Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
bobbysocks
Chief Master Sergeant
we need people to scour all of north africa to find engines and complete planes....
GregP
Major
I agree ... If you are going to restore a Buchon as a Buchon, then it should have the correct 4-bladed propeller on it instead of a 3-blade that tries to immitate a Bf 109. We are doing one now that will be restored with a 3-blade and will try to be a Bf 109 in airshows. That's the wishes of the owner.
If it were mine, I'd do it as a Buchon, but it isn't mine ... so we do as asked.
If it were mine, I'd do it as a Buchon, but it isn't mine ... so we do as asked.
net_sailor
Senior Airman
I understand, and no offence against you personally.
It's a pity that owner wants to destroy a classic warbird, cause in his opinion is not classic enough.
It's a pity that owner wants to destroy a classic warbird, cause in his opinion is not classic enough.
bobbysocks
Chief Master Sergeant
did he buy all 6 or just 1? if he bought all of them he could do some as buchons and customize some of the others to his taste
GregP
Major
We have a real life DB-engined Bf 109G-6 in Arizona, and the Hispano. It was mostly used for movie work. If it looks close enough to a Bf 109, it gets regular movie roles. This particular Ha.1112 played "the Luftwaffe" in Pearl Harbor (2000) and was damaged when the right brake failed on takeoff.
We have a rule at the Museum that we don't fly anything we don't have a spare engine for, and the single DB is all we have. If we had two, we'd fly it. Getting one is much too expensive for a non-profit museum. Still, I'd LOVE to see and hear a real one fly again.
When this one is finished, it will likely be used for movie work and the annual airshow almost exclusively. Nobody really likes the way it flies, so it would have to be a paying job to chose to fly it over almost anything else. Our Seversky AT-12, on the other hand, flies so well that ANYONE would want to fly it if allowed to do so. Ditto the Boeing P-26 ... but it only gets flown by Steve Hinton these days, and rarely at that. I was floored when they sent it over to the UK last year ... and then weather kept it grounded for all but 2 or 3 days! Go figure.
We have a rule at the Museum that we don't fly anything we don't have a spare engine for, and the single DB is all we have. If we had two, we'd fly it. Getting one is much too expensive for a non-profit museum. Still, I'd LOVE to see and hear a real one fly again.
When this one is finished, it will likely be used for movie work and the annual airshow almost exclusively. Nobody really likes the way it flies, so it would have to be a paying job to chose to fly it over almost anything else. Our Seversky AT-12, on the other hand, flies so well that ANYONE would want to fly it if allowed to do so. Ditto the Boeing P-26 ... but it only gets flown by Steve Hinton these days, and rarely at that. I was floored when they sent it over to the UK last year ... and then weather kept it grounded for all but 2 or 3 days! Go figure.
- Thread starter
- #27
It's different down here in NZ. And there are aircraft with NZ manufactured engines flying over there, so it can be done.
We've got standard, restricted, and special categories. The 'Special' category is further divided into experimental, exhibition, amateur-built, primary, LSA, and limited. the 'Special' category is where anything that cannot conform to a type certificate is put (which is most ex-military aircraft), and allows for a wider range of modifications.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
That's only if you're flying it under a "limited airworthiness certificate".
From the Feds...
"A limited category special airworthiness certificate is issued to operate surplus military aircraft that have been converted to civilian use under the following conditions:
•The aircraft has a limited type certificate.
•The aircraft conforms to its type certificate.
•The FAA has determined that the aircraft is safe to operate.
•Operations may not include carrying passengers or cargo for hire. The FAA may prescribe additional limitations as necessary for safe operation."
The P-51 does have a TCDS (Cal Aero owns the TC IIRC). If you fly the aircraft experimental you'll have more leeway on what you could do but more than likely will have to run any major alterations through either the local FSDO or MIDO office if you're operating in the US and you may be limited on where and when you could fly the aircraft. This is what the FAA says about "experimental" aircraft.
"A special airworthiness certificate in the experimental category is issued to operate an aircraft that does not have a type certificate or does not conform to its type certificate and is in a condition for safe operation. Additionally, this certificate is issued to operate a primary category kit-built aircraft that was assembled without the supervision and quality control of the production certificate holder.
Special airworthiness certificates may be issued in the experimental category for the following purposes:
Research and development: to conduct aircraft operations as a matter of research or to determine if an idea warrants further development. Typical uses for this certificate include new equipment installations, operating techniques, or new uses for aircraft.
Showing compliance with regulations: to show compliance to the airworthiness regulations when an applicant has revised the type certificate design data or has applied for a supplemental type certificate or field approval.
