Hacker

I belive that everyone has had to suffer through "Wingman Day" recently. Probably not as painful as "Combat Nighthawk" or any number of those programs, but still pretty laughable.

I definitely see that the downswept top surface of the ramps would provide some aerodynamic forces that the flight control computer would have to deal with. Based on my purely non-scientific experience looking out the window at the ramps while actuating the stick in flight, I don't see that there's any relation to the commands generated by the flight control computer and the commands generated by the air inlet controller. Interesting information, though. Perhaps even true!

That's a new one on me. While I don't doubt that the large under-side surface area of the ramps provide some kind of newtonian lift via ram-air, I have never heard that they had any relation to the flight control system. Do you have a reference for that? My -1 doesn't mention anything about it.

Dang, and I was just getting all amped up to resign my USAF commission and join CAP so I could get close to the real action...

The F-15A, at least, had capability to select and drop dumb iron, as well as a depressable air-to-ground pipper and even an air-ground mode of the radar to use for ranging. Many early operational Eagle squadrons even had RAP counters for bomb dropping.

I don't believe that the crash is actually on the video. The tape that I'm aware of has them doing the wingovers by the cliff on a different day prior (I don't know how long before...) to the flight on which they crashed and were killed.

Beware of what you sign up for with the USMC. A friend of mine in college signed one of these "guaranteed pilot" contracts with the Marines. While he was off at a summer program called "Bulldog" (which I assume is a field training type of thing) he broke his ankle...and as a result lost his pilot slot. Apparently in the fine print of the contract there was something saying that if you are injured they don't have to make you a pilot. So...he was headed to be a rifleman instead of a jet jock!

The Eagle Rage trailer actually pre-dates the "American Fighter Pilot" series by a year or so, back when they wanted it to be a full-on 2-hour movie. Of course, CBS picked up the project and they intended to make it into "reality TV"...and you know the rest of the story. The producers of the series all ready have DVDs in the works, and have been saying for a year now that they would be hitting retail. Supposedly it is the entire series. The latest I heard was that it would be available on DVD by Christmas.

I've seen the mockup for this aircraft (in the pits at the Reno Air Races this year) and spoken at length with one of their sales guys. The designer, and the president of ATG, is a former T-38 UPT instructor, so there at least seems to be some sort of rational basis of experience at ATG. Personally, I wasn't impressed with what I saw, and I don't see that it offers anything that the T-38C does not outside of some engine commonality with commercial bizjets. There are, of course, advanced aerodynamics and construction methods, but I don't really see how that can enhance student training. It seems like a smaller T-38 to me, and that's about it. I would be interested to see how the airplane actually flies before I comment on how it would be able to fill the IFF/LIFT role. Based on how the sales guy was talking, he didn't seem to have much experience with teaching fighter pilot basics and couldn't answer many of my questions regarding the airplane's advanced handling qualities. He also didn't seem to have any concept of what was important in teaching budding fighter pilots, going on at length about the airplane's amazing digital scoring system for bomb dropping and weapon shots (it essentially seemed the same capability all ready fielded in the T-38C).

WSOs with landing currency.

Are you Hef?? I've been reading your sh*t over at the edodo for years...great stuff.

I generally use the "2-ranks rule" with respect to callsign use. Someone who is two ranks higher than me, I will address by their rank or "Sir".

Yep, fully true story that happened circa 97 or 98. I asked the Commandant (Col. Sergeant?) who said "no" and later an IP who gave me the story that the scarves were only for IPs. I thought fighter pilots were a bunch of pr*cks then, anyway, so it didn't surprise me. Now, being on the other side, if someone asked me for a scarf, I'd give it to them just to make it go away! [ 17. October 2004, 09:48: Message edited by: Hacker ]

The black-and-yellow checkerboard scarves used to be the excluive territory of the USAF Weapons School. When I was a maintenance officer out at Nellis (and before I thought scarves were kind of retarded!), I tried to get one but they wouldn't part with one...saying that they were only for WIC IPs! That being said, most of the scarves I've seen are made by a place called Rama World (https://www.ramaworld.com/) out in California. I'm sure you might be able to get something from them. Toro, I think the 37th scarves used to be blue-and-yellow.

