Military Paint Schemes

[Marco Leon]

Something I've always wondered: are there any restrictions on how an owner
can paint their aircraft with a military paint scheme? In particular, the
L-39's have some very authentic-looking and current US military paint jobs
and I wonder if owners have to follow guidelines when painting them.

Marco

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
"Marco Leon" > wrote:

> Something I've always wondered: are there any restrictions on how an owner
> can paint their aircraft with a military paint scheme? In particular, the
> L-39's have some very authentic-looking and current US military paint jobs
> and I wonder if owners have to follow guidelines when painting them.
>
> Marco

A friend has an L-39 in full "Blue Angels #7" paint scheme. He asked
them for permission and was told that he could paint it any way he
wanted, but that they really did not approve.

At airshows where the Blues fly they shun him; the Thunderbirds LOVE it,
however!

Another friend has a Yak-52 in camo and Red Stars. One day at Titusvile,
where we fly for Saturday breakfast, a couple of cops, who was taking
the pursuit driving course (held on the airport) came into the
restaurant.

"Who is flying that communist airplane?" All had a laugh. Somebody could
have said, "That belongs to a Russian colnel who flies up here from
Havana for Saturday breakfast." I guess that would have really set him
off.

[Marco Leon]

"john smith" > wrote in message
...
>
> Besides N-number size, placement and "contrasting" color regulations, I
> don't recall seeing any restrictions on aircraft painting.

I haven't been able to find anything about it. It seems odd to me that I can
paint a somewhat modern-looking trainer/light attack jet with the a US Air
Force gray scheme complete with "FF" (for the First Fighter Wing in Langley
AFB but any other active designation will apply) on the tail. I thought at
least one would not be able to put active tail codes but I guess I'm wrong.

Marco

[Marco Leon]

"Orval Fairbairn" > wrote in message
...
> A friend has an L-39 in full "Blue Angels #7" paint scheme. He asked
> them for permission and was told that he could paint it any way he
> wanted, but that they really did not approve.
>
> At airshows where the Blues fly they shun him; the Thunderbirds LOVE it,
> however!

I don't see why they wouldn't like it. It's free promotion. I guess it also
depends on the type of aircraft. Painting a Cherokee like a Blue Angel seems
a bit less cool than an L-39.


Marco

[Really-Old-Fart]

In rec.aviation.piloting, on Tue 28 Aug 2007 11:51:37a, "Marco Leon"
> wrote:

> I don't see why they wouldn't like it. It's free promotion. I guess it
> also depends on the type of aircraft. Painting a Cherokee like a Blue
> Angel seems a bit less cool than an L-39.

Here's one that Don McNamara did to a Grumman AA1B.

http://i18.tinypic.com/4tknc3t.jpg

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 12:47:01 -0400, "Marco Leon" > wrote:

>"john smith" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> Besides N-number size, placement and "contrasting" color regulations, I
>> don't recall seeing any restrictions on aircraft painting.
>
>I haven't been able to find anything about it. It seems odd to me that I can
>paint a somewhat modern-looking trainer/light attack jet with the a US Air
>Force gray scheme complete with "FF" (for the First Fighter Wing in Langley
>AFB but any other active designation will apply) on the tail. I thought at
>least one would not be able to put active tail codes but I guess I'm wrong.

Not sure, exactly, what it would be in violation of. Service rules, probably,
but they don't apply to civvies. Few people would understand what the tail
codes mean, anyway. The N-number tells any service member that it's a privately
owned aircraft.

Strangely enough, one of the local car forums I'm on had a recent discussion
about police-like paint jobs. Some state codes include restrictions on
police-like markings for non-police vehicles. Seems like the same thing,
really. Betcha if you flew an intercept with a USAF-marked L-39, you'd hear
about it....

Local youth aviation group has a Zenair 601 in a Blue Angels paint scheme
(Number "1/2"). Placard says they received permission from the Blues to paint
it that way. Of course, it never flies.

Ron Wanttaja

[Marco Leon]

"Really-Old-Fart" > wrote in message
.. .
> In rec.aviation.piloting, on Tue 28 Aug 2007 11:51:37a, "Marco Leon"
> > wrote:
>
>> I don't see why they wouldn't like it. It's free promotion. I guess it
>> also depends on the type of aircraft. Painting a Cherokee like a Blue
>> Angel seems a bit less cool than an L-39.
>
> Here's one that Don McNamara did to a Grumman AA1B.
>
> http://i18.tinypic.com/4tknc3t.jpg

The 1980's era Jolly Rogers paint scheme has got to be one of, if not THE
coolest military paint schemes. That one on the Grumman came out very nice.

[Marco Leon]

"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
>
> Not sure, exactly, what it would be in violation of. Service rules,
> probably,
> but they don't apply to civvies. Few people would understand what the
> tail
> codes mean, anyway. The N-number tells any service member that it's a
> privately
> owned aircraft.
>
> Strangely enough, one of the local car forums I'm on had a recent
> discussion
> about police-like paint jobs. Some state codes include restrictions on
> police-like markings for non-police vehicles. Seems like the same thing,
> really. Betcha if you flew an intercept with a USAF-marked L-39, you'd
> hear
> about it....

That makes sense. Without the proper IFF equipment and codes, the
requirement to give a heads-up to the FAA wherever you go, and the
demilitarization process the risk of foul play is probably minimal.

Marco

[Really-Old-Fart]

"Marco Leon" > wrote:

> The 1980's era Jolly Rogers paint scheme has got to be one of, if not
> THE coolest military paint schemes. That one on the Grumman came out
> very nice.

Yep. Don apparently did quite a bit of research into it and created a
pretty accurate copy of their paint scheme. For whatever reason (probably
the sliding canopy), you seem to see a lot of the Grummans with
"different" paint schemes, although more so in the 2-seaters than in the 4-
seaters.

[Jay Beckman[_2_]]

On Aug 28, 2:57 pm, "Really-Old-Fart" >
wrote:
> In rec.aviation.piloting, on Tue 28 Aug 2007 11:51:37a, "Marco Leon"
>
> > wrote:
> > I don't see why they wouldn't like it. It's free promotion. I guess it
> > also depends on the type of aircraft. Painting a Cherokee like a Blue
> > Angel seems a bit less cool than an L-39.
>
> Here's one that Don McNamara did to a Grumman AA1B.
>
> http://i18.tinypic.com/4tknc3t.jpg

"Every Once In A While Baby!"

Doesn't have quite the same ring as "Anytime Baby!" but it's close...

:O)

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

[Montblack]

("Really-Old-Fart" wrote)
>> The 1980's era Jolly Rogers paint scheme has got to be one of, if not THE
>> coolest military paint schemes. That one on the Grumman came out very
>> nice.

> Yep. Don apparently did quite a bit of research into it and created a
> pretty accurate copy of their paint scheme. For whatever reason (probably
> the sliding canopy), you seem to see a lot of the Grummans with
> "different" paint schemes, although more so in the 2-seaters than in the
> 4- seaters.


I really liked this one @ OSH this year.

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/landof10klakes/albums/
Look in album: 1 RV(F-86) OSH 2007


Paul-Mont