frame canopy and take off the football, I'll be happy.

I already made somewhere for RAF Harvards to fly from (Sutton Bridge) and Terry Boissel has done the same place - he may have done other advanced training stations as well. I just need A2A to release it and me to find enough money to get it.


Ian P.

I am an advisor to the project and can state that two T-6Gs were used in the making of this aircraft. The panel is that from Pamela Marie with the exception of a moved ASI as that was positioned differently from the one the test flying was conducted on. As I have said before, all panels are different - a friend of mine in Canada has basically a glass cockpit in his and each individual owner puts his own identity on the airframe as required. Months of work was spent getting this right and I truly believe what you are about to see if fully representative of the T-6. Think you will be pleased with the final result. I am.

Martin

[gray eagle]

I got this from the wikipedia as I wondered what if any, were the differences (exterior/interior) in the Navy SNJ-4/5/6 series from the AT6 series....

<dl><dt>SNJ-4</dt><dd>Same as AT-6C, 1240 built.</dd><dt>SNJ-4C</dt><dd>SNJ-4s converted as deck landing trainers with tailhook arrester gear.</dd><dt>SNJ-5</dt><dd>AT-6Ds transferred from the USAAC, 1573 aircraft.</dd><dt>SNJ-5C</dt><dd>SNJ-5s converted as deck landing trainers with tailhook arrester gear.</dd><dt>SNJ-6</dt><dd>AT-6Fs transferred from the USAAF, 411 aircraft.

It looks like there was an order for 240 SNJ-8's but was cancelled.

Anyway, I wonder if there will be any SNJ paint variation(s) from this AT6 that A22 is advertising?

BTW, thanks John for the info on the fine details of the Texan.....
</dd></dl>

That big ADF "football" on the spine of the aircraft was a post-WWII addition, as were the canopies with the missing central framing, so if a WWII-era paint scheme is applied, these will be two items that should be 'checked off' for proper appearance (for those that care about such things) - the spinner was also a very late WWII addition, only seen during WWII on a few AT-6D's/F's/SNJ-6's, and thus the vast majority of WWII-era Texans/SNJ's never had that. With the fully framed canopies fitted, and the ADF antenna and spinner removed, the aircraft will look outwardly very close to a WWII AT-6C/AT-6D/SNJ-4/SNJ-5 (which I'm trilled about!). - For those that haven't yet seen on the A2A forums, I mention this because all of those details will be selectable from the maintenance hangar screen.

The fully clear rear windscreen, as seen in the racer option, was originally introduced in late AT-6 production (seen fitted to AT-6F's and the SNJ-6's), but these still had the earlier fully framed canopies - just one of those things that highlights how so many things changed/varied, not only between AT-6/SNJ/Harvard production, but all of the changes/variables that there have been on any particular airframe in all of the years since original manufacture. All that really matters, is that the basic AT-6/SNJ/Harvard airframe is largely the same no matter what you call it, it's not until you dive into the details that they become so separated. All of the one-offs, racers, or Hollywood modified examples aside, some sources claim that there are no fewer than 260 different sub-types of the AT-6 family, especially if you go all the way back to the root of its design, in the General Aviation company's GA-1 to GA-15 designs. What is considered the prototype of the AT-6, the fixed-gear, open cockpit, NA-16, was flown for the first time on April 1, 1935, powered by a 400-hp R-975 engine.

[T6flyer]

Basically no real difference externally between the AT-6C and D and the SNJ-3, 4 and 5 (with the exception of course of the hooked C sub variants and some AT-6Cs which had plywood rear fuselages).

Same goes for the Harvard Mk.IIA and Mk.III (AT-6C and D).

I've just completed work on a SNJ-5 that started life as an AT-6D. All changes are basically internal - 12 and 24 volt batteries.

Martin

[joe bob]

I am reading the manual right now, 40+ pages of background, starting with the invention of the wheel I believe
They must be paying Glicksman by the word!

[Bomber_12th]

Some of the differences between variants can be dealt with just in the textures - for instance, the AT-6F, SNJ-6, and Harvard variants had a fully rectangular baggage door on the port-side fuselage, just behind the rear cockpit. On other variants of the Texan/SNJ (those that could have, or did mount, a swivel/positional seat in the back), this door had an angled line to it along the left-lower side of the door due to the different baggage compartment design. Different variants also had some minor differences in access panels around the exterior, etc.

[T6flyer]

Harvard Mk.IIA and III had the cutout baggage door as they were basically AT-6Cs and Ds, but the Noorduyn built MK.IIB had the rectangular door and the fixed 6 panel rear section, along with the longer exhaust of course. These two features are not replicated in the A2A model.

I bet this all sounds so confusing to those not really interested in the T-6 family.

Best wishes,

Martin

[Bomber_12th]

So who else wants to dent some wingtips flying formation when this thing is released?





Just be careful to keep it off its nose.