Warbird Information Exchange

Hi everyone,

Just wanted to pop an operational question on here for those of you who are involved with flight ops of warbirds.

Instrument (IFR) flying is pretty common in the General Aviation world and obviously has significant importance in the commercial flying world, but we hear little of it in the warbird community. While I was the National Coordinator for the Wings of Freedom Tour with the Collings Foundation, I know that they would need to file an IFR flight plan on occasion to reposition the planes and all checkrides included some sort of IFR application. Some of the pilots even remarked how nice the bombers were to fly in IFR... being very stable platforms and perfectly suited for the kind of flying that it entails. CF even went so far to have a Garmin IFR moving map system (GNS 430 with TCAS I think) installed to make it easier. Of course, they even went so far to install it behind a false radio panel on the B-24 to keep it authentic looking on the ground.

I'd be interested in knowing how many other owners or organizations commonly operate their warbirds under IFR rules and what their strategy is to keeping their pilots current and appropriately trained for such operations?

Additionally, how do you deal with the situation of installing appropriate avionics in addition to or in place of the more historically accurate components in the cockpit?

For those of you operating turbine or jet warbirds, how common is it for you to operate in Class A airspace for better efficiency when flying cross country and how do you deal with IFR operations? For those of you who operate foreign jets, how do you approach the avionics situation when dealing with foreign instrumentation, radios, and the like?

I'd be interested in learning more about this seldom mentioned area in respect to warbird operations.

Thanks!
Ryan

_________________
Ryan Keough
Stow, MA

Although not a pilot I did install a full IFR panel in P-51D Bald Eagle in 01. It features Garmin 530 and Sandel EFIS HSI. The previous panel was installed in 1981 by Chuck Cabe and was state of the art at that time. BE also has an auto pilot. The panel installed then was enlarged so it really wouldn't ever look stock and it is hard to squeeze the needed stuff into the panel area. Frenesi will mirror this panel and we will add XM weather to both BE and Frenesi. Princess Elizabeth is very stock and has 1 com and a transponder, both are 1960's vintage black box radios. I have since gotten the transponder to function and connected it to the static system. I also have installed an EBC502 ELT that is kinda out of sight.
We feel that using modern avionics is important. These 51s are used for airshow work and you have to get there to get paid. With the equipment installed it greatly improves the variety of weather you can operate in. It also means you still have to have limits. Some say having IFR equipped A/C means the pilot is going to go beyond their abilities into weather they shouldn't. We have few pilots who operate the P-51s based here. We look at as giving the pilots the tools to get them out of a bad situation. We try to avoid the weather but sometimes you can't. When those few times come along you would want to have good avionics and instruments to use.
For the WWII stuff there isn't any modern radio equipment that looks anything like it's WWII counterpart. You have to make some kind of trade off. You have to hide or group the modern stuff off in a area as much out of view as possible. This then makes operating it in flight a pain. If you fly single pilot and formation the radios need to be easily accessed and simple to operate. That allows you to focus on flying. Typically that means near the throttle so you don't need to change hands on the stick and divert your eyes for a prolonged period.
Rich

I think that you will find very few Warbirds flown in the IFR environment.
One huge reason is that rain tends to take the paint off of the aircraft over 200mph.
Another reason I have noticed a disconnect between the type of pilot that flys IFR and the typical Warbird pilot.

In one type, you fly by the seat of your pants, and in the other, you have to trust the instruments and totally ignore the feelings in that same seat.

I fly both but don't mix the two.
My F-90 has a great autopilot to help, along with moving map, TCAS, TAWS, WAAS and 2 forms of weather depiction. Add in pressurization , air conditioning, auto feather, and rudder boost and the IFR environment gets easier to navigate.
But the biggest thing we have is 3 seperately powered horizons for safety.
One of the worst possible scenario is the gradual loss of the horizon and to avoid that possibility we have an AC powered unit, a Vacuum powered one, and a DC powered horizon with it's own backup battery.
All of this stuff just won't fit in your average Warbird or it will look nothing like the original with this safety equipment installed. Some of it like the deice equipment can't be used at all.
I used to fly the T-34 IFR but after picking up a bunch of ice and realizing how few options I had I now sit out the weather.

Back to the difference in the type of pilot. The discipline needed for each type of flying seems to have virtually no common areas.
My guess is that fewer then 10% of the current Warbird pilot's fly IFR in any type of aircraft.

Unfortunately since the FAA has passed the RVSM rules none of us can fly above 27,000 feet without dual static systems, special approved auto pilot's etc. So no Warbird will be able to fly that high again.

