Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The civil reg is a novel thing on a fast jet.
Hope these are not the same ones the Apollo astronauts used for transport and training!
Likely so. US is looking to replace them in next 10yrs. If they are still used in 2040, I would be REAL suprised.
They are underpowered and analog. Not exactly a real world trainer for our modern platforms.
I was incorrect in saying they will be used as a trainer until 2040, although I would not be surprised if they were..
Well, it does not have one-to-one thrust as the latest fighters, but seldom has trainers met the performance of contemporary fighters, in fact the T-38 was probably the only one designed as a trainer that did perform as well as most contemporary fighters at the time. You can pretty well bet that new AF trainers will not either. .
From personal experience, I do not understand the reason to upgrade thrust, maybe that more thrust is always better.
The T-38 is a delight to fly and to watch. .
When they do retire her, there will be a long line of buyers waiting to scarf up any with time left on the airframe. I suspect they will not retire her until she just falls apart.
I don't think they will likely be around as a US govt front line trainer for USAF. Your quote below is absolutely accurate though in my opinion.
I never said anything about 1-to-1 thrust, but rather it is underpowered to replicate modern fighter sustained turns and dash speed necessary for modern operational concepts training.
Trainers don't have the performance of their fighter counterparts. T-6 Texan was not a Mustang. Cost would be higher if pilots were trained like for like.
Yes NASA is civilian.
There is a forum on the internet I recall which had all the reg of the Talons NASA had during the 1960s. So can see if this one is included.
And notice how dated that looks compared to F-35, Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen and Pak FA.
And notice how dated that looks compared to F-35, Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen and Pak FA.
There are also several civilian ones being operated out of Van Nuys airport in Southern California.
Thornton Aircraft Company
Actually, I don't see much difference. Take out functionality of the weapons system, defensive management system and offensive sensor systems, which a trainer will not have, and you would get what he T-38C has. What is important is being familiar with the data driven display logic and paging system of a glass cockpit and flying a high performance aircraft at the same time. Simulators can handle most of these task but it is not the same a doing it while learning to fly at the same time. I remember that one of the most difficult tasks I had to learn was to talk on the radio at the same time I was executing a high altitude penetration. I don't see any problems with the avionics in the T-38C for teaching latest operational logic.
To me your point is exactly what is missing from from the avionic suite of the T-38. It is not just a matter of exercising the human-machine interface while piloting the airplane. Rather it is also learning the repetative cockpit flow with displays that are highly reconfigurable in real-time and interfaces that allow the fusion of system status, flight management,
Again, this is traditionally a receiving command training not UPT. There will probably be no sensor nor data link at level. If it so, the "C" architecture will be adaptable.and netcentric information flow via data link (not just own airplane sensor fusion).
On top of this put a modicum of weapon/mission capability for both advanced air-to-air and advanced air-to-gnd and you have a completely different animal than the T-38.
Remember, that this is necessary because there are no two-seat F-22 and F-35 airplanes.
Now to top this off, DoD is not seeking just a new airframe. Rather they are seeking a "family of systems" that includes both simulated and virtual training systems to supplement airplane flying.
And finally maintenance. We are looking at an airframe that was designed in 1962. Maintenance efficiency gains will play a huge part in selection, that the T-38 could just never compete with.
"Due to the age of the T-38C, as well as the long lead time required for a major aircraft acquisition program, Air Education and Training Command (AETC) began the acquisition process for replacement of the T-38 training FoS in the fall of 2003. The T-38 training FoS is currently expected to be the Advanced Trainer for the Fighter/Bomber (F/B) APT track until at least 2017.
United States Air Force (USAF) pilot training in 2017 will be tailored to support USAF missions identified in the Quadrennial Roles and Missions Review Report (January 2009). Moreover, the APT FoS will ensure pilots are trained to transition to operational aircraft with the core competencies necessary for safe and efficient follow-on weapon system mission-ready training. Examples of these competencies include: basic aircraft control, airmanship, formation, instrument and navigation, advanced air-to-air, advanced air-to-ground, and advanced crew/cockpit resource management.
however, increased complexity, especially in terms of information management will make Cockpit/Crew Resource Management skills and advanced skills even more important than they are today. Having the right balance of simulation/virtual and aircraft flying training within the APT FoS is essential.
the fighter piece of the Fighter and Bomber Track (Advanced Phase) and the Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals (IFF) segment will address the Formal Training Unit (FTU) challenges resulting from a lack of two-seat F-22 and F-35 aircraft.