T-6 vs. T-37 (which program is better)

[CCDiscoB]

Jet vs. Prop

I never liked the prop idea. A little too "basic training" for me. Reminds me of getting my PPL. The Navy forced the AF to buy the T-6. We never wanted it. It's too much like the T-34.

Soon we will have pilots who will have never flown the T-37 or the T-38. Can you imagine how many pilots those planes have trained. There isn't an AF pilot on active duty who hasn't flown the T-37 or T-38. You'll look back and be able to say, "I flew both of those legends."

Another random thought, you'll be assigned to (gulp) Moody AFB. I'd much rather be at .....um.....or how about.....never mind.

 

[CAL to T-1A]

Having flown turboprops to include the T-6 and jets, the T-6 flies more like a jet than a prop. The Trim Aid Device (computer controlled rudder trim) takes away most of the effects of the prop to include gyroscopic effects during aerobatics. In addition a computer slows the acceleration of the engine and the advancement of the prop angle to accelrate more like a spooling up jet than a near instantaneous thrust.

We never wanted it is probably correct. However, what we got is a great leap ahead of a T-37 and an even greater leap from a T-34.

 

[Opie-wan]

After being a tweet FAIP and being in the T-6 program at RND since day one, I recommend the T-6. You'll better prepared for T-38s or T-1s, as well as your first assignment, after flying the T-6. You are able to do much more in a 1.4 sortie, and in comfort. The new air conditioning system on the T-6 (one of the fixed problems) works well, even during a pattern-only sortie in 100 degree weather.

 

[Spur]

I say go Tweet! You will find a proven program, proven techniques, and a great, albeit old, airplane. In 20 years you'll look back at UPT and say "when I was learning to fly, we didnt have no stinkin'...."

The tweet is built like a sherman tank. You can bump them into each other, the ground, runway remaining markers, a fence, whatever, and the **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** thing just keeps on going. Gear down? Thats optional. Try landing a T-6 gear up, then jacking it up, dropping the gear, cranking the motors and taking off...

Okay so the A/C and thrust suck, but 1 engine out it'll beat the T-6 any day, and you will be able to breathe O2 while you perform your EP! If you're worried about ejecting, don't. You probably wont be in the envelope anyway, but personally I use a minimum of 425 knots and 25000 ft for ejection. Who needs to eject anyway when you fly over a 100nm by 300 nm soft field landing strip know as Oklahoma. Just don't go to Columbus.

Anyway, gotta make a beer run, but think of this... You can always come back and fly the T-6 as an IP later in life. This is probably your last chance at the legendary Tweet.

 

[CCDiscoB]

Owning a Tweet

I would love to own a Tweet. I imagine the AF will sell them cheap soon. What would I do with it, I would put new engines and avionics in it. It would have a perfect weekend plane to pull Gs and fly into small, out of the way airfields.

Unfortunately even owning a Tweet would be too expensive for the average professional pilot. Not what we get paid these days. But that's a different topic, isn't it.

That could be an excellent business for someone. Buy the T-37s, modify them as I described, then sell them.

 

[T1bubba]

Now THATS funny...

It's not an exaggeration either. One of my friends got to explore the off-road handling characteristics of the tweet- after all, who wants to wait for a taxiway on rollout, right? The jet was fixed that night and flew the next day.

T1bubba

 

[Abe_Froman]

I know this is off topic, but...

T1bubba,

How is it that you've flown the T-34, T-1, T-44, and E-6?

Are you a navy ip that instructed in the tone? But if that's true, then how can you get an E-6 out of the -44?

Just curious,
Thanks.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

my guess:

He selected E-6's out of T-44's when it was still an option in 1995, then got shore duty as a T-1 IP. How'd I do, Bubba?

 

[T1bubba]

Abe,

Nice handle.

Hugh, you're right on except for the year.

Joint pilot training didn't start until 1994. Before that all E-6 drivers were trained in the T-44. I missed the chance to be the first Navy T-1 student and guarantee myself an E-6 by a week (I had just started T-44 ground school when they asked for volunteers). I ended up flying E-6's anyway, then T-1's on my second tour.

All the joint stuff is fun, I've definitely gained a new appreciation for some of the stuff the AF does. Guess that's one of the reasons I'm joining the ANG.

Now back to your regularly scheduled topic...

T1bubba
soon to be C-130J driver

 

[Mud Eagle]

Re: Owning a Tweet

I would love to own a Tweet. I imagine the AF will sell them cheap soon. What would I do with it, I would put new engines and avionics in it. It would have a perfect weekend plane to pull Gs and fly into small, out of the way airfields.

Unfortunately even owning a Tweet would be too expensive for the average professional pilot. Not what we get paid these days. But that's a different topic, isn't it.

That could be an excellent business for someone. Buy the T-37s, modify them as I described, then sell them.

That would be cool -- the J85 engine out of the T-38 (less the burner section) nearly bolts right into the Tweet without modification. It makes it a much better flying airplane and reduces operating costs significantly over the "$85,000-dollar fuel control" J69 that's in there now.

Plus, the entire avionics package would need to be sh*t-canned -- probably more expensive than buying the airplane itself!

A wicked idea, but.....

A few friends I know in the warbird businees are telling me that current DoD regs do not allow outright sale of anything -- Tweets included -- to civilians.

Apprently all of the Tweets and T-38s that are currently operating on the civil registry came from out-of-country sales or are rebuilds from wrecks sold off for scrap.