I know of one L-39 pilot who can (and occasionally does) fly IFR, but he does it only when he's going from A - to - B, and usually that's between where the plane is and his home.

The R4D is certified for instrument flight and most of the pilots are instrument rated (most are also ATPs), but we do avoid weather as much as possible, but it's nice to have the option to go through if we have to.

I don't remember specifically what the CAF's regs are on IFR flying in the aircraft and there are conditions in which the aircraft can be launched and recovered in full IMC, but I'll defer the actual regs to people like Bill, Doug, and Gary who know much more about that particular item than I do.

One big thing I know about warbirds is that many have their de-/anti-icing equipment removed or deactivated, so they're no more capable of IFR than a Cessna 172 and that has to be factored in when considering whether to attempt an IFR flight or not. But for most of the operations Warbirds are used for, my opinion is that IFR certification is mainly as a "make sure we get there safely" feature than a "get there more often" feature.

My Focke-Wulf is almost IFR, all it needs is an ADF. I do some IFR training sorties with it sometimes, but I'd rather fly a real IFR bird for real IFR, even though the Focke-Wulf is really stable and is a good instrument platform.

Like mgeorge51 said, nothing beats a real solid IFR platform, specifically designed for that purpose, like our Scaryvan.

_________________
Olivier Lacombe -- Harvard Mk.4 C-GBQB

To add to the discussion, a few other things to note.

With the jets, any time they fly above 18,000 feet, they must be IFR (positive control airspce). But there is a difference between filing IFR and flying in IFR at that altitude . . . many of all of our jet friends file since they have to, but stay out of the clouds (wisely and conservatively).

Also, with all Experimental Exhibition certified aircraft (majority of warbirds), how you can fly that specific plane is directly controlled by one's Operations Specifications. And most Ops Specs as are written by the respective local FAA office only allow day VFR.

Fully agree with Mike (hi Mike) in his comments above there is a world of difference in flying the different types of planes. Biggest is all of these warbirds of ours are very, very old . . . no matter how well we maintain them . . . how much gadgetry we stick in them . . . literally these aircraft have 1930's and 1940's systems designs.

A very few of us that do lots of airshows each year do fly some limited IFR. In my case flying TORA 101 because of our busy schedule all over the US, I will do very, very limited IFR (in cloud) but with my personal rules of enroute only (no approaches). And with at least marginal VFR below us (in case the big fan up front croaks).

TORA 101 is a rather unique in we do have fully redundant front cockpit instruments and navigation systems . . . Dynon EFIS Horizon/MFD/HSI, Sandel EFIS HSI/Map, then with a full set of standard steam gauge instruments as backups. Plus dual GPS (one IFR approach approved), both with backup internal batteries, and a TruTrak 3 axis autopilot (which has to be functioning for us to even consider in cloud).

For additional safety nets, we also have a full ILS (just in case the weather craters real quick), and satellite weather so we can monitor all aspects of the weather (even had two for a while, WSI in the Sandel and XM in the Garmin, now just have the Garmin).

Due to some great sponsors and friends, we are better equipped than most corporate aircraft . . . and yet even still we only do the above noted all of the backups need to work, and we only do very light IFR enroute (which amounts to about 3 times a year).

One of the few other AT6 airshow folks who do any IFR is AeroShell . . . and are similarly equipped to us but with a full stack of more integrated Garmin and STEC goodies (yes, they have better sponsors . . . which they do well deserve).

At any rate, just some thoughts.

