Jump to content

LookieRookie

Supreme User
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    735

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

 Content Type 

Posts posted by LookieRookie

    Flight Evaluation Board (FEB)

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by LookieRookie

    47 minutes ago, ThreeHoler said:

     


    So you failed out of IFF...

    And you failed out of your new airframe...

    Multitasking is your problem...

    ...then it sounds like your problem is you probably shouldn’t have graduated UPT.

     

    This may be a true statement. I'm sure the FEB will review his undergraduate gradebooks as well. 

     

    Nothing to add broski but be prepared to lose your wings, that doesn't mean you shouldn't fight.

    Edit: are you in afsoc?

    C-130 down near Savannah, GA

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by LookieRookie

    1 hour ago, Tonka said:

     

    Sorry... this is not on him, blame his training, blame the aircraft, the maintenance, and the acquisition process.  He gave it everything he could, all his years of flying... his life... don't put this on him.  Could he/they have done better-obviously yes, but my 8-year old can fly a manual 3-engine ILS in the C-17 sim (on her knees with nothing touching the rudders!), there is nothing remotely intuitive in an engine failure/surge at/near rotate for a C-130... I wonder if anyone on the AIB tried it in the sim. (of course we can't use an AIB to provide truth, because that causes litigation.)

     

    I have an issue with this. If the engine was "secured" and feathered and it says not to turn into a shut engine in the -1 and he did, that's completely on him. If he just flew straight ahead and gained flying airspeed they wouldn't have stalled.

     

    The most important part of an any EP is to maintain aircraft control. It was less than 2 minutes to impact. He destroyed a completely flyable airplane.

     

    This doesn't mitigate other factors, but that crew crashed the airplane.

    • Like 3
    • Upvote 3

    C-130 down near Savannah, GA

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, matmacwc said:

    I'm surprised they have airplanes at all, and I would of said that before this accident.

    Terrible read. I've heard anecdotally from Herk drivers in the past that no one wants to train with the PRANG because of lack of ability/adherence to standards.

    What is next for the UPT-Next graduates?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    10 hours ago, Majestik Møøse said:

    Spend 9 figures on developing a T-6 that has capes that many CAF aircraft still lack? Except that it doesn’t actually have a real sensor or drop a real bomb. Sounds about right. While the SPs get worse at basic flying skills because they’re wrapped up in what FIPS 140-1 means.

    I wouldn't be surprised if every T-6 is updated to this standard and the turbotrack only* track is expanded big time.

    *There is a N=1 data set being tested at END from a SP that didn't graduate PTN and that SP is currently flying T-6s for Advanced Phase.  Separate from PTN and currently restricted to T-6 FAIPing and U-28s as follow-on platform as of a few weeks ago.

    What is next for the UPT-Next graduates?

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by LookieRookie

    Well it seems the Air Force wants to do a mod to a new "E-model" standard for the PTN T-6s. (Navy has T-6Bs, Beech sells T-6C, Army has T-6Ds)

     From the RFI:

     


    The United States Air Force is interested in assessing industry’s capability and technical maturity in modifying up to eight T-6As to integrate the following capabilities on a temporary basis to demonstrate evolutionary training/learning procedures.   
    We ask that any interested potential vendors specifically address each numbered capability with a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) along with substantiating data and estimated schedule to field each capability.  Additionally, we are interested in airworthiness certification, cybersecurity, and spectrum certification strategies.  Please include all of your assumptions in these strategies.  

    1.    Generic Inflight weapons employment simulation (air-to-air and air-to-ground) including fully integrated sensor fusion 
    a.    5th Gen style Helmet / HUD symbology
    b.    Gun (20, 25, and 30 mm) – air-to-air and strafe
    c.    Targeting/ISR sensor simulation and management (radar, FMV, infrared, radar warning)
    d.    Unguided weapons (general purpose, rockets)
    e.    Guided missiles (heat-seeking, radar)
    f.    Laser-guided air-to-ground weapons (rocket, bomb, missiles)
    g.    GPS-guided air-to-ground weapons/Inertially-aided munitions
    h.    Retaskable after launch munitions (e.g SDB, JASSM-ER, etc)

    2.    Helmet mounted cuing system (HCMS) (objective) or fully integrated Heads-up-Display (HUD) (threshold)
    a.    5th Gen style Helmet/HUD symbology fully compatible with capabilities listed in item 1 above
    b.    Simulation of sensors (radar, infrared, radar warning)
    c.    Sensor displays (attitude, altitude, airspeed, TCAS/ADS-B)
    d.    Simulated target display (air-to-air and air-to-ground)
    e.    Artificial Intelligence and Virtual Construct display capability (fully compatible with datalink
    f.    Display of GPS flight planned route(s)

