Yak-52, CJ-6, etc

[flywithastick]

Anyone have direct experience with this type of equipment? More interested in ownership experience, since everyone says they fly nicely. I've been eyeing the CJ-6's for a while. Yesterday, I got a close look at a Yak-52. I tell you, they're impressive (to me) - fairly well built, tough and the looks kind of grow on you. Not to sure about all that cyrillic writing though! I hear that parts are readily available and even still in production in some cases. Not to many complaints about them falling out of the sky. Don't carry much gas though - 30 gals std in the -52.

Makes me think about selling my existing machine and looking around for one of these "light" warbirds!

 

[VMA214]

Fwas,
My neighbor has a CJ-6. A sweet flying airplane!! Although its got 75 LESS horsepower it will walk away from a YAK-52. The CJ-6 is flush riveted. Put them in the vertical though and its a little different story of course.

The airplane is based at Flying W in Lumberton NJ. I'm sure he'd give you a ride if he knows you're looking at one.

 

[flywithastick]

Thanks for the response, 214. your info matches up with what I've found so far - CJ's are faster, older (for the same $$ as a -52), have more fuel, less aerobatic. Yak-52's are newer (for the $$), more aerobatic, more powerful but have cr@p for range (30 gal fuel cap!).

What a deal to be part of VMA-214! One of my favorite, along with VF-84 and the former VF-17.

 

[Dan CFI/CFII]

Perosnally, I like the CJ better. I'm sort of in the market for the right one as we speak...

The CJ is considerably faster, on less gas, and is a kinder, gentler plane. The 52 is more of a balls out acro bird. But parts to both are pretty easy to find (both are still in production). The Yak-52W is real cool (all western components)--but a bit pricey since they are only a year or so old.

That, and the CJ is better looking, although the 52 isn't bad. Now the Yak-50: there is a plane!

Dan

 

[flywithastick]

That, and the CJ is better looking, although the 52 isn't bad. Now the Yak-50: there is a plane!

Dan [/B]

Yea, but only one seat! There's one at Clover in Houston. Looks good. Not sure if it's still with us. I heard a yak bit the dust somewhere around here recently... need to find out more.

 

[Dan CFI/CFII]

Yeah, but the 50 just looks so good...

There's that Yak-52TW out now. A Western Taildragger. Seems as if it'd be a lot of fun.

But I'm still sticking to the CJ. I think it's a bit more of a practical airplane, and more than enough fun for me (especially with a few choice modifications...)

Dan

 

[Tram]

Long dead thread, I know.. Almost 4 years..

Dan, if you still come here, did you ever pick up the Cj?

My pops and I are finding that our RV6 is not really what we were looking for in terms of "lazy aerobatics.." It is not quite draggy enough, and tends to accelerate pretty quickly..

So we are looking for something else..

I like the looks, speed and range of the CJ better..

How much more aerobatic is the Yak than the CJ?

We are not planning on doing unlimited aerobatics, however, loops, rolls, split s's.. the general run of the mill stuff is what we are after..