Doug Jackson
Owner and Pilot, TORA 101
Wichita, Kansas

Ryan,

My T-33 is a little unusual in that it's avionics were upgraded by the Canadian Air Force in the late 1990s with the latest/greatest (expensive!!)electromechanical ADIs (attitude direction indicator or artificial horizon) and HSIs (horizontal situation indicator or compass card) i.e. no electronic flight instruments (EFIS) aka "glass"/flat-screen displays. Consequently the FAA was agreeable to license the aircraft for IFR in it's stock military configuration...kinda cool! I strap a hand-held Garmin GPS to my knee as a backup to my steam-driven avionics. Yes I do vault into the Class A (above 18,000') to save fuel for flights well over 200 nautical miles as a rule of thumb and the savings is significant. Besides the economics of fuel savings, we're always rationing fuel and recalculating fuel status in jets because of the high consumption especially if ATC delays the climb or descends you early it can significantly alter your fuel state. Flying to/from Sun 'n Fun non-stop from WI, I came close to diverting because of ATC delayed my climb and descended me early. Depending how busy the air traffic control environment is, especially on arrival, I'll modify the profile like I did for my arrival to Thunder where I cancelled the IFR flight plan on the enroute descent to avoid having to fly the ATC assigned standard terminal arrival (STAR) that would have taken sdennison and I into Willow Run in a very indirect, inefficient (from a fuel consumption perspective) manner. Flying VFR once below 18,000', we cancelled IFR and went direct to the field with ATC flight following. Plus it would have been way more work for me (ok that's the main reason) flying needle and ball, flying radials and intercepting courses, counting DME (slant range in miles) and I was already pretty thirsty and Dennison kept nagging me about having to pee and we're late for happy hour etc...I kid, I kid. Anyway, it's not that I relish flying IFR (I don't, it's more work, & there's no autopilot) but it's nice to have the option especially if the forecast ends up being out to lunch, it gives me an "out". Another example was departing the Thunder on the Lakeshore (Manitowoc WI) air show when the field was socked in with pea soup lake effect fog from that big ol' great lake nearby but it was clear VFR above 3500'. After hearing several pilot reports (PIREPs) to that effect, I filed an IFR flight plan, took off into the fog and was on top in seconds and cancelled IFR and flew the remaining 65 nautical miles dancing around the puffies. As far as maintaining currency, I fly for a living so that's a huge plus and keeps me IFR current and proficient. Hand flying single pilot IFR in these jets and other high performance warbirds can be like crisis management and you've gotta be very IFR current and proficient, plan thoroughly and stay ahead of the airplane to do it safely. Most jet warbirds I've seen are IFR equipped and I suspect it's because of the need for high altitude flying on cross-country sorties and the associated fuel savings for the longer flights. As for local flights where I'm just doing aerobatics or formation for a 30 or 40 minute sortie , I'm staying on the ground if I gotta worry about IFR conditions. It takes away from the fun anyway so why bother. If by chance I'm practicing instrument approaches in the T-33, it's on a clear day and it's as much to validate the avionics work as advertised as much as it is my instrument skills.

i also fly for a living IFR and stay very current, however, when i started flying a mustang for a local museum i was asked if i would be doing any IFR in the acft, and my answer was "i get PAID a lot to fly IFR and this is volunteer and fun so, NO"....

fly safe

jcw

Ryan, we have Garmin 480s in the 17,24, and 25.

The jets fly IFR above 18'000. They are all equipped with their regular military avionics. F-4 and TA-4 are TACAN equipped. No functioning autopilot either aircraft. The TA-4 has a Garmin 165 with an MX-20 in the panel in place of the long removed APG-53 radar. F-4 uses a Garmin handheld. The F-4 has dual Collins VHF-20s with the original ARC 164 UHF availible as backup. The TA-4 has a single ARC 186 VHF for now. Transponders in both jets are the original military fit with Mode 3 only.

_________________
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass..."
Admiral Isoruku Yamamoto

"having to pee"? Not likely. I feed on the energy altitude brings. Getting your sorry butt to happy hour to see how a real jet jockey perfoms, yup. Next time, don't delay the ETD by days so we get out qualified...

_________________
"There are old pilots and bold pilots but few old, bold pilots."

I stand corrected. I'll do better next time, I promise. I hope we can still be friends.

I currently operate a T-6. I keep the T-6 IFR current and myself IFR current. As Scott mentioned several of the Warbird Bombers do operate IFR. In order to safely keep tour stops, appearance at Air Shows, and simply fly within the US airspace I believe this is a safe practice. The big requirement is the aircraft and pilot must maintain IFR currency. Many of the single engine warbird are certainly capable of flying in the IFR system as well. However as with any single pilot IFR operation the flight must be well organized and planned. Cockpit management of charts, programming radios, and overall workload must be well managed. This is not to say we should be using warbirds as one might use a Bonanza. However a well qualified pilot and aircraft getting in to the IFR system to return from an air show marginal VFR day is better than scud running to get home or on the next activity.

_________________
Rick Siegfried

I have a lot of IFR time in the Mustang and, with the avionics upgrades that Rich did, it's fun and comfortable to fly it in the weather. I have a Cheyenne II and of course if I have a choice I take the Cheyenne, but as long as it's not icing I've got no problems taking the Mustang into the weather. I'm less of a fan of night flying in it than flying in the weather (if that makes any sense?). We're redoing Frenesi with a similar panel to that in Bald Eagle and I plan to use that, as necessary, in the weather as well. There are some that put leading edge tape (look at Rod Lewis' Mustang that he bought from Frank Borman) and that really helps with protecting the paint. I don't have them and if the paint was done right it's not that bad. Even the prop does okay when properly painted. Jim Beasley