On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 00:47:51 -0500, "Morgans" wrote:


"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
.. .

The guys building the Me262s in Washington State came within a gnat's eyelash
of getting them Experimental/Amateur-Built. The DAR was going to sign them off,
but the local FSDO refused to allow it. They've got Exp/Exh, but with pretty
loose restrictions.

I thought they were going to get the same classification as other warbirds,
since they were built according to factory plans, or is that what the other
warbirds get?

You're probably right. The head of the operation is a member of EAA 26 (past
president, in fact) and he gave a talk at the last meeting, including the tale
of the certification process. Afterwards, I asked how bad his restrictions
were, and they sounded little different from Exp/Am-Built. They are permanent,
too, they don't have to be renewed every year like some of the Exp/Exh
airplanes. IIRC, he said it took them four months to get the first 262
licensed, and two weeks for the second. Beyond that, I can't tell you the
operating limitations.

The planes aren't just built to factory plans, they are considered factory
aircraft. Daimler Benz Aerospace assigned them the next five serial numbers on
from the wartime records. Other than critical safety issues (modern engines,
modern alloys, etc.), these planes are built the same as the wartime aircraft.
They've got steel where the WWII models had steel (LOTS of steel) and wood where
Messerschmitt used wood. They've even got dummy guns (needed for CG) and have
tankage for only 60-90 minutes of fuel.

One landing gear leg collapsed on the second landing, and it turned out to be a
manifestation of a common wartime fault (a built-up of tolerances in the
mechanism). After it happened, one of the old-time Messerschmitt mechanics
called from Germany to tell them exactly what to look for....

Ron Wanttaja