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
|
|||
|
|||
Evan Williams wrote:
The problem with being "Tip of the Spear" is that every time you turn around, all you see is the shaft! I have the utmost respect for the abilities of engineers. I just wish that the maintainers had more to say about the design as it is being designed. Actually, the A-10 is an example of just such a plane. (Though nowhere near as packed with black boxes as an F-4.) A number of experienced NCO maintainers had near-veto power over some of the component-positioning decisions on the A-10. I started out on F-4S's which when designed, MacAir's policy was "If you could put your hand in a compartment, something is missing". As a result on a good day it would take about four hours to change out a fuse on our electrical fusing power supply. On the other hand, I could sit in the cockpit and depending on what worked with the switches in different positions I could tell you exactly what was broken. Basically you could have forked hay all of your life but if you had common sense you could fix the aircraft. For the sidewinder missile system, we had an AN/AWM-20B test set. Memory check: Nope. The -20 checkers were for AIM-7 stations; Lots of solenoid "eyeballs" for checking the different functions. It had two knobs one on top of the other and a meter. Each step of the test you would move a knob to a different position and read the meter. If a step failed you instantly knew what was wrong. It was dead nuts simple. Sounds like a GWM-4 tester. Used on the AIM-9 launchers - as long as you remembered to remove ALL of the missiles from the other wing before starting the checks! Then we transitioned to the F/A-18. OH MY GOD! It's all about computers talking to computers. That was the same set of problems as the F-16 hunk-o'-junk. ("Current software is capable of accurately diagnosing 80% of detectable faults...". Yeah, right. Who gets to fix the remaining 20%? What about the guy stuck with a persistent "non-detectable" fault?) That's where the system of "smart machine, dumb technician" failed miserably. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
F-102 pilot kicks sailors ass | D. Strang | Military Aviation | 22 | March 26th 04 05:03 AM |