Crew training: for training the applicant's flight crews in experimental aircraft for subsequent operation of aircraft being flight tested in type certificate programs or for production flight testing.
Exhibition: to exhibit an aircraft's flight capabilities, performance, or unusual characteristics for air shows, motion pictures, television, and similar productions, and for the maintenance of exhibition flight proficiency.
Air racing: to operate an aircraft in air races, practice for air races, and to fly to and from racing events.
Market surveys: to conduct market surveys, sales demonstrations, and customer crew training for U.S. manufacturers of aircraft or engines.
Operating amateur-built, kit-built, or light-sport aircraft
Special Airworthiness Certificate, Experimental Category for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) and Optionally Piloted Aircraft (OPA)"
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #29
That's similar to what we have here. In the CJ-6, we have a special - primary airworthiness cert. (Meaning it doesn't have a TC, but acknowledging that it was built to some sort of specification) We are limited to not flying above built-up areas (unless taking off or landing) and no night flying.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Yes, we'll (The US - NZ) will have similar regs under our bi-lateral aviation agreement.
- Thread starter
- #31
If you want some idea of how to do it, The Vintage Aviator manufactured a WW1 engine from scratch for their BE2F aircraft
RAF.1a Engine | The Vintage Aviator
And their Oberursel engine (for the triplane):
Oberursel Reproduction | The Vintage Aviator
RAF.1a Engine | The Vintage Aviator
And their Oberursel engine (for the triplane):
Oberursel Reproduction | The Vintage Aviator
GregP
Major
Hi Joe,
Our three P-51s are limited category. The stock P-51s with modified engines are mostly experimental and the ones with modified engines and airframes are mostly experimental exhibition. I'm sure there are exceptions to this, but not many as far as I know.
We have the only example of several aircraft flying and I an embarrassed to say I don't know what category they are all in. We fly the only Boeing P-26, the only Northrop N9M-B, and the only Seversky AT-12. If there is another Pilatus P-2 flying in the U.S.A., I am unaware of it. Our Mitsubishi A6M5 Model 52 Zero is the only one flying with the original engine and prop, and so probably has the only chance of flying as a limited aircraft here in the U.S.A., but I am nto sure of the category it is actually licensed in.
We fly what I beilieve is the only Douglas SBD that is airworthy in the world at present. There are other simlar flying examples that claim to be SBD's but they are all actually Army A-24 Banshees as far as I know, and some have been converted by the addition of arrester gear to SBD configuration. They started life as A-24s. I do not know the category.
We display one of the VERY few airworthy Grumman J2F Ducks and I don't know that category either.
To tell the truth I never cared about the category but this thread has made me curious and I'll find out pretty soon about all the categories of our aircraft as a result.
I do know that Strega and Voodoo are both experimnental exhibition, though they seem to be able to fly about as needed when fitted with stock engines. I'll ask about that when I see Stevo Hinton next time. He isn't around the museum all that much these days and has been travelling all over the world for flight testing and licensing of warbirds. He recently test flew and certified a P-51D in South Africa. Good work if you can get it.
Our three P-51s are limited category. The stock P-51s with modified engines are mostly experimental and the ones with modified engines and airframes are mostly experimental exhibition. I'm sure there are exceptions to this, but not many as far as I know.
We have the only example of several aircraft flying and I an embarrassed to say I don't know what category they are all in. We fly the only Boeing P-26, the only Northrop N9M-B, and the only Seversky AT-12. If there is another Pilatus P-2 flying in the U.S.A., I am unaware of it. Our Mitsubishi A6M5 Model 52 Zero is the only one flying with the original engine and prop, and so probably has the only chance of flying as a limited aircraft here in the U.S.A., but I am nto sure of the category it is actually licensed in.
We fly what I beilieve is the only Douglas SBD that is airworthy in the world at present. There are other simlar flying examples that claim to be SBD's but they are all actually Army A-24 Banshees as far as I know, and some have been converted by the addition of arrester gear to SBD configuration. They started life as A-24s. I do not know the category.
We display one of the VERY few airworthy Grumman J2F Ducks and I don't know that category either.
To tell the truth I never cared about the category but this thread has made me curious and I'll find out pretty soon about all the categories of our aircraft as a result.
I do know that Strega and Voodoo are both experimnental exhibition, though they seem to be able to fly about as needed when fitted with stock engines. I'll ask about that when I see Stevo Hinton next time. He isn't around the museum all that much these days and has been travelling all over the world for flight testing and licensing of warbirds. He recently test flew and certified a P-51D in South Africa. Good work if you can get it.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #33
GregP
Major
There is a BIG difference in the U.S.A.