    3.    Enhanced data transfer & sharing: UNCLAS datalink; data & video transfer (msn planning, scenario builds, debrief data [Ops, Safety, & Mx])
    a.    Mission planning upload to include full mission simulations as a Live Virtual Constructive (LVC) – data transfer device (DTD)
    b.    Datalink to fully enable LVC missions
    1)    Sufficient bandwidth to support multiple channels of HD video (Threshold:  3, Objective: 12)
    2)    High definition video (threshold:  4K, objective 8K)
    3)    Ground control station to build, execute, monitor and record LVC missions
             Range w/gnd station repeaters (T:   40 Nm, O:  60 Nm)
             Range w/out repeaters (T:   70 Nm, O:  100 Nm
    4) Datalink meets FIPS 140-1 security for FOUO data
    c. Ability to adjust LVC scenarios, helmet/HUD displays from rear cockpit or from ground station controls and inject synthetic sensor data and constructed targets (overlaid on geo-rectified sensor “feed” for air-to-ground) to include ability to construct moving ground targets
    d.    Mission record capability via DTD
    1)    Operations (HUD/Helmet video, crew biometrics, datalink, 360/cockpit video)
    2)    MFOQA data
    e.    Objective: Integrated Bluetooth & Wi-Fi to import external sensors (i.e. view real-time biometrics, helmet data); Threshold (data port for biometrics, helmet data)
    f.    Power and/or data ports for hand-held equipment (EFB, FIS-B, TIS-B, ATAK)
    g.    Tactical Situation Display that integrates the simulated radar and weapons cueing/control with real sensor data   (LVC, ADS-B [TIS-B], TCAS), the datalink and simulated Radar Warning Receiver with cursor ability to determine target data

    4.    Hands On Throttle and Stick (HOTAS)
    a.    Fully compatible with all weapons and sensor simulations
    b.    Maximum similarity with 5th Generation Fighters
    c.    Data entry options (e.g. single pilot, left-hand oriented).

    5.    Night Vision Goggle compatible lighting and displays.

    6.    Radar Altimeter

    7.    Ability to display GPS-driven flight plan (Threshold) and Moving Map (Objective)

    8.    Simulated defensive system (chaff/flare with HOTAS buttons to dispense); captured on mission recording

    9.    Debriefing system capability that can combine AHRS, LVC and DTD information.

    10.    360 degree video record capability (separate from Helmet/HUD) – recordable and datalink

    11.    Basic Altitude Hold function

    12.    Fully-coupled, three-axis autopilot

    13.    Expanded video of front cockpit occupant displayed in the back seat, recorded, and datalink (e.g. supplement biometric data of student)

    14.    HMD adaptable to accept biometric monitoring capability (recorded parameter)

    We request that you also provide your company’s recommendation for existing T-6 capabilities and components whose function can be provided via the components that would be proposed to meet these new capabilities, along with strategies to certify these existing capabilities through the use of these new components.  This modification must not negatively impact the existing aircraft flight capabilities.  Identify a strategy to verify these existing capabilities remain intact post-modification.

    Promotion and PRF Information

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    2 hours ago, olevelo said:


    They gave me the authority to stand up a new test unit and do O-5 things, but that experience doesn’t really matter apparently.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Did you have g-series? Request a DAFSC duty history change in vMPF to put a prefix on your afsc and if that doesn't work BCMR it.

    What is next for the UPT-Next graduates?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    5 minutes ago, MooseAg03 said:


    Of course we can critique RPA wings, they are “operators” not pilots. I know because I did it for years.

    My point was that they are no longer considered Undergraduate aviators if they have pilot wings, so why send them to Phase 3 UPT.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Check above. They won't go to Phase III. They would do a T-38 TX course at Randolph that already exists for Toner Bros that get fighters later in life 

    U-2 Dragonlady info

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by LookieRookie

    2 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

    Not sure what you mean. He was a C-130 Reservist and remained a Reservist. 

    However, it was a very unusual and isolated case. 

    Many proposals have been generated about part time U-2 Pilots. Foolishly, none have taken hold. Maybe things are changing. 

    He's Reserve unsponsored to UPT and wants to be a FACT.

    Future T-38 replacement?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    12 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

     

    T-X for advanced trainer, eliminate T-1 and buy more T-X.  

     

    Why do you think the original proposal was for 350 T-X and now there is a contract for 475 total?  Convenient that 125 was the magical number to replace all T-1s with T-X and return to GUPT.

×
×
  • Create New...