If it were within your reach [cost not a factor] and you had your choice, would you take ownership of and operate one of the following fully restored aircraft:

T-38
Alpha Jet A
L-39ZA
Mig-29
Su-27

[Fully restored and fully demilitarized. FAA Experimental Certification with type rating only.]

Assuming one-on-one flight training were available, long-term maintenance & parts were available and you had a good location to hanger-up.

Would you engage the opportunity? Why/why not, please?

 

The T38 is a dangerous aircraft for someone flying it as a hobby who isnt familiar with it. It has been rather hard to handle for many USAF pilot trainees.
The SU27 and Mig 29 would be amazing, but I bet they would be cost prohibitive. Best bet would be an "Americanized' L39. Decent low speed handling qualities, fun to fly, can would cost a whole heck of a lot less in the long run.

If $ were no object? Su27 or Mig 29 with a cockpit retrofit as their ergonomics SUCK

 

Flanker due to slightly better range and I think it looks cooler.

 

If I even had the money to get a civilian type rating/LOA, the modernized T-38 looks like it would be fun...at least for the few minutes before I became a NTSB punchline.

 

So, thus far, are all of you that you would rank things this way:

L-39ZA
Su-27
Mig-29
T-38
Alpha Jet A

Do I have that about right. Or, did I misplace something?

Again, assuming certification, good initial pilot/transition training and ongoing currency training, adequate parts availability and good routine maintenance.

What are some of the operational considerations would you take into account as you progressed through all of your options before making your final decision? Location of home base, home base annual climate, home base runway configuration and approach configuration, ground support requirements, etc.

Cost not being a factor, would you fly once per week, three times per week, every day, once per three weeks, etc. Would you feel comfortable flying single-pilot, or would you operate the aircraft with a safety pilot at all times? How much American "glass" would you install? How much "glass" would you think you need and for what purpose?

In your mind, how would you rank your potential purchase from top to bottom?

Dtfl,

I hear that from the L-39 community specifically, but I always thought that when I ask them anything about the Albatross, that I was getting spun all the time through a series of biased answers. I don't blame them, they are hooked on that particular jet, no doubt. I just want to spread the questions around a bit, to get some unbiased replies. But, again, your commentary about the "ease of use" re the L-39 are legendary to say the least.

I've also heard tales of death re the T-38 and that's a shame too, because I love that aircraft. However, "love" is not a reason to own or operate one, no doubt. I wonder if there is a way to get trained in one such that the risk levels are severely mitigated down the road? Anyway, thanks for the input.

Slice,

Gear-up, she is one of the best looking machines in the air, no doubt. Her side profile as to be admired. It reminds me of a Maserati MC-12 when viewed from the side with gear retracted, for some odd reason - at least in my eye she does.

Sultano,

Let us pray, not - please.

 

I agree...but I lean to modesty. I have 0 time in swept wing or transonic aircraft. Thus, my knowledge is all theoretical or secondhand.

 

You are wise. The -38 was fun to fly but dangerous if not proficient and sometime even then. Partly due to it's crappy ejection seat compared to an ACES II. Saw a friend of mine nearly killed one day when they hit wake turb in the flare of a touch and go, within a foot of cartwheeling the thing.

 

I have no experience or knowledge of the other aircraft, but my personal choice would be the T-38. It was an absolute pleasure to fly and I would do just about anything to fly it again. However, I would not recommend it to anyone who has no fast-mover time. You will be a statistic. Again, not sure about the others, but another factor to consider is that the T-38 takes a huge chunk of airspace to have any real fun.

 

RVSM:

To say the T-38 is dangerous is somewhat misleading. It is the most difficult airplane in the USAF inventory to land today, except for the U-2. About 8% of the total fleet has crashed; although most of them were in the first 10 years, before some significant procedures changes were instituted. After that, crash rate went down by 400%.

But consider this:

USAF student pilots get about 25-30 hours of light-aircraft flight screening. Then, they go to pilot training, and get about 70-80 hours in the T-6A.

I send them on their initial solo with all of 12 hours in a supersonic, swept-wing, afterburning jet.

How many of you civilian-background guys would have thought you could solo a T-38 with 110 hours to your credit? I know when I had 110 hours, I couldn't have. Yet the USAF has been doing that for 48 years....pretty safely.

The T-38 is safe if you are properly trained, and fly on a regular basis, say, twice a week until you get 200 hours in it, then you could get by with once every two weeks. Ross Perot Jr owns one. Supposedly, so does Steven Jobs. Boeing uses one as a chase jet. Thornton Aircraft will sell you one (see Thornton Aircraft Company). I've seen a few F-5s and T-38s in other hands, as well.

Slice:

Lots of airplanes are flown safely without an ejection seat. The current seat actually is quite good given its age. The bigger factor is most people have no experience with a very thin wing with short span. If the T-38 had leading-edge flaps like a Viper (or even an F-5B, F-5E, or F-5F), it would handle much nicer at high AOA. And you have to fly at high AOA to land it properly.

The L-39 is T-38-ish at a fraction of the cost, but commensurately lower speed. It has a fatter wing and longer span, but people still kill themselves in it. I like the L-39...I'm just saying the slower jet isn't necessarily any safer than the T-38.

The Alpha Jet is a fun little airplane, and 3 years ago, a guy in Washington State was importing them. Almost as fast as a T-38, faster than the L-39, and twin-engined. Probably the most mechanically reliable aircraft in your list.

Fighters: from a practical perspective, hideously expensive to operate. Most without military experience have no idea how often these things break. The T-38 breaks about every third or fourth flight. It may be minor--or it may be expensive.

But nothing is more fun to fly than a fighter with seemingly unlimited thrust and unlimited lift and g.

Here's some estimated costs per hour to fly your list:

Su-27: $15-20,000/hr
MiG-29 $8-12,000
T-38 $3-4000
L-39 $800-1200
Alpha Jet $1200-1500

The Collings Foundation at Ellington Field, TX (Houston) will sell you a ride in an F-4D or TA-4J. The Phantom is $9000 for 45 minutes, and the A-4 is about $7000.

 

How about an A-37? Side-by-side seats, reasonably fast, safe, powerful, and aerobatic.