Harrier in civillian hands
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
TEEEJ,
Thanks for the post of the Sea Harrier Display, all I can say is if you thought the mindless drone of the PA commentator was annoying for one display, you should have tried it for 2 whole days. The man was truly gifted in his ability to fill dead air with meaningless dribble - huge potential to be a poilitician or a senior officer.
Thanks for the post of the Sea Harrier Display, all I can say is if you thought the mindless drone of the PA commentator was annoying for one display, you should have tried it for 2 whole days. The man was truly gifted in his ability to fill dead air with meaningless dribble - huge potential to be a poilitician or a senior officer.
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-VTOL
Yes G-VTOL was originally certificated on the civilian register (it only had dual Mil/Civ later when the rules changed) and was given a CoA in the 'private' category with the restriction that it always had to be captained by a ministry approved Harrier pilot employed by HSA who had at least a PPL.
On a point of detail the VL when Art could not get the nose gear locked was its first flight and the emergency blow down was fitted but inop that sortie.
On another point of detail re LM's comment I don't know what he thought of himself but I certainly realised I was not 'norma' l after I asked to go to CFS from a Hunter Sqn in 1960.
On a point of detail the VL when Art could not get the nose gear locked was its first flight and the emergency blow down was fitted but inop that sortie.
On another point of detail re LM's comment I don't know what he thought of himself but I certainly realised I was not 'norma' l after I asked to go to CFS from a Hunter Sqn in 1960.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will probably be able to buy an AV8B in a few years time when the USMC get their F35s and it might be possible to get support from Boeing.
OTOH you would almost certainly have to keep it N-registered in the experimental class which means keeping it in the USA.
Just about every american warbird has a few flying examples on the civilian register, they are a big attraction over there.
OTOH you would almost certainly have to keep it N-registered in the experimental class which means keeping it in the USA.
Just about every american warbird has a few flying examples on the civilian register, they are a big attraction over there.
You will probably be able to buy an AV8B in a few years time when the USMC get their F35s and it might be possible to get support from Boeing.
OTOH you would almost certainly have to keep it N-registered in the experimental class which means keeping it in the USA.
OTOH you would almost certainly have to keep it N-registered in the experimental class which means keeping it in the USA.
US Govt/Mil are making it VERY difficult to get more modern ex-mil jets on N-reg. Why do think Art Nalls has a ex-RN SHAR.
Even the Collings Foundation were recently thwarted in trying to aquire the last non-cut F-105 Thunderchief from Davis-Monthan as they didn't want it being returned to the air, despite CF's already successful operation of it's A4 and F4.
And further more, as of a couple of weeks ago, the FAA released a memo relating to regarding further restrictions on granting airworthiness certs for ex-mil jet aircraft.
The issue about “Complex” types is directly about the experience of operators and/or maintenance staff and a perceived propensity to manage or complete aircraft maintenance with a “Can-Do” attitude instead of doing the right things.
This rule hopefully prevents anyone with ‘enough money’ endangering the public by ensuring that the maintenance and flight operations are properly managed and overseen by a properly qualified and responsible company, such as a fleet operator of a similar type, or the airframe manufacturer. See the Vulcan’s management team as an example.
Had the Concorde bid for heritage status gone ahead it too would’ve needed EADS sponsorship and design support.
I have operated an ex-military type on a UK Permit-to-Fly and it was sponsored by a large company (Bristow's) familiar with the type of aircraft on a mandated instruction from the CAA.
Under EASA all jet engined aircraft including helicopters are considered “complex”. Most military aircraft are also considered complex too, even if they are not (Bulldog), because of their high potential for unknown/undocumented/inaccurate flying and maintenance histories. Not much chance there for Hawks, I'm afraid.
I find it interesting that someone has decided the hawk is an “intermediate” when there is no grade for this? – Please prove me wrong.
Hunters/JPs are not considered complex due to their being in civil use for so long – more than 25 years in some cases – and they got Grandfather Rights by being in use (and now of a known quality) before the rules changed.
Under ITAR rules (unless I have it wrong again!) no private/commercial concern can obtain military jets that are still in service – hence the only Harrier out there is a Sea Harrier. And in the states it’s classed as “Experimental” so it’s flown on personal ownership in a limited capacity.
