Techsan Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Here's what the glass will look like: We go to some amazing places..sure we aren't tactical minus our run into Bagram every now and then, but we still hit some pretty awesome locations. I know its not G-14 Classified, but nice OPSEC bro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Last Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Here's what the glass will look like: I know its not G-14 Classified, but nice OPSEC bro. Sh!t I'd kill for a decent flight director and FMS as opposed to our POS SCNS that we currently and will probably have for years to come... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarheadBoom Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 And now we really know what happened to the C-130 AMP program... un-f'n-believable There's only 59 KC-10s. How many hundreds of C-130s would be getting AMPd? One KC-10 was actually modded and flown with glass in the early 2000s. The program $$$$ got canxd, the aircraft was de-configured back to the original steam gauges, and (according to a few crewchiefs I've talked to) has been a COM/NAV, GAC, Electrics nightmare ever since. Techsan: Nice pics. Did they make T-255 a KDC-10 yet, or is it still a DC-10? Pics of it from Jan. '09 show no boom installed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PirateAF Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 You want a peek inside the life of a KC-10 pilot? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q_WDX2Ilhc (disclaimed: I'm sure this has been posted on baseops before) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CharlieDontSurf Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Sh!t I'd kill for a decent flight director and FMS as opposed to our POS SCNS that we currently and will probably have for years to come... 2 or they could have given us H3's instead of letting the guard bums keep 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Techsan Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 One KC-10 was actually modded and flown with glass in the early 2000s. The program $$$$ got canxd, the aircraft was de-configured back to the original steam gauges, and (according to a few crewchiefs I've talked to) has been a COM/NAV, GAC, Electrics nightmare ever since. Ahh, yes, tail 1950. Her and I go way back. She tried her best to do us in one night over Asscrackistan. Ended up a class B. We're cool now though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Hungus Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 AMC/CC said at Q&A yesterday that they're moving forward with KC-10 cockpit upgrades and should start them next spring. Right. Said they have to since the -10 will be around til 2040. Right. Said don't expect any decrease in deployment/ TDY rates because they'd just have to fill the spots with -135s. SQ/CCs seem to be pushing for whole squadron deployments, we'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JS Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 You want a peek inside the life of a KC-10 pilot? http://www.youtube.c...h?v=1q_WDX2Ilhc (disclaimed: I'm sure this has been posted on baseops before) Probably the 10th time I watched that, and I still clicked on it and watched it in its entirety. Totally hilarious - plus it took a lot of talent. My favorite part is the end when they call out all of the green-suiters back home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy.The.Engineer Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 2 or they could have given us H3's instead of letting the guard bums keep 'em. Now you know that's right. The H3 was the mature version of a proven concept. I see your H3 and raise you: H3 with 8 blades. Yeah, a little pee came out, when I wrote that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sweatie311 Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 Now you know that's right. The H3 was the mature version of a proven concept. I see your H3 and raise you: H3 with 8 blades. Yeah, a little pee came out, when I wrote that. You and 8 bladed props...all I can say is the back of the plane is the same, but it gets cold now! Very COLD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapilot Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 (edited) The 135 gets a 707 type. At what point does that happen at? After you finish Altus right out of UPT, or after you become an AC. To get this type on your ticket what do you have to do? Is it a simple visit to the local FSDO or is more involved? Is it the same for the BE400 and MU300 for the T1 guys? Edited September 10, 2009 by kapilot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammer Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 (edited) After you get a form 8 from Altus you just bring a copy to the FSDO. Same thing you do for the 400 add on. Edited September 11, 2009 by snizz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bergman Posted September 13, 2009 Share Posted September 13, 2009 After you get a form 8 from Altus you just bring a copy to the FSDO. Same thing you do for the 400 add on. I would call ahead to the FSDO. From the stories I have heard, different locations wanted additional paperwork. Beyond the type rating, all you need is 1000 hours as an AC, a walk-in to FedEx, and you're good-to-go... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammer Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 (edited) I would call ahead to the FSDO. Absolutely. A few guys tried to show up to the OKC office and were sent away because they had weird hours like only 1 day a week. Make an appointment. Edited September 15, 2009 by snizz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapilot Posted September 15, 2009 Share Posted September 15, 2009 I'm still a ways off from being at this point but I will remember to make an appointment when I get there. Thanks for the input. Heck who knows maybe we'll all get 777 types.... (sarcasm) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Techsan Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Just thought I'd post this pic here. Taken last month out here on the left coast... