Ram Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Never done a Class A but...a lot. And if they need something, that base will open right back up from Xmass. Granted no fatals so president will be an O6 instead of one star, but they generally don't play. Unlike Bs and Cs, the 30 day time limit is generally adhered to. This could easily turn into Pperation Cancel Christmas for Columbus permanant party. Sounds like a great way to make friends at Columbus: 1. Don't see traffic in the VFR pattern 2. Cancel Christmas for everyone 3. ????????? 4. PROFIT! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BoneDriver Posted December 8, 2007 Share Posted December 8, 2007 From a guy who has been an IP in both the mighty Tweet and T-6 (combined time in AETC = over 3.5 years), I can say that the T-6 was a overall a better trainer than the T-37. The only two things I ever thought were easier in a Tweet was pointing out visual references on the ground while flying (in the pattern and area references) and flying fingertip. In terms of visual references you could point things out a lot easier, though with some practice, a T-6 IP could use the vertical metal tab on the end of the wingtip (attached to the strobe) as a pointer. In terms of fingertip, Tweet references were flap hinge on the helmet where the flap hinge was 1/2 down the wing. In the T-6 you used the pitot tube and exhaust stack with the pitot tube being at the end of the wing. This caused every little bank by lead to seem like 2 was WAY out of position. Also, the "superpowered" prop driven T-6 through it single PCL (which you couldn't walk like two throttles) gave some yaw with every movement you made, (not probably noticeable to the student, but it was there). The tandem seating everyone maligns wasn't even that big of a deal as the number of sims the students are given prior to hitting the flightline and the training the IPs get from PIT, do a good job prepping both side for the adventure known as Phase II. Other than those two things discussed above, the T-6 was hands down a better trainer (glass cockpit, GPS, AC that worked - almost too good at altitude, interphone that worked, and a luggage compartment to boot!) considering what our future pilots will contend with. Furthermore, you were bound to have some sort of gear problem at some point in time. What better EP training is there than that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riebs Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 Do they get kicked out of UPT for the crash? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flare Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 Do they get kicked out of UPT for the crash? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy782 Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123090840 The report has been released. I'm still glad everyone got out OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tmickel Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123090840 The report has been released. I'm still glad everyone got out OK. Well, you can tell a flyer didn't write that article... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MT near Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 That article is inaccurate as hell!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herkbum Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 One of the IPs mentioned was my Assistant Flight Commander 6 years ago. Didn't realize he was still in the squadron. Glad to hear everyone was OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toro Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 That article is inaccurate as hell!! Becauuuuuuusee....???? Well, you can tell a flyer didn't write that article... Again....becauuuuuuusee....???? Aside from calling it a "landing traffic entry pattern", it seemed pretty straight forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amcflyboy Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 Yup glad to hear that they all got out ok as well. The IP in the first aircraft gave me my Formation 88 ride. He was cool as hell! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herkbum Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 Yup glad to hear that they all got out ok as well. The IP in the first aircraft gave me my Formation 88 ride. He was cool as hell! That's the one and I agree, great guy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HercDude Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 Becauuuuuuusee....???? Again....becauuuuuuusee....???? Aside from calling it a "landing traffic entry pattern", it seemed pretty straight forward. The mishap board results are FOUO so be careful before anyone starts talking details. The writeup linked here makes it sound like they had the midair in the pattern. Using "VFR entry" instead of "landing traffic entry pattern" would have made it a lot clearer. And anyone who has flown VFR entry at Gunshy (or any UPT base aux field I would assume) probably has an idea of how this could have happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hacker Posted March 21, 2008 Share Posted March 21, 2008 Using "VFR entry" instead of "landing traffic entry pattern" would have made it a lot clearer. And anyone who has flown VFR entry at Gunshy (or any UPT base aux field I would assume) probably has an idea of how this could have happened. Interestingly, NOT everyone who reads these reports is a pilot and has any f*cking clue what "VFR entry" might be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now