[homme de fer]

Hi all,

An old partially scratch built PT-19 recently came into my possession. It looks like it was built on plans from 1956. My guess is the build started about 20 - 30 years ago but, for whatever reason, never was finished. My questions are:

1. What should I do to strenghten the joints. Some of them have come loose and I'm not sure if CA was used so should I use CA or maybe Ontario Adhesives 'Super Phatic' glue?

2. I know that the RCAF used PT-26's. But, did they use any PT-19's? If they did, does anyone have any pictures of a full scale PT-19 in RCAF colours?

Thanks for any help.

[Guest]

Sounds like it may very well be a Sig PT 19 at about 1/6 scale. If so and it is not covered yet It can be easily converted to a PT 26. I converted a finished one years ago and actually stripped the covering off ( it was blue and black) and recovered it in the yellow bird colours and put a canopy on it. The aircraft was totaled in a mid air one week prior to the NATS during a practice at the field. I may still have the custom made landing gear if you are interested. Let me know and I can take down a few storage boxes and have a look.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~denpratt2/PT%2026.html

Dennis

[homme de fer]

Hi Propworm,

We chated back in the summer about a Lazy Ace bipe. I was all set to get some plans but then this thing came my way. It was "advertised" as a PT-26 Cornell but the plans say it is a PT-19 (1/6 scale). The builder tried to make a canopy (which I have) but was unsuccessful. I would love to make this a PT-26 so I can finish it in yellow RCAF colours (fabric, of course).

Would you have any plans/description on how I would go about building a canopy? I've never tried it before. And, since the plane came to me at no cost, I want to use this build to really push the envelope and acquire new skills.

Also, I'm pretty sure it isn't a Sig as the plans look like they came out of a magazine from the '50's. The instructions talk about how it is made for 1 or 2 channel applications and the suggested engine is a K & B .29. The builder had built it according to the plan but the nose is way too long for a modern engine (I'm thinking a .50 or .70 four stroke but I'm open for suggestions). I have to cut off about 3 or 4 inches and rebuild it, adding a tank floor, firewall, and build a fiberglass cowl (which I have never done, to be the subject of another thread).

Anyhow, I am open to any and all suggestions to get this thing into flying shape so all comments are welcome.

Thanks again

P.S. landing gear would be great. The one it came with makes no sense to me and doesn't look like it is strong enough to hold the plane up as a static display, let alone for one of my "landings". At the very least, it will give me a place to start.

[homme de fer]

I did some research, it is a Chuck Hollinger PT-19 with the plans that came directly from the August 1956 edition of "Young Men" magazine. The plans were sold a company called Jetco (I think) that built kits. Later, the plans were sold to Sig who manufactured it for many years.

So, Propworm is absolutly correct; it is basically a Sig PT-19.

[guyl]

Hello Homme de Fer;

The difference between the two is one was open cockpit (2-holer)
and the other add the green house (for winter flying).

During WWII The BCATP (British Commonwealth Air Training Plan
were using them amongst other types.

For a very interesting and unique colour scheme. I would suggest
the Norwegian RNAF who were stationned near Toronto and in the
winter were doing some ski flight training in the Muskoka region
which is an area similar to Norway. Their PT26s had a colour scheme
that if you paint yours like it....would certainly arouse the curiousity
of many. Ottawa Museum may help.

Guyl

[homme de fer]

guyl,

Like this?

[ovelyn boucher]

hi my name is ovelyn boucher. i have a pt26 i dont have cg for it if you can help me. pl email. ovelyn_69@hotmail.com tk it will help me.

[twnotter]

I was curious as to what it looked like and found these really good pictures. It would be a really nice paint scheme, sure beats the yellow.

[j3_av8r]

Originally Posted by twnotter

I was curious as to what it looked like and found these really good pictures. It would be a really nice paint scheme, sure beats the yellow.

I have to agree that the Norwegian colours are a little more attractive than the traditional yellow RAF/RCAF markings. There is also a full size one in Norwegian colours in Guelph now. It was rebuilt as a homebuilt. Here is a pic of it I took at the fly-in there a couple of weekends ago.

If you want to avoid the canopy issue, there is also an open cockpit version in this scheme. Goto the link below and search for PT-19 norway.

http://www.airliners.net/

I have been collecting pics of this plane for a while as I too have aquired an ancient version of this model that desparately needs recovering.

[Max]

Wow. I agree. This one looks really nice