Last minute Christmas Gift Idea

I know that some of you haven't got me anything for Christmas yet, so here is a great last-minute idea.

Northrop F5

Seriously, if you have $850,000 you can buy an F5! I was really meant to be Uber rich.

OK, I am getting a lot of questions via PM.

1) Any color is fine, I m not picky.
2) I will transport it to my local air field and find hangar space, you don't have to throw that in but thanks.
3) This one has the T38 ejection seat, but I am OK with the OEM style.
4) I will not strafe your ex's house, but I will do a fly by at over 400 knots.

Meh, I'll take the Mig 29 instead:

http://www.raptoraviation.com/aircraft%20spec%20pages/Mig29.html

What would it cost a guy in fuel to go for a flight for like two hours? Not that it matters, I'm just curious.

I have a sneaking suspicion that fuel would not be your biggest problem flying that Mig around just about anywhere in the world.

Can they take off and land on a carrier? I work across the street from the Intrepid and this would greatly improve my commute.

Internet says an F22 uses anywhere from 4000 to 40000 pounds of fuel per hour depending on your throttle heaviness. So lets say you are using 10000 pounds per hour. The fuel costs $5.21 a gallon and a gallon weighs 6.8 lbs. That equals $0.77 a pound. That comes to a total fuel bill of $7700 per hour.

I'm a little surprised by this. First they use more fuel than I expected. Second jet fuel is cheaper than I expected.

Conventional wisdom says a privately-flown military jet like that runs about $5,000-$10,000 an hour in operating costs.

Yah, buying it is one thing. Owning it is a completely different budget.

I flew Lear 24s and 25s for many years. They use the same basic engine as the F-5, without afterburners. We would roughly burn 300- 350 gallons the first hour then 200-250 gallons the second hour. I would imagine the F-5 would be similar if you stay off the burner.

A related question for pilotbraden: Aside from the lack of afterburner, the Lear engine also has provisions for noise abatement. Usually, a military aircraft like the F-5 lacks any noise abatement mods. Do those mods affect power output or fuel consumption rates significantly?

pilotbraden wrote: I flew Lear 24s and 25s for many years. They use the same basic engine as the F-5, without afterburners. We would roughly burn 300- 350 gallons the first hour then 200-250 gallons the second hour. I would imagine the F-5 would be similar if you stay off the burner.

I don't think I could have an afterburner and not use it.

Can the afterburners be swapped to the lear jet?

Ladies and gentlemen, the captain would like you to direct your attention to the center of the luxuriously appointed cabin, where our engine will be passing through momentarily...

Jerry From LA wrote: A related question for pilotbraden: Aside from the lack of afterburner, the Lear engine also has provisions for noise abatement. Usually, a military aircraft like the F-5 lacks any noise abatement mods. Do those mods affect power output or fuel consumption rates significantly?

The Lear 24 and 25 did not have noise abatement when built, but there have been some hush kits developed. The Lear 31, 35 and 36 use turbofans that are much quitter and more efficient.

JamesMcD wrote: Can the afterburners be swapped to the lear jet?

That would be fun, but I don't think it help the center of gravity. A lear 24 needs a tail stand when the crew is out of the cockpit. Without it the airplane can end up on it's tail. The copilot usually installs it while the captain does paperwork in the cockpit. I have seen the nose wheel replaced by 1 man lifting the nose while another swaps the wheel.