RCAF markings on surplus aircraft

[T33driver]

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

August,

Thank you for your feedback on the CF markings issue. My contacts from the Canadian T-33 auction have inquired on my behalf to Mr. Neil Cuddihy at the Canadian Government's Office of DDSAL (Director Disposal Sales, Artifacts, Loans). I'm waiting to hear back. All I know for sure is my surplus T-33 sales contract said "The Government of Canada markings will be removed prior to the release of the aircraft to the Offeror" (that's me). It was my own feeling I wouldn't put CF markings on my T-33 until all like CF aircraft were retired from active service. Now that all CF T-33s are retired, I'm revisiting the issue. If it isn't too much trouble, I'd appreciate any information you could glean from your contacts in Canada, but don't use up an important favor or go to too much trouble over it. On the surface it would seem there is no "controlling legal authority" involving me, but there's always the possibility there is something in ITAR (International Traffic in Arms) or US codes/laws governing surplus "articles of war", though I wouldn't bet money on it. I'm not an attorney, but had to familiarize myself enough with applicable laws and policies during the purchase, transfer and importation of my CF T-33. I'll let you know what I hear.

thanks!

[Ollie]

It's apparently illegal, but I spent an evening pouring through the ministry of justice's website without finding anything. I agree on it being bad form though.

[warbirddriver]

Paul,

you're thinking too hard and trying to create somthing that doesn't exist. What you do with or to your T-33 in the USA is of no concern to ANYONE in Canada. Aircraft have been flying in Canada in their original military markings since they were released from the military. (eg. many many harvards) If there had been a rule against it, we wouldn't have been able to do it. Last thing anyone wants to do is stir up a beaurocrat into making it a reality. Leave it alone and go fly!!!!

My 2-cents anyway.

Glenn

[T33driver]

Paul,

you're thinking too hard and trying to create somthing that doesn't exist. What you do with or to your T-33 in the USA is of no concern to ANYONE in Canada. Aircraft have been flying in Canada in their original military markings since they were released from the military. (eg. many many harvards) If there had been a rule against it, we wouldn't have been able to do it. Last thing anyone wants to do is stir up a beaurocrat into making it a reality. Leave it alone and go fly!!!!

My 2-cents anyway.

Glenn

Thanks Glenn. That's good advice!

[k5083]

Paul, I have not checked into this yet, but my instinct is that Glenn is probably right, although he overstates it a little bit. What you do with your bird in the US can be the subject of a contract between you and a Canadian seller, whether public or private. Your sales contract says that the military markings will be removed prior to delivery to you, but it doesn't seem (just from that one snippet you quoted) to constrain what you can do, like whether you can put them back on. Of course, you need to show the entire agreement to your lawyer and also discuss with him any oral communications relating to it if you really want to know whether it limits what you can now do.

August

[T33driver]

Paul, I have not checked into this yet, but my instinct is that Glenn is probably right, although he overstates it a little bit. What you do with your bird in the US can be the subject of a contract between you and a Canadian seller, whether public or private. Your sales contract says that the military markings will be removed prior to delivery to you, but it doesn't seem (just from that one snippet you quoted) to constrain what you can do, like whether you can put them back on. Of course, you need to show the entire agreement to your lawyer and also discuss with him any oral communications relating to it if you really want to know whether it limits what you can now do.

August

August,

My purchase agreement with the "Queen in right the Crown of Canada" (did I say that correctly?) was surprisingly brief and straight-forward and the snippet I quoted was the only reference in my contract to Canadian National markings. The best answer I got from Canadian officials (recently) again referenced the aforementioned provision and further explaned that DND's intent was to prevent surplus aircraft from being mistaken for a Canadian Forces aircraft in active service. I appreciate your input and welcome any more information in the future.

Cheers,

[BLR]

Hi Paul,

I had a chat with a Communications Officers from another federal department (the rules are the same) and he didn't shed any light on the matter. Basically he said what was already covered on this thread, i.e. the potential of confusion of active CAF aircraft and Gov of Canada trademark laws.

On the Canadian Governments Treasury Board website, there is a bit more info on the use of Canadian government markings known as the Federal Identity Program (FIP) which may provide you a bit more info, see: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/fip-pcim/man_e.asp. The FIP is the bible for current Gov of Canada markings.

I always get a bit nervous when people suggest bring it to the US and then do what ever you want. You may get away with it but you may cause problems for the next guy who buys a surplus aircraft or may cause yourself a bit of grief if you need to get parts/tech info from DND or if you want to do contract work for the military. Not much sense in creating problems for yourself.

That said, there is a CL-41G Tebuan, N403AG, painted using more current CAF paint scheme. This was never a Canadian owned aircraft so the rules may be different.

Anyway, I don't think its as big an issue as it appears, it sounds like use of older RCAF markings is ok and approval for these is a formality.

Maybe you should start a WIX contest called Paint Paul's Plane and see who can come up with the best paint scheme.

BTW, do you have any photos of you T-33 while in service?

Brian....

[T33driver]

Hi Paul,

I had a chat with a Communications Officers from another federal department (the rules are the same) and he didn't shed any light on the matter. Basically he said what was already covered on this thread, i.e. the potential of confusion of active CAF aircraft and Gov of Canada trademark laws.

On the Canadian Governments Treasury Board website, there is a bit more info on the use of Canadian government markings known as the Federal Identity Program (FIP) which may provide you a bit more info, see: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/fip-pcim/man_e.asp. The FIP is the bible for current Gov of Canada markings.

I always get a bit nervous when people suggest bring it to the US and then do what ever you want. You may get away with it but you may cause problems for the next guy who buys a surplus aircraft or may cause yourself a bit of grief if you need to get parts/tech info from DND or if you want to do contract work for the military. Not much sense in creating problems for yourself.

That said, there is a CL-41G Tebuan, N403AG, painted using more current CAF paint scheme. This was never a Canadian owned aircraft so the rules may be different.

Anyway, I don't think its as big an issue as it appears, it sounds like use of older RCAF markings is ok and approval for these is a formality.

Maybe you should start a WIX contest called Paint Paul's Plane and see who can come up with the best paint scheme.

BTW, do you have any photos of you T-33 while in service?

Brian....

Thanks for the info Brian. Here are a few pics of other paint schemes "back in the day" for my CT-133 serial #133579:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=0 ... id=0883878
[url]

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=0 ... 3%20(PY-30)&Wm=0&WdsYXMg=Pnanqn%20-%20Nve%20Sbepr&QtODMg=Geragba%20(LGE%20/%20PLGE)&ERDLTkt=Pnanqn%20-%20Bagnevb&ktODMp=Whar%201993&BP=1&WNEb25u=Qra%20Cnfpbr&xsIERvdWdsY=133579&MgTUQtODMgKE=Syntfuvc%20bs%20434%20Oyhrabfr%20Fdhnqeba,%20ryrpgebavp%20genvavat&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=1019&NEb25uZWxs=2002-06-22%2000:00:00&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=&static=yes&width=1024&height=670&sok=JURER%20%20(ZNGPU%20(nvepensg,nveyvar,cynpr,cubgb_qngr,pbhagel,erznex,cubgbtencure,rznvy,lrne,ert,nvepensg_trarevp,pa,pbqr)%20NTNVAFG%20('+"PG-133"'%20VA%20OBBYRNA%20ZBQR))%20%20beqre%20ol%20cubgb_vq%20QRFP&photo_nr=110&prev_id=0246488&next_id=0243282