Leaderboard

A classic thread now ruined... I'm not a fan of personal attacks, but Pancake, you're an idiot. You are the type of American that appreciates the loss of personal/inalienable rights for increased "security." Once they're gone, they're extremely difficult to get back. Your lack of support for the 2nd amendment shows your disrespect for what the the Bill of Rights stands for. They are natural born rights not to be fucked with by a government. The Founding Fathers were smart enough to add them to the Constitution, because they knew pricks like you would want to subjugate their fellow man. Eat a bag of dicks and choke yourself.

What research, specifically, is it that you're looking to accomplish, outside of asking opinions on an internet forum? Are you polling IFF and FTU IPs -- they're going to be your best source of opinion on the matter. In terms of speeds, general handling, avionics, E-M diagram, stick-and-throttles muscle memory, when compared to a Marchetti or CJ-6 -- all of them! The T-38 "generally" performs more like the fighters than any other reasonably available aircraft currently available. Nearly every speed the T-38 flies is within 5 knots of the F-15E, FWIW. That's not the point, though. Look back at the genesis of the LIFT program to see what the real value is. In the late 60s and 70s, the Fighter RTUs were having trouble with pilots learning fighter concepts (tac form, basic fight geometry, fighter pilot wingman admin) at the same time trying to tame the fighters of the day. There's a good discussion of some of these challenges in Ed Rasimus' When Thunder Rolled relating specifically to the F-105 RTU. The solution was to have that information taught in a separate TAC program using an aircraft that students all ready understood how to fly This meant that they were able to spend all of their effort on learning the fighter concepts, rather than learning that information simultaneous to learning their first fighter. It was better for the students, and ultimately it meant that the product entering the RTUs was better prepared (which meant their training time/dollar went further as well). As was all ready mentioned, the T-38 has a steeply-pitched E-M diagram, meaning that energy management is the CORNERSTONE of being able to execute any energy gameplan in BFM. It's FAR less forgiving than any other fighter grads will go on to fly, thus it is an excellent teacher. Energy management in a small piston aircraft doesn't even begin to relate to how it will work in a big fighter. Not only that, the completely different techniques of operation for the piston engine, as well as significantly differing power and throttle responses are where there would be negative training. Going from a 400-knot afterburning jet T-38 in SUPT Phase III, to a 200-knot piston Marchetti in "Mouse IFF", then back to a 400-knot afterburning jet in their FTU would involve a huge amount of negative transfer in both of the transitions. What is the turn circle of a Marchetti at max G? The T-38's max rate turn has a 4,500' radius, which just happens to be very similar to the big gray fighters. That allows very similar G and very similar maneuvering cues (ergo, control zone size and shape) to those big gray jets. Again, a Marchetti or CJ would have neither similar G performance nor similar turn geometry to the big gray jets. As was mentioned, keeping tally is rarely a significant issue in the '38. Neither is learning under G. Both issues, by the way, are things the students HAVE to learn to cope with for their continued success in the fighter world. Don't forget that students are all ready flying tactical formation and sustaining G in the T-38 during their undergraduate course, and there is not a whole lot new to adapt to in those areas when they transition to IFF. So, given that... What, exactly, would the benefit of a Marchetti/CJ IFF course be? More importantly, you need to look into what the vision of the future of IFF is, based on the requirements of the fighter fleet for the next 20-30 years. Currently, the thinking is that the T-38 is not adequate in terms of G, energy, or avionics to teach students who will go on to fly Raptors and Lightnings. They're looking at aircraft like the KAI T-50 as potential replacements -- aircraft with better performance and avionics that can simulate the systems studs will find in Raptors and Lightnings. If the T-38C isn't sufficient, you have to ask yourself why you think stepping back to a small piston aircraft would be better. Again, this is what the AF has decided it wants in an IFF replacement...after nearly a decade of inputs from Raptor units, studies, and analysis of current IFF grad performance.

M2, Please don't take offense, but I don't see the point of letting citizens own assault weapons. I fully agree with gun ownership for hunting, home defense, and self protection. Your well laid out argument concerning CCW is as relevant as my theory that he would have been stopped much earlier had he only had a revolver. Can you name an incident where a home-owner has defended himself more ably with an assualt weapon against an intruder than with an ordinary pistol? I remember Columbine (12 dead): "During the shootings, Harris carried a 12 gauge Savage-Springfield 67H pump-action shotgun (serial no. A232432) and a Hi-Point 995 Carbine 9 mm semi-automatic rifle with thirteen 10-round magazines, fired 96 times. Harris's other weapon, the shotgun, was fired a total of 25 times. Harris committed suicide by shooting himself in the head with his shotgun. Klebold carried a 9 mm Intratec TEC-9 semi-automatic handgun manufactured by Navegar, Inc. with one 52-, one 32-, and one 28-round magazine. He also carried a 12 gauge Stevens 311D double barreled sawed-off shotgun (serial no. A077513). Klebold's primary weapon was the TEC-9 handgun, which was fired a total of 55 times. Klebold would later commit suicide via a shot to the left temple with the TEC-9." I remember Georgia Tech (32 dead): "Cho used two firearms during the attacks: a .22-caliber Walther P22 semi-automatic handgun and a 9 mm semi-automatic Glock 19 handgun." Where do we go from here...more guns in the hands of responsible citizens...less guns in the hands of all citizens...?

Pancake. It says that every time I post.

Wow, kettle meet black. For not being a fan of personnel attacks you sure did call "fights on" early in this post.