Ross Perot Jr.'s T-38 - question

[Ztex]

Here's the other pics I have of this airplane...see if they help with the parts ID...
I don't know enough about T-38/F-5 to know the differences.

[Randy Haskin]

The only thing I see in there that is F-5 is the "boat-tail" -- the part that holds the hotizontal stabs and the nozzle ejectors. As others have mentioned, that does appear to be an F-5 drag chute housing (the AT-38B had a similar area used to house a weight to balance out the pylon that was on the B model, but it was more narrow than the F-5).

Everything else on that jet (the stuff that differs between the 38 and the F-5; nose, intakes, wing, gear) are T-38.

Here's an F-5F for comparison. The "flat" nose, the squared intakes, the wing with slats/fence, and the beefier main gear should be obvious differences from the Perot jet.

[CraigBirkhold]

This aircraft was restored by John Dilley and crew of Fort Wayne Air Service. They brought a wrecked T-38 and a F-5 and put them together. The aircraft was built up in 1 of the 3 big hangars that sit on the west side of the Fort Wayne Indiana airport that is in front of the old ATC control tower. They took the best features of each aircraft and mated them together to make one of the fastest T-38s out there. It is mostly a T-38, but I believe they put F-5 engines in it with the supporting cowlings and hardware. It is probably 70% T-38 and 30% F-5. After the aircraft was completed, it was painted mostly white with an orange stripe and I think it had a bumble bee painted on the tail.
I spoke with a couple of USAF types that were given the opportunity to fly it and they said it was the fastest T-38 they had ever flown! I personally watched this aircraft come together from a pile of parts and the finished product is a testament to skilled craftsman of Fort Wayne Air Service. These are the same people that brought Dean Cutshall's F-100 Super Sabre back to life, which is painted in Fort Wayne ANG colors. The T-38 aircraft was painted in the Thunderbird scheme after it was owned by the Perot family.

[Holedigger]

It is a VERY nice looking ride! Probably wouldn't happen today, the AF doesn't tend to let birds like that go, wrecked or not, unless the pieces can fit in a standard envelope! I guess folks just have to settle for Eastern Block jets! plenty of them to be had!!! Just takes $$$$$$$'s

[Vulture]

I am aware of another T-38 project that is for sale. I believe he wanted a cool mil . 3 ... but it apparently was "complete" but still a basket case.

[Randy Haskin]

I am aware of another T-38 project that is for sale. I believe he wanted a cool mil . 3 ... but it apparently was "complete" but still a basket case.

Thornton has at least two for sale -- one flyer and one project:

http://www.thorntonaircraft.com/body/bo ... e_name=mil

[aseanaero]

They are a great looking little fighter

On Thornton's website they refer to a few aircraft as 'pre-moritorium' fighters.

I've seen that term used a lot to be honest I don't know the significance in terms of potential use of the aircraft.

Can anyone please enlighten me ?

[DB2]

They are a great looking little fighter

On Thornton's website they refer to a few aircraft as 'pre-moritorium' fighters.

I've seen that term used a lot to be honest I don't know the significance in terms of potential use of the aircraft.

Can anyone please enlighten me ?

Prior to 1993 or thereabouts, when former (mostly military) aircraft - that didn't have a US type certificate - were registered in the US, they were placed in the experimental exhibition category and basically had no restrictions on their movements.

Then, the Feds decided that there wasn't enough beauracracy involved, so they began issuing Operating Certificates that restricted how far the plane could fly from the home base...generally 250 nm for piston planes and 500 nm for jets. The rules varied based on what FAA regional office (FSDO) issued the letter. Some would only allow the plane to take off and land from the same airport. If the plane was to be "repositioned for a display event" to another field outside of the noted operating area, you had to fax notice in advance to the local FSDO. Some required that you submit a list of planned airshows etc at the start of each year.

If, however, you bought an experimental exhibition plane that was registered prior to 1993, you could fly it wherever you wanted to, whenever you wanted to (as long as the local FSDO didn't required you to reapply for the operating letter). Obviously, freedom from the Feds added a bit to the plane's worth, thus the reason people were quick to point out that a plane is "pre-moratorium".

However, a couple years ago the Feds removed these limitations so the characterization of an aircraft as "pre-moratorium" now holds no value.

[aseanaero]

Thanks for that explanation DB2

[mlenoch]

The moratorium refers to the time period of either the late 1980's or early 1990's, when there was a ban on imported-foreign aircraft into the US (excluding airliners). After the ban was rescinded, each non-certified aircraft needed to obtain an approved maintenance program with their local FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO). Many, if not all, of the FSDOs had no idea what these aircraft (Migs, etc.) required for a maintenance program. The result was a very tedious and long process of making the manual AND then getting it approved. The FSDOs operate in an almost 'kingdom' like status in the US, where one FSDO's program for a specific aircraft is not approved at the the next FSDO. This requires a new approval if the said aircraft was sold to another part of the US. ---- Also, the maintenance program is good only for THAT specific aircraft serial number. This process is horribly inefficient. The EAA/Warbirds is working to relieve some of this process.

Pre-moratorium refers to aircraft licensed prior to this time, where the aircraft has a 'normal' experimental certificate and only requires a common annual inspection for maintenence, utilizing the manufacturers or military maintence manuals.
(Correct me if I am wrong.......that's how I interpret it.........Thx.)
VL

[DB2]

Vlado is quite correct on the maintenance aspect of it, though for the more generic and simpler imports (e.g. CJ6) the Feds have allowed standardized maintenace and operating documentation. I had thought the maintenance program documentation requirements for all but the most exotic had already been relaxed, but perhaps not.

As noted, though, each FSDO seems to have its own interpretation of the rules, which can vary widely from FSDO to FSDO, to the point of being ridiculous.

[Ken]

Anyone know the details of this 2004 story?

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/ ... 31/370705/