INTERVIEW WITH PETR JEZEK
Petr Jezek (right) and Zdenek Dvorak with the restored Northrop F-5E Tiger II in front of Ceska Aviaticka hangar at Prague Kbely. Photo: Petr Jezek
Petr Jezek, 46, is an aircraft restorer. Aircraft are his lifelong passion and hobby. Between 2016 and the end of 2023, he worked for Ceska Aviaticka located at Kbely in Prague, where he was involved in the restoration of historic aircraft. Over the last year, and along with his colleague Zdenek Dvorak, he worked on the museum’s American Northrop F-5E Tiger II. He left the company at the end of 2023 and has been working for the Military Historical Institute of the Kbely museum. Besides aircraft, he also has a soft spot for cars manufactured by Saab.
How did you come to restore aircraft?
I got into aircraft restoration in 1996, as a soldier in the basic service. I was assigned to the aviation museum in Kbely with Mr. Jan Sýkora. At that time, the Šmolík Š-2 aircraft was being restored. My very first job on this aircraft was to repair the observer's machine gun swivel mount.
I had no idea that basic military service could provide work at the museum in Kbely. I would like that too! Did you spend a year there and then went to civilian life? Or did you stay there after your service obligations were met?
I served in the aircraft repair squadron at the base in Kbely. I had my duties there, serving as a supervisor and worked on aviation technology. When I wasn't needed, I spent my free time in the workshop at the aviation museum. During my time at the museum, I met and became friends with a number of people who shared the same affinity for vintage aircraft as I did. After my military service ended, I went to the aviation museum with these friends in my free time and helped with everything that was needed for free. That lasted almost twenty years, with a couple of brakes in between.
Was this with Mr. Janečka still serving as the museum’s curator, or was he gone by then?
I remember the founder of the Aviation Museum in Kbely, Colonel Janečka. I talked to him several times when I entered the museum. But he was no longer on active duty during my tenure.
Did your military service provided you with your first exposure to the museum at Kbely? Were you not there prior?
As a visitor, many times. My father used to take me to the museum as a boy. My dad worked at LOK (Kbely Aviation Repair Shop) on, among other things, renovations of exhibits for the Aviation Museum. For example, he participated in work on the C-11, CS-92, Meteor, Vampire, and the An-2. He showed me the Phantom, for example, shortly after the British had flown it to Kbely. So I just kind of stumbled around, and now I have ‘airplanes’ as a family diagnosis.
The Kbely Phantom FG.2. Photo Petr Jezek
Fourteen-year-old Petr Jezek on the museum’s Phantom. Photo Petr Jezek
How many restorations have you got under your belt?
Just for the Military Historical Institute, I participated in the renovation of the Su-7, Su-22, Su-25, F-4S Phantom II, F-5E Tiger II, Aero Ae-45, C-104, Mi-1 and the Aero C- 3B. This also includes some free maintenance of airplanes and helicopters for the Kbely Museum, just out of my love of airplanes.
Did you work on those seven planes and the helicopter at your previous employ in Kbely? What was the most interesting part of it?
Yes, under my previous employer. It is impossible to say which project was the most interesting. These were all airplanes that I had admired in the museum and had no idea I would ever get this close to them. I enjoyed working on all of them.
Which do you enjoy the most? Jets, props, biplanes or helicopters?
I enjoy variation, so everything. After working on a jet, I look forward to a biplane.
Aero Ae-45 before restoration. Photo: Petr Jezek
Aero Ae-45 after restoration. Photo: Petr Jezek
Do you know what it will be specifically?
It will be an aircraft from Hangar No.18. For now, I can’t say any more, but that will be revealed shortly on the Facebook page of the museum, where the progress of the project will be posted.
Was the renovation of the F-5E any different than the renovations of other aircraft you've worked on?
All renovations follow approximately the same course, although each one is different at the same time. What was exceptional about the F-5E was that most of the parts had already been removed from the aircraft during examination by Aero Vodochody in the eighties. It was up to us to clean the parts that had been stored in crates for forty years, restore them, and find their correct place in the airplane.
Was this with the help of manuals or some type of documentation, or was deduction a tool?
There was precious little documentation to go by. The greatest help to us were several contemporary photos from the examinations and tests conducted by Aero, and a summary of these was written by Ing. Vlček that survived in the archive. The Internet provided some documentation as well.
Did you make any contact with other museums or manufacturers?
We did, but the work went faster than the communication with other institutions progressed. But we hope that the established contacts will bear fruit and the F-5E will be completed on our acquiring the missing parts there still are.
