kahloq

Negative. Thats your interpretation. A military task is relative to national defense or combat/combat support. Flying an extra 300 in demonstration flight is not either of those.

kahloq

If it is a civilian scheme cub, it is not in any way shape or form a warbird. Training someone how to fly in a cub does not make the cub itself a warbird. Paint it military colors, put it into active service where it may be used to recon or even shoot rockets, then yes.

cannonball200

My Feedback: (36)

I'll send you the info to prove you wrong... I will also post the same here.
Thanks,

cannonball200

My Feedback: (36)

Kahloq;

Note: This aircraft is located in the Presidential Gallery on a secure part of Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Click here for visiting instructions.

This Piper J-3 represents the contributions of the Civil Air Patrol (CAP) to the U.S. Air Force. The CAP was organized on Dec. 1, 1941, under the Office of Civilian Defense and in 1943 was transferred to the War Department. During World War II, CAP members flying their personal aircraft, such as the J-3, hunted for enemy submarines along the U.S. coasts, reported damaged ships, towed aerial targets, and delivered high priority orders of vital war materials. After the war Congress charted the organization in 1946 as a benevolent, non-profit organization and in 1948 designated it as a civilian auxiliary of the U.S. Air Force. It provides emergency services in times of local or national disasters, including search and rescue, courier service, mercy missions, and emergency radio communications. It also provides aerospace education and training for its members, supports the USAF, and promotes the development of aviation and aerospace technology.

The Piper J-3 Cub aircraft was designed in 1937 and produced continuously until early in 1942. Beginning in 1939, nearly 75 percent of the primary trainers in the U.S. government's civilian pilot training program were J-3s. In 1942 Piper ceased producing civilian aircraft and began producing the militarized version of the J-3, identified by the Army Air Forces (AAF) as an L-4. An AAF L-4 is on display in the museum's Air Power Gallery. The J-3 on display is further identified as a J-3C-65-8 indicating it is a J-3 aircraft powered by a Model 8 Continental A-65 engine of 65 horsepower. It is painted in the widely known Piper "Cub yellow". The aircraft on display was donated in 1971 by the Greene County Composite Squadron, Civil Air Patrol, of Xenia, Ohio.

I'll get more for you..
Thanks,

cannonball200

My Feedback: (36)

More Cub is a warbird:


The Piper J-3 Cub became the primary trainer aircraft of the CPTP — 75 percent of all new pilots in the CPTP (from a total of 435,165 graduates) were trained in Cubs. By war's end, 80 percent of all United States military pilots received their initial flight training in Piper Cubs. The need for new pilots created an insatiable appetite for the Cub. In 1940, the year before the United States' entry into the war, 3,016 Cubs were built; soon, wartime demands would increase that production rate to one Piper J-3 Cub being built every 20 minutes.

Thanks,

wayne d

My Feedback: (5)

I have read through all the posts and just couldn't help myself. There seems to be as many opinions one way as the other. I think the problem is how we classified the aircraft. I would prefer to call them Military Aircraft as opposed to Warbirds.
Now, I am in no way shape or form an expert on anything, but lets take a look at a few aircraft throughout history and decide IF they would be or are considered Warbirds.
Lets start with the J-3 Cub. Is it a warbird. I guess the short answer is yes.
It started its life as a civilian aircraft and was absorbed into military service to train pilots. With it a military designation.
DC-3 Started life as a civilian aircraft and was placed into military service. I guess that makes it a Warbird with a military designation, C-47
KC-135 (flying gas station) Most likely built for civilian use and placed into military service.
Cessna L-19 started life as a Cessna 140. Then placed into military service.

Question is are all these considered military aircraft or warbirds, Yes. Do they have to shoot at something to be considered a warbird? No

Now the question is, Does an Extra 300 qualify as a military aircraft. It started life as a civilian aircraft and it appears that is has been absorbed into a form of military aircraft for a foreign country. Will it ever shoot at anything or be placed into active service against a hostile force, I think not. But is has been placed into military service, flown by military pilots and represents a military aircraft by a legit government.

If you change the title to Military Aircraft as opposed to Warbird, it fits.

Just my two cents worth.
BTW, My two Military Aircraft are a Meister P-47 and a Ziroli SBD Dauntless.

perttime

What about flying an Extra or Sukhoi to prepare the pilot for flying jet trainers and fighters?

- fly a Sterman to prepare you for Texans and Mustangs
- fly an Extra to prepare you for Hawks and Hornets

Q: What is the difference?
A: The year it was produced.

dasquirrelisme

My Feedback: (81)

I am done with this thread now.....somebody actually argued that a honda civic is a musclecar....I dont know what to say except sorry to the GTO's and cudas and classic camaros and mustangs...so if we can make stuff as we go if I cover my gee bee in a p-40 color scheme can I fly it as a warbird?...lololoololol

Flak

My Feedback: (1)

The guy with a Honda Civic probably stuck a fart bomb muffler on it to make it loud and noticeable. No muscle, just annoyance! [ ]

hellcat56

My Feedback: (21)

if you have to ask Is it a warbird
You already know it is not

I am done with this thread

bjor

I dont expect you to reply or read this - are you are done with this thread but.............


No - and typically you missed the point. If I colour my Extra in P-40 colours it dosen't make it a "military plane" either. The point being is that the Extra in question is covered in a scheme that represents the airforce of a legit government. If your Gee Bee flew for the thunderbirds - in a scheme representating the USAF and was flow by military personal to promote, train or instruct that service - then yes, it would be hard to not classify it as a "military aircraft".

perttime

Of course not: as far as I can tell, no military organization ever used a Gee Bee for anything.