Nope. Bill Boeing started the company in Seattle in the 'teens, first producing the Boeing B+W floatplane in 1916. Far from ever being a conglomerate until post-WWII when they diversified into helicopters, space and missiles, boats, and all kinds of stuff that got them in trouble.

I am pretty sure that there is a Life Support tech order that restricts the painting of the HGU itself. I don't know what it specifically is off hand, but I can go look it up if you're really that interested. It was never an issue when I was an LSO, so I have never looked it up that I can remember. That being said, I've seen numerous "special" squadrons that painted helmets, most significantly the F-117 squadrons used to have black-painted helmets with special aftermarket black leather (purchased by their Life Support accounts!). There was also a Group Commander at SJAFB when I was there who flew F-15Es with a red-painted HGU...I know *I* certainly didn't have the balls to tell him he couldn't wear it anymore, especially since I believe it was a gift from the life support folks at his previous base when he left there. My understanding on the painting issue (as explained to me by my life support NCO) is this: Some types of paints can damage/degrade the fibreglass shell of the helmet and the USAF didn't want to have to regulate what kinds of paints were being used by billy-joe-bob on his helmet. This one always sounded a little fishy to me, since Gentex has no problem painting the base HGU in almost any color, but I'm sure there are some solvents and types of paint that could potentially damage the shell. Also (and more importantly, depending on who you ask) since the helmets are the responsibility of the life support techs in your squadron, a painted helmet becomes a liability for them. How pissed would you be if a 2-striper put a big-assed scrape through your airbrushed helmet while they were changing out your bayonet holders or your leather edge roll. They don't need that kind of baggage while working on government equipment. Would they be responsible for touching up the paint? What if they didn't fix it to your satisfaction? Would you fly into combat with your fancy-painted helmet, or would you ask for a "sterile" one when the balloon went up? See where this is going...it was just FAR easier to say "no" and not have to deal with painted helmets all together, since there is really no benefit to it. As far as the Navy goes, that's a whole different ball of wax. They actually require a certain percentage of their helmet to be covered with reflective tape, and thus the white base color of many Navy helmets is actually white reflective tape. Since they don't abide by AFIs, they can do what they want, I guess. The Navy HGU helmets that I've seen that appear to be "painted" are actually colored tape or latex graphic stickers applied over the reflective tape. I don't know how they deal with damage to those graphics through use...perhaps they just suck-it-up fatty if their enlisted tech alters it when they do their work. I've tried lots of different times to put something on my helmet, getting rebuked every time -- one time I wanted to put a little UW Husky sticker back by the nape of my neck on the shell, and it was removed the next day by the LSO.

Most visor covers are embroidered with callsign and sone kind of squadron emblem...at least that's my experience in the last three squadrons I've been in.

My understanding is that everyone is getting waivers. I have a couple students who are headed to Tyndall for FTU and, even though they will conduct the majority of their flying over water, they have had water survival waived.

What types of things does your AAS pledge program do to prep a cadet for FT?

That's where you insert the Data Transfer Cartridge. It is a standard PCMCIA card.

F-15Es lasts 7 months, and you get circa 69 hours.

You sure about that? I've got a student at Moody currently who fits that same bill; Major, ex-Marine, Super Cobra pilot, hired by A-10 ANG unit. He just started IFF. Seems pretty coincidental that there'd be two of the same floating around right now....

This possibility was discussed a couple years ago at flightinfo.com, and I surprised to hear the answer from somebody who actually knew. As far as AFPC is concerned, they will only assign pilots who flew T-38s *in UPT* to fighter units. I believe that is policy, and not regulation, that sets up that "rule". The other piece of the puzzle is the physical existence of a fighter crossflow board to allow re-tracking from a non-fighter MWS to a fighter. The last fighter crossflow board was held in '98/99 time frame, after which the previous CSAF declared "there will be no more fighter crossflow boards." So there will have to be more than one policy change to make the heavy/U-2/T-38/fighter career path a reality.

Very few bases have flying clubs anymore, unfortunately.

Someone in my squadron saw her very recently...still flying for ASA and apparently sporting a new last name.