USAF charter jet carrying women's b'ball team damages OK airport runway after unauthorized landing

I heard the airport parking lot and FBO lobby was also damaged and they want money to repair as well. (I kid, I kid……..)
 
Flew in there to attend a game in 2014. Have they fixed the road from the airport to town yet? Dang that was rough.
 
Gilbert Buettner said:
I was a C-130 pilot. In the US, we often flew trips that might look like a waste of money, but there was training going on almost all the time.
Click to expand...
For some reason the military can't use sims like the airlines do. Because they've got buckets of our money to burn.
 
If you think training only happens on the flight deck on military transport you need to figure out you know nothing about military aviation…probably need to discuss it with a loadmaster or crew chief…so many unique situations through out the spectrum of military aviation and branches…training can be incorporated even into milk runs.
 
I agree that the military wastes a lot of money. I wouldn't put training flights in that category, though. Money spend on contractors? Purchasing of things that don't work that we don't need? Yes and yes. My opinion may be skewed by discussions of people working for such contractors back when Jack Welsh ran one of them.
 
Todd82 said:
For some reason the military can't use sims like the airlines do. Because they've got buckets of our money to burn.
Click to expand...

I don't know how it compares, especially today, but I certainly spent a lot of time in the sim when I was flying in the Air Force.
 
I‘ve said it a million times, every aviation unit is allotted X number of hours in their flying program. Outside of a training squadron, I guarantee no unit is even coming close to their annual allotted hours. This flight could easily been chalked up to a training flight.

Pilots are struggling just to maintain basic proficiency. Imagine flying only 10 hrs per month or even less in some cases (fighters). Back in the 80s they would’ve flown triple that.

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/air-force-flying-hours-decline-again-after-brief-recovery/
 
Todd82 said:
For some reason the military can't use sims like the airlines do. Because they've got buckets of our money to burn.
Click to expand...

They do have plenty of our money but they need to train in the real deal and I bet those machines, much like my little puddle jumper, need to be taken out and flown about once a week or so. I don't like letting mine sit too long. Of course with this cold that we're having it's gonna be a few days ...
 
Todd82 said:
For some reason the military can't use sims like the airlines do. Because they've got buckets of our money to burn.
Click to expand...
I went to the sim in the Air Force more often than I do at my airline. Twice a year for the AF, at the airlines it's every 9 months.
 
Velocity173 said:
I‘ve said it a million times, every aviation unit is allotted X number of hours in their flying program. Outside of a training squadron, I guarantee no unit is even coming close to their annual allotted hours. This flight could easily been chalked up to a training flight.
Click to expand...

Maybe today... but it wasn't that long ago that units were using so many flying hours for real-life missions that pure training sorties weren't available. I'm referring to units flying in support of the various actions in hot, dry, sandy places (cargo, gas passers, surveillance).

Or, at least that is what I was told by guys wearing the baggies...
 
Just how much did those ladies weigh that demanded they be transported in a C-17.??
 
Bob Noel said:
Maybe today... but it wasn't that long ago that units were using so many flying hours for real-life missions that pure training sorties weren't available. I'm referring to units flying in support of the various actions in hot, dry, sandy places (cargo, gas passers, surveillance).

Or, at least that is what I was told by guys wearing the baggies...
Click to expand...

Yeah that’s what we call feast (war) or famine (garrison). Right now we have the later. I did a flight one day and flew some LTs and CPTs just out a corridor and back to get their one flight every 60 days currency. One 15 minute flight in 60 days ain’t proficiency.
 
"The military does not use sims, like the airlines do"

Do you remember the infamous Link Trainers? I have been in a war surplus one from WW 2, back in the '50's,no longer in use, as it was worn out. My understanding is that more than half of IFR training was in Links.

In the '60's, I had stock in a company that made much better analog trainers for the military's versions of civil planes, and expanded into civil sims. Boeing saw the profit that they were missing, and entered the business. They packaged the sims with the first deliveries of a contract, freezing out the independent builder.

I exited at a profit, the company, Servonics, failed.

The manufacturers claimed that no outside company knew as much as they about how their plane flew.
 
I had some classes with some B2 pilots back when I was in college. If I'm not mistaken, they did a fair amount of training in T38's to keep time off the B2's. They also very much have B2 simulators. They let me fly in one on a visit to Whiteman.
 
It's one of the reasons I love my training command gig. It's a no fail mission set, during sequestration they were grounding grey jets while we were cranking out sorties like donuts through the whole affair. It's a low block, high sortie count gig, ratio which fits me like a glove. It's a shame instruction don't pay Ricardo on the outside, really gonna miss this job.
 
hindsight2020 said:
It's one of the reasons I love my training command gig. It's a no fail mission set, during sequestration they were grounding grey jets while we were cranking out sorties like donuts through the whole affair. It's a low block, high sortie count gig, ratio which fits me like a glove. It's a shame instruction don't pay Ricardo on the outside, really gonna miss this job.
Click to expand...

Yeah at the school house I flew about 450 hrs a year for 4 years straight. No deployments, no crack of dawn formation runs and home every night. Good gig but teaching the same basic maneuvers to new students gets old after awhile.
 
Velocity173 said:
Yeah at the school house I flew about 450 hrs a year for 4 years straight. No deployments, no crack of dawn formation runs and home every night. Good gig but teaching the same basic maneuvers to new students gets old after awhile.
Click to expand...

A common complaint in my occupation, and i totally understand it. I love the homesteading affirming schedules that relative monotony has afforded me for the latter 12 years of my career. Its a great trade that works for both me and team DOD, especially given the promotion terminal condition.

The wife would be forced out of her current desired career environment (acute care) if i was still in the CAF or doing 121 stuff (save for niche out n back stuff at silver et al). We do get CT allocations where we dabble in the sport of kings (solo CT) and rage a little with uncle sammys toys, which is a nice weekly blend. At PIT we do a larger portion of direct supporting as well, so more sport of king time than at UPT.

This is really a perfect pre retirement gig for the a-word seekers, and a great TPIC building gig for the FAIPS. For everybody else, including the CAF warriors who feel teaching TP stalls is beneath them, the job is often viewed as scutwork trash. Honestly, the worst part of my job is dealing with that constant 'tude from a certain subset of the incoming fighter pilots with a chip on their shoulder about having been reassigned "down" to aetc for their alfa tour, while their more favored peer got selected for ops to ops or WIC. I get it must be a shock to their system to find out where they sat internally in their ops squadron rack and stack, but good lord what an insufferable cohort to have to train to teach undergraduates. As much as i grew to loath my time in the buff, i never let that bleed through to my students. I never lied, but kept it short when they asked where i came from.

I feel exceedingly fortunate to have the ability not to have to abandon my preferred cockpit in order to concurrently accommodate my physical presence in my young sons life, and my wifes career desires. Which is a longwinded way of saying: I dont look at a gift horse in the mouth. To each their own of course.
 
hindsight2020 said:
A common complaint in my occupation, and i totally understand it. I love the homesteading affirming schedules that relative monotony has afforded me for the latter 12 years of my career. Its a great trade that works for both me and team DOD, especially given the promotion terminal condition.

The wife would be forced out of her current desired career environment (acute care) if i was still in the CAF or doing 121 stuff (save for niche out n back stuff at silver et al). We do get CT allocations where we dabble in the sport of kings (solo CT) and rage a little with uncle sammys toys, which is a nice weekly blend. At PIT we do a larger portion of direct supporting as well, so more sport of king time than at UPT.

This is really a perfect pre retirement gig for the a-word seekers, and a great TPIC building gig for the FAIPS. For everybody else, including the CAF warriors who feel teaching TP stalls is beneath them, the job is often viewed as scutwork trash. Honestly, the worst part of my job is dealing with that constant 'tude from a certain subset of the incoming fighter pilots with a chip on their shoulder about having been reassigned "down" to aetc for their alfa tour, while their more favored peer got selected for ops to ops or WIC. I get it must be a shock to their system to find out where they sat internally in their ops squadron rack and stack, but good lord what an insufferable cohort to have to train to teach undergraduates. As much as i grew to loath my time in the buff, i never let that bleed through to my students. I never lied, but kept it short when they asked where i came from.

I feel exceedingly fortunate to have the ability not to have to abandon my preferred cockpit in order to concurrently accommodate my physical presence in my young sons life, and my wifes career desires. Which is a longwinded way of saying: I dont look at a gift horse in the mouth. To each their own of course.
Click to expand...

You do this on purpose, don't you?

If you ever get out of the military, you are really going to have to work hard to demilitarize your speech! :D
 
Sorry, should have PM'd that response to @Velocity173 . didn't realize it was hard to follow for the non .mil.

" ill do better next time" . <--Works for SWA (thats southwest airlines btw :D )
 
Just thinking about the sim comment. I went through my records and show 402.4 hrs in 12 years in various (UH-1,TH-67,UH-60) sims. I forget the reg requirement but I probably averaged one trip a month to the sim.

The sim is great for EPs and instruments but plenty of maneuvers aren’t realistic. Also, like stated above, doesn’t do anything for crew chief/loadmaster types. Gotta get out and fly.
 
Last edited:
hindsight2020 said:
Sorry, should have PM'd that response to @Velocity173 . didn't realize it was hard to follow for the non .mil.

" ill do better next time" . <--Works for SWA (thats southwest airlines btw :D )
Click to expand...
I admit to having trouble figuring out what the Commemorative Air Force (CAF) had to do with you wife's work.....

Ron Wanttaja
 
geezer said:
Do you remember the infamous Link Trainers?
Click to expand...
I restored one, for my CAP squadron, back in my college days. WWII model, type was, I believe, C4 rather than the wartime AN-T-18.

Absolutely fascinating devices. Basically an analog computer...in vacuum. Roll and pitch used vacuum bellows, yaw had a huge vacuum motor up front with a big belt going to a pulley at the balance point. Small vacuum tank stored attitude (at half the rate of real life), and a separate vacuum manifold "stored" the airspeed. The vacuum in the airspeed manifold held a valve forward. If the vacuum got too low, the pendulum would drop, breaking the vacuum and applying vacuum to one side or the other of the yaw motor to make you spin.

One negative: They didn't fly like an actual airplane. Roll too far, and the bellows wouldn't have enough effect to bring you upright...you had to dive to increase speed, and roll level using a rocker underneath the fuselage. Maybe ours was just old, and we didn't have enough RTV on the bellows. But I've heard the same story from others. You learned NOT to use ailerons in turns, just rudder. Often, photos showing Link Trainers in actual operation (as opposed to posed shots) have the strap installed on the left side that locked it in roll. Didn't really need it for instrument training.

Came with a wheel, like a transport, and an optional stick, like a fighter. The stick gave horrible leverage. Wheel worked better.

It flew in other weird ways, too, but didn't realize what was going on until I re-read "Stick and Rudder." Langewiesche describes how non-fliers THINK airplanes work. And that's exactly how the early Links operate. Remember, it was originally designed as a carnival ride.

The Link itself used early electronics, but not for the fundamental flying. Fans, lights, remote-reading instruments for the instructor's table as well as the "bug" that drew the lines on maps.

I've told this story before, but it's a good one. I have one unique record.

Was working on the Link late one evening. Popped the think into a left spin. While it whirled around, I started smelling smoke. Popped the side-opening canopy a bit, and as the Link whirled around, I saw smoke coming from the electrical box in the base. Shoved the wheel forward, and kicked the right rudder pedal.

The rudder cable popped off the pedal. No way to stop the spin. So I fully threw open the canopy. stood in the door, and dived out when a clear spot of floor appeared.

I'm the only person ever to successfully bail out of a burning Link Trainer in an unrecoverable spin.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Ron, I have heard versions of every one of your stories and descriptions except for bailing out in a spin.

Remember, I am recalling from 70 years ago. I have in fact 'flown' in a Link, and was appalled when I saw my track on the map. One flight, about half an hour, at College Park, Maryland, during the legendary Brinkerhoff years.

It stunk of sweat, overheated belts, and stale tobacco smoke. The vacuum pump was noisy, and I was soon adding my new sweat to the smells. I squandered a days pay for that "lesson" in instrument flight.

Thanks for bringing back those memories.

The Geezer has forgotten a lot of his life, but tweaks of this sort bring some back clearly.
 
A slightly different twist on the damage:


The City of Stillwater said the airport is safe and operational after patching the damaged surface but will need engineers to see if there is significant damage to the subsurface.

"Engineers are in the process of evaluating the next step for assessing the full extent of damage to the runway," City of Stillwater Director of Communications told the News Press. "The initial report was based on surface damage caused by the extreme jet blast needed for a plane the size of a C-17 to perform a short-field takeoff. This included damage to airfield signage and the removal of several areas where concrete and/or pavement epoxy were used to repair the runway. Although much of the surface damage was cosmetic, the primary concern is the potential damage to the structural integrity of the runway."
​
https://www.aviationpros.com/aircra...ims-of-c17-damaging-stillwater-airport-runway
 
Also:


Air Force officials with the 911th Airlift Wing claim the flight was coordinated with SWO five days before the landing.
​
And

The City of Stillwater told the News Press it stands by its original statement that the flight was unauthorized.​
 
Plus:


Paul Priegel, director of the Stillwater Regional Airport, said they would be in communications with the Air Force and has asked the Federal Aviation Administration to open an investigation.

SWO has solicited help from its representatives in Congress.

"Stillwater Regional Airport has briefed the offices of Sen. James Lankford, Sen. Jim Inhofe, the Oklahoma Aeronautics Commission and the Federal Aviation Administration," Jones told the News Press.​
 
Velocity173 said:
Yeah at the school house I flew about 450 hrs a year for 4 years straight. No deployments, no crack of dawn formation runs and home every night. Good gig but teaching the same basic maneuvers to new students gets old after awhile.
Click to expand...

I was never a Schoolhouse instructor, but I flew over 1,000 hours in one year in Korea doing orientation flights, mission training for 20-30 NFGs and all the P-518 TAC zone and P-73 Soul Prohibited area fam flights.

My Brigade commander personally awarded me my 6,000 hour safety award in a formation and when he handed it to me, he asked "how the hell did you get that many hours?'

I told him I was just doing my job.
 
IK04 said:
I was never a Schoolhouse instructor, but I flew over 1,000 hours in one year in Korea doing orientation flights, mission training for 20-30 NFGs and all the P-518 TAC zone and P-73 Soul Prohibited area fam flights.

My Brigade commander personally awarded me my 6,000 hour safety award in a formation and when he handed it to me, he asked "how the hell did you get that many hours?'

I told him I was just doing my job.
Click to expand...

Man, that’s a lot of flying. My best in a year was 875 in Afghanistan and I was beat.
 
From personal experience, if jet blast can damage your pavement, it was already in failing condition. This does not sound like a weight related issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top