Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

Bingo. You want some things to be tacticle and always available at a moments notice, not buried in a screen. Reference professional SLR cameras. Still have a bunch of buttons because it’s good human factors. 

In the C-130 (classic and J models) tactile switch difference is clutch in several time sensitive situations (airdrop, NVG airland, etc).  Several switches require touch only for identification, and that streamlines human factors. Touch screens are neat a ground speed zero, but they reduce capability in a tactical and time sensitive environment because they require visual verification (a.k.a. diverted attention).  Compound that with turbulence, smoke/fumes, and task saturation, and those screens will be a liability.  Thank engineers, but i'll keep my switches.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Posted
On 2/8/2018 at 1:06 PM, Prozac said:

My airline recently started installing touch screens in place of physical CDUs. 

Saw a picture of one of these the other day.  Looked essentially identical to our FMS recreated entirely on a touchscreen.  My first thought was, I would waste a lot of time punching the wrong buttons.  I suspect changing your active waypoint, altitudes, airspeeds, etc in the box on climbout on a nice bumpy day would be a PITA.

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted
34 minutes ago, xcraftllc said:

Anyone have any new gouge on the decision timeline?

same timeline Light Attack has been on

amazing we went to the moon 8 years after kennedy made it the goal.

these days we can't get shit done: Light attack, T-38 replacement, new tanker. too much red tape, leaders with no sack. SAD!

  • Upvote 1
Posted
2 hours ago, xcraftllc said:

Anyone have any new gouge on the decision timeline?

No gouge but wiki says 2023 and the ref for that was from 2013 (AF Times).  Sounds about right for today's FUBAR acquisition process.

Posted
11 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

...if even only 75% true of their advertised capability

With that many retired GO's involved, the 10% rule is definitely in play.

  • Upvote 2
Posted

For those of you currently at an AETC pilot training base, how many hours are on those AETC T-38C's?

Posted
For those of you currently at an AETC pilot training base, how many hours are on those AETC T-38C's?
22k is the average I'm seeing.

Anything less than 20k still has that new plane smell.
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Posted
19 minutes ago, ThreeHoler said:

 


You can get a DFC for teaching UPT if the situation is right. Just ask Johnny Weida.
 

 

Tell the story...

  • Like 2
  • 5 months later...
Posted
9 minutes ago, icohftb said:

With all these t38 crashes any updates on the t-x decision timeline?

None related to the crashes. That's making fvck all difference in the timeline.

Yeah we saw the AFOTEC slides. Selection decision this year (they're already late), prob turn of the fiscal. As to IOC? LOL. Dude, 2023 at the earliest.This entire thing can shift right with a single call for arbitration. Boeing ) being the usual whiny bitch, is one of the participants so that probably means this thing will get stonewalled to the right.

BL, the cavalry ain't coming bud. The T-X canard at this point is like posterity...the fvck has it done for me lately?

 

 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, icohftb said:

With all these t38 crashes any updates on the t-x decision timeline?

While the T-38 is older than you want, don't try to make this an issue.  

AETC pushed the C-model.  Lots of "new shit" on the jet.  The got what they asked for.  The millions of $$$ spent on the PMP and the MB seat (how many millions???) would have been useful elsewhere.  

A-models with 21,000 hours are doing pretty well from a safety viewpoint.  

Yes, the fleet needs to be replaced.  No argument there.  

No:  Paul's jet having dual airframe-mounted gearbox failures is more a function of shitty maintenance than anything else.  As a retiree, I'm not "in the know" as much as I'd like to be on his death.  Yet.  But I'd gladly jump in ANY Beale T-38 and go fly it.  Because Beale has some quality guys working those jets.  

And I'll continue to fly the civilian T-38 without any qualms.  It's well maintained, and the seat is solid, in the unlikely event I need it.  

T-38 crashes should have no bearing on T-X timeline.  It should be based on the fact we need an upgraded trainer for our future F-22 and F-35 pilots. 

Edited by HuggyU2
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Posted

Is the idea that the T-X will become a single trainer to replace both the T-38 and T-1?  If so, that would take at least a month off the timeline already dedicated to phase III academics and help accelerate graduation.  Just in time for class 25-01 I guess....

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...