Bose A20 or the LIghtspeed.
I've got an old pair of Bose X, and they are great. When they die, I'm getting the A20 since it is TSO'd for airline use, noise cancelling, and extremely comfortable. It is a step up from my Bose X (which is very good).
If the Lightspeed price is significantly better, and you can live with a non-TSO headset, that might be a very good option. I've borrowed them a couple of times and they work well.
We had a Kuwaiti student who washed back so many times, he went back through the same T-38 flight. We had actual grade books back then, and he had Volume I and Volume II. The embassy kept paying, so we kept flying him.
He apparently ended up being some kind of Kuwaiti war hero for his efforts in the A-4 when the Iraqis invaded and ran the Kuwaiti Air Force out.
Assuming it is not an SIE, does this apply to just about everyone that washes out? Or is this a case-by-case thing, with only a small minority getting to try again?
BTW, what's the UPT Next washout rate?
Don't feel bad at all.
I spent 4 years at DLF with no airline service.
Back then, we drove these things called "cars" to where we wanted to go. Everyone crying about no airline service needs to give it a try. Get a fast "car" and go. With your buds.
You can be at SAT airport in about 2 hours. No different than flying out of DLF. And a lot more convenient.
BTW... front gate of DLF to front gate of Randolph in 2+12. On a Friday. Going through the city at rush hour. (According to a friend... not that I approve of such behavior from 22 year old student pilots.) That was when the Auger Inn was "a thing".
Oh... and when you see a Border Patrol airplane at 50' AGL flying east-bound, down the shoulder of Hwy 90, and they pass you... and then YOU decide to pass THEM... it's pretty fun.
I had a blast in DLF. There's no reason you can't. Even if you're from "up north" and used to having 1,000,000 people in a square mile of city. Give it the college try.
The U-2 is not an option for at least 4 years. But keep it in your long-term cross-check.
As for Squirt's post, the first 4 sentences have value... ignore the rest. He will grow up some day.
They have been combined before, for all the reasons you state and more. With the cyclical nature of things, maybe it will happen again.
I don’t believe it changed relationships for the better when MX was in the flying squadron.
When the idea was discussed about doing this interview, I wasn't sure I would do it. However, Hacker spoke very highly of Steve and assured me it would be great. He was right. Working with Steve was a pleasure and he's a class act. I'll admit he got me talking about some stuff I hadn't thought about in a long time.
We did the interviews some time ago, but I believe Steve plans to add on to the interview with some additional talks that we are doing now.
bfargin, you were very close. UPT Class 86-05, started 4 June 1985.
Thank you for creating a well done final product, Steve. (And especially for your editing work!! You know what I mean!! Haha!!)
It's been a big eye-opener to see the lack of proficiency (mainly due to having never trained to it) of many commercial pilots when it comes to unusual attitudes.
I can't tell you how many times pilots have told me "I didn't apply to the U-2 because I didn't fly the T-38 in UPT".
Note: flying the T-38 in UPT is not a pre-req for the U-2. Off the top of my head, I'd say at least half of the U-2 community went T-1's. Read the application requirements.
Thanks for posting that. I found that article in 2011 when I was over there. I couldn't recall the title and hadn't been able to find it since.
Well worth the read.
What do you know or suspect that is driving this statement? Just an overall observation on UPT training?
Do you also mean to include FTU syllabus training?