![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 09:40:29 -0500, Jack
wrote: Sam Byrams wrote: [Mason's book claims] the T-38 Talon was a big challenge for people whose total experience consisted of under 200 hours in the T-37. In the mid and late 60's it would have been less than 100 hrs in the Tweet for studs transitioning to the Talon, and nobody didn't like the T-38. You've got that right. I had 132 hours in Tweets before Talons. The UPT syllabus dropped that to 120 with introduction of the T-41 screening. No problems. Later with better simulators the total UPT syllabus was reduced to 188 hours with less than half of that coming prior to T-38 qualification. The T-38 has been a great airplane for 42 years of training and with the upgraded glass cockpit looks like it will be active in SUPT for another 20 years at least. Easy to fly, no adverse characteristics. Reliable. I wound up with about 1500 hours in Talons, more than 1200 accrued as an instructor in Fighter Lead-In teaching new instructor candidates. (And taking the occasional recreational trip to ski in CO/UT, visit the sea-food paradises of FL or the sexpots of LSV.) Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Ed Rasimus wrote: On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 09:40:29 -0500, Jack wrote: Sam Byrams wrote: [Mason's book claims] the T-38 Talon was a big challenge for people whose total experience consisted of under 200 hours in the T-37. In the mid and late 60's it would have been less than 100 hrs in the Tweet for studs transitioning to the Talon, and nobody didn't like the T-38. You've got that right. I had 132 hours in Tweets before Talons. The UPT syllabus dropped that to 120 with introduction of the T-41 screening. No problems. Later with better simulators the total UPT syllabus was reduced to 188 hours with less than half of that coming prior to T-38 qualification. The T-38 has been a great airplane for 42 years of training and with the upgraded glass cockpit looks like it will be active in SUPT for another 20 years at least. Easy to fly, no adverse characteristics. Reliable. I wound up with about 1500 hours in Talons, more than 1200 accrued as an instructor in Fighter Lead-In teaching new instructor candidates. (And taking the occasional recreational trip to ski in CO/UT, visit the sea-food paradises of FL or the sexpots of LSV.) Preceded you a little bit. Did the T-34, Tweet & T-bird. Old T-bird had a lot of inertia with full tips and a lot of slack in the stick. There was a noticeable drop in instrument skills and ability to handle older aircraft when the all Tweet/Talon guys started coming out the end of the pipeline. They were just TOO easy to fly. Our T-34/Tweet instructors were "civilian" at least technically. Mine was actually one of those much reviled in another tread TANG types, in fact became GWB's commander in the Deuce. My best friend, then and now was another instant airman to lieutenant guardsmen. A second guard classmate went on to command his state guard with 2 stars on his shoulders. None of us saw Vietnam. All 3 of us managed 30+ years of airline. Beats working for a living. -- Ron Parsons |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ed Rasimus wrote:
Later with better simulators the total UPT syllabus was reduced to 188 hours with less than half of that coming prior to T-38 qualification. I got a bit over 200 total with a little over half that in the T-38. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 09:36:59 -0600, Ed Rasimus
wrote: The T-38 has been a great airplane for 42 years of training and with the upgraded glass cockpit looks like it will be active in SUPT for another 20 years at least. I have a friend who went from F-18s and SR-71s to T-38s (Bs, I think) with conventional cockpits. He sure missed the HUD at first. I don't think he realized how much difference it made to him. I could have told him, though, because having a HUD greatly improves my piloting, so think of what it does for a real pilot. Does the T-38 glass cockpit have a HUD? NASA did a cockpit upgrade on the JSC T-38s, but I'm pretty sure it didn't include a HUD. The USAF has been turning every cockpit into a glass cockpit. They did the KC-135s that the ANG flies a couple of years ago, even. That's real dedication to glass cockpits, I'd say. Mary -- Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:35:10 -0700, Mary Shafer
wrote: On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 09:36:59 -0600, Ed Rasimus wrote: The T-38 has been a great airplane for 42 years of training and with the upgraded glass cockpit looks like it will be active in SUPT for another 20 years at least. I have a friend who went from F-18s and SR-71s to T-38s (Bs, I think) That doesn't track. Was he on USN exchange? Was he flying "company" SR-71? If he was USAF it isn't likely that he would have been flying either, but then how did he get to T-38s? The only "B" models are AT-38s, which are only flown by the SUPT fighter-leadin squadron. The NASA, ATC/UPT Talons are all "A" models. with conventional cockpits. He sure missed the HUD at first. I don't think he realized how much difference it made to him. I could have told him, though, because having a HUD greatly improves my piloting, so think of what it does for a real pilot. Did the SR-71 get a HUD? Dunno what there would be to see out the window. Does the T-38 glass cockpit have a HUD? NASA did a cockpit upgrade on the JSC T-38s, but I'm pretty sure it didn't include a HUD. The glass mod does include a HUD. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Was he flying "company"
