Jump to content
Baseops Forums
flynhigh

Future T-38 replacement?

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, ThreeHoler said:

 


You can get a DFC for teaching UPT if the situation is right. Just ask Johnny Weida.
 

 

Tell the story...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, icohftb said:

With all these t38 crashes any updates on the t-x decision timeline?

None related to the crashes. That's making fvck all difference in the timeline.

Yeah we saw the AFOTEC slides. Selection decision this year (they're already late), prob turn of the fiscal. As to IOC? LOL. Dude, 2023 at the earliest.This entire thing can shift right with a single call for arbitration. Boeing ) being the usual whiny bitch, is one of the participants so that probably means this thing will get stonewalled to the right.

BL, the cavalry ain't coming bud. The T-X canard at this point is like posterity...the fvck has it done for me lately?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, icohftb said:

With all these t38 crashes any updates on the t-x decision timeline?

While the T-38 is older than you want, don't try to make this an issue.  

AETC pushed the C-model.  Lots of "new shit" on the jet.  The got what they asked for.  The millions of $$$ spent on the PMP and the MB seat (how many millions???) would have been useful elsewhere.  

A-models with 21,000 hours are doing pretty well from a safety viewpoint.  

Yes, the fleet needs to be replaced.  No argument there.  

No:  Paul's jet having dual airframe-mounted gearbox failures is more a function of shitty maintenance than anything else.  As a retiree, I'm not "in the know" as much as I'd like to be on his death.  Yet.  But I'd gladly jump in ANY Beale T-38 and go fly it.  Because Beale has some quality guys working those jets.  

And I'll continue to fly the civilian T-38 without any qualms.  It's well maintained, and the seat is solid, in the unlikely event I need it.  

T-38 crashes should have no bearing on T-X timeline.  It should be based on the fact we need an upgraded trainer for our future F-22 and F-35 pilots. 

Edited by HuggyU2
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the idea that the T-X will become a single trainer to replace both the T-38 and T-1?  If so, that would take at least a month off the timeline already dedicated to phase III academics and help accelerate graduation.  Just in time for class 25-01 I guess....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the iff jets with 16000 hours are bent to sh!t. The c model hasn't helped with structural integrity, ie wingtips falling off and cracked longerons. So yeah i think the updated seat is well worth it of youre stuck flying them.

 

And no my original post did mean to imply that the decision should be hurried because of the crashes but that it was overdue from their constantly moving timeline.

Edited by icohftb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/25/2018 at 11:11 PM, HuggyU2 said:

While the T-38 is older than you want, don't try to make this an issue.  

AETC pushed the C-model.  Lots of "new shit" on the jet.  The got what they asked for.  The millions of $$$ spent on the PMP and the MB seat (how many millions???) would have been useful elsewhere.  

A-models with 21,000 hours are doing pretty well from a safety viewpoint.  

Yes, the fleet needs to be replaced.  No argument there.  

No:  Paul's jet having dual airframe-mounted gearbox failures is more a function of shitty maintenance than anything else.  As a retiree, I'm not "in the know" as much as I'd like to be on his death.  Yet.  But I'd gladly jump in ANY Beale T-38 and go fly it.  Because Beale has some quality guys working those jets.  

And I'll continue to fly the civilian T-38 without any qualms.  It's well maintained, and the seat is solid, in the unlikely event I need it.  

T-38 crashes should have no bearing on T-X timeline.  It should be based on the fact we need an upgraded trainer for our future F-22 and F-35 pilots. 

T-X projected for IOC 2024, with IFF getting the first jets, followed by AETC....contract award was supposed to be June, then July, now it's almost September...we'll see.  AETC has a real problem...the math doesn't work for them.  Trying to grow their way out of a pilot shortage by upping production, while balancing hours on the C model fleet.  The only answer is to cut the syllabus and fly less per student (aka lower standards), hoping that innovative things like VR training can make up the difference.

With the A model, I don't know Huggy, I think we're starting to hit the exponential snowball of failing components sooner that the SPO projected.  The MTBF is decreasing on lots of components, harder and harder to keep Code 1 jets on the line.  They (the SPO) have a plan on phasing the A models in for something called the TRIM mod.  Which is basically a light weight version of the Pacer Classic 3 mods on the C model to beef up the structure and extend their structural life.  A models have never been cracked open, only x-ray'd and other NDI during phase, so we don't exactly know how bad they are from a structural standpoint. 

Gearbox issues are becoming a problem for the As too...and the other elephant in the room is avionics.  We're laughable as an IFR platform.  Not on track to meet the 2020 ADS-B either (like everyone else).  Multiple jets down right now for HSI problems.  Dual UHF radio is a joke.  TACAN decommissioning all over the place, no ability to navigate point to point (Thank you Steve Jobs for iPads).

