Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Yes, the T-38 wings have been replaced which is expected after 50+ years but I do not think there has been any upgrade to the basic airframe including tail section. I worked at Northrop for 29 years with about four years on the F-5 (basically a muscled-up T-38) and then about 20 years in B-2 Avionics Controls and Displays including being manager. If you have any comments from pilots on the B-2, specifically the Controls and Displays system, I would be grateful to hear about them.Davparlr,
I was in 89-12, 1988-1989 and experienced only the Tweet / Talon. The T-1 came well after my time as well as the other than white paint scheme on T-38A's. Currently the standard configuration is the T-38C, with full glass, GPS and HUD and is used in the Advanced pilot training as well as Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals (IFF).
They also got rid of the FAR / TTB rankings while I was there, but still tracked guys / gals under that philosophy.
The only A models left are hand me backs from Singapore that fly Red Air for the F-22 and F-35.
The USAF C models have had new wings installed at least twice, new seats with chute built in, and new intakes.
Cheers,
Biff
Yes, the T-38 wings have been replaced which is expected after 50+ years but I do not think there has been any upgrade to the basic airframe including tail section. I worked at Northrop for 29 years with about four years on the F-5 (basically a muscled-up T-38) and then about 20 years in B-2 Avionics Controls and Displays including being manager. If you have any comments from pilots on the B-2, specifically the Controls and Displays system, I would be grateful to hear about them.
I do have an interesting story about the F-5 that I think you would enjoy. During manufacturing, one station mated the tail section to the main section with bolts. Two men worked this station for many years with no problem. One day one of the men was on vacation and the other got sick. New men were brought in to mate the aircraft. They couldn't do it. The bolts holes did not align. The assembly line stopped. When the the sick man returned he was confronted. He said he knew that. They just took a larger drill bit and redrilled a bigger hole and pressed on. Northrop was in a uproar and spent emergency review of the stress guys to determine if that was a catastrophic modification. To everybodies relief, the results was no impact.
I'm not familiar with FAR/TTB. Could you explain?
Recovery from a spin is power off, opposite rudder, nose down right?
I've been treated to that little delicacy by a number of hamfisted students over the years, mostly when I was phase-checking other instructors' students. Usually resulted in a consult with the instructor involved, especially if it transpired that the student hadn't had any spin training at all.Some of youse guys flying the Cessna 150/152 ans 172 series ought to try experience the adverse yaw spin.
Occasionally a student would come along who just couldn't get the "hang" of coordination, and if he/she had the persistence and resources to stick with it, the younger instructors would send them to me. If they turned out to be a hard case, and were still game, I would send them over to the soaring center in the next valley. It's amazing what a yaw string right in front of your eyes can do. The original HUD. They generally came back to me much improved, but once in awhile one would get seduced by sailplanes and never be seen again, except when I instructed over there.The lack of the realization about the need for coordination and actual lack of it very often leads to serious problems for pilots.
Lucky girl!the instructor perusing her log book was astounded that she had never flown a "nosedragger".
PA-38 Traumahawk- a dangerous airplane whose designers both stated it should have been de-certified and grounded.
Dig up the NTSB report from around 1994, double fatal at Inman, KS.
And yet the flying school I worked for flew with a fleet of up to 20 of them, and time-expired a number of airframes at 11k hours, without any stall/spin problems experienced. You trained for the aircraft you were using, and we were pretty hot on co-ordination.The cute little PA-38 had bug problems brought on by the desire to produce a "modern-looking" trainer (T-tail) cheaply (reducing wing ribs, etc.). It was supposed to compete with the C-150's. Due to its less than appropriate handling characteristics, it did not. The Piper design team gave the production design team a good product. The production design team diddled around and created a pretty dangerous airplane.
I think we all tend to have a soft spot for what we grew up with. Despite being raised on strut braced high wings, I wound up a fan of Beechcrafts.I never liked the Navajo, but the Cherokee is a great aircraft in my opinion.
I think we all tend to have a soft spot for what we grew up with. Despite being raised on strut braced high wings, I wound up a fan of Beechcrafts.
"Ouch" is right. There were numerous, well-written, articles on the PA-38's problems in Aviation Consumer after this accident.
Beechcraft makes an amazing product. I love everything they put out. I worked at a Part 145 for 5 years that was a Beechcraft Service Center. 5 years of doing King Air phases and the occasional Bonanza or Baron annual. I love the Bonanza. My only turboprop Stick Time is is in King Airs.
And yet the flying school I worked for flew with a fleet of up to 20 of them, and time-expired a number of airframes at 11k hours, without any stall/spin problems experienced. You trained for the aircraft you were using, and we were pretty hot on co-ordination.
I guess I should be dead...