Airplane Paint Scheme Question

cancidas · Thu Jul 26, 2007 12:05 pm

while i already spoke with my local FSDO about this and am awaiting thier answer i read the FARs and have not found anything mentioned about specifically what schemes may or may not be applied to an airplane. so to you out there who may know, is it a good idea to paint this airplane:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Erick Stamm

like this:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Karl Drage

now, my intention is to only use the basic three-color camouflage on the airplane. the tail number would be applied in black on the fairing between the fuselage and tail. i'm not planning on using any military-style symbols or numbers on it. in fact, the tail number will be the only number applied to it. we did want to have the "pilatus" name under the cockpit window though, that would also be in black.

Jetlagged · Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:02 pm

I don't know what the rules are, but anything which reduces your visibility to other aircraft has got to be a bad thing in a civil aircraft. The point of camouflage is to reduce your visibility to others. Why on earth do you want to do that to your Pilatus, except in some kind of show of solidarity with the military. But there are cheaper ways of doing that.

There are camouflaged civil aircraft flying (most warbirds for a start) so I doubt it is illegal. Most carry national markings, military codes, etc as well. But they don't tend to fly at night or in poor visibility.

cancidas · Fri Jul 27, 2007 2:02 am

i see your point, but not to be an [email protected]$$ about it that's what anti-collision lights are for. even when they're pained in the usual white biz-jet schemes airplanes can damn hard to spot. also, the majority of the flying with that airplane is going to be IFR anyway.

basically, we're all bored by the usual GA bizjet schemes these days. we wanted something unique. i do know of one sabre running around the US in a quasi-camo scheme:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Brandon Thetford

[Edited 2007-07-26 19:07:14]

SWISSER · Sun Jul 29, 2007 12:35 pm

I do remember from somewhere that if your civil markings are clearly visible and no MIL markings are applied you can do whatever you want!(that excludes applying TWS, A-A or A-G capabilities etc.!)

HAWK21M · Mon Jul 30, 2007 3:44 pm

Shouldn't Camoflauged color scheme be limited to only Military Vehicles.
regds
MEL

vzlet · Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:49 pm

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael Carter

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Johan Knijn

HAWK21M · Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:12 am

Interesting.
Any Military livery on Disclosed Civilian owners.
regds
MEL

pizzaandplanes · Thu Aug 02, 2007 6:23 am

If they wanted to stay sort of invisible by having a camouflage paint scheme in the air wouldn't they want to paint the aircraft blue/white to blend in with the clouds and sky?

57AZ · Thu Aug 02, 2007 6:57 am

Quoting Pizzaandplanes (Reply 7):
If they wanted to stay sort of invisible by having a camouflage paint scheme in the air wouldn't they want to paint the aircraft blue/white to blend in with the clouds and sky?

Depends on what part of the aircraft you're talking about. Many camouflage ships were painted desert or jungle colors on the top and robin blue on the bottom-the intent being to hide the airplane against whatever background it was being viewed against.

Quoting SWISSER (Reply 3):
I do remember from somewhere that if your civil markings are clearly visible and no MIL markings are applied you can do whatever you want!(that excludes applying TWS, A-A or A-G capabilities etc.!)

I'd have to refer to the FARs for details but I recall that for domestic operations, the civil registration need only be visable-no minimum size requirement. Most of the restored military aircraft that I am aware of only operate domestically in the US. As for military markings, no one's going to mistake the old T-6 or a P-51 for an active military unit. All of the ships I've seen (privately owned) carry guns and other equipment (bombsights, etc.). As with many exotic weapons here, they are registered and owning the weapon is not as much a problem as obtaining or owning the ordinance. Pretty much all of the owners will do something to render the guns inoperative-usually by simply removing an internal part of the firing mechanism.

bobbidooley · Thu Aug 02, 2007 9:07 am

I still don't understand why all aircraft are not required to be painted with a high visibility orange or yellow stirpe. While increadably ugly, if it saved just one life... I can't recall a Southwest midair.
Bobbi

MrFord · Thu Aug 02, 2007 10:34 am

Quoting Bobbidooley (Reply 9):
I still don't understand why all aircraft are not required to be painted with a high visibility orange or yellow stirpe. While increadably ugly, if it saved just one life... I can't recall a Southwest midair.

Sometime, it's just better not to see what's coming at you, when it's already too late to avoid it...

cancidas · Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:16 am

found another one:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

FredT · Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:05 am

Quoting Cancidas (Reply 2):
i see your point, but not to be an [email protected]$$ about it that's what anti-collision lights are for. even when they're pained in the usual white biz-jet schemes airplanes can damn hard to spot. also, the majority of the flying with that airplane is going to be IFR anyway.

Having shared pattern with mil aircraft on many occasions, I can tell you: They are one helluva lot harder to keep track of visually than anything painted typically civilian white/red/yellow/lemon blue.

A) Illegal or against regs: Probably not.

B) A bright idea: Not at all, IMNSHO.

C) Are others doing it: Yes.

D) Does C change B: Nope.

Most of the time, what you do with your aircraft is up to you. When it comes to visibility, it is not. I think it is rude to other aviators to intentionally make an aircraft harder to see than it has to be. What's the goodwill gained by not being rude worth to your company?

Cheers,
/Fred

57AZ · Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:47 am

Quoting Bobbidooley (Reply 9):
I still don't understand why all aircraft are not required to be painted with a high visibility orange or yellow stirpe.

MATS-Military Air Transport Service used a Day-Glo orange paint scheme on it's VIP transports at one time. Parts of the forward fuselage and perhaps some control surfaces-tail fin and wing tips had that color.

411A · Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:55 am

Quoting 57AZ (Reply 13):
MATS-Military Air Transport Service used a Day-Glo orange paint scheme on it's VIP transports at one time. Parts of the forward fuselage and perhaps some control surfaces-tail fin and wing tips had that color.

So did the FAA with their DC-3's used for navaid calibration.
Some FAA Sabreliners used overseas for the same purpose.

The day-glow paint faded greatly, however.

Airplane Paint Scheme Question

Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

RE: Airplane Paint Scheme Question

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net