A number of military organizations have used Extras for training their pilots for combat duties.

Whistling Death

Out of all the posts in this thread, this is one says more in two lines than all of the others.
If you are trying to convince yourself it is a warbird then it surely isn't.

perttime

I am not sure this is a warbird. But I am trying hard to convince myself it is:

edit:
Why am I not sure?
- first one flew in 1946. Too late?
- only a small number were built and it never went beyond test flying and carrier trials.
- it definitely never fired a gun in anger. Actually, I am not positive real guns were installed.
- It was not used for fighting
- it was not used for training pilots to fight
- it was not used to support combat units

But it does look a lot like a warbird, which is why I am trying to convince myself it is.

flyingfrog007

ok
here is one of my warbirds i think or is it ok.

Whistling Death

I believe any of the cubs, be it O-59 (1941), L-4 (after April 1942), and NE (Navy), that were used in a combat zone, especially the ones used as spotters for arty and scouting, are war birds. He might not be able to fire on you directly but he can bring hell down on you just the same. The sight of an allied cub flying overhead could bring as much fear as any attack aircraft or bomber.

Whistling Death

You have a hard time trying to convince me the Spitfire Mk19 isn't a warbird.

G-Pete

To complete that, the Navy had an HE version which was modified with a stretcher for ambulance flights. If you fly wounded soldiers out combat zones.....that IS a Warbird.


As for the question in post #1 No it is not a warbird.

perttime

What spitfire MK19?

I certainly didn't post one. I posted a pic of a Supermarine Seafang MK32.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Seafang



What about something like Spitfire FR14C (cn 6S/648206)... Did it stop being a warbird while it was painted red?
http://www.airliners.net/search/phot...nct_entry=true

Silvaire

My Feedback: (50)

What about all the personal aircraft that were conscripted during WWII and given a military number designation? For many of these, there were only one or two examples.


Confidential to wayne d:

There is no direct connection between the Cessna 140 and the L-19 - other than that of the stretched design progression that connects ALL single engine Cessnas, with the exceptions of the various Cardinal and Caravan models.

kwik

Why can't the "Extra folks" just arrange a "Is this a Warbird?" fly-in?

dasquirrelisme

My Feedback: (81)

this is good stuff....hahahaha....im done with this thread.....


ok maybe not...ill keep checking back....

rcphotog

In my opinion, as a life-long ( since I was 3 years old ) aviaton nut/enthusiast, the answer is ... no.

The history of Aviation has been segmented by "Eras" and as such the term "Warbird" ( in the U.S. ) has been coined to describe ( in a "classic" or "traditional" definition )

All aircraft flown in support of the "war effort" by all nations involved. This has been the "classic" definition as long as I can remember. ( I'm only 48 )

The airplanes of the first World War are grouped by the term "The Great War" = airplanes of the Great War.

The "Golden Era" of aviation refers to planes of the 1930s, sometimes also refered to as "The Golden Age"....which includes all civilian planes ( no military ) including racing planes.

Paralleling the "Golden Age" would be the "Pre-War" group refering to Military planes of the 1930s

The "Korean Era" refers to planes flown in support of the "Korean Conflict" which also begins another group called the "Century Series" of fighters.

"Post-war" would refer to planes placed into sevice after WWII. A "post-war" fighter would be like a Grumman F8F Bearcat and F7F Tigercat because they arrived too late to see combat. These and simular planes are still considered Warbirds. This leads to the term "Post-war-aviation" referring to civilian aviation around the world immediatley after WWII. A Pitts Special is a product of "Post-war-aviation"

So, maybe today the broader definition of Warbird ( with a capitol W, not warbird or war bird ) has been expanded to include all military planes ever produced. If this is so, then I'm learning of this change here today.

The term Warbird ( in the U.S. ) has always refered to WWII aircraft. You can debate the nuaunces of what that means if you like. I'm only trying to answer the original posted question- is an Extra 300 a Warbird if painted as such. In the classic / traditional sense here in the U.S.A. ....No.

Here in the U.S.A., a Warbird airshow is a show intended to celebrate aircraft of WWII. ...again, you may debate what is considered a "WWII airplane" if you wish.

Happy landings whatever you fly,
Ken.
I hope this helps.

blikseme300

My Feedback: (118)

<start flame suit on>

....and I always thought that the proof of an aircraft being a warbird is that the owner needs to be an opinionated & arrogant know-it-all that can hardly fly anything well. (I apologise to the few people out there that don't fit this mold, but this has been my experience at too many fly-ins.)

</flame suit off>

Off to play with my P-51's & Extra's, etc.

Bliksem

Flak

My Feedback: (1)

I belong to the Commemorative Air Force, which recognizes military aircraft up through the Vietnam War as Warbirds. Well, that's being half assed about it. The CAF used to only recognize WWII military aircraft as Warbirds. One can not look at an F-15 Eagle or an F-22 Raptor and say that is not a Warbird without being demeaning. I would gladly allow a modern day military Warbird into a Warbird event. It gives flavor to the event, and allows modelers a much larger field to choose from in what aircraft they wish to build, fly, and compete with. We need to upgrade our line of thought about Warbirds. Like I stated before, if you want to have a Warbird event limited to a certain era, then state so when posting said event. Otherwise, make the event open to all qualifying Warbirds of all eras. I would love to see a formation flight of a P-51, P-47, F-16, and A-10.