What is left to do there?
Some cockpit equipment is missing, such as a scope, mirrors and a few small parts, and then the ammunition guide to the cannon and the boarding ladder. And probably the biggest item is the General Electric J-85 engine. We'll see if these missing parts can be found over time.
Were those parts already missing when the plane arrived in Czechoslovakia, or were they lost here?
The plane arrived in Czechoslovakia complete. Some of the missing parts did not return after the plane was examined at the companies to which they were sent, and some were lost during storage of the aircraft at Aero Vodochody before being transported to the aviation museum in Kbely.
Perhaps the biggest problem is the engine, or can one be sourced easier than the little things?
As for the small things for the cockpit, they can be found. It’s harder to source items that were typically used exclusively in the F-5. But even that has a solution. It's a little harder still with the engine. They are certainly available, but it is already a larger unit, so acquisition and transport are a bit more difficult.
What was the condition of the exhibit when you took it over for renovation?
It was in surprisingly good condition for the fact that the exhibit had been displayed outdoors for thirty years. Some corrosion on the outer panels was present along with rusted over screws, but nothing serious. The internal structure was in good condition. You could see that quality materials were used on the airplane.
Is it true that the Kbely F-5E is assembled from two different airframes?
It does appear to be that way. The distribution of the camouflage colours on the tail of the aircraft is a mismatch with the forward section, leading to the conclusion that the two sections probably do not belong together. We suspect that the back end of our F-5E is in Poland, on display at the Aviation Museum in Krakow, and we have the Polish counterpart.
But this is not certain?
Unfortunately, no. The production plate that would be conclusive is missing from our airframe Someone must have swiped it over the years. But there is still hope that there is a label on the Krakow F-5E. If the serial number matched our machine, our suspicions would still be confirmed.
Any desire to go to Krakow?
Desire? Yes! Time? Not so much!
What is the state of the F-5E’s armament?
Only the Ford M39 cannons survived with respect to the F-5E. It is said that they came to Czechoslovakia including ammunition. The AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles were also said to have been delivered, but where they ended up is unclear.
The renovated aircraft has its cannon installed?
Yes, both of them.
Ford M39 20mm cannon installation in Kbely’s F-5E. Photo: Petr Jezek.
That’s fantastic! And missiles?
Currently, the F-5E sports Soviet R3s mounted on the missile rails. It is interesting to note that they mounted onto the rails without any problems. But they should prove to be only temporary. We anticipate that the aircraft will be displayed with Sidewinder mock-ups in the future.
AIM-9 Sidewinder mock-ups, built on the basis of the Soviet R-3 copy. Photo: Vladimir Sulc
From your responses, it sounds like the renovation was actually pretty routine. Were there any out of the ordinary snags encountered?
It wasn't routine. Every reconstruction presents its own problems. The stencil data on the airplane were probably the biggest. At first, when the restoration was being planned, we were convinced that there would be only a few. We couldn't have been more wrong. In the end, there were over three hundred such items.
What was your reference source for the stenciling on the aircraft?
The bulk was obtained from an examination of the surface of the aircraft. Some labels had been preserved, at least to some extent. Some were only discernible under lighting at different angles. And those that were discernible only partially or not at all were found in publications or using the internet.
I'm a little confused that you didn't contact the manufacturer or other aviation museums. We have very good experience with museums. There is always someone to advise us on various problematic matters, especially if they have the aircraft in their collections.
If we got into trouble, we would, of course, contact other institutions. But I think we managed it. But the option to contact both Northrop Grumman and other museums was available to us.
So I understand. Helping yourself is of course the right solution. Now it is fair to admit to the readers that I already know what I am about to ask you now.
The original stencil data on the F-5E had their own specifics, they were not sprayed over a template, as modellers would probably expect. How did you go about restoring them?
After deciphering the text of each stencil, they were photographed and then processed into a drawing by a graphic artist. It took about four months of work in total. We had no problem with large numbers and inscriptions. The problem arose with inscriptions and tables, where the font size was around one and a half millimeters. The original decals on the F-5E were screen printed at the Northrop factory. This would have been a solution for our project, but in the volume of many individual prints that we needed, it was financially nonviable. Therefore, we had to look for another solution.
I already know you made them as decals. Why did you choose them?
We decided on the decal option mainly because it presented the possibility of small fonts and thin frames. This would not be possible with any other available technology.
Why did you decide on Eduard decals?
