Vance for Primary??

[Kickflip89]

Not according to about five or six IPs I was talking to about the T-6. They said the AF didn't want it since none of their turboprop planes have it so they didn't want their studs picking up any bad habits.
Second or third-hand knowledge, take it for what it's worth but it made sense to me.

That sounds like a problem. Anyone know if any studs punch themselves out by dropping a checklist or something?

No, but out-of-standards (chubby?) AF instructor (I think) punched out trying to unpin (or maybe pin...can't really remember the story) the seat (couldn't see the pin). 3 swings before he hit, no injuries.

And yeah, forgot about the no beta...another big gripe.

 

[MasterBates]

No Safe/Arm handle in that thing?

(as a large guy who fights with pins, I am a fan of the S/A handle)

 

[Kickflip89]

No Safe/Arm handle in that thing?

(as a large guy who fights with pins, I am a fan of the S/A handle)

Nope. There is a seat pin, but that (supposedly) just keeps the handle from being pulled. And if BOTH is selected a pinned seat can still eject.

 

[MasterBates]

That is stupid.

In the 45 (and other NACES equipped aircraft) there is S/A handle, and a pin. Both prevent the handle from initiating ejection, although a pinned/unarmed seat can eject if the the other seat initiates ejection for both in BOTH or FWD BOTH/AFT SELF modes.

 

[bunk22]

True, but in my limited experience with the T-45, AoA approaches feel nothing like they did in a T-34, so I think its a wash. The challenge flying the jet is in managing the mushy controls and engine spool-up time that comes with flying a jet at high AoA. In the T-34 the power response was near instantaneous. Whether you fly AoA or Airspeed in the T-34 I dont think really matters because you have to learn a totally different a/c when you get to advanced.


Question: does anyone else fly AoA or is that purely a jet/E-2 thing?

IMO, the T-34 is not exactly what I would call near instaneous, maybe compared to the T-45....I never flew the 45, just the T-2C Buckeye. It was better than the T-2. However, want instaneous response, thats the E2/C2 with props operating at 100% RPM at all times. Get low at the boat, power call...bang, hp/tq is there, now. I would think AoA is for boat aircraft. I only fly them on aero flights at VT-6 and it's not all the way to touch down. the FITU let me do it but I certainly won't let studs do it.

 

[bunk22]

Not according to about five or six IPs I was talking to about the T-6. They said the AF didn't want it since none of their turboprop planes have it so they didn't want their studs picking up any bad habits.
Second or third-hand knowledge, take it for what it's worth but it made sense to me.

I think thats total bullshit...C-130 no beta or reverse thrust? That wouldn't make sense at all.

 

[Herc_Dude]

...since none of their turboprop planes have it so they didn't want their studs picking up any bad habits.

First - all Hercs have reverse (thus Beta).

Second - the T-44 and TC-12 have reverse which AF prop studs fly after the T-6. Both have reverse and use it on just about every landing.

 

[FLY_USMC]

Nope. There is a seat pin, but that (supposedly) just keeps the handle from being pulled. And if BOTH is selected a pinned seat can still eject.

That is stupid.
In the 45 (and other NACES equipped aircraft) there is S/A handle, and a pin. Both prevent the handle from initiating ejection, although a pinned/unarmed seat can eject if the the other seat initiates ejection for both in BOTH or FWD BOTH/AFT SELF modes.

Personally I've always thought both were a little odd. I'm sure there's a VERY logical reason, but knowing that even with my seat safed I could still be ejected in the T-45 always bothered me....alah half way unstrapped and bam.

 

[JSketto]

Hey Guys,

I just wanted to say thanks for everyone who responded...I got some good feedback from you guys....I just started API and made the decision to go to Corpus....again, thanks for all ur help!

-Justin

 

[picklesuit]

Hey Guys,

I just wanted to say thanks for everyone who responded...I got some good feedback from you guys....I just started API and made the decision to go to Corpus....again, thanks for all ur help!

-Justin

This one will go far...

 

[HuggyU2]

The guy that ejected himself while holding short (trying to unpin the seat) is a good friend of mine. Yes, he's a big guy, and he walked away with no injuries.

The initial cadre T-6 guys that I know (including a Marine) say the USAF (don't know if Navy was included too) wanted it to be "like a jet", hence no beta. That said, one of our T-38 IP's here was a T-6 IP at P'cola, and said that he (and other IP's) could land, stop, and taxi off at the approach end hammer head at places like Robins. Don't know that beta could really gain you significantly more performance than that.

 

[Herc_Dude]

Don't know that beta could really gain you significantly more performance than that.

That is a good point. Does the T-6 have anti-skid? I guess if the brakes are good enough you might not really need it. I know that in the Herc reverse really only saves us about 200-300' of runway - we stop the a/c using brakes. Of course we are haulin anywhere from 100,000-155,000lbs+ so its a bit different story. Just thinkin out loud here...

 

[Gatordev]

The initial cadre T-6 guys that I know (including a Marine) say the USAF (don't know if Navy was included too) wanted it to be "like a jet", hence no beta. That said, one of our T-38 IP's here was a T-6 IP at P'cola, and said that he (and other IP's) could land, stop, and taxi off at the approach end hammer head at places like Robins. Don't know that beta could really gain you significantly more performance than that.

I'm not familiar with Robins (but will look when I get to work), so not sure how long that actually is. However, when I stood RDO and watched the T-6s bounce, they were coming in significantly faster at the flare than the T-34 and if they had to abort, would have rolled farther. If flown "correctly," I could get the T-34 stopped in 500 feet and still have my tires when I was done. There were several instances when it was optimum to do that, but certainly wasn't the norm.

Whether that's actually needed in the T-6 is a whole other debate and really not worth yours or my time to argue.

 

[Kickflip89]

I'm not familiar with Robins (but will look when I get to work), so not sure how long that actually is. However, when I stood RDO and watched the T-6s bounce, they were coming in significantly faster at the flare than the T-34 and if they had to abort, would have rolled farther. If flown "correctly," I could get the T-34 stopped in 500 feet and still have my tires when I was done. There were several instances when it was optimum to do that, but certainly wasn't the norm.

Whether that's actually needed in the T-6 is a whole other debate and really not worth yours or my time to argue.

T-6 final approach speed is 105 kts with T/O flaps. As far as I know we are not authorized to land on runways less than 4,000 ft. unless an emergency, and can never land on runways less than 3,000 ft.

And yeah, I also hear that the AF wanted it to fly 'like a jet' hence the no beta and the Trim Aid Device (if we put a TAD on a 1100 SHP turbo prop, we'll never have to use the Rudder!!).

 

[picklesuit]

That is a good point. Does the T-6 have anti-skid?

As someone who has a T-6 tire in his office from primary I can most assuredly tell you there is no anti-skid. I blew that puppy in less than 200 feet...but I did make the early taxiway!
Cost me a case of beer and a flight patch.