T-38 mishap Sheppard, AFB

[East]

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123096788

So long brothers, prayers for the families...

 

[Achilles]

This is twice within a week, same airplane and same results. Prayers to the families.

 

[snake020]

The Air Force has now grounded its T-38s following this and the previous crash at Columbus

 

[Swanee]

Hard year for military aviation.... fly safe ladies and gents.

 

[Cabbage]

We flew the T-38 at TPS. During the first week of class, they briefed us on all the prior mishaps. That aircraft is not forgiving. +/- 5 knots on approach is the difference between a safe landing and a smoking hole in the ground.

 

[loadtoad]

Doesn't that thing have a pretty fast approach speed? NASA has a bunch of T-38's at my old base and it always seemed they came in faster than the vipers. Hard to really tell standing on the sideline though.

This is a shitty year for military aviation. I am shocked that this keeps happening.

 

[whitman]

One of the fastest, if not the fastest approach speeds of any jet. 155kts plus one knot for every 100lbs of gas over 1000lbs. That's with flaps.

It also has a tremendous roll rate. 2 aileron rolls/second at full stick stick deflection.

My old man instructed in the 38 and said it was a blast to fly but confirmed that you are right on the edge of stalling in the final turn. Sad year for the military.

Them. Them.

 

[HuggyU2]

Additional info: the 155+fuel is correct for a T-38A. The T-38C's are a touch heavier, and I suppose they are closer to 160. Don't know for sure.
For a T-38 no-flap, add 15 KIAS to the flapped speed,... and double your landing roll distance.
I believe the F-102/104/106 were even faster on final.

 

[nittany03]

I believe the F-102/104/106 were even faster on final.

Supposedly the MiG-21 is up there, too. Think I recall some Discovery Channel special quoting 170kts or somesuch. Of course they may have dorked away the whole knots/mph thing, and I'm sure there was a metric conversion in there somewhere . . .

 

[sevenhelmet]

189 crashes since inception sounds like a lot, although it has been deployed for almost 50 years now...

You'd think with all their money, the AF would buy something new.

 

[snake020]

189 crashes since inception sounds like a lot, although it has been deployed for almost 50 years now...

You'd think with all their money, the AF would buy something new.

You mean like this?

 

[sevenhelmet]

Good point, although I was referring to their training fleet.

Anyone know how that safety record stands up? I have yet to find a side-by-side comparison...