How much would it cost to make your own p51?

>>31981001
>Wanting to replace the v12 Merlin with a Turbojet

Faggot

>>31981001
All comes down to what equipment you want. If you just want a P-51 without any facy gadgets you are probably looking at around 1 million USD

>>31981001
There is a 2/3 scale mini mustang kit.

>>31981001
People do actually.

Full scale? About 3/4ths of a million.

But heres the gig, aircraft cost isnt in build, its in licensing, inspections, and maintenance.

They have mandatory overhaul and rebuild times measured in hours for both the airframe and engine.

So you pay a couple grand, some inspector says its airworthy, then signs off that in 500 operating hours the engine must be 100% overhauled and that in 700 hours the airframe must be 100% overhauled.

Plus its not going to fall into a sport aircraft category so pilots licensing and hours spent renting a bird to earn your license will cost you a good chunk of change too. Not to mention renting hangar space, which can cost a lot too.

Between complete build plus all the red tape and maintenance it could very easily cost 1 mil to 1.5 mil to do. And will be expensive as fuck to operate. Aircraft like this can cost 300 to 400 per hour to operate in maintenance fees.

>>31981628
Actually when you build the plane the specifications are a bit different because nobody technically knows it better than you, and that goes for most home built aircraft.

https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/gen_av/ultralights/amateur_built/amateur_regs/

File: tuo.jpg (1MB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x1000px

>>31981001
use a tuplov turbo prop, imagine a 15000 hp countra rotating prop on a small plane

File: Strega-P-51D-20-NT-Mustang-AAF-44-13105-2.jpg (476KB, 2000x1001px) Image search: [Google]

476KB, 2000x1001px

>>31981001
just buy an old one or a racing one from a retiring team

if you want a modern power plant you should really get a radial engine plane and put a r-4360 in it, some models made 4300 hp, with wep (nitrous and water injection) you could get well over 5000 hp.

>>31981029
>>31981628

additionally you would need a high horsepower rating, a complex air frame rating and probably an aerobatics rating since the plane is still considered to be made for aggressive flight. Additionally because of the horsepower and the idea that the air frame will be flown aggressively the maintenance cycle will be shorter and the insurance will be much higher.

>>31981778
Kek

You mean a modern GeeBee at that point.

>>31981778
I'd love to put that bitch onto a big rig chassis.

Imagine making a Oshkosh M1070 burning rubber on all axles before zipping away down the highway.

>>31981860
Exactly.

My dad was a boeing engineer, I grew up around pilots, most former ww2, korean war, and vietnam vets. To celebrate the end of the cold war the old flyboys pooled money and bought a mig-21.

They immediatley regretted the decision. Fucking money pit, 8 guys all making 6 figures a year were struggling to keep it airborn, worse yet, they couldnt even sell the fucker because nobody wants to take care of it. They ended up donating it to some podunk air-museum.

On the bright side, I actually got to go on a 15 minute flight in one at 12 years old. Some crusty former korean war Marine Corsair pilot saw me lovingly stroking the hull and babbling a mile a minute about military history.

Talked my grandad into taking me for a spin in it. Was the coolest moment of my young life.

>>31981012
Why would he do that? He said modern engine, not jet engine you fucking sperg. That includes more powerful and reliable avgas engines and turboprops.

>>31981001
My absoulute dream is to have what is esstentially a p51 with a modern power plant, no weapons (unfortunately), and modern instruments and communications

So, in other words, not a P-51 at all. And evidently you know shit about planes and engines, if you dont understand it's the engine that makes the plane the plane it is.

>>31981778
> WHAT?
> TOWER, SAY AGAIN?
> I PASSED WHAT?

>>31983867
It's also entirely possible he doesn't want an engine that will crap out explosively in forty hours if it doesn't get an overhaul. We can make much more efficient and reliable ones now.

>>31983862
>more powerful and reliable avgas engines
late war WWII fighters make up to 1500 horsepower
There is not a single aviation piston engine built in the last 50 years that makes more than about 500

>>31983933
>1500

Try 2000 and higher

>>31981001
and what exactly is wrong with a rolls royce merlin engine?

your plane will sound like a faggot and fly itself into a trash can

File: IMG_3018.jpg (78KB, 800x531px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 800x531px

>>31981001
Something like a Pilatus PC-9 is something like what you are describing. Although you could probably buy an original P-51 for cheaper. The Pilatus would probably be easier and cheaper to maintain though, and far more reliable. Plus with the tricycle landing gear and an ejection seat, you would be a lot less likely to die in it.

>>31983867
Sorry, I meant to write Turpoprop.

