Learning to fly with guages vs. glass panels.

[Orange Anchor]

I had a spinnable compass like that in the Tweet (I think it's called a a "J-2" or something?)..

I had forgotten the compass in the "Tweet". I had an instructor I learned to really HATE. We would be on a GCA and maybe be slightly high on the glideslope. He would say he was going to lower pitch a half bar width AND DO IT.. cross cockpit. I was trying to just keep blue side up or in that case, black side down, white up. I don't think I ever figured out the little course indicator thing on the -37 and only learned how to fly NDBs after going into O-2s.

In the -37, I had a fuel cell collapse, a hyd failure and an engine failure.. all pre-solo. My instructor, a great guy later killed in an A-1, set the standard and each time, he was a very cool fellow. Stop. Think. Collect your wits. Later as I encountered a few problems with various airplanes I almost always thought of him and his approach to abnormals/emergencies. It has served me well for these decades.

 

[Orange Anchor]

Sounds like Old School has always hated New School, similar to what I see a lot in the glass vs. conventional panel debates.

True and no doubt, when the enclosed the cockpit, the old guys complained you couldn't hear the wind in the wires and it wasn't real flyin'. But the real test is can you fly the system you have. I've had the chance to fly single cue, dual cue, flight path vector as well as a bunch of other stuff. I have been in the three major communities (military, gen-av and airline) and each have had different demands. As long as one can demonstrate skill, proficiency and ability using the systems available that's the final measure.

 

[Douglas]

BTW, who are you? I'm surprised that you know this much about my previous flying situation. It's been a long time since I've posted.

Ha, you had your blog link in your signature, which I read as you said a long time ago.

Good luck in your new career, flying on the side is a good way to go. :bandit:

 

[fish314]

I had forgotten the compass in the "Tweet". I had an instructor I learned to really HATE. We would be on a GCA and maybe be slightly high on the glideslope. He would say he was going to lower pitch a half bar width AND DO IT.. cross cockpit. I was trying to just keep blue side up or in that case, black side down, white up. I don't think I ever figured out the little course indicator thing on the -37 and only learned how to fly NDBs after going into O-2s.

In the -37, I had a fuel cell collapse, a hyd failure and an engine failure.. all pre-solo. My instructor, a great guy later killed in an A-1, set the standard and each time, he was a very cool fellow. Stop. Think. Collect your wits. Later as I encountered a few problems with various airplanes I almost always thought of him and his approach to abnormals/emergencies. It has served me well for these decades.

I really loved the Tweet. You just could not break the thing, short of flying it into the ground... and sometimes even then. The instruments were lousy, but they forced you to develop an awesome cross-check and focus on the basics. It had a lot of down sides, but man was it a fun and easy airplane to fly... (although I didn't think that as a student, but it was a BLAST as an IP).

 

[Orange Anchor]

It had a lot of down sides, but man was it a fun and easy airplane to fly... (although I didn't think that as a student, but it was a BLAST as an IP).

A great introduction to jets and instruments. Easy to fly, as you note BUT not easy to fly precisely until you developed the skills.

(one of our instructors was a real aero-eng guy and he told us with that fat little wing even 4 J-79s with burner would not get it supersonic. It would, however, climb like a Atlas rocket!)

(I did one sortie in the A-37 down to IV Corps. Fat wing with the J-85s.. nice little machine)

 

[///AMG]

I was chatting with an IP here who did the Vance/Navy exchange thing back in the Tweet days, and he said the only thing he remembered about it was how long the engines took to spool up, and that if you pulled them back to idle in the approach turn, you wouldn't have time to spool them back up before you hit the ground. Any truth to this? I know we have a noticeable spool time, even with a low altitude fuel dashpot boost thingie, so I can't imagine what those old turbojets must have been like

 

[Orange Anchor]

I was chatting with an IP here who did the Vance/Navy exchange thing back in the Tweet days, and he said the only thing he remembered about it was how long the engines took to spool up, and that if you pulled them back to idle in the approach turn, you wouldn't have time to spool them back up before you hit the ground. Any truth to this? I know we have a noticeable spool time, even with a low altitude fuel dashpot boost thingie, so I can't imagine what those old turbojets must have been like

I don't remember a long spool time but what I do remember is us turning final around 90-100kts and later finding out the entire final turn was OUT of the ejection seat envelope. Too slow and too high a rate of descent.

