Wed Dec 13, 2006 7:41 am
The LOA's (Letter of Authorization) were for experimental category aircraft only. The P-38 in question was in Limited category. So where he could have legally flown, say.....Lefty's old P-38 (which I am almost positive was experimental category), he was not legal to fly in the Limited category airplane.
Another way to put it is that as strange as it may sound........If you bought Dago Red or Strega, the highly modified, Experimental category P-51 Mustangs, and got yourself an LOA in one of them (now a whole different thing with the FAA), you could fly it and any other Experimental P-51 you wish. However, you wouldn't be legal to fly most other Mustangs, since they are in the Limited category.
Confused yet? I am trying to help, but am not sure that I have.
Gary
Another way to put it is that as strange as it may sound........If you bought Dago Red or Strega, the highly modified, Experimental category P-51 Mustangs, and got yourself an LOA in one of them (now a whole different thing with the FAA), you could fly it and any other Experimental P-51 you wish. However, you wouldn't be legal to fly most other Mustangs, since they are in the Limited category.
Confused yet? I am trying to help, but am not sure that I have.
Gary
Wed Dec 13, 2006 7:56 am
if he had an all-piston LOA, then why wasn't he legal?
It was for experimental only................
Also-has we all know legal doesn't mean qualified. Jeff was neither.
For the P-38 he actually needed a type rating.
To expand on what Gary said I recall (old rules here) you could hop in a limited 51 and fly but need a LOA for a 51 in the experimental catagory.
John Dimmer had issues with his Wildcats. He needed a LOA in one but not the other. F4F-3 experimental vice FM-2 limited.
Last edited by Jack Cook on Wed Dec 13, 2006 8:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
Wed Dec 13, 2006 8:30 am
You must have a Type Rating (used to be called an LOA) in most if not all experimental warbirds.
If the aircraft is in Limited Catagory, you only need your standard license to fly these aircraft. No special training or add on to your license on these unless it is a heavy multi-engine engine aircraft, or such, and then you still have to get a Type rating (although I can't think of many heavy warbirds that are have a limited airworthiness certificate anyway).
The experimental aircraft are harder to get certified to fly.
If the aircraft is in Limited Catagory, you only need your standard license to fly these aircraft. No special training or add on to your license on these unless it is a heavy multi-engine engine aircraft, or such, and then you still have to get a Type rating (although I can't think of many heavy warbirds that are have a limited airworthiness certificate anyway).
The experimental aircraft are harder to get certified to fly.
Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:49 am
King wrote:You must have a Type Rating (used to be called an LOA) in most if not all experimental warbirds.
If the aircraft is in Limited Catagory, you only need your standard license to fly these aircraft. No special training or add on to your license on these unless it is a heavy multi-engine engine aircraft, or such, and then you still have to get a Type rating (although I can't think of many heavy warbirds that are have a limited airworthiness certificate anyway).
The experimental aircraft are harder to get certified to fly.
As King has mentioned Limited Aircraft that have GW listed on the TCDS of over 12,500 require a type rating. The TCDS on the P-38L lists the GW at 18,500. This is what made Jeff illegal to fly a Limited -38.
Re: ????
Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:53 am
Randy Haskin wrote:Jack Cook wrote:Jeff had a all piston experimental letter.
Both Tillimook P-38s were in the limited catagory. He had 0 experience in P-38s and was not legal to fly them
I don't follow..if he had an all-piston LOA, then why wasn't he legal?
From my understanding, under the old unlimited LOA system, Jeff was technically legal to fly an experimental P-38 with a cockit check and signoff from a qualified P-38 pilot/instructor. I won't get into the argument as to whether he would have been qualified or not.
There are a few contributors to this forum who had Unlimited Piston LOA's, they maybe able to chime in here and provide some guidance on how the old system really worked.
???
Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:59 am
From my understanding, under the old unlimited LOA system, Jeff was technically legal to fly an experimental P-38 with a cockit check and signoff from a qualified P-38 pilot/instructor. I won't get into the argument as to whether he would have been qualified or not.
You are correct Tim.
But, the P-38s he was flying were in the limited catagory hence the problem and of course he needed a type rating. This isn't a LOA issue. To my knowledge he was never signed off by anyone.
Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:01 am
Jeff was a great guy and a true gentleman. He was always approachable and easy to talk to. He was a great support to me, always generous with advice and encouragement. I still miss him. 
Here's a picture of Jack Erickson's P-38, painted in the markings of Jeff Ethell's dad, taken one week ago on Dec 4th at Tillamook Air Museum.
Dennis
Here's a picture of Jack Erickson's P-38, painted in the markings of Jeff Ethell's dad, taken one week ago on Dec 4th at Tillamook Air Museum.
Dennis