Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

T-38 Trainer Becoming Too Costly and Dangerous to Keep Flying
Lexington Institute ^ | August 31, 2011

Posted on 09/01/2011 5:13:11 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki

T-38 Trainer Becoming Too Costly and Dangerous to Keep Flying

(Source: Lexington Institute; issued August 31, 2011)

(© Lexington Institute; reproduced by permission)

The U.S. Air Force's pilot training program relies upon an obsolete Eisenhower-era jet that may soon be too unsafe to fly. The T-38 Talon was the world's first supersonic training aircraft when it debuted in 1959, but half a century later the average plane has logged 15,000 flight hours -- over twice the planned design life -- and age-related problems have begun to appear. Investigations following a fatal 2008 crash caused by metal fatigue found 156 "single-point failure paths" in the flight controls alone. Aside from safety issues, the airframe is troubled by rising maintenance costs and diminished availability.

The Air Force has relied heavily upon the T-38 to train pilots destined to fly its bombers and fighter aircraft. However, the value of the aircraft began to diminish with the introduction of so-called fourth-generation fighters such as the Boeing F-15 and Lockheed Martin F-16 in the 1970s, because those airframes were considerably more advanced than the design on which the T-38 was based. Talon replacement was deferred, though, because two-seat versions of the F-15 and F-16 were purchased suitable for training their pilots.

That is not the case for newer fifth-generation fighters -- the F-22 and F-35 -- which are only built in single-seat configurations and therefore require a better trainer to prepare their pilots. The Air Force has identified five demanding training activities in which a replacement plane capable of carrying instructor and student would be highly desirable: sustained high-G operations, aerial refueling, night vision operations, air-to-air combat, and datalink utilization. Ground-based flight simulators are useful in preparing pilots to execute such activities, but despite all the advances in simulator technology, there is still no substitute for actually putting pilots in a trainer and sending them aloft -- if they are accompanied by a competent instructor. What this all points to is the need for a new dual-seat trainer aircraft that can close the gap in performance characteristics between the trainer plane and the fighters that trainees must one day pilot. The fact that current trainers are increasingly unsafe simply underscores the need to get moving on a successor. The Air Force has such an effort in place, called the T-X program, but whether in will be funded in an increasingly austere budget environment is anyone's guess. The program apparently will entail the purchase of 350-500 training aircraft, several dozen ground simulators, and a variety of other instructional devices.

Pilot training is one of those support missions that seldom gets much mention in the national media. However, it's just common sense that if the Air Force and other services don't buy the tools needed to train future warfighters, then the value of America's investment in cutting-edge military equipment will be greatly diminished. For the safety of future pilots and of the whole nation, Congress needs to keep the T-X program on track. There's no good reason why the men and women who will secure the skies over future battle zones should have to train in planes that were developed at the dawn of the Cold War.

-ends-


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aerospace; ajt; t38; usaf
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 09/01/2011 5:13:16 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

We had a bunch of them on base at Barksdale AFB when I was station ed. Neat little buggers. They used to escort the Space Shuttle down.


2 posted on 09/01/2011 5:18:41 AM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

I love the t38, and it’s single seat sibling. Very pretty planes.


3 posted on 09/01/2011 5:51:18 AM PDT by Adams (Fight on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Those were the “company cars” for Apollo (and other) astronauts.


4 posted on 09/01/2011 5:51:37 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Are you better off now than you were four trillion dollars ago?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Does this mean there are insufficient numbers of 4th Gen Trainers, or that someone wants a plush new contract?


5 posted on 09/01/2011 5:53:32 AM PDT by Apogee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Adams

With about 200 hours in the T-38, I can say it is one of the finest planes ever. Nothing compares with diving to pick up 500 knots, pulling until pointed straight up with 5G’s and then throwing the stick hard left so the plane rolls over and over as it zooms upward until it runs out of airspeed, then floating over the top. Obviously, it is also a great plane in which to learn air-air combat, formation flying, and basic ground attack maneuvers.


6 posted on 09/01/2011 5:57:34 AM PDT by LukeSW (The truth shall make you free!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
The fact that current trainers are increasingly unsafe simply underscores the need to get moving on a successor. The Air Force has such an effort in place, called the T-X program, but whether in will be funded in an increasingly austere budget environment is anyone's guess.

Seems like the Talon has proven itself as an excellent and reliable trainer. Why not just dust off the blueprints and build some fresh copies? Of course this would not allow for politically connected contractors to do multi-year multi-millon dollar "studies" on a replacement, which will likely never pan out.

We no longer have a manned space vehicle available. Now it looks like we're on the way to having no available jet trainer aircraft. The country is dying, not with a bang, but a whimper.