Meanwhile NASA is upgrading their avionics...again.  My time is being spent right now trying to convince the frozen middle at ACC that this is important and we need to spend a few dollars to make these things last for 10-15 more years.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would the idea be for ya'll to receive C models as the T-X comes online (if ever)?  Or would you just upgrade to the T-X?  Similarly does anyone have any insight as to the future ADAIR in regards to the A model future?  Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AZ,

As usual, you are spot on.  And you bring up some solid points that trump my over simplification of the problem.  

I've been away from Beale for 4 years now, so I'll defer to those of you current in AF A-models.  

As for the ejection seat, it is plenty capable.  How much did the MB seat cost to install in the jet, after all of the delays and cost overruns? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, YoungnDumb said:

Would the idea be for ya'll to receive C models as the T-X comes online (if ever)?  Or would you just upgrade to the T-X?  Similarly does anyone have any insight as to the future ADAIR in regards to the A model future?  Just curious.

Yup that's ACC's plan for now.  As the T-X comes online, ACC will take over as lead command for the T-38.  CTPs will get C models, ADAIR will absorb the remaining A models (They don't want C models b/c the performance is worse due to PMP...18 deg NL to sustain 5G).  I don't think anyone at ACC really knows what the future of ADAIR will be.  There's lots talk of contract ADAIR too. 

T-X seems like a fantastic platform for ADAIR...cheap, relative to F-22 or F-35 flight hours...can simulate just about anything you want on the avionics, so 5th gen guys could train to their respective platforms.  But...I predict ACC will, as per usual, shoot themselves in the dick and not buy it.

24 minutes ago, HuggyU2 said:

AZ,

As usual, you are spot on.  And you bring up some solid points that trump my over simplification of the problem.  

I've been away from Beale for 4 years now, so I'll defer to those of you current in AF A-models.  

As for the ejection seat, it is plenty capable.  How much did the MB seat cost to install in the jet, after all of the delays and cost overruns? 

Let's get that contract or reserve CTP IP force going...get you back in the game!

I love the A model...but she just needs some attention.  At least we're putting up sunshades at Beale to stop them from baking in the sun.

Not sure on the final cost of the MB seat...rough number I heard was $1 million / jet.  At the end of the day though that seat has saved 4 dudes in the past year.  Should've been 5 unfortunately.  But that's the stupidity of it all...we'll spend all kinds of money on stupid shit, and then refuse to do simple things, like put in a seat armed light, or an ISS position light...or a speed brake light in the A model.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AZwildcat said:

A-models with 21,000 hours are doing pretty well from a safety viewpoint.  

Pointy noses are not in my wheel house so I have to ask - what is the intended service life hour limit for the T-38A's? I ask because in the H-60 world we are flying 12,000+ hour machines that were designed for 6,000 hours and are now showing structural cracks, etc. We also fly them 5,000+ lbs (30%) over the original max gross weight and max perform our E-M charts every day so it's a real wonder we aren't seeing worse issues IMHO.

Edited by SPAWNmaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*points to 308 beam crack*

SPO: "That little guy? I wouldn't worry about that little guy"

Edited by Breckey
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, SPAWNmaster said:

Pointy noses are not in my wheel house so I have to ask - what is the intended service life hour limit for the T-38A's? I ask because in the H-60 world we are flying 12,000+ hour machines that were designed for 6,000 hours and are now showing structural cracks, etc. We also fly them 5,000+ lbs (30%) over the original max gross weight and max perform our E-M charts every day so it's a real wonder we aren't seeing worse issues IMHO.

Northrop had it pegged at 8k hours iirc. We're circa 18K in most of the PIT/UPT fleet. IFF as mentioned before, are bent to sH@t.

About the only thing that appeases me about my career airframe, is that seat.

  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/27/2018 at 8:20 PM, hindsight2020 said:

Northrop had it pegged at 8k hours iirc. We're circa 18K in most of the PIT/UPT fleet. IFF as mentioned before, are bent to sH@t.

About the only thing that appeases me about my career airframe, is that seat.

Career airplane?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2018 at 7:24 AM, ThreeHoler said:

 


You can get a DFC for teaching UPT if the situation is right. Just ask Johnny Weida.
 

 

Am I the only one anxiously awaiting this story? 🍿 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2018 at 8:54 PM, ThreeHoler said:

 


You can get a DFC for teaching UPT if the situation is right. Just ask Johnny Weida.
 

Yeah, we want to here about this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I need to hear this story, please. 

Weida was my OG many years back when I was a T-38 PIT IP.  

First AF guy I met that was frocked to O-6.  

Edited by HuggyU2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2018 at 8:54 PM, ThreeHoler said:


You can get a DFC for teaching UPT if the situation is right. Just ask Johnny Weida.
 

 

giphy.gif

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T-X Program winner to be announced this week (supposedly, although not holding my breath).

My money is on Boeing, if only because the .gov wants to keep Boeing-St Louis in business......

https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardaboulafia/2018/09/24/were-about-to-learn-the-winner-of-the-air-force-t-x-trainer-contract-four-things-you-should-know/#72c3065b33e2

Edited by Blue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×