2x Laughlin T-38s down

[ClearedHot]

2 minutes ago, M2 said:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43357/t-38-jets-in-recent-fatal-crash-were-executing-a-formation-approach-report

"Two T-38 Talon jet trainers that were involved in a fatal accident last month at Laughlin Air Force Base in Texas were performing a formation approach at the time, according to a report from the San Antonio Express-News newspaper. The Air Force has also now confirmed to The War Zone that Colonel Nathan Thompson, the second in command of the 47th Flying Training Wing, the main unit at Laughlin, was in one of the jets at the time. T-38 pilots assigned to Air Education and Training Command units, such as the 47th, have been banned from conducting formation landings, a similar maneuver, in virtually all situations in the wake of a different deadly mishap two years ago."

Ouch!

[Steve Davies]

For the uninitiated, can someone explain why a formation approach is any more/less risky than formation aerobatics or formation flying in wx? I get that proximity to the ground is a big consideration, but is there anything else that is inherently different about it?

[SurelySerious]

For the uninitiated, can someone explain why a formation approach is any more/less risky than formation aerobatics or formation flying in wx? I get that proximity to the ground is a big consideration, but is there anything else that is inherently different about it?

Getting into the landing configuration is typically a bit of a disturbance for the students as the aerodynamics change and they get back to position and then, the airplane does behave more mushy once configured for landing. Throw in a big power change for something like a go-around, and sometimes there are deviations.

What makes it potentially more dangerous in the T-38 is that in addition to the ground proximity you mentioned the rudder gives you full authority in landing configuration, and that can go south very quickly.

One or two considerations.

[WheelsOff]

2 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

Getting into the landing configuration is typically a bit of a disturbance for the students as the aerodynamics change and they get back to position and then, the airplane does behave more mushy once configured for landing.

And I’ll add for clarity - that this is caused by the flap-slab interconnect, when rolling the flaps upon configuration for landing. The jet becomes a lot more pitch-sensitivite, and most students have difficulty, at least initially, with the added pitch sensitivity while trying to stay in position.

Shack on the rest. 

[ClearedHot]

16 hours ago, Steve Davies said:

For the uninitiated, can someone explain why a formation approach is any more/less risky than formation aerobatics or formation flying in wx? I get that proximity to the ground is a big consideration, but is there anything else that is inherently different about it?

Steve - others have covered it well, but a bit more color.  100 years ago when I flew T-38's we would do a rudder effectiveness demonstration in the landing configuration.  At altitude we would slow and configure the jet.  As you got closer to touch down speed the IP would have the student move the stick form side to side, the jet was absolute mush and would barely roll.  Next the IP would have the student rapidly apply full rudder, often you would find yourself hanging upside down in the straps.  The change in pitch sensitivity Wheels mentioned along with the change in rudder effectiveness make for a different jet, especially when flying in close proximity to another aircraft and near the ground.

[tac airlifter]

As someone who has never flown a T-38 please educate me: what is the DLO of form takeoff & landing?  

[VMFA187]

1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:

As someone who has never flown a T-38 please educate me: what is the DLO of form takeoff & landing?  

We did it in the Hornet in the RAG/FTU and fleet to show that you could bring back another aircraft through bad weather that didn't have the ability to ability to navigate or fly safely on its own due to aircraft malfunctions like a failed INS/GPS or lack of airspeed indications due to failed sensors. 

I had to bring back a Hornet for a section landing once due to the latter.

[ClearedHot]

1 hour ago, VMFA187 said:

We did it in the Hornet in the RAG/FTU and fleet to show that you could bring back another aircraft through bad weather that didn't have the ability to ability to navigate or fly safely on its own due to aircraft malfunctions like a failed INS/GPS or lack of airspeed indications due to failed sensors. 

I had to bring back a Hornet for a section landing once due to the latter.

[TreeA10]

11 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

As someone who has never flown a T-38 please educate me: what is the DLO of form takeoff & landing?  

Had a major electrical failure in a T-38 with low ceilings and flew a formation approach to find the runway. 

[DEVIL]

42 minutes ago, TreeA10 said:

Had a major electrical failure in a T-38 with low ceilings and flew a formation approach to find the runway. 

2.

It is really nice having a big ol second motor and APU though. 

[TreeA10]

On 12/5/2021 at 2:03 PM, Steve Davies said:

For the uninitiated, can someone explain why a formation approach is any more/less risky than formation aerobatics or formation flying in wx? I get that proximity to the ground is a big consideration, but is there anything else that is inherently different about it?

I'll also throw this into the hopper, if the flight lead is a weak instrument pilot, odds are that power changes, configuration changes, and control inputs to fly the approach will be large and late creating a much larger and later correction by the wingman. The decreased response effectiveness of the throttle(s) and flight controls are made worse at slower speeds like an approach. You work your butt off flying on the wing of a weak instrument flight lead. 

[VMFA187]

2 hours ago, TreeA10 said:

I'll also throw this into the hopper, if the flight lead is a weak instrument pilot, odds are that power changes, configuration changes, and control inputs to fly the approach will be large and late creating a much larger and later correction by the wingman. The decreased response effectiveness of the throttle(s) and flight controls are made worse at slower speeds like an approach. You work your butt off flying on the wing of a weak instrument flight lead. 

I hope your lead brought you in for a straight in to ILS or PAR... If it warrants a legit section penetration to section landing it warrants an emergency declaration.

If he's leading a hurt bird on a Hi-TCN triple arcing procedure then he's AFU. Tell your flight leads to suck less. 

[WheelsOff]

On 12/6/2021 at 8:00 AM, ClearedHot said:

Steve - others have covered it well, but a bit more color.  100 years ago when I flew T-38's we would do a rudder effectiveness demonstration in the landing configuration.  At altitude we would slow and configure the jet.  As you got closer to touch down speed the IP would have the student move the stick form side to side, the jet was absolute mush and would barely roll.  Next the IP would have the student rapidly apply full rudder, often you would find yourself hanging upside down in the straps.  The change in pitch sensitivity Wheels mentioned along with the change in rudder effectiveness make for a different jet, especially when flying in close proximity to another aircraft and near the ground.

Still being done 100 years later early in the Transition phase! I called it the “rudder appreciation demo”

[ToHoldShort]

SIB is out if you have someone with safety access