If you fly in the experimental exhibition category in the U.S.A., every flight begins and ends at the home airfield unless the aircraft is being flown for a public exhibition, pilot currency, test flights, flights to expand operting limits, or ferry to and from a race.
You cannot fly it to another airfield for a business flight and cannot take a passenger for hire, and youa re supposed to send the FAA a yearly list of your proposed flights and reason for same at the start of the year. They MAY have changed that requirement since I last looked at it but, if so, I haven't heard about it.
If you fly in the experimental exhibition category in the U.S.A., every flight begins and ends at the home airfield unless the aircraft is being flown for a public exhibition, pilot currency, test flights, flights to expand operting limits, or ferry to and from a race.
You cannot fly it to another airfield for a business flight and cannot take a passenger for hire, and youa re supposed to send the FAA a yearly list of your proposed flights and reason for same at the start of the year. They MAY have changed that requirement since I last looked at it but, if so, I haven't heard about it.
- Thread starter
- #35
that's why I prefaced my comment with 'for a single-seater'. For a single-seat aircraft such as these warbirds, you have listed 99% of all flying that they would do.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Greg, if the aircraft does not have a TCDS it would only have an experimental air worthiness. There are a few (very few) exceptions but that's what you're going to find for most WW2 aircraft, and I bet dollars to donuts the Zero is experimental
GregP
Major
I would not bet against you, Joe. I have NO IDEA whether the U.S.A. and Japan had reciprocity on aircraft types before WWII ... but I'd guess no until I look it up. I'll let you know when I find out.
You probably can guess the categories better than I can since most of my pre-Planes of Fame experience was with civil types, not warbirds.
You probably can guess the categories better than I can since most of my pre-Planes of Fame experience was with civil types, not warbirds.
- Thread starter
- #38
USA and Japan don't have reciprocity now, so historically I'd doubt it.
A lot of the TCDS that do exist for WW2 aircraft types are only for a very few serial numbers. I've been through the exercise of trying to put an AT-6 on a standard airworthiness cert, but couldn't find on that covered the s/n. same with a P-51 down here.
GregP
Major
Hu gumbyk,
You may be a bit out of date here. I KNOW the Missubishi Mu-2 has a type certificate that was bilateralled from the JCAB since I just finished working on updating a panel in one and SAW the type certificate.
See: http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cer...s/baa_basa_listing/media/Japan_IPA_Amdt_1.pdf
If you look at 3.2.2.3, the Zero could be in a limited category if the JCAB or its ancestor agency ever issued a design approval. I don't know if the Zero ever got design approval. If so, it could be limited.
Again, I'll check and tell you for sure.
If I had to guess, I'd go with Joe's inital estimate of no, and experimental.
You may be a bit out of date here. I KNOW the Missubishi Mu-2 has a type certificate that was bilateralled from the JCAB since I just finished working on updating a panel in one and SAW the type certificate.
See: http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cer...s/baa_basa_listing/media/Japan_IPA_Amdt_1.pdf
If you look at 3.2.2.3, the Zero could be in a limited category if the JCAB or its ancestor agency ever issued a design approval. I don't know if the Zero ever got design approval. If so, it could be limited.
Again, I'll check and tell you for sure.
If I had to guess, I'd go with Joe's inital estimate of no, and experimental.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
The Mu-2 was also built in Texas by Mooney...
There is no TCDS for the Zero...
For the most part this is still correct however it will depend on your "Operations Specification" that will describe in detail where you could go, what can you do, and who you could take as a passenger on an experimental aircraft. I do know for example that the VNY FSDO does not like experimental jets operating anywhere in the LA basin. I've licensed UH-1s and we were allowed to carry passengers if they were to be a participating crewmember (maintenance, observer, operating a piece of equipment) in support of the flight which gave us almost a blank check. We were limited where we could go and had to specify operating airports in the Ops spec.
On jets (L29s, L39s for example) there used to be a 500 mile ring that you have to stay in listing airports where you would operate out of. The Classic Jet Aircraft Association (CJAA) lobbied to change that policy and some jet warbird operators have a lot more lee way. Experimental aircraft operations will depend on the authorizing FSDO and policy does change region to region.
When I lived in SoCal I licensed about 2 dozen aircraft including a PBY, a Grumman Tracker, several UH-1s and an experimental Boeing 707 that had a detachable refueling receptacle. Unfortunately the 707 is no longer with us.
Last edited:
