T-45 evac

Man, somebody's missing out on a paid vacation. Hurr-evacs are usually a good deal, I would've jumped at the chance. Maybe they were sending them to Salinas or something, so no one wanted to go.
 
Sad stuff...in 1984 we had a storm go into the panhandle and Ft Rucker evacuated...most of the the UH-1s were flown with two unrated student pilots with an IP in the lead aircraft...my crew had less than five hours in the aircraft and had a matinance guy make sure we started it okay and then jumped out of the left seat....flew to Birmingham and a bus ride home....similar to this a no notice storm
 
That's one way of getting rid of problem aircraft.
 
35 AoA said:
I was part of a VA beach F/A-18 "hurrevac" in 2012........it perfectly aligned with fantasy fest in our destination of key west FL. It was awesome. Wife probably had a couple overturned leaves in the yard as a result, back home.
Click to expand...
When I was at Eglin during a few evac's the 33rd FW sent their eagles to boring places but the test wing vipers/eagles and warthogs all went off on their individual much more desirable places. Not a bad way to TDY.
 
Radar Contact said:
When I was at Eglin during a few evac's the 33rd FW sent their eagles to boring places but the test wing vipers/eagles and warthogs all went off on their individual much more desirable places. Not a bad way to TDY.
Click to expand...

We always sent the Hornets to JRB Ft Worth. Don't think any of those guys got to go anywhere cool like Key West.

I remember base ops being packed with pilots trying to file and get WX and NOTAMs. Now, they probably do all that on a computer and never leave their hangar.
 
Man, I wonder why so many were considered not to be airworthy and if they were possibly still safe to fly? Dose anyone know what their definition of airworthy is? I'm sure it probably differs from the FAA definition.
 
SkyDog58 said:
Man, I wonder why so many were considered not to be airworthy and if they were possibly still safe to fly? Dose anyone know what their definition of airworthy is? I'm sure it probably differs from the FAA definition.
Click to expand...

That part didn't sound right. The only thing I could think of was the OBOGS issue, but I think they have been flying them the way they are and just staying below 10K. The real issue may have been getting enough IPs to leave their families and take the jets somewhere.
 
Cooter said:
.... The real issue may have been getting enough IPs to leave their families and take the jets somewhere.
Click to expand...

I doubt that very much. My experience with Hurrevacs have been that the military member doesn't have a choice unless the command gives them a choice.

I'm guessing the 'real issue' are aircrew limitations related to currency and/or unresolved maintenance tasks.
 
TCABM said:
I doubt that very much. My experience with Hurrevacs have been that the military member doesn't have a choice unless the command gives them a choice.

I'm guessing the 'real issue' are aircrew limitations related to currency and/or unresolved maintenance tasks.
Click to expand...
They were volunteer when I was flying. I guess they could force people to go, but before they did that, they would probably let the later stage students fly them out under supervision.

The hangars are hurricane proof but it's a tight fit to get all the Jets inside. I think they're really just looking to make hangar space, not necessarily get all the Jets out. There are usually enough single guys that are willing to head somewhere for the weekend, but the Navy also wants people to take care of their families. The Training Command isn't the same as the fleet where family comes second. At least that was my experience.

Back when I was there, I think there was something like 75 lines a day on the flight schedule. Those airplanes fly, and there aren't any IPs that aren't current unless they are Med down. It's a strange article, it didn't sound right to me.
 
Guess that's one difference between AF and Navy. I haven't really kept up with the T45 issue, but i know we had a hard time keeping production up during the years of the F22 'tax' and certain airframes had to reduce production during The buildup and kickoff for OIF.

I agree it's a strangely written article, I guess I just had a different experience in my career and read it with an AF view.
 
TCABM said:
Guess that's one difference between AF and Navy. I haven't really kept up with the T45 issue, but i know we had a hard time keeping production up during the years of the F22 'tax' and certain airframes had to reduce production during The buildup and kickoff for OIF.
Click to expand...

That's just the Air Force's way of getting better Gyms, BOQs and MWR facilities.;) The Navy hasn't figured out how that works yet.
 
Velocity173 said:
We always sent the Hornets to JRB Ft Worth. Don't think any of those guys got to go anywhere cool like Key West.

I remember base ops being packed with pilots trying to file and get WX and NOTAMs. Now, they probably do all that on a computer and never leave their hangar.
Click to expand...

Oh man, it was awesome. We went there because the whole squadron had been previously scheduled to do A/A SFARP the following week in KW, so we were going there eventually anyway. That was a whole ORM nightmare of a trip for a lot of reasons I won't say here, but it was awesome because the 4 of us, all JO's (not sure why we only hurrevac'd 4 jets) were literally on our own little island, with no adult supervision, for almost a week, flying here and there to keep the jets warm so to speak.....during fantasy fest.
 
Cooter said:
That part didn't sound right. The only thing I could think of was the OBOGS issue, but I think they have been flying them the way they are and just staying below 10K. The real issue may have been getting enough IPs to leave their families and take the jets somewhere.
Click to expand...

Yeah, something's not right. I'm on ADT right now and sat through all the Harvey telecons up to Friday. NAS Corpus was talking about having some aircraft that they were not going to be able fly out, but it was nowhere near those numbers.
 
I built a jet engine test cell at NAS Kingsville in the late 80s. Back then VT-21 and VT-22 were flying T-2 Buckeyes and TA-4Js. Dyncorp maintained them. The T-2 is built like a brick ****house. I struck up conversations with some ensigns and LTJGs on the flight line, and they told me the Buckeye could be made to enter an inverted flat spin and recover.

I finished my project just a few months before the T-45 came on line. From what I've read about them since then they have had a rather poor fleet readiness percentage.
 
3393RP said:
I struck up conversations with some ensigns and LTJGs on the flight line, and they told me the Buckeye could be made to enter an inverted flat spin and recover.

I finished my project just a few months before the T-45 came on line. From what I've read about them since then they have had a rather poor fleet readiness percentage.
Click to expand...
I don't remember that being the case w/ T-45s. But the Kingsvile jets are getting some age on them. I thought though, that they were getting some new ones up until a few years ago.

I don't remember an inverted spin in the T-2, but they did flatten out a spin in one of the syllabus hops so that you could feel the "eyeballs out G".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top