Warbird Information Exchange

We were allowed to take our aircraft to airshows if remained within the "600 mile ring" which as been eliminated through the efforts of the CJAA.

I don't understand your last comment about putting the aircraft in "standard" category (Part 23 or 25). An aircraft without a TCDS can never be put in Standard Category.

Actually DZ, there are several procedures outlined in the bold faced emergency procedures before you get to eject.

We have had the firelight scenario during an airshow display with the F-4 early on. The pilot followed procedures and pulled the offending engine back to idle where the firelight went out. He promptly landed. We found out that one arm of the bleed air collector had failed and at high power the hot, high pressure blleed air was blowing directly on the fire loop. Pulling the power back reduced the hot air flow enough to turn out the light.

Procedures are there to be followed and both crewmembers carry a checklist on every flight.

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

It sounds like you haven't read all the posts. You're talking about experimental exhibition standards which are what they are. It has no bearing on what we are talking about here. We are talking about allowing somebody to get paid while flying an experimental exibition airplane. Not what the existing rules are. We're talking about the need to improve upon the existing rules.



Actually we don't know if that's true. We're talking about trying to lift restrictions on Experimental Exhibition aircraft, so they can be flown for compensation or hire. We're suggesting perhaps a strong lobby through the AOPA would allow to change the rule on experimental warbirds (maintained to standard category standards)to be put in standard category.

A similar type of lobby was done to create the LSA category. You can't simply say it can't be done, since nobody has made a serious effort at doing so.

_________________
"No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" R.R.

Welcome to the USSA! One Nanny State Under the Messiah, Indivisible with Tyranny, Higher Taxes, Socialism, Radical Environmentalism and a Loss of Income for all. Boy I'm proud to be a part of the USSA, what can I do to raise taxes, oh boy oh boy!

That's all fine but people are getting paid for operating experimental aircraft that are in the "exhibition" category.

http://www.jetwarbird.com/prices.html

I know the Patriots get a nice chunk of change for their shows as well and their pilots are paid.




A rule change would be required to place an experimental aircraft (one without a TCDS) into a different category - with the current state of the FAA, good luck! However it actually been done, once to my knowledge - Tracor Flight Systems established a TCDS for the F-100s they operated in Germany so they could be operated under "Restricted" Catagory. I know they got rid of the planes a few years ago and turned in the TCDS.

BTW - this contract was a civilian contract and had nothing to do with the US government.

Here's a picture of one at Le Bourget airshow a few years back. Under the front cockpit you'll see the pilot's name then under that the word "Restricted."

http://jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6102637

I really don't see how a rule change could be made as there are design characteristics in many warbirds that could never comply with part 23 requirements, therefore making them impossible to be moved into a standard category. Its not a matter of maintenance, its a matter of design that makes an aircraft eligible for a TCDS and therefore a standard category airworthiness certificate. What needs to be changed is the guidance the FAA uses to issue operations letters where it could be indicated that the owner operator can accept compensation.

_________________
"If its red or dusty - DON'T TOUCH IT!

My opinion about the FAA is that the people who work there are just collecting a paycheck, and mainly interested in protecting their own hyde.

With that said, I think now is the best time to make a change, they'd probably go along with it if a strong enough effort were created.

I was actually surprised when the LSA deal happened, I don't think they would have ever done that 20 years ago.

_________________
"No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" R.R.

Welcome to the USSA! One Nanny State Under the Messiah, Indivisible with Tyranny, Higher Taxes, Socialism, Radical Environmentalism and a Loss of Income for all. Boy I'm proud to be a part of the USSA, what can I do to raise taxes, oh boy oh boy!

There are some good ones there, sometimes hard to find, but they are there.
It would mean a strong lobbying effort to show the Feds that the current state of rules are ambiguous to say the least. Its more of a policy change and just some additional guidance for issuing operations letters would do the trick.
Actually a lot of the LSA deal was spearheaded by a Washington DC based FAA PMI named Bill O'Brien. Bill was one of the more level headed guys within the upper echelons of the FAA.

_________________
"If its red or dusty - DON'T TOUCH IT!