KP/Kopro

[Weaver]

KP have done a Pilatus PC-9, which I think I'm right in saying is the first 1/72nd kit (almost certainly the first affordable kit) of this subject.
Hannants don't have it in stock yet but it's listed as a future arrival and they're taking pre-orders for it, so it's not vaporware.

There are four boxings. Note the Irish Air Corps option (another source of IAC decals for whiffs!):

PC-9M Over Europe: https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/KPM72468?result-token=Wp0OC
PC-9M Other Services: https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/KPM72469?result-token=Wp0OC
PC-9/B Part 1: https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/KPM72470?result-token=Wp0OC
PC-9 Part 2: https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/KPM72471?result-token=Wp0OC

[chrisonord]

Those PC-9's are itching to have underwing ordnance, and a FLIR under the fuselage.

[PR19_Kit]

How much do the RAF T-6C Texan IIs differ from a stock PC-9? Or is there no visual difference?

[Spey_Phantom]

How much do the RAF T-6C Texan IIs differ from a stock PC-9? Or is there no visual difference?

there's a littlr difference, mosty a modified cowling and prop. the rest is almost the same as the T-6A Texan II is pretty much an licensebuilt Americanized PC-9M.

[PR19_Kit]

Well yes, but will the kits show the differences?

[CammNut]

There are a lot of differences, actually. Different propeller, different engine, different cockpit, very different canopy and tail. Convertible, but the canopy would be a challenge (for me anyway)

[PR19_Kit]

I guess we'll have to see what the reviews say. Sounds like there needs to be lots of alternate parts in the kit, or two different kit mouldings.

[Mossie]

ZK119 was a PC-9, so won't need any conversion. It was owned by BAE and operated out of Warton, as was ZG969 which was in company colours. They were let go some years before the Texan T.1 entered service.

[chrisonord]

Just seen this on facebook.

[kitbasher]

T-6 Texan II versus PC-9.  Engine is different but the cowling and exhausts look the same.  Can't tell how the prop differs but interested to learn more.

The Texan has a ventral strake that the PC-9 doesn't have.  The PC-9M has the larger dorsal fin extension that's not copied over on to the Texan.  Other than it being a two-piece canopy on the Texan, I can't see any shape difference with the PC-9's, so maybe just mask and paint an additional frame?  Don't know, here to bow to more superior PC-9/Texan knowledge.

Leading on from Mossie's post, the boxing containing markings for ZK119 (https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/KPM72470?result-token=Wp0OC) and indeed ZG969
(https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/KPM72471?result-token=Wp0OC) would seem to be a reasonably-priced basis for a simple conversion of a PC-9 to a Texan T.1. 

That does assume that a builder wouldn't be too fussed about cockpit interior differences (or modified the interiors).

[Weaver]

ZK119 was a PC-9, so won't need any conversion. It was owned by BAE and operated out of Warton, as was ZG969 which was in company colours. They were let go some years before the Texan T.1 entered service.

IIRC BAe had them because they developed Hawk-compatible cockpits for them for Saudi Arabia.

When the Nimrod MRA.4 had it's first flight, everyone from the factory went out front to watch. One of the PC-9s (I think it was ZG969 but don't hold me to that) was acting as camera ship. The airfield boundary at Woodford was a bit random, with an "intrusion" of a civvie cul-de-sac with tall trees that jutted out perpendicular to the runway. As the Nimrod started to roll the PC-9 came in very low and slow to run parallel to it, and, from our point of view, disappeared behind the trees. Knowing that the pilot was probably looking sideways at the Nimrod not forwards, the conversation near me went something like:

"Tree."
"Trees..."
"Tree, mate..."
"TREES! Oh Shi..."

Then suddenly the PC-9's engine sound jumped up and it appeared over the trees going up at about 45 degrees.

Obviously couldn't say for certain that he misjudged it and nearly became a tree surgeon the hard way, but it sure looked like it from where we were standing...

[Mossie]

Other than it being a two-piece canopy on the Texan, I can't see any shape difference with the PC-9's, so maybe just mask and paint an additional frame?  Don't know, here to bow to more superior PC-9/Texan knowledge.

The Texan canopy is taller at the rear Dave.  There's a larger fairing where it meets the tail to account for the difference.  There's a shape difference too, the Texans follows a curve, the PC-9 flattens just after the seat.

[Mossie]

IIRC BAe had them because they developed Hawk-compatible cockpits for them for Saudi Arabia.

ZG969 was loaned from the Saudi Air Force, then returned to them in 2016. I'm not sure where ZK119 came from.

[kitbasher]

Cheers Mossie.  Yes you're right, I'd not noticed - the rear contours really are very different, aren't they.

[Mossie]

Yeah, it looks tricky to do a conversion.  I guess the bulge is to accommodate taller pilots, looks a tad tight in the PC-9.