T-37 Tweet, what now???

BHawthorne · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:48 pm

I find it sort of silly they even make a distinction of weapons platforms, because it's not like weapons capability would ever make it into the air again.

Looking at all the jet trainers the only one that seems the least bit achievable is the T-33. Everything else looks way too cost prohibitive. A T-37 would be cool. I know they've exported them to private owners. KAM has one that was seized from the previous private owner. I heard it was a plane that they sent to Cessna for some mods and never heard from the owner again. It's in USAF paint scheme now.

If I had the cash, I'd get a T-38A. a couple of those are available, but no way I could ever afford one.

RickH · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 4:01 pm

Quote:

US DoD policy states that NO turbine/tactical aircraft may be released in flyable condition to a civilian operator.

The caveat is, if the aircraft has a civilian counterpart. King Air, L100/C130, P3/Electra etc...

How did the Trackers get out, why they are recip, of course !

BHawthorne · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 4:33 pm

Non-flyable condition is a bit irrelevant too. Just buy the microfilm from NASM and rebuild it or scratch build a replica. :wink:

Policy and law are two different matters I suppose.

sdennison · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 5:00 pm

What foreign countries fly the T-37? That seems like the next possible candidate or perhaps the Tudor when Canada retires them?

tex-fan · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 5:13 pm

United States Air Force
Brazilian Air Force
Pakistan Air Force
Portuguese Air Force

i guess the reason i started this thread is i would just hate to look up in 20 or 30 years [not that i'll be around that long], and there not be very many of them around. i mean 54 years of service, there should be at least one in EVERY museum in the US. to my way of thinking, years served has to count for something.

Chunks · **Joined:** Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:02 am **Posts:** 361

Unfortunately I don't remember all of the details, but within the last several months there was a T-37 package for sell in Trade a plane...IIRC it was 9 or 10 planes and 15 mil in spare parts all for around 1 mil. If anyone was serious about T-37 ownership that was the way to go!

I've always liked them. How many civilian tweets were manufactured by Cessna?

Chunks

sdennison · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 8:00 pm

Stupid here, were there civilian Tweets? :oops:

Tulio · **Joined:** Mon May 03, 2004 1:05 am **Posts:** 3236

IIRC, there was a mock-up for a four-seater civilian version of the Tweet, but it did not go beyond that stage.

Saludos,

Tulio

TimAPNY · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:39 pm

RickH wrote:

In the USAF/DoD mindset, all surplus jets are just waiting for the first opportunity to take a suicidal dive into an ice cream parlor. They will quickly tell you that NO civilian can maintain a military jet as well as a military organization.

Just remember CAG 11 during the 1990's. Three of the squadrons lost eight aircraft in just over 4 years. I think 7 aircrew were killed and 3 civilians in the Nashville area.

Just saying :roll:

Tim

sdennison · **Posted:** Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:40 pm

uh...the Paris Jet? Kind of...sort of. They did seem to compete for loudest jet award. :shock:

A2C · **Posted:** Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:14 am

I've read the FAA/DOD reauthorization act. It states that military trainers can be "considered" for sale to private use, but fighters cannot. Possibly a letter to a congressman can make the exception for a fighter.

warbird1 · **Joined:** Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:25 pm **Posts:** 2760

BHawthorne wrote:

If I had the cash, I'd get a T-38A. a couple of those are available, but no way I could ever afford one.

I don't believe any flyable, non-demilled T-38's are available to individual civilians from AMARC. I've never heard of that happening. I know they go to museums, but they are non-flying static/de-milled examples. I know there have been T-38's for sale from foreign operators, or examples pieced together from statics and crashes (Chuck Thornton's), but I've never heard of a flyable one being sold to an individual direct from AMARC. AFAIK, unless policy has changed, the T-38 is considered a "tactical" aircraft and they're not allowed to be sold to individuals, unless de-milled.

warbird1 · **Joined:** Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:25 pm **Posts:** 2760

sdennison wrote:

uh...the Paris Jet? Kind of...sort of. They did seem to compete for loudest jet award. :shock:

Different airplane. The 4 seat version of the Tweet was not the Paris jet.

Fouga23 · **Posted:** Tue Aug 11, 2009 1:59 am

warbird1 wrote:

sdennison wrote:

uh...the Paris Jet? Kind of...sort of. They did seem to compete for loudest jet award. :shock:

Different airplane. The 4 seat version of the Tweet was not the Paris jet.

No, but they do have Marboré engines, just like the Fouga. The Tweet uses a license made version of that engine, hence the similar sound.

BHawthorne · **Posted:** Tue Aug 11, 2009 2:18 am

warbird1 wrote:

BHawthorne wrote:

If I had the cash, I'd get a T-38A. a couple of those are available, but no way I could ever afford one.

I don't believe any flyable, non-demilled T-38's are available to individual civilians from AMARC. I've never heard of that happening. I know they go to museums, but they are non-flying static/de-milled examples. I know there have been T-38's for sale from foreign operators, or examples pieced together from statics and crashes (Chuck Thornton's), but I've never heard of a flyable one being sold to an individual direct from AMARC. AFAIK, unless policy has changed, the T-38 is considered a "tactical" aircraft and they're not allowed to be sold to individuals, unless de-milled.

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

Warbird Information Exchange

T-37 Tweet, what now???

Who is online