History of Limited Type Certificates

[Lon Moer]

It’s worth noting that the P-51 Limited TC only covers the C, D and K, which is why most of the new-build high-back Merlin Mustangs are registered as P-51Cs (Bs have to be registered as Experimental)

Same reason the Cavaliers built for the civilian market recycled NAA/USAAF identities and the ones built for military contracts used new 67,68, and 72 serials.

And why the 67/68/72 aircraft that now fly on the US register use "heritage" NAA/USAAF identities that likely have nothing to do with where the metal came from.

Did you read that in a book?

[Noha307]

This lawsuit may have doomed the company, as in June of of that year a B-18 belonging to the Air Trading Corporation was noted as being sold at a sheriff's sale in Oklahoma City.

Hmm. Wonder which one it was? Checked Geoff Goodall's list and the only one listed with Oklahoma connections was 39-25/N62477, but Air Trading and Norman Blake (the buyer) don't show up in that history.

There's another possibility: a number of the old articles I come across have mistakes due to non-aviation inclined reporters misunderstanding important details. So it's possible that this was a case of a B-17 or something similar being misreported as a B-18.

Alternatively, according to another article, Norman Blake was president of a company called Southwest Aviation, Inc. So maybe the aircraft was registered under the company's name rather than his?

Finally, a different article notes that the company acted as a dealer for surplus aircraft. So a third possibility is that it remained on his books for such a short time before being resold that it was never really noted.

[Noha307]

• A North American test pilot, Paul J. Franklin, had his plane unsuccessfully stolen according to page 3, part 2 of the 13 October 1948 issue of the Los Angeles Times. This name matches the one on LTC-32. (For those wondering, based on a picture, the stolen plane was not a BT-14.)

A quick follow up on the BT-14 alluded to above: According to the North American T-6/Yale section of Warbirds Directory, the aircraft was s/n 40-1147 and it was struck off the USCR in 1971. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it is claimed to be the only actual BT-14 ever registered. However, it is interesting to note that two surviving flyable Yales have been converted to BT-14 configuration. (Although also representing a BT-14, the Yale at NMUSAF is not airworthy.) I thought maybe, in a weird twist, it was the existence of LTC-32 that made this possible. Yet, this does not appear to be the case, as the two aircraft, N314BT and N3361, are registered as NA-64s.

[rcaf_100]

However, it is interesting to note that two surviving flyable Yales have been converted to BT-14 configuration.

There would be a lot more work involved in converting a Yale to proper BT-14 configuration other than sticking an R-985 on the front. The outer wing panels were different (with the BT-14 having the later style with less leading edge sweep), as were the elevators, cowling, exhaust, instrument panels, etc. It would be akin to someone simply sticking a Merlin on an A-36 and calling it a P-51B. Close, but no cigar.

Yet, this does not appear to be the case, as the two aircraft, N314BT and N3361, are registered as NA-64s.

I believe you're referring to N55903 instead of N314BT. The latter still has an R-975 installed. N64FL in Arizona also has an R-985 installed.

[Noha307]

However, it is interesting to note that two surviving flyable Yales have been converted to BT-14 configuration.

There would be a lot more work involved in converting a Yale to proper BT-14 configuration other than sticking an R-985 on the front. The outer wing panels were different (with the BT-14 having the later style with less leading edge sweep), as were the elevators, cowling, exhaust, instrument panels, etc. It would be akin to someone simply sticking a Merlin on an A-36 and calling it a P-51B. Close, but no cigar.

Good point. The A-36/P-51B analogy is particularly well-taken. Would you say it would be easier to convert a T-6 into a BT-14 then? (I really need to pull out the Hagedorn T-6 book again.)

Yet, this does not appear to be the case, as the two aircraft, N314BT and N3361, are registered as NA-64s.

I believe you're referring to N55903 instead of N314BT. The latter still has an R-975 installed. N64FL in Arizona also has an R-985 installed.

Sorry, I should have clarified that I was basing those claims on the Warbirds Directory section, which refers to N314BT and N3361 as "BT-14 repl.". It doesn't say anything about N55903 or N64FL being converted. I don't know any more about any of those four airframes outside of what I read there, so you're probably right. Thanks for the correction and please feel free to shed some more light on the subject if you're so inclined.