SR-71? I didnt think there was such a thing, other than the A-11, which were well before F-18. Ron PA-31T Cheyenne II Maharashtra Weather Modification Program Pune, India |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Ed Rasimus" wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:35:10 -0700, Mary Shafer wrote: On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 09:36:59 -0600, Ed Rasimus wrote: The T-38 has been a great airplane for 42 years of training and with the upgraded glass cockpit looks like it will be active in SUPT for another 20 years at least. I have a friend who went from F-18s and SR-71s to T-38s (Bs, I think) That doesn't track. Mary was at NASA, F/A-18's, SR-71's and T-38's have been and are in their inventory. Was he on USN exchange? Was he flying "company" SR-71? If he was USAF it isn't likely that he would have been flying either, but then how did he get to T-38s? The only "B" models are AT-38s, which are only flown by the SUPT fighter-leadin squadron. The NASA, ATC/UPT Talons are all "A" models. with conventional cockpits. He sure missed the HUD at first. I don't think he realized how much difference it made to him. I could have told him, though, because having a HUD greatly improves my piloting, so think of what it does for a real pilot. Did the SR-71 get a HUD? Dunno what there would be to see out the window. Does the T-38 glass cockpit have a HUD? NASA did a cockpit upgrade on the JSC T-38s, but I'm pretty sure it didn't include a HUD. The glass mod does include a HUD. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 17:33:39 -0400, "Brett"
wrote: "Ed Rasimus" wrote: On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:35:10 -0700, Mary Shafer wrote: On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 09:36:59 -0600, Ed Rasimus wrote: The T-38 has been a great airplane for 42 years of training and with the upgraded glass cockpit looks like it will be active in SUPT for another 20 years at least. I have a friend who went from F-18s and SR-71s to T-38s (Bs, I think) That doesn't track. Mary was at NASA, F/A-18's, SR-71's and T-38's have been and are in their inventory. All the more reason to say it wasn't "B" models. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:24:07 -0600, Ed Rasimus
wrote: On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:35:10 -0700, Mary Shafer wrote: On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 09:36:59 -0600, Ed Rasimus wrote: The T-38 has been a great airplane for 42 years of training and with the upgraded glass cockpit looks like it will be active in SUPT for another 20 years at least. I have a friend who went from F-18s and SR-71s to T-38s (Bs, I think) That doesn't track. Was he on USN exchange? Was he flying "company" SR-71? If he was USAF it isn't likely that he would have been flying either, but then how did he get to T-38s? The only "B" models are AT-38s, which are only flown by the SUPT fighter-leadin squadron. The NASA, ATC/UPT Talons are all "A" models. Actually, he started flying helos in the USN, converted to F-4s, and was sent to Dryden as Navy Liaison Officer. He left the USN and hired on at Dryden, where he flew the F-8 DFBW, the B-52, the F-104, the F-18, the F-18 HARV, and the SR-71. He was flying the last three before he transferred to JSC to be a support pilot flying T-38s. I don't know what model the JSC T-38s are. I thought they were Bs, but I'm apparently wrong. We had one for a while, but we had to give it back or I could have checked. with conventional cockpits. He sure missed the HUD at first. I don't think he realized how much difference it made to him. I could have told him, though, because having a HUD greatly improves my piloting, so think of what it does for a real pilot. Did the SR-71 get a HUD? Dunno what there would be to see out the window. No need. You don't fly the SR-71 head-up but on the instruments. The crews say they rarely even look out the window except during takeoff and landing. The RSOs don't even do that. I was referring to the F-18s and their HUDs. We have both research F-18s and support F-18s, so the test pilots get most of their time in them. Mary -- Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Welcome back, Mary!
Mary Shafer wrote: On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:24:07 -0600, Ed Rasimus wrote: On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:35:10 -0700, Mary Shafer wrote: On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 09:36:59 -0600, Ed Rasimus wrote: The T-38 has been a great airplane for 42 years of training and with the upgraded glass cockpit looks like it will be active in SUPT for another 20 years at least. I have a friend who went from F-18s and SR-71s to T-38s (Bs, I think) That doesn't track. Was he on USN exchange? Was he flying "company" SR-71? If he was USAF it isn't likely that he would have been flying either, but then how did he get to T-38s? The only "B" models are AT-38s, which are only flown by the SUPT fighter-leadin squadron. The NASA, ATC/UPT Talons are all "A" models. Actually, he started flying helos in the USN, converted to F-4s, and was sent to Dryden as Navy Liaison Officer. He left the USN and hired on at Dryden, where he flew the F-8 DFBW, the B-52, the F-104, the F-18, the F-18 HARV, and the SR-71. He was flying the last three before he transferred to JSC to be a support pilot flying T-38s. I don't know what model the JSC T-38s are. I thought they were Bs, but I'm apparently wrong. We had one for a while, but we had to give it back or I could have checked. with conventional cockpits. He sure missed the HUD at first. I don't think he realized how much difference it made to him. I could have told him, though, because having a HUD greatly improves my piloting, so think of what it does for a real pilot. Did the SR-71 get a HUD? Dunno what there would be to see out the window. No need. You don't fly the SR-71 head-up but on the instruments. The crews say they rarely even look out the window except during takeoff and landing. The RSOs don't even do that. I was referring to the F-18s and their HUDs. We have both research F-18s and support F-18s, so the test pilots get most of their time in them. Mary |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Juan Jiminez is a liar and a fraud (was: Zoom fables on ANN | ChuckSlusarczyk | Home Built | 105 | October 8th 04 12:38 AM |
Bush's guard record | JDKAHN | Home Built | 13 | October 3rd 04 09:38 PM |
Two MOH Winners say Bush Didn't Serve | WalterM140 | Military Aviation | 196 | June 14th 04 11:33 PM |
bush rules! | Be Kind | Military Aviation | 53 | February 14th 04 04:26 PM |