7 posted on 09/01/2011 6:00:20 AM PDT by 6SJ7 (atlasShruggedInd = TRUE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW

Agree completely. I went through UPT at Reese AFB, Lubbock, TX back in ‘77-’78. I could barely tolerate the T-37; just didn’t do it for me....even had me questioning if flying was what I really wanted to do for Uncle Sam.

Then....on to the -38....and I had a love affair with that aircraft. Finally, flying was all I had hoped it would be. It was fast, fun, a tad dangerous in the pattern if you didn’t keep your airspeed up, etc., etc., but damn was it a blast to fly.

All that said, no doubt it’s well past time to put those beauties out to pasture.


8 posted on 09/01/2011 6:07:13 AM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
My dad instructed in those for a few years. I always thought it was a beautiful plane. It will be interesting to see how this replacement program goes. Either the ‘buy American’ group of people or the ‘don't over run costs’ faction are going to be very disappointed.
9 posted on 09/01/2011 6:20:04 AM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Sad. Still one of the most beautiful, sexy, stunning planes ever designed. Too bad they're worn out. Otherwise I'd sure love to see them go to use by wealthy general aviation types. It would be first on my list of exotic planes to have if I had mega-bucks....... For many years this was my desktop wallpaper....
10 posted on 09/01/2011 6:29:04 AM PDT by Arlis (- Virginia loghome/woods-dweller/Jesus lovin'/Bible-totin'/"gun-clinger")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Apogee

No, it means these aircraft are all but worn out. The service life extension program got all the goodie out of them that could be gotten. They are wonderful little airplanes but their time is limited. They have been G’d and sprung, landed hard countless times and had wings replaced but they keep flying.

You can’t inspect and replace every part on an airplane. You have to eventually declare them worn out.

Our pilot has over 1000 training missions in the type and absolutely loves the airplane, under powered though she may be, and even he says they need to be replaced. If he had his way they would just build more of them though. Almost every pilot who has flown them says they are the favorite and most fun to fly. Northrup did great on the T-38 and F-5. The F-20 would have been a great airplane as well.


11 posted on 09/01/2011 6:42:04 AM PDT by Sequoyah101 (Half the people are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101

Can the T-38 glide at all if so do you know what the glide rate would be just curiious?


12 posted on 09/01/2011 6:56:29 AM PDT by Rappini (Pro Deo et Patria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 6SJ7
Why not just dust off the blueprints and build some fresh copies?

While I agree with you in principle, this would not be as easy as it seems. The cost of going back and digitizing all the design data for modern manufacturing processes would be very large indeed. Fact is it would likely be far more cost effective to start from scratch.

That being said, I see no reason they can't take all the best aspects of the T38 and simply design and build something very similar, with all the latest accoutrement's of course.

Of course that's rather common sensical, which isn't so common any more.
13 posted on 09/01/2011 7:02:19 AM PDT by rottndog (Be Prepared for what's coming AFTER America....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rappini

Similar to a brick.


14 posted on 09/01/2011 7:09:53 AM PDT by Sequoyah101 (Half the people are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Still beautiful aircraft...


15 posted on 09/01/2011 9:15:16 AM PDT by TXnMA ("Allah": Satan's current alias...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101; LukeSW

I amazed at anyone that can fly jets. I’m working on the basics of a Cessna 172 on Flight Simulator X and it’s the hardest thing I’ve ever tried to do!

Thanks for your service.


16 posted on 09/01/2011 10:47:50 AM PDT by tweakDU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101

Thank you,
I was wondering if there were not enough F-16 trainers from the article’s wording.
(when I was younger, getting into the Air Force and subsequently a Falcon was my dream for a few years... Priorities changed, however).
Always like the F-5 lines, too.


17 posted on 09/01/2011 1:46:38 PM PDT by Apogee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Got an incentive ride in a T-38 in 1978...they were old then!

Nice plane.


18 posted on 09/02/2011 2:59:52 PM PDT by hattend (If I wanted you dead, you'd be dead. - Cameron Connor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101

I remember that on my incentive flight. The pilot had me put the flaps and airbrakes out, gear down and set up a rate of descent. Then “stir the stick”. Plane didn’t do anything but fall like a brick straight ahead.

Down remember how fast we were going down but it didn’t take long to get from 40K to 15K or so.

Dodging cumulus clouds and doing loops and rolls was the best. A long approach to Holloman in summer was miserable! Like a sauna under that canopy.


19 posted on 09/02/2011 3:06:55 PM PDT by hattend (If I wanted you dead, you'd be dead. - Cameron Connor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
The Navy's version isn't supersonic, but then again, going fast isn't really a consideration when you have to do this on a daily basis.


20 posted on 09/02/2011 3:13:20 PM PDT by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson