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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
I enjoyed the discussion, CAVU 4U!
"TTA Cherokee Driver" wrote in message ... What's this? a politcal rebuttal that is informed and well thought out and not full of flames? What the heck happened to the usenet I've come to know? Seriously, nice work Dude. I agree that what you have written below is the crux of our disagreement on this issue. You feel that GA would have flourished if left to its own devices and that the infrastructure that we now use is more an imposition to please the big lines than an essential part of our GA experience. I believe that GA would never have been as widespread or as successful as it is if it didn't have all that infrastructure to get a relatively free ride off of. Fair enough, we just see it differently. And we both agree on politicans of both parties at the local level being bought and owned by development interests Dude wrote: After writing my response, I am coming back to the top here to perhaps save you time, and because I realize a key point. We are mostly in disagreement based on my belief that you cannot fairly account a pro rata share to GA users because most of what we use is forced on us due to the needs of other users of the airspace. Since we are being accepted into the airspace as secondary users, it is only appropriate that the accounting of costs keep this in mind. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
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. T-38N, modified version of the A model. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 04:29:03 GMT, "Murphy" wrote:
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. T-38N, modified version of the A model. And some of them were modified to chase the Shuttle back in the late '70s, but not enough to make them into NT-38Ns, fortunately. We didn't have to modify the F-104Ns and F-104Gs. Mary -- Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 17:13:20 -0700, Mary Shafer
wrote: 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. How sad! all the best -- Dan Ford email: (put Cubdriver in subject line) The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com Expedition sailboat charters www.expeditionsail.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
American nazi pond scum, version two | bushite kills bushite | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 21st 04 10:46 PM |
Hey! What fun!! Let's let them kill ourselves!!! | [email protected] | Naval Aviation | 2 | December 17th 04 09:45 PM |
bush rules! | Be Kind | Military Aviation | 53 | February 14th 04 04:26 PM |
God Honest | Naval Aviation | 2 | July 24th 03 04:45 AM |