We decided on Eduard decals because, among other things, their decals have a relatively thin layer of varnish that does not spoil the final look.
As is well known, the varnish can be peeled off. On the surface of the F-5E, you can see that you peeled the clear varnish off some of the labels and left it on on others. How did the varnish peeling go for you?
Yes, that clear layer removes quite easily. But unfortunately, in some places, we left it in place until the next day, and then the peeling became a bit problematic. It was due to our inexperience with this technology. Later, we learned our lesson and applied the decals in smaller quantities, allowing us time to peel off the carrier film.
The markings look authentic on the plane and the result is excellent. However, the decals would, of course, be very large from a modeling point of view. The ink is thin and has a tendency to chip and tear even in smaller areas on this scale. How difficult was it to apply them?
At the beginning we struggled with it a bit, but with increasing experience it was no problem to apply even the large decals. Sometimes, it was necessary to work in pairs, and we had to correct some of them. Since we expected problems, we had duplicates of every stencil made.
The stencil data as it appeared on the unrestored aircraft. Photo: Petr Jezek
New stencil data post-restoration. Photo: Vladimir Sulc
Were the decals overcoated in any way?
Yes, the entire airframe was overcoated after the stencil data was applied with a clear coat.
It suits her well. But I still have it in my head that F-5Es were matte, the Kbely airplane is semi-gloss now after the renovation. How do you see it?
Yes you are right. Going by photos of F-5s in Vietnam, the machines were very matt. But at the request of the VHÚ staff, we chose a seventy-five percent matt finish.
What is your opinion on the rate of renovations of the museum’s exhibits? For example, I am not really a big fan of a complete renovation and repaint of the entire plane using current colors. I prefer the planes to stay in their original livery. They seem more authentic to me, and especially more valuable as exhibits.
Each exhibit must be approached individually. Unfortunately, most of the exhibits get to us in such a condition that there is no other option not involving a complete repaint. But there are also exceptions such as the Su-7, Su-22, MiG-23 and 29, and Mi-1. I also see an overall rebuilt aircraft as somewhat sterile, without history, but sometimes there really is no other way.
Mi-1 in the collection of the VHU prior to restoration. Photo: Petr Jezek
Same item post-restoration. Photo: Petr Jezek
I understand. We are now collaborating on the reconstruction of a Stuka wreckage to airworthy condition, and with this project, it is clear that there is no other way. It will be essentially a newly built piece. But if the plane is in good condition, I wouldn't touch the surface. For us, as a kit manufacturer, such authentic exhibits are priceless!
It seems to me that every museum plane yields many new items when it's restored. I once saw several boxes of such things that came out of a Marauder restoration. In addition to a pile of Flak shrapnel, there was a pack of cigarettes, a newspaper from 1945, and the skeleton of a rodent. Do you find such remains in airplanes too?
Since we are working on exhibits from a slightly different period, our findings are not particularly interesting. Most of the time it is a fastener that dropped down to irretrievable locations or some coins. Our F-5E, although it had photographic evidence of surface damage from the Vietnam War, cleaning the interior of the fuselage found nothing to cause the damage.
What was the extent of the F-5E renovation?
The scope of the renovation was generally no different from other renovations. Simply put, we documented the condition of the aircraft, cleaned all available areas, removed paint from the surface of the aircraft, repaired the airframe, restored and reassembled the surviving parts, and finally painted the aircraft. It sounds simple, but behind it lies almost a year of hard work.
It seems to me that you had it done incredibly quick. Was this the work of just the two of you?
Two people worked on the plane, but we outsourced some work to external collaborators and companies. After all, we can't do everything, and we don't have time for some operations, so we outsourced them to subcontractors. In total, we worked on the Tiger for almost ten months.
From a restorer's point of view, what is the difference between the Russian and American schools of design?
Each has its strengths and weaknesses. My opinion is that Eastern Bloc tech was built for rougher handling and that's why it's so robust. The western technique I have experience with seems more subtle, but at the same time more thoughtful and easier to maintain. But it's my personal opinion that not everyone may agree with.
I would tend to agree. Aircraft differ from one to the next, but all are beautiful.
Yes. To me, all the planes I've worked on are beautiful. Even if I didn't think so before working on them to the level that I did. But when you can touch them, see their shapes from other angles, become familiar with their curves, you can’t help but develop an affinity for them.
It’s kind of like with women, isn’t it?
As a happily engaged father, I can't comment on that
Thank you for the interview.
Kbely’s Northrop F-5E Tiger II after renovation. Photo: Petr Jezek