T-38 incident?

[Fury220]

It's not so much the large, easy to see, single-ship bird that I worry about.


More like the flock of hundred, small, I-won't-see-them-until-a-millisecond-before-impact, dual-engine-FODing kind that's on my mind.

It helps that I'm typically in the rear (sts) with Stanley Birdscreen in the FCP.

 

[SIG600]

That T-38 vs. Cessna story is amazing. I can't believe the thing was still controllable with the huge firewall/speed brake AND the aft CG shift.

 

[Fury220]

That T-38 vs. Cessna story is amazing. I can't believe the thing was still controllable with the huge firewall/speed brake AND the aft CG shift.

From the hearsay I've heard about the story (and you know how reliable that is...), the Cessna was practically uncontrollable. Due to the CG and airflow changes, it entered a series of stalls and recoveries on its way down, and the IP on board made the most of it.

(Stall...recover...stall...recover...crap pants...stall...recover...stall...recover...land.......change pants before the NTSB arrives.)

 

[Huggyu2]

More hearsay:
Apparently, he went down (sts) like a falling leaf, with no real control. Also, "it is said" that the battery (or something else heavy) remained attached forward of the firewall, and had it not remained, the aircraft's CG would have been so far aft that they would have not made it.

 

[LAFrequentflyer]

He used 8 of his 9 lives that day...

One lucky SOB...glad he and the AF guys made out without loss of life.

-LA

 

[mule]

Why all of the "sts" comments? You aren't robots, you can refrain from using your fighter "cranium," "sts," etc. crap on a message board can't you?

Speaking of the "cranium" crap...what are some of the other stuff the fighter boys/girls (you do have a female T-bird wannabe now...so might as well include them) use...or don't use? We could start a whole thread that would go on and on....

Bring on the flames...sts...

 

[Fury220]

Why all of the "sts" comments? You aren't robots, you can refrain from using your fighter "cranium," "sts," etc. crap on a message board can't you?

Sure we could. If we wanted to take the fun out of it.

We could start a whole thread that would go on and on....

Go for it. Start one. This thread is about T-38 mishaps.

 

[SIG600]

This thread is about T-38 mishaps.

That said, the Navy seems to lose 2-3 T-45's per year with only 2 jet training bases. I'm surprised the AF seems to go much longer between mishaps with as many T-38 (training) bases as you guys have.

 

[Fury220]

That said, the Navy seems to lose 2-3 T-45's per year with only 2 jet training bases. I'm surprised the AF seems to go much longer between mishaps with as many T-38 (training) bases as you guys have.

I didn't mean to exclude you guys. I just wanted to prevent a sts pissing contest or something...


Maybe it's due to the single engine nature of the T-45? It's also a newer aircraft. We lost tons of T-38s in its earlier years, but it's since calmed down as we've learned it's Mx quirks and bad tendencies of its pilots. I assume it would be the same way with the Goshawk.

 

[SIG600]

Ya that could be it, the incidents I know of were a majority birds getting sucked into THE engine, and ground handleing issues of the jet leading to runway departures/ejections.

 

[FastCargo]

I remember that one. The IP was a former student of mine. I guess I didn't teach him how to clear! Good guy. The cessna landed on 1604 minus one engine. Everyone in both acft unscathed.

That happened just before I arrived at LAFB. The student on that T-38 flight ended up coming back to LAFB as a T-38 instructor some years later. It was a couple of years I was working with him before I found out he was that guy! Good flyer...guess ejecting didn't faze him too much!

FastCargo

 

[FastCargo]

There's HUD (C model) video of a near miss with a light aircraft during a PIT low level. The IP is at CBM now. It had maybe two frames showing the encounter danger close.

Yea, talked to those guys the day after that incident happened...can you say 'Holy *&($!!!!' The only reason you can't see if the pilot of the civilian plane was wearing glasses was because of the grain of the HUD video. I am NOT kidding...it was that close.

FastCargo

 

[FastCargo]

It's also a newer aircraft. We lost tons of T-38s in its earlier years, but it's since calmed down as we've learned it's Mx quirks and bad tendencies of its pilots. I assume it would be the same way with the Goshawk.

That's always been the way of aircraft (or of almost any machine). There are ALWAYS teething problems when new aircraft come out. Designers and engineers have never anticipated all the potential problems an aircraft can have when it finally 'hits the line'. There once was an old saying..."Never fly the 'A' model of anything." It still applies to an extent...

FastCargo

 

[Huggyu2]

Gee, Mule,... I hope you manage to cheer up and have a Merry Christmas. I didn't think the "sts" would bring you down (sts) so much.

 

[Fury220]

Yea, talked to those guys the day after that incident happened...can you say 'Holy *&($!!!!' The only reason you can't see if the pilot of the civilian plane was wearing glasses was because of the grain of the HUD video. I am NOT kidding...it was that close.

FastCargo

Interesting about that video...

If you have the audio up, you can hear a long, noisy transmission over 255.4 JUST before the near-miss. I've noticed that as a trend...there's almost always a distracting factor that diverts aircrew attention when the sh!t hits the fan.


"Dude...let's just go home..." haha. These guys had a little more self-control than I would have with their colorful use of the English language.