The T-39 and Pensacola

[A4sForever]

And the usual cockpit arrangement is PIC in left seat, stud in right seat, INFO in jumpseat. Miscellaneous cats and dogs in back, who may or may not do the inflight Chinese fire drill seat swap depending on the syllabus event.

I think a general conversation on the non-accident aspects of this thread is O.K., since we seem to be going there in any case. When more information is available, then we can split off the non-accident posts to another thread, if anyone wants to do it. Obviously, no disrespect is meant for any of our Brothers who were involved in the accident while we wait for more information ... and I suspect they'd be 'O.K.' with what I'm saying, too .... so:

The T-39 is really long in the tooth, having entered USN service @ early-mid '60s. It was up and running when I went through and available for STUD-NFO training ONLY as they were flown by VT-10. Obviously ... no pilot STUDs partook of the training as the pilot STUDs were otherwise occupied at Whiting, Ellyson, Meridian, Corpus, Kingsville, Beeville and the other end of the ramp @ Sherman Field.

The counterpart of the Saberliner for A-6 NFO training platform was the TC-4C, more commonly known as the 'Tick-4' ... the E-MEN simply called it the 'Tic'. It was a Grumman Gulfstream I with an 'A-6 nose', radar, and NAV/ATTACK computers as there were not any 'real' A-6 simulators in the early to mid years of the UGLY. So the boys @ Grumman loaded up a Pilot & Bombardier station (a semi-virtual A-6 cockpit complete w/ air conditioning for the A-6 electronics) in the tube of the Gulfstream and that's where the 'hands-on' portion of the syllabus was taught in earnest, prior to going to a squadron. I think it was last used around the end of the 1st Gulf War. Both the NAVY and the USMC had their own 'Tic-4's ... Navy 6, USMC 3.

Besides being a BN trainer, the TC-4 was frequently employed as an all-around aircraft that did yeoman service for the RAG and sometimes the NAS and was frequently utilized in roles that are reserved for the C-12 today. During weapons Dets to Fallon -- the TC-4C was the 'horse' that usually ferried personnel and 'important' small parts to the high desert that could not be accommodated in an INTRUDER.

It was usually crewed by a dedicated Aviator (assigned to the RAG) in the left seat w/ whomever could beg, buy, or steal 'future airline time' in the right seat -- sometimes E-MEN got 'stick time' ... accompanied by one or two B/N Instructors and 2-3 STUDs ... sometimes Aviator FRP's as well as FRBN's.

The routes were over eastern WA and sometimes Oregon -- emphasizing RBS training and 'bombing runs' on the radar 'range' operated out of Fairchild AFB. All FRBN's and all FRPs had to qualify prior to graduating from the RAG -- COMMATVAQWINGPAC BULLESEYE patches were awarded to both BNs and Pilots ... and some Instructor BN's sported dozens acquired over a career @ NUW.

p.s. ... NO ONE called it 'The Academe' ...

 

[HAL Pilot]

^ Back in the day, flying the Tic was a highly sought after P-3 pilot shore tour. I knew 2 that used it a path to an A-6 transition.

 

[A4sForever]

....@A4s: Did the BN students in the Tic actually nav/do comms, or were they strictly focusing on practicing bombing runs?

Not so much 'comms' as they were kinda' specific to the guy in the front seat and the route he was flying. He had to coordinate all that vis-à-vis his flight plan and ATC and then he had to check-in w/ Geiger for the radar 'bomb runs' with competition from commercial airlines and the Air Force. So, FRBNs doing 'comms' in the Tic-4?? Not that much ...

We'd sometimes overfly a low-level route at mid-altitudes and finish the route w/ an initial run (for BULL score -- you could only get a BULLSEYE patch on the first run), then followed by multiple radar bomb runs on the Spokane 'target' sites for practice & training. Other than the chitty-chat w/ center and Spokane/Fairchild, the FRBNs would basically do the whole 9 yards NAV-wise from take-off to radar hand-off on the return to a visual/IFR approach back into NUW. The TC-4C frequently requested & got permission from ATC to adhere to 'steering' provided from the A-6 cockpit mock-up in the tube ... again, comm was not that 'big' in the greater scheme of things, as any 'comm applications' derived from the TIC-4 into the world outside of training was problematical at best, what with Hanoi ATC being their usual 'uncooperative' selves ...

Since the entire NAV/ATTACK suite of radar,instrumentation & electronics was available on the 'TIC-4', it was a very good, relatively cheap, all-around practice platform for the nascent Bombardier/Navigators ... pilots, too.

 

[JIMC5499]

So that's what that damned thing was. I saw them on the transient line at Jax a few times.

 

[ea6bflyr]

The Museum in PCOLA has one in their backlot tour. Here's side #850 from VA-128:

-ea6bflyr

 

[Pugs]

The T-39 is really long in the tooth, having entered USN service @ early-mid '60s. It was up and running when I went through and available for STUD-NFO training ONLY as they were flown by VT-10.

I flew the T-47A Platypus when I was in 10 and 86 and the T-39's came back shortly after I left. There was a bunch of evals done and I flew a L/L after winging in a lear to write up an eval for using those. I think they also tried the Beechjet. In the end, the T-39's came out of the boneyard but I thought they had done some engine and avionics upgrades before they went back in service.

Besides being a BN trainer, [/B]the TC-4 was frequently employed as an all-around aircraft that did yeoman service for the RAG and sometimes the NAS and was frequently utilized in roles that are reserved for the C-12 today.

Yep, the guys from 128 were always game to get troops and parts to a broken jet in Minot or China Lake or some other garden spot when you needed it.

 

[SteveG75]

I was at VT-10 during the T-47 to T-39 change-over. The T-39N's had some newer avionics and a version of the APG-66 radar (F-16 radar).

 

[Pugs]

The T-39N's had some newer avionics and a version of the APG-66 radar (F-16 radar).

The T-47 had the APG-66 as well. You had to open the baggage door on the nose and look at the back of the dish and see whether the air to air or air to ground antenna installed.

Sorry for the threadjack back to more pleasant times on this sad occasion.

 

[A4sForever]

I decided to go ahead move these above posts from the crash thread -- the time is right and if anyone chooses, there's enough to talk about re: T-39 Saberliners and other assorted NFO in-flight training platforms. It now makes sense to bring it to a general discussion on its own merits w/out having to re-read the crash thread posts every time.

Stay safe out there. Best, all ....

 

[The Chief]

I decided to go ahead move these ... Stay safe out there. Best, all ....

Great. Thanks.

 

[A4sForever]

One of the better -- make that one of the better AND more 'fun' times in PCOLA was in VT-4 (GUNS & CQ) when we were paired up w/ VT-10 STUDs. We (pilots) were in the eastern hangar @ Sherman Field and VT-10 was in the western hangar and had T-39's and T-2's for STUD NFO training.

Some bright soul in STUCON thought up the idea of putting STUDENT NFO's in the backseats of STUDENT NAVAL AVIATORS for later stage GUN hops -- male Naval Aviation 'bonding'(?) -- as the STUD-NFO's were already seat qualed in the Buckeye having spent part of their training to date in it and the STUD-AVIATOR's were pretty competent by the time they'd reached VT-4 ...

It was fun ... it was GREAT ... both cockpit seats LOVED it ... it was probably the first time in Naval Aviation that the NA/NFO STUD population 'felt like a crew' ... instead of a solo on borrowed time and/or a STUD under instruction ... the pilots felt 'responsible' and the NFO's-to-be felt like a 'real' crew member.

At the time, it was a very positive experience in everyone's opinion.