One of the slowest engines to spool up was early versions of the CFM-56 on the 737-300/400.

 

[fish314]

I was chatting with an IP here who did the Vance/Navy exchange thing back in the Tweet days, and he said the only thing he remembered about it was how long the engines took to spool up, and that if you pulled them back to idle in the approach turn, you wouldn't have time to spool them back up before you hit the ground. Any truth to this? I know we have a noticeable spool time, even with a low altitude fuel dashpot boost thingie, so I can't imagine what those old turbojets must have been like

I don't remember a long spool time but what I do remember is us turning final around 90-100kts and later finding out the entire final turn was OUT of the ejection seat envelope. Too slow and too high a rate of descent.

One of the slowest engines to spool up was early versions of the CFM-56 on the 737-300/400.

They did have a long spool up time from idle to 100%, but not any worse than a lot of other engines out there. About 10-15 seconds, I think. The problem was that you were so thrust deficient so you really had to get them all the way spooled up... partial thrust and you would probably still be slowing down if you leveled off or attempted a climb.

So anyway, they had these devices called "thrust attenuators." They were pushed out into the airflow leaving the nozzle using the hydraulics to kill some of the thrust, but leave the engines partially spooled up. That brought the spool up time way down because you're already half way up there.

And yes, in the final turn you are out of the envelope for the seats, but if you took out the bank angle you could get back in the envelope provided you were above 300 AGL.

 

[Orange Anchor]

So anyway, they had these devices called "thrust attenuators." They were pushed out into the airflow leaving the nozzle using the hydraulics to kill some of the thrust, but leave the engines partially spooled up. That brought the spool up time way down because you're already half way up there.

The CitationJet (CJ and CJ1) used the attenuators. I had one last year that didn't retract on power up for takeoff and we had to abort. Cessna deleted them on later CJs.

 

[MikeD]

I really loved the Tweet. You just could not break the thing, short of flying it into the ground... and sometimes even then. The instruments were lousy, but they forced you to develop an awesome cross-check and focus on the basics. It had a lot of down sides, but man was it a fun and easy airplane to fly... (although I didn't think that as a student, but it was a BLAST as an IP).

Great jet......love the Tweet. The UH-1H/Vs I'm flying now have nearly the same panel with the same crosscheck......makes it nice and easy to get back into.

 

[Bandit_Driver]

That tweet panel is really old school without the traditional six pack orientation. I got to talk to a lot of tweet guys that came into FBO where I worked as a line guy. They were a great bunch of guys and always had time to answer questions I asked and show me the plane. I remember over wing fueling them while the IP or student pushed the tail to the ground so we cold get some extra fuel in them.

The JT8D on the 727 has a considerable spool time too. If you are at a high rate of descent at idle and need power to break it your are SOL as it will take several seconds for the engine to spool...

 

[MikeD]

That tweet panel is really old school without the traditional six pack orientation. I got to talk to a lot of tweet guys that came into FBO where I worked as a line guy. They were a great bunch of guys and always had time to answer questions I asked and show me the plane. I remember over wing fueling them while the IP or student pushed the tail to the ground so we cold get some extra fuel in them.

...

Did you ever have to bounce the wingtip around during start to help with lightoff?

Here's an interesting Tweet I flew during UPT oh-so-long ago that I wrote about here:

......T-37B s/n 67-14762 is now retired to the Tucson boneyard.

'762' served for many years with the 82nd Flying Training Wing/96th Flying Training Squadron at the former Williams AFB (formerly Williams Gateway Airport, now Phoenix/Mesa Gateway Airport) Arizona. In 1974, '762' participated in the filming of the movie "Airport 1975. In the movie, '762' is the USAF "chase plane" that initially intercepts the striken 747 airliner to assess the damage following the mid-air collision with the Beech Baron.

Following the closure of Williams AFB in September 1993, '762' was transferred to the 47th Flying Training Wing/85th Flying Training Squadron at Laughlin AFB, Texas.

Yours truly has 18.6 hours logged in 67-14762, and I know I will miss this old bird when it very soon gets sent to out to pasture. This is the jet I took my last T-37 flight in, and at that time (long time ago), it had about 32,000+ hours in it's logbook.

It also had a faded plaque affixed in the cockpit on the left fuselage wall denoting it as the "Hollywood Tweet" and a brief description of it's movie career that it took part in.

I wonder if that plaque is still there......

 

[Bandit_Driver]

Very interesting....If these planes could, the stories they could tell.

No, I never bounced the wing tip for start...They briefed a couple of times on the fire signal and where to stick the fire extinguisher if they had a fire on start. I told them that this little bottle isn't going to do jack and unless you guys can't get out and run I am going the other direction and calling the trucks...

When I was out in Kingman I was told that they just cut up the old 727 that made the last filght out of Nam...I was sad to learn it didn't go to a museum.

Does anyone have a link to the you tube video that shows that flight with 200+ pack inside and it flying with people in the cargo holds and the doors open.

 

[stesta5074]

Glass is fine, times are changing. Our kids are going to hear us say VOR and they'll look at us like we're from the stone age.

 

[shdw]

Glass is fine, times are changing. Our kids are going to hear us say VOR and they'll look at us like we're from the stone age.

Wait...you mean the magenta line?

 

[Joe Gremlin]

I've seen this debate hashed out a few times over the years. Its funny how times change. When this came up a few years ago on another forum, the general opinion among the 'kids' was that it was better to teach students who were on a career path in glass because that's what they'd be flying for throughout their career.

I chimed in that I had flown professionally and I could count the number of times I'd been paid to fly a plane that was built after I was born on one hand with fingers left over. That was met with some hearty thanks for the advice old man but times have changed, today they'll be in the right seat of a CRJ by the time they have 300 hours, so they should learn on glass. When I then asked what these 300 wonder pilots were going to be flying once they got to 1500 hours and the bottom fell out of the industry, I was again told that times have changed old man and it was very likey that pilot on a career path in this 'advanced year of 2006' would never have to worry about flying an approach behind steam gauges again.

Fast forward to now. I wonder how many of those same 'kids' still think they'll never have to fly behind steam gauges. For that matter, I wonder how many of those same kids would wash and wax my car for free every week just for a chance at a $10/hr job flying a 60 year old airplane today.

The day is coming when it will make more sense to train on glass from the start. But that day won't be here for another 30 years IMO.

 

[Orange Anchor]

When I was out in Kingman I was told that they just cut up the old 727 that made the last filght out of Nam...I was sad to learn it didn't go to a museum.

Does anyone have a link to the you tube video that shows that flight with 200+ pack inside and it flying with people in the cargo holds and the doors open.

I believe you are thinking of the World Airways 727 out of Danang. Ed Daly, Pres of World, was on the flight that was to be a refugee flight for women and children. It turned out very differently. 260 total.

http://tinyurl.com/ycfppwu

 

[MikeD]

Very interesting....If these planes could, the stories they could tell.

No, I never bounced the wing tip for start...They briefed a couple of times on the fire signal and where to stick the fire extinguisher if they had a fire on start. I told them that this little bottle isn't going to do jack and unless you guys can't get out and run I am going the other direction and calling the trucks...

When I was out in Kingman I was told that they just cut up the old 727 that made the last filght out of Nam...I was sad to learn it didn't go to a museum.

Does anyone have a link to the you tube video that shows that flight with 200+ pack inside and it flying with people in the cargo holds and the doors open.

You aren't kidding about the amount of history in these yards. The TWA L-1011s there especially, if they could talk....

 

[Bandit_Driver]

I believe you are thinking of the World Airways 727 out of Danang. Ed Daly, Pres of World, was on the flight that was to be a refugee flight for women and children. It turned out very differently. 260 total.

http://tinyurl.com/ycfppwu

You got it that is the one, thanks.

I am going to have to buy you a beverage if I get to meet you.:beer:

 

[MikeD]

You got it that is the one, thanks.

I am going to have to buy you a beverage if I get to meet you.:beer:

Some famous planes:

I think that bird was 692WA which later became 398UP for UPS. I believe it was indeed scrapped at IGM.

The Northwest 727 that got hijacked by DB Cooper, N467US, eventually became 838N for Piedmont, then N29KA for Key Airlines and was flying people back and forth from Nellis to the uprange areas of Tonopah, etc, prior to the Janet planes being established. It was scrapped in 1996 in Greenwood, MS.

The United 811 747 4713U/4724U was scrapped in 2004 at Plattsburg, NY.