Warbird Information Exchange

There are two more CT-133's sharing space with this one.
The gray one is N615RC s/n 21615
Probe nose is N613RC s/n 21613 (possible relation to the one your looking for)

_________________
Roger Cain
www.sfahistory.org
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Stearman/


We must limit politicians to two terms:
one in office and one in jail.

T-bird 613 served with "the big X" which was AETE (Aerospace Engineering Test Establishment) in Cold Lake Alberta. That is the Canadian military flight test division. Their fleet of mixed types all wore an X on the tail.

The NRC T-bird was not military.

Here's 613 back in 1999 when still in service:

Double post deleted..sorry.

Looks like one of the ones that was at mountainview? any info on her?

_________________
Cheers,
Peter

________

Owned by Rick Clemons (Cactus Air Force) in Carson City NV. Two are for sale with offers pending. 615 was flown out of Mountainview in summer of '03. Will update as soon as I know something for sure.

Hey Paul,

my 2-cents is this: they ain't flying them anymore so it doesn't matter what you paint it as. My T-34 is in authentic RCAF markings and flew in Canada like that for 14 years before I brought it south. (BTW, it's heading back north this summer.) So go and paint it and have fun.

Glenn

ps I did get your email about OSH and passed it along accordingly.

_________________
"Remember....it's always better to overshoot and have people think you can't land than to crash and prove it!"

Hello Glenn,

so your T-34 is going up North again? Are you following it?

_________________
Olivier Lacombe -- Harvard Mk.4 C-GBQB

Hi Ollie,

Yep! The whole family is moving back to Toronto in June. Not sure where I'll be baseing it yet, but I do know that I'll be spending some time in Oshawa flying some yellow birds and in Hamilton flying whatever needs to be flown. We should meet up at Potter's one day and do some flying.

Glenn

_________________
"Remember....it's always better to overshoot and have people think you can't land than to crash and prove it!"

Thanks Glenn! That's what I figured. It's ironic a buddy of mine has a Harvard in RCAF markings two hangars down from me and RCMP goon squads haven't swept in yet! Good luck on your move and I'll see you around the campus after my January SIL.

Hi Paul,

>>a buddy of mine has a Harvard in RCAF markings << you aren't refering to that United captain who also has the wrong chippy are you??

SIL line?? Wish we had them on the 76 this month!

Fly safe,

Glenn

_________________
"Remember....it's always better to overshoot and have people think you can't land than to crash and prove it!"

Excellent news Glenn,

we'll surely bump into one another next summer!

Cheers!

_________________
Olivier Lacombe -- Harvard Mk.4 C-GBQB

Glenn,

Affirmative on the SIL line for the 767-400 and the UAL capt is Vic S. When it comes to work, the only thing better than flying is not flying--working the consulting job all month. Thanks for forwarding my Oshkosh flightline feedback!

cheers,

Paul

Regarding the RCAF/CF markings, I've been waiting to see if someone would come forward with official or definitive info on this question before I weighed in with my own guesswork, but since no one has...

I would think the purpose of this policy/law/regulation, whatever it is, as Brian said, is mainly to prevent observers, including the general public, from misidentifying aircraft as CF when they are in fact civilian. Many of these observers will not be skilled at aircraft recognition nor fully informed as to the CF aircraft inventory nor familiar with the correct style of roundel; therefore the rule logically should apply to all aircraft, whether surplus or not, and to all markings that could reasonably be mistaken for CF markings. In other words, the homebuilt with inaccurate CF markings should come within the rule. If the rule exists.

The question is does it exist, if so what form does it take, and whom does it bind? Is it merely a DND "policy"? If so, it is hard to see how it would bind anyone outside the DND except those who deal with the DND directly and can be made to agree to it. Is it a real law that binds ordinary people like the homebuilt owner or a subsequent purchaser of a surplus aircraft? If so, it should be possible for a Canadian lawyer or law student to figure out what it is. If you need help with this, I don't have access to many Canadian law resources myself but I might be able to call in a favor from someone who does. If it is a law, it still should not be applicable to US residents flying US registered airplanes in US airspace unless it is subject to some enforcement agreement between Canada and the US.

Anyway I'll be interested to hear what DND tells you. If they tell you it is a real law and not just a policy, ask them to cite it.

August

I know that a friend of mine told me I couldn't wear CAF pilot patch because it would lend people in believing I was a CAF pilot. Kinda like wearing a police badge without being one.

_________________
Olivier Lacombe -- Harvard Mk.4 C-GBQB

Well Ollie, personal insignia is a little different than colours painted on an aircraft. I don't think there is any specific rule about wearing CF wings (if that’s what you're referring to as a CAF pilot patch) however it is generally considered bad form to wear a particular wings badge if you haven't personally EARNED it. This is primarily because the wearing of such an item is intended to be representative of a particular background in terms of training and experience.

An issue of propriety more so than following of published rules...