RTB

On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 19:39:07 GMT, "Erik \"Falcon\" Glascoe"
wrote:

I lived in Englewood Colorado for 3 years, loved it, hated the weather. I
heard the times over there now are difficult. Is that true? With the
housing and such.

Dunno what you mean. Denver is in a growth cycle. Ditto for Colorado
Springs. Anti-tax mentality means education, highways and
state-provided public services are in marginal supply.

The weather on the "Front Range" is pretty darn good. Warm but low
humidity in the summer, cool with low humidity in the winter. Not much
snow and often 55-60 degrees in January/February.

Forgive me for a dumb question, but, are you a "Thud" Pilot?

That would be F-105 Thunderchief pilot to you, sir.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

Ed Rasimus wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 19:39:07 GMT, "Erik \"Falcon\" Glascoe"
wrote:

snip
Forgive me for a dumb question, but, are you a "Thud" Pilot?

That would be F-105 Thunderchief pilot to you, sir.

Ed Rasimus

There now Erik, consider yourself 'put in your place'.

--
-Gord

Ed Rasimus wrote in
:
Dunno what you mean. Denver is in a growth cycle. Ditto for Colorado
Springs. Anti-tax mentality means education, highways and
state-provided public services are in marginal supply.

My mother who travels for business over there sometimes said the housing
there was very expensive and the houses were tighty together, no yards or
nothing. Guess she saw a different area.

The weather on the "Front Range" is pretty darn good. Warm but low
humidity in the summer, cool with low humidity in the winter. Not much
snow and often 55-60 degrees in January/February.

Yeah that is the norm for Colorado. I was talking bout the snow blizzards
and it'll be sunny on the next day. Weird.


That would be F-105 Thunderchief pilot to you, sir.

Sorry to offend you sir. Most Thunderchief pilots called the F-105 the
"Thud".

Erik

Erik "Falcon" Glascoe wrote:
Hey Jim,

I had so so time on Saturday. With the lack of flying and the weather, it
was medicore. I thought the Thunderbirds did ok, they were kinda sloppy on
few demos though.

I had a cool experince though. I shook a hand of a Tuskegee Airman. I also
thanked him for his service. I couldn't talk to him though, their tent was
full of people that wanted to talk to them.

It was cool though. Did the weather improved any on Sunday Jim?

Erik


I left before the T-Birds started. Low show isn't my fort'e.
Considering the iffy forecast for Sunday I opted to drive home. 708
miles in 14 hours not too shabby, eh? Oh yeah, two food and fuel stops.

I left before the T-Birds started. Low show isn't my fort'e.
Considering the iffy forecast for Sunday I opted to drive home. 708
miles in 14 hours not too shabby, eh? Oh yeah, two food and fuel
stops.


Not too shabby my friend . Did you see "Glacier Girl" while you was
there? God she is just a beautiful P-38. They had a Bearcat too. Thats one
huge, slick machine. Never seen one in person and up close before. The F-18
flight demo was pretty slick with the vapor coming off the fuseluse.

Bummer bout the 22 being no show. Someday I'll see her fly .

Erik

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:00:59 -0400, Jim wrote:

So a question for all is what criteria would have been applied here?
Ed, being USAF do you have any comments. Should note here that
monitoring the frequencies there were no other systems failures mentioned.

In my experience you are better off to put a twin with a failure on
the ground ASAP. Afterall, you have just lost 50% of your power and
100% of your "J" factor. This is not the time to "fool around."

If you are in a many-motor (P-3, KC-135, etc.) then maybe you can
"fudge" a short flight to a facility with better maintenance. The P-3
NATOPS specifically addresses "three engine ferry" flights (I don't
know about Air Force policy and proceedure). But I don't know of
anyone who ever did one who was really comfortable. Sure, it might be
a "pain in the butt" to mount up a maintenance det, but I'd rather see
that than a "smoking hole."

Bill Kambic

Most of his time and 100% of his engine failures in S-2, P-3, and
T-44.

Might have been a simple safety plus prudence-driven decision.

Perhaps DAY was the best field available versus schlepping a sick bird
across the northern Dayton suburbs to FFO. With as high a profile as the
Dayton airshow is, you are smart not to risk a prang on the way over all the
playgrounds and residences. This is like choosing to fly a lonely route when
with hung ordnance. Suburbanites mourn their dead, seek compensation for
their losses, and vote. Fishes in the sea and lizards in the desert do not.

Support availability is nice, but if my choice is avoiding a high-visibility
mishap by taking the nearest capable runway versus landing at a field with
all the whistles and bells, I'll let the techs and the yellow gear follow me
wherever I go.
--
Mike Kanze

"Large increases in cost with questionable increases in performance can be
tolerated only in race horses and women."

- Lord Kelvin


"Jim" wrote in message ...
Returned home late last night from a trip to the Dayton airshow. One
seemingly minor incident raised my curiousity.

A two plane detachment of F-117s were sent to the show. As is quite
typical one aircraft departed intending to provide flybys at other
regional shows before returning to Dayton for a final flyby and landing.

Shortly after departing however he experienced a loss of one engine.
Aircraft recovered at Dayton. I wonder why he would RTB to a civilian
field when WRI-PAT is so near. With this aircraft considered to be a high
value asset wouldn't the increased security of a major military airfield
have made more sense?

So a question for all is what criteria would have been applied here? Ed,
being USAF do you have any comments. Should note here that monitoring the
frequencies there were no other systems failures mentioned.






ACC USN ret.
NKX, BIKF, NAB, CV-63, NIR
67-69 69-71 71-74 77-80 80-85
&
74-77

Founder: RAMN (rec.aviation.military.naval)

being the lowly army aviation guy that I am, we have in our checklist the
"Land as soon as possible" and "Land as soon as practicable". The first
means land now, where you can, and the latter, means the nearest suitable
airfield...