Hope this helps...
This rule hopefully prevents anyone with ‘enough money’ endangering the public by ensuring that the maintenance and flight operations are properly managed and overseen by a properly qualified and responsible company, such as a fleet operator of a similar type, or the airframe manufacturer. See the Vulcan’s management team as an example.
Had the Concorde bid for heritage status gone ahead it too would’ve needed EADS sponsorship and design support.
I have operated an ex-military type on a UK Permit-to-Fly and it was sponsored by a large company (Bristow's) familiar with the type of aircraft on a mandated instruction from the CAA.
Under EASA all jet engined aircraft including helicopters are considered “complex”. Most military aircraft are also considered complex too, even if they are not (Bulldog), because of their high potential for unknown/undocumented/inaccurate flying and maintenance histories. Not much chance there for Hawks, I'm afraid.
I find it interesting that someone has decided the hawk is an “intermediate” when there is no grade for this? – Please prove me wrong.
Hunters/JPs are not considered complex due to their being in civil use for so long – more than 25 years in some cases – and they got Grandfather Rights by being in use (and now of a known quality) before the rules changed.
Under ITAR rules (unless I have it wrong again!) no private/commercial concern can obtain military jets that are still in service – hence the only Harrier out there is a Sea Harrier. And in the states it’s classed as “Experimental” so it’s flown on personal ownership in a limited capacity.
Hope this helps...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Lincs
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rigga: You have just blown your cover! The Bulldog is not deemed a 'complex' ex-military type. All Series and all Models of the Bulldog, including the ex-RAF T Mk 1 (designated the Series 120, Model 121), are civil-certificated as shown un UK CAA Type Certificate BA7. Their design and maintenance histories are known and they operate quite merrily just like any other certificated aircraft in the UK and elsewhere. In the US they are flown on the Experimental category because there is no FAA Type Certificate - no-one is prepared to take on the liability.
Now, if you had said, for example, Gazelle helicopter ....
Now, if you had said, for example, Gazelle helicopter ....
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: around
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rigga, you're confusing the EASA definition of 'complex' with the CAP632 definition, where it refers to 'intermediate' type ex-military types (referred to above).
I hope the FAA allow someone to operate a fleet of Hawks in a similar manner to the 20-odd Tucanos someone shipped out there and refurbished...
I hope the FAA allow someone to operate a fleet of Hawks in a similar manner to the 20-odd Tucanos someone shipped out there and refurbished...
John F,
Me too mate - and I did it from Lightnings!
On another point of detail re LM's comment I don't know what he thought of himself but I certainly realised I was not 'norma' l after I asked to go to CFS from a Hunter Sqn in 1960.
Me too mate - and I did it from Lightnings!
There was once a whisper about a civilian jet display team being formed to operate 4 x AV8s.
Then came September 11th.....
ENDEX ENDEX ENDEX
Re. Bulldogs, once the leaden hand of €urocracy has inflicted itself upon us, it will still be possible to fly a Bulldog on and old-style UK PPL, to obtain an IMC rating on it and you won't need an aerobatic rating either!
So a nice Bulldog in good nick should be worth its weight in gold soon...
Same goes for a Chipmunk or Tiger Moth. Or Harvard!
Then came September 11th.....
ENDEX ENDEX ENDEX
Re. Bulldogs, once the leaden hand of €urocracy has inflicted itself upon us, it will still be possible to fly a Bulldog on and old-style UK PPL, to obtain an IMC rating on it and you won't need an aerobatic rating either!
So a nice Bulldog in good nick should be worth its weight in gold soon...
Same goes for a Chipmunk or Tiger Moth. Or Harvard!
Last edited by BEagle; 8th Sep 2011 at 12:05.
Normality!
LM, I wasn't throwing stones, just using the words of the chap I was talking to. When pushed, he said he really meant non-military (trained) pilots but that there would still be an issue of currency that would be hard to overcome. How that works with a beast like the Sea Vixen is anyone's guess.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Devon
Age: 71
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is possible to operate fairly modern jet types in civilian hands . Take the Breitling Jet Team for instance , I believe Breitling is itself based in Switzerland while the team is based in France flying Estonian registered L-39C Albatros aircraft .
