A Really Bad Paint Job on a Gnat
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Really Bad Paint Job on a Gnat
Hope this is the right forum?
I just came across this Gnat for sale, in USA, big overhaul and ready to fly. I think the paint job is just dire, speaking as a former Gnat pilot at 4 FTS.
Photo Album
I just came across this Gnat for sale, in USA, big overhaul and ready to fly. I think the paint job is just dire, speaking as a former Gnat pilot at 4 FTS.
Photo Album
If I may speak as an A1 QFI and Gnat driver. I do not care what he does with his aeroplane - he is Yank and cannot possibly be expected to respect history and heritage.
This is simply because these things do not exist where he lives.!
GOOD EVENING NEWT.
A2QFI,
I note Jaguar in your portfolio. Since I have almost 2000 hours on type then I must know you.......
This is simply because these things do not exist where he lives.!
GOOD EVENING NEWT.
A2QFI,
I note Jaguar in your portfolio. Since I have almost 2000 hours on type then I must know you.......
The opening post in this thread has seriously pi**ed me off. Should we be really so pompous about the owners choice of paint scheme? He (or she) has clearly spent some $$ in keeping it airworthy.
Which genuine scheme would you have? the one that was in use when you were associated with it, in which case which scheme would you not have (thus consigning it to the mire of inadequate history). Off the top of my head I think it flew in 5 schemes not counting the display teams.
Maybe grounding Miss Demeanour for being outrageously offensive to Hunter fans?
Should Red Bulls Sea Vixen have refused funding 'cos they wanted a scheme not reflecting the glories of the FAA?
TBH whether you flew for RAFAT or 4FTS is irrelevant. You can't afford to play a part in maintaining this aircraft in flying condition (otherwise you would have referenced the fact), the current owner can.
Be grateful for that.
Which genuine scheme would you have? the one that was in use when you were associated with it, in which case which scheme would you not have (thus consigning it to the mire of inadequate history). Off the top of my head I think it flew in 5 schemes not counting the display teams.
Maybe grounding Miss Demeanour for being outrageously offensive to Hunter fans?
Should Red Bulls Sea Vixen have refused funding 'cos they wanted a scheme not reflecting the glories of the FAA?
TBH whether you flew for RAFAT or 4FTS is irrelevant. You can't afford to play a part in maintaining this aircraft in flying condition (otherwise you would have referenced the fact), the current owner can.
Be grateful for that.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,093
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I reckon any members of the Parachute Regiment, past and present, would be really chuffed with it! All it needs now is Pegasus on the fin!
Agreed, as an ex Gnat stude I cannot say I like it, but better flying like thay than scraped or "static" - funny instrumentation though. Anyway, it is "his" toy, he can do what he likes with it ast long as he knows the STUPRE drill!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fife
Age: 87
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know the airframe number of this one when it was in one or other of the "authentic" paint schemes? I'm curious to know whether it was one of the 74 I enjoyed flying.
WANDER00
STUPRECC would make it a slightly less complicated jet in manual.
WANDER00
the STUPRE drill
N-A2 - You are probably correct, but then I have trouble remembering what I had for breakfast -- OK -what's "breakfast" - but you get my drift.
I recall the instruction at Valley, on the basis that "no engine, no power controls", "In the event of engine failure solo students are to eject; instructors are to use their discretion, and then eject".
I recall the instruction at Valley, on the basis that "no engine, no power controls", "In the event of engine failure solo students are to eject; instructors are to use their discretion, and then eject".
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why all the fuss? His jet, his colours. I think it looked rather snazzy, personally. As for the 'OR946' stuff - what would YOU do if you were trying to maintain a flight instrument system in a serviceable state so it can be used? Know a good source of 946 spares?
If I was rich enough to own a Gnat, I would paint it any colour I liked :-)
Fitting standard US instruments seems a very practical decision, from a maintenance point of view.
Fitting standard US instruments seems a very practical decision, from a maintenance point of view.