>>31985050
Meant for>>31983862

People race bubba'd P51s in Reno that are essentially what you are describing. Between 750k and 2 mil is the answer.

>>31981860
There is no endorsement for aerobatic flying. All you need to do is abide by FAR 91.303 and wear a parachute. You'd need to be at least a student pilot with appropriate solo, complex, high performance, and high altitude endorsements.

>>31981860
Those are all endorsements, not ratings.

There is a difference.

>>31985050
Piper's got you covered!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_PA-48_Enforcer

>>31981860
No endorsement required for high altitudes. This is for pressurized airplanes.

No endorsement required for flying aerobatics, a previous anon has already addressed this.

Complex aircraft endorsement would be needed. Highly performance aircraft endorsement would be needed. Tail wheel endorsement would be needed. An adequate amount of flight time in similar airframes would be demanded by any insurer. Things like a Stearman, t-34, t-6 Texan and the like.

>>31985379
You are going to need a cross country navigation instrumentation cert, as well as the instrumentation installed in your bird.

Gonna have to get a pretty high class aviation radio too.

Were talking tens of thousands added onto your build, and a couple grand for the instrumentation cert.

The real kicker aside from the initial build is going to be racking up those flight hours though.

Renting an airframe equivalent to the build is gonna be around 500 per hour, and you are gonna need a couple hundred hours.

Flying is a rich man's sport if you intend to be piloting anything bigger than a light sport craft or ultralight.

It aint JUST the bird thats expensive, ya got just a fuckload of licensing fees, insurance, maintenance, and hangar space rental.

Protip: hangar rental is fuckin hard to find, and costs a lot.

For something like a p-51 replica you really need a heated and airconditioned floor space of a decent size, which will run you around 2,500 per month on average. Thats an average though, it can less at some places, much much more at others.

File: 20161021_174204.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

The thunder mustang kits are $300,000.

But, someone builds real P-51s brand new.
There is a company, can't remember the name, but they have all the tooling, wing jigs, and an inventory of spare parts from old P-51s, and new old stock. Original engines too.

These guys build a new plane from scratch, slap a data plate from an old wrecked P-51, and call it a restoration. Then sell it for $2M.

They put out several p-51s a year. All D models, with the stupid looking canopy.

There are so many awsome aircraft you can buy for a fraction of the price and with more history in the rivets. Hell, you can even get into jet powered aircraft and buy a t-33, F-86, or F-104.

>>31986653
>2500 per month

This must be at major airports like DFW or JFK.

I hangar my Beech travelair at a major FBO hangar with white floors for $150 a month. It's a busy, towered airport too.

In a different hangar, the rent for a C-47 is $1080 a month.

>>31986915
back P-51?

>>31986915
that doesn't look like a travel air cockpit
and your oil pressure is high

OP here.

Let me clarify.

I want a plane that is basically a WWII era p51 in aesthetics only. I love the look of the plane but there's no way in hell I'd be able to manage the upkeep and maintenance on an actual Mustang.
I think the best bet would be to do like>>31985059 or >>31981847 said and find a retired racing one and try my best to get it looking like a p51c rather than d.

>>31983933
I didn't say we have made them , I said we could. I learned to fly at an airport housing one of four still flying F4Us, and it puts out 3000ish horses. The engine is a custom rebuild, though.

Lots of changed stuff because WWII engines sacrificed a lot of reliability to produce that power, and dying in an old warbird because of a simple engine failure is not the objective of the aircraft's owner.

Oh, and yes, that fucker is gloriously loud. Almost collided with me on my second flight lesson because his radio wasn't working, too. Good times.

>>31987207
It's a c-47 cockpit. It's also the first engine run on a new engine, oil pressure hasn't been adjusted yet.

File: A-29.jpg (85KB, 1024x767px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1024x767px

p51 is crap.

Super Tunaco fucking pwns it.

File: Piper_PA48_Enforcer_USAF.jpg (208KB, 1280x838px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 1280x838px

>>31983867
Basically this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_PA-48_Enforcer

File: t-51d.jpg (66KB, 750x325px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 750x325px

>>31987782
So this
http://www.titanaircraft.com/t-51d.php

>>31987782
>>31989913
and other scale P-51's have been around for a while
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjUs6l_7Yfo

no weapons = no /k/.

>>31992004
/k/ tends to be the most aviationy of the boards. Also, the whole reproduction of a plane designed to be a weapon thing.

Everyone, go take a look at the Epic E1000 or Epic LT. It's basically a new P51. Similar HP, but incredibly modern. Also expensive AF. But so shiny