Yak 50/55 v Pitts S-1T

[Penguinracer]

Hi all, a quick question: As an ownership proposition how does a Yak-50/55 stack-up against a Pitts S-1T. I'm talking about recreational aeros with the odd competition at intermediate & possibly advanced thrown in for good measure. I suppose my main questions are:
(1)Which is more fun to fly?;
(2)Will there be a big disparity in maintenance costs?;
(3)Which is more useable? - I have concerns over the use of the laminated wood / cloth wing of the Pitts if it's wet/foggy (for the odd x/c);
(4)Durability - again is storing & using the wood/cloth winged Pitts an issue under UK conditions?
(5) Resale value - which is easier to move on if required? I could imagine more buyers would be comfortable with the Pitts than the Yak.

Operating a Pitts in California, Texas, Australia (anywhere with little rain & low humidity) is one proposition - but how does it respond to sitting in a UK hangar, especially over the winter?

Tim

[eharding]

1) I don't have any Yak-50/55 time - just Yak-52 and Pitts S1 (and I really must take up the offer from the local 55 operators of a blast in G-NOIZ...we just need to find a suitable crane to get me into the thing). All three will be a complete hoot, the 55 and S1 will be fine up to Advanced, nowadays you wouldn't want to abuse a 50 at anything over Intermediate. The Pitts, however, is completely sublime in the air, and can be an absolute sod to land. The Yaks will be slightly less extreme in both regards.

2) Expect an order of magnitude difference in maintenance costs for the Yaks vs. the Pitts - especially if you can find an S1-T on an LAA Permit - being factory built, msot of them are on a C of A or the N-reg. From experience, I'd say maintenance costs for anything with an Ivchenko at the front have at least doubled over the past few years, if not tripled, and it wasn't cheap to start with. In principle, the 55 has less maintenance complexity than the 50, but if you get into replacing some of the titanium bits then expect some truly eye-watering bills. AFAIK there are only 3 55s operating in the UK at the moment anyway.

3) The Pitts will be fine being exposed to rain occasionally, but you wouldn't make a habit of it.

4) You'd need hangarage for the Pitts, the Yaks will survive quite happily outside with a good set of covers. In either case, the secret is to fly them on a regular basis. Leaving something parked - inside or out - for a couple of months over the winter will lead to problems.

5) There is a very worrying MPD hanging over the future of the Yak-50s in the UK, stipulating a total airframe life of 600 hours until a suitable life extension inspection regime can be established - which that last time I looked, it hadn't - which obviously leaves the resale value in limbo. There have been similar issues with the Yak-55 in the past, now resolved. The problem is that the original Soviet-era airframe life specifications were deliberately set at a vanishingly small number of hours in order to ensure a flow of repeat business for the factory - the airframes themselves are built like tanks, particularly the 55 - but nowadays the Yakovlev Design Bureau have no interest in publishing more realistic lifetime figures, so the CAA work on the basis of the original documents. What invariably happens is that large amounts of money are extracted from the owners, an engineering survey is conducted by the CAA which discovers that the aircraft is, indeed, built like a tank, and a lifetime extension programme is finally established. To an extent, anything even slightly exotic operating on a CAA Permit is at the mercy of arbitrary CAA muppetry of this sort. You shouldn't have any problem selling the Pitts, provided it is in roughly the same number of pieces it was when you bought it.

[Penguinracer]

Thanks eharding. I've tried to find Pilot Flight Reports for both. I must admit I haven't read a bad word about any of the Pitts S-1s. They seem to be viewed as the benchmark for fun aerobatic flying, even though later generations of carbon composite monoplanes now dominate unlimited aeros. My impression was that the 55 lacks the Pitts' finesse - resorting to brute power to overcome drag & weight. The report I saw alluded to the 55 easily entering unsolicited snap rolls during loops with a new pilot, perhaps due to the considerable torque of the motor.They almost seem like apples & oranges. The Yak could be flown on an x/c & left outside overnight without concerns about it blowing away or moisture damage, but then the Pitts looks like a little sports car - a Ferrari perhaps - delicate & close fitting like a hand in glove.