Great shot of the Thunderbird F-16 Ejection

He's talking about doing acro over the field...not making a
cross-country.

--
Dale L. Falk

regardless.. you still can't turn the altimeter adjustment that far to get
to zero.. and if the local pilots want to fly at zero.. it sets bad habit
patterns for when they do go cross country

BT

"BTIZ" wrote in message
news:FvxQb.59482$zs4.11458@fed1read01...

He's talking about doing acro over the field...not making a
cross-country.

--
Dale L. Falk

regardless.. you still can't turn the altimeter adjustment that far to get
to zero.. and if the local pilots want to fly at zero.. it sets bad habit
patterns for when they do go cross country

Well maybe someone ought to think outside the box (or, in this case - inside
the box). It makes sense to have an adjustable altimeter for aerobatics than
can be zero'ed through at least 10,000 MSL.

"Pilot Bob (I am just a great guy!!)" wrote:

It makes sense to have an adjustable altimeter for aerobatics than
can be zero'ed through at least 10,000 MSL.

And you're going to put this *where* in an F-16?

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

In a previous article, said:
"Pilot Bob (I am just a great guy!!)" wrote:

It makes sense to have an adjustable altimeter for aerobatics than
can be zero'ed through at least 10,000 MSL.

And you're going to put this *where* in an F-16?

On an F-16, it will probably be a software patch. They don't call it the
Electric Jet for nothin.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Please say this was followed by a very serious discussion on Right and
Wrong involving a blow torch, 220V, a cobra and three East Germans
named Georg... -- Robert Uhl

You can already set the "electronic" system altitude to zero. But then you
have the analog "steam gauge" which won't match and F-16 pilots don't like
conflicting readings. And if you set the "electronic" system altitude to
zero, it would throw off the delta altitude values for all of the reference
steerpoint settings unless you adjusted them also. Too much room for error.

Darrel

Paul Tomblin wrote:

In a previous article, said:
"Pilot Bob (I am just a great guy!!)" wrote:

It makes sense to have an adjustable altimeter for aerobatics than
can be zero'ed through at least 10,000 MSL.

And you're going to put this *where* in an F-16?

On an F-16, it will probably be a software patch. They don't call it the
Electric Jet for nothin.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Please say this was followed by a very serious discussion on Right and
Wrong involving a blow torch, 220V, a cobra and three East Germans
named Georg... -- Robert Uhl

"BTIZ" wrote

regardless.. you still can't turn the altimeter adjustment
that far to get to zero..

BTIZ..or whatever your name is...I found this posted over at
rec.aviation.naval by Dudley Henriques who seems to have a lot
of experience in this field.

Bob Moore

I've been back channeling for two days now with friends who are
ex-Thunderbirds and professional pilots in other professions. Most of us
are
puzzled by the report although not at all puzzled by the results of
Stricklin's mistake!
There's something about this report some of us don't quite get, and it
concerns the zero set on the altimeters. The TB fly a zero set altimeter
for
a show. It's not only basic for low altitude acro work, but it's specified
in the regulations for the Thunderbird mission and procedures. (the old
regulation anyway. haven't seen the revised one yet)
My guys however, were on the T38 team, and the TB regulation for practice
might have been changed since then. However, none of us believe that
Stricklin took off with the altimeter set for the elevation at Mountain
Home, which is 2996 feet ASL. That leaves only one scenario; that the
present Viper team must be using a MSL base at Nellis for practice because
of the mountains at Indian Springs. If this is true, then we still can't
figure out why Stricklin would reverse on the roof of his maneuver with a
target altitude of 1600 feet which is basically what happened. It just
doesn't make sense to us. If the team is using a MSL base at Nellis, and
Stricklin was using that base in his mind when he reversed; the elevation
at
Nellis is 2000 feet. That would have put his reverse at 4500 feet for the
Viper instead of the 1600 plus he used. 1600 is way low for the Viper even
for a zero set altimeter reference It's very puzzling!!!
Also, there's been a lot of talk about not being able to zero altimeters at
some high elevation airports. This is puzzling also. The Kollsman range,
which is also the basic baro range in the Viper's CADC which drives the
Viper's altimeter in both ELECT and PNEU backup, is aprox 22.00 inches on
the low side and 32.00 inches on the high side. (I had to check this out
with some buddies of mine, as I'd forgotten the range in the Kollsman
myself!! :-)
This gives you, even figuring the 1 inch per thousand rule, an elevation
reset capability to a zero reset before takeoff of 10, 000 feet. This
basically allows a zero reset anywhere in the U.S. at least, allowing for a
standard atmosphere. I don't think I'm missing anything here, but I might
have.....getting older you know!! :-) I just can't remember a zero set
being
any problem for me during my tenure as a demonstration pilot.
The Thunderbird's are locked up tighter than a drum right now, and answers
from the present team are not easy to get; so the bottom line so far for us
old timers trying to figure this out is that the team indeed does use a MSL
reference at Nellis because of the mountains, but resets to a zero
altimeter
set before takeoff at the show site. If this is the case, it's
understandable to me how Chris Stricklin could have made the mistake he
did.
I'll tell you up front. I can sympathize with Chris Stricklin, or anyone
else for that matter who has to work low altitude acro this way. If there's
one thing that will kill you doing low work it's non-standardization. If
the
Birds have to use a MSL calculation for their roof target altitudes at
Nellis for a vertical plane maneuver because of the mountains, then revert
to a zero set when doing a show; that in my opinion is bad news! It's only
a
matter of time when things like this catch up to you when doing low work in
high performance airplanes.
Chris Stricklin is a damn good pilot. He's also a damn lucky pilot!
What happened to Stricklin has happened to a lot of very good pilots who do
low work. If all this reporting is true, he was simply bitten by non
standardization! I understand the situation's being looked at closely by
the
Air Force. That's one good thing anyway, although I don't see how they're
going to change anything unless they can take the mountains at Nellis out
of
the Thunderbird equation.
Frankly, the whole damn thing is puzzling to us; us being myself and a few
ex-Thunderbirds. I know I'll probably pick up the straight scoop sooner or
later through my grapevine, but for right now, this report, and putting it
together for a clear picture of what happened to Stricklin is one large
puzzle in progress.
Dudley Henriques

"Robert Moore" wrote in message
. 6...
"BTIZ" wrote

Also, there's been a lot of talk about not being able to zero altimeters
at
some high elevation airports. This is puzzling also. The Kollsman range,
which is also the basic baro range in the Viper's CADC which drives the
Viper's altimeter in both ELECT and PNEU backup, is aprox 22.00 inches on
the low side and 32.00 inches on the high side. (I had to check this out
with some buddies of mine, as I'd forgotten the range in the Kollsman
myself!! :-)

Wow. OK, I was dead wrong on that (so were many others, but I think I was
the first :-) ).

-- David Brooks