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nike Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Hey all, I was wondering what you guys thought some pros and cons of being in an Airlift Squadron opposed to an Air Refueling Squadron were. I am looking towards that division of the air force, but I dont exactly know which one to pick IMHO: #1 priority in choosing a heavy airplane: Does it have an engineer? -engineers are great, they warm the plane up (or cool it down) for you before you even arrive, they do the forms, smack around the crew chief, and brow beat the on-ground transient alert people for you did I mention the walk around (or lack thereof?) #2: Does it require air-stairs Ok, if it is heavy - its gonna be tall, so if you have some vertical rope/ladder contraption required for you to egress (or just get out) - it could be a pain, the big thing here to ask: how do you bag drag up a ladder? KC-10's are great, but moving bags up that ladder...sheesh... -choose wisely- JP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BZ Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 (edited) "#1 priority in choosing a heavy airplane: Does it have an engineer? -engineers are great, they warm the plane up (or cool it down) for you before you even arrive, they do the forms, smack around the crew chief, and brow beat the on-ground transient alert people for you did I mention the walk around (or lack thereof?)" Nike, respectfully you couldnt be more wrong. The best thing about the C-17 is the lack of an engineer. As a former C-5 dude, replacing the engineer with a computer was the best change. Edited January 24, 2010 by BZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arg Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 "#1 priority in choosing a heavy airplane: Does it have an engineer? -engineers are great, they warm the plane up (or cool it down) for you before you even arrive, they do the forms, smack around the crew chief, and brow beat the on-ground transient alert people for you did I mention the walk around (or lack thereof?)" Nike, respectfully you couldnt be more wrong. The best thing about the C-17 is the lack of an engineer. As a former C-5 dude, replacing the engineer with a computer was the best change. Daaaanng.. took almost an hour for the eng hate'n to begin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CharlieFoxtrot Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 A different view of some tanker-on-tanker action. NSFW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Techsan Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Nike, respectfully you couldnt be more wrong. The best thing about the C-17 is the lack of an engineer. As a former C-5 dude, replacing the engineer with a computer was the best change. The computer doesn't care if you land gear up, an engineer does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BZ Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 The computer doesn't care if you land gear up, an engineer does. With that logic you shouldn't be able to fly an airplane without an engineer. I know for a fact that a reserve C-5 squadron landed gear up at travis 10-15 years ago on a local. I can go beyond gear and talk about the famous throttle swap at dover that the engineer's didn't catch. I’m just saying I don’t need an engineer to do work that another pilot or computer can do for me.(walk around, told, preflight, alerting me to performance limitations, balancing fuel, warming the jet up) As for the downrange incident, until you fly a night nvg tactical approach to the box please keep you mouth shut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Techsan Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 As for the downrange incident, until you fly a night nvg tactical approach to the box please keep you mouth shut. Give me a fucking break. Everyone else that has flown a night nvg tac approach didn't have problems lowering the gear. A difficult approach does not rationalize the fact that they forgot the most important part of a successful approach/landing...LANDING GEAR--DN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BZ Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Give me a ######ing break. Everyone else that has flown a night nvg tac approach didn't have problems lowering the gear. A difficult approach does not rationalize the fact that they forgot the most important part of a successful approach/landing...LANDING GEAR--DN. Yah obviously you have not. Listen I'm not trying to make excuses for that crew. They ######ed up and that’s a fact. But really bro, are engineers there simply to make sure the gear is down??? If so you need to cut their tech school by about 5 months. In our community we have loadmasters and pilots do the safety checks. That obviously was overlooked because of human error but who are you to say that an engineer would not have missed that call as well with all the checklists they have to run on landing?? Look on the outside, how many engineers are flying the line @ the major carriers??? They've gone the way of the navigator. With the way technology is going they are able to replace the engineer. Hell, MD-11's don’t even have engineers. I personally don’t like engineers because in my opinion I think they ###### up the C-5 reliability rate. Sure the airplane breaks by itself, but it sure is helped out by engineers. I saw it firsthand. If the engineer wanted to stay somewhere, the plane was staying. Yah it was laughed about, but it was true. Now not all engineers would break airplanes but it got so bad that the community sort of expected to break. Rant off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stunna Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Yah obviously you have not. Listen I'm not trying to make excuses for that crew. They ######ed up and that’s a fact. But really bro, are engineers there simply to make sure the gear is down??? If so you need to cut their tech school by about 5 months. In our community we have loadmasters and pilots do the safety checks. That obviously was overlooked because of human error but who are you to say that an engineer would not have missed that call as well with all the checklists they have to run on landing?? Look on the outside, how many engineers are flying the line @ the major carriers??? They've gone the way of the navigator. With the way technology is going they are able to replace the engineer. Hell, MD-11's don’t even have engineers. I personally don’t like engineers because in my opinion I think they ###### up the C-5 reliability rate. Sure the airplane breaks by itself, but it sure is helped out by engineers. I saw it firsthand. If the engineer wanted to stay somewhere, the plane was staying. Yah it was laughed about, but it was true. Now not all engineers would break airplanes but it got so bad that the community sort of expected to break. Rant off Really? What's the matter here man, did one of the female engineers turn you down out on the road once and now you're all bitter? You are why I hate the 17 community in broad sweeping generalizations... Engineers F'ing up the reliability rate sure sounds like an excuse to me. Lame one at that. You must hate crew chiefs too... I can't even remember how many times I have called a checklist item, and the pilot and/or co-pilot rattled off the response, without actually applying the step, at which point I've had to re-call the step. Typical landing setup is usually calling for the flaps, then the gear, then asking for the checklist, and most guys I know (self included) will not even start calling checklist items until we have already visually verified the gear is down. Sure we're all human, and mistakes are always bound to happen, but how is not having an extra pair of eyes really a good thing? I don't get the logic, at all. Whatever, just don't come fly with me, you'd probably get upset at all the min ground time and lack of breaking anyway... 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