America's Newest Warbird: The T-53A

JohnB · **Posted:** Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:09 pm

Nutty Merrill McPeak, the former USAF Chief of Staff, defended the purchase of the T-3s with an infamous quote...
"I don't want my pilots training in a plane lthat a dentist would fly his family in on vacation."
Which is why (in part) they bought the T-3...

He won't be happy with a Cirrus (the ultimate dentist plane, IMHO...often chosen by people new to aviation because they saw Angelina Jolie fly one in Vanity Fair)....I guess his friends at the Pentagon..(if he has any) didn't listen.
Still, as a vocal and visible Obama supporter in the campaign, I'd expect he still has some pull.

brucev · **Posted:** Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:26 pm

shrike wrote:

k5dh wrote:

As has been pointed out, the Cessna 172/T-41 is perfectly well suited to this mission and has an institutional history (ie. there have been lots of people who know 'what' and 'how') since 1964. They are less costly to maintain, operate and repair. Engine overhauls for the IO-550-N in the Cirrus are 50% more expensive than the IO-360L2A in current 172. Fuel burn is 25 - 50% higher per hour, and aluminum structures lend themselves better to localized repairs than do composites.

the link starting this thread states they are buying a variant of the SR20 which uses some version of the IO-360 itself, not the IO-550 which is in the SR22

kalamazookid · **Posted:** Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:03 pm

Does this mean I can buy one and put a shark's mouth on it?

Speedy · **Posted:** Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:24 pm

kalamazookid wrote:

Does this mean I can buy one and put a shark's mouth on it?

Just don't paint the inside of the landing gear doors green.

gale_dono · **Joined:** Mon Sep 08, 2008 2:32 pm **Posts:** 328

RyanShort1 wrote:

Based on the GA record I'd have picked the Diamond before the Cirrus - and I guess that means the USAF is buying Chinese aircraft now, too, since the Chinese now own Cirrus. I wonder how long it will take for one of those to crash and burn - which is the number one reason I'm unsettled about the plane. It's apparent propensity towards total loss after any sort of accident.

Ryan

I don't really see how Cirrus' ownership would affect their product in any way; the aircraft are still built here. Overseas ownership is just a part of the 21st Century world.

Pogmusic · **Posted:** Fri Jul 08, 2011 2:20 pm

I think most everyone misunderstands the intended use of this aircraft. IIRC, It is not for training pilots to solo and fly around. It is for screening and familiarization flights by certified USAF IPs with cadets in the other seat(s).

gtokid · **Posted:** Fri Jul 08, 2011 4:48 pm

I work for Purdue University's Aviation Technology Department. We purchased 16 Cirrus SR20's last year for flight training use. So far they been pretty good aircraft. All of them have over 500 hours on them with no major issues and no chute deployments. A representative from the Air Force visited us just this week. Sounds like they are mostly using them for intro flights that all cadets take, and they don't anticipate flying as many hours as we do. They do plan on spins which is something we don't teach in the Cirrus. They are equiped the same as ours with the IO-360ES, 2 blade prop, and Garmin Prospective (G1000). Someone mentioned the brake fires; we ordered 13 of our aircraft without wheel fairings/pants, and haven't any brake overtemps. I'll admit as Piper guys, we were abit skeptical at first, but the SR20 is winning us over. I think the Air Force will be quite happy with their purchase.

-Todd

shrike · **Posted:** Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:12 pm

brucev wrote:

shrike wrote:

k5dh wrote:

As has been pointed out, the Cessna 172/T-41 is perfectly well suited to this mission and has an institutional history (ie. there have been lots of people who know 'what' and 'how') since 1964. They are less costly to maintain, operate and repair. Engine overhauls for the IO-550-N in the Cirrus are 50% more expensive than the IO-360L2A in current 172. Fuel burn is 25 - 50% higher per hour, and aluminum structures lend themselves better to localized repairs than do composites.

the link starting this thread states they are buying a variant of the SR20 which uses some version of the IO-360 itself, not the IO-550 which is in the SR22

Mea Culpa. Change overhaul cost to 30% more expensive, fuel burn is now a wash depending on pilot ability, and I'll stick to aluminium being easier to repair

sdennison · **Posted:** Fri Jul 08, 2011 10:58 pm

AF student pilots with a savior chute? You've gotta be sh!ttin me! Easy Pop. :roll:

I think the syllabus should just be computer sims then jump in the real thing and go. No PT, BT, AT right to the end result. WTF? Just like a computer, eh? Cirrus have a stick?

Forgotten Field · **Posted:** Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:54 am

Cirrus,
BAHHHH! The USAAF started going downhill when they went to electric starters and got rid of the biplanes... What a bunch of pansies... Glass cockpits... PSHAWW! Successful outcomes in WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Persian Gulf, Afghanistan? They just got lucky, is all... What could they possibly know about what airplanes to buy?

Just jealous, is all. Sarcastically yours,
Steely-eyed, barrel-chested, rag-wing flyin', steam-gauge usin', Forgotten Field...

Warbird Information Exchange

America's Newest Warbird: The T-53A

Who is online