Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:29 AM - Re: T-3 FIREFLY (Gary Casey)
2. 10:31 AM - Re: T-3 FIREFLY (Doug Dodson)
3. 02:05 PM - Re: T-3 FIREFLY (Jeff Boatright)
4. 09:36 PM - Re: T-3 FIREFLY (teamgrumman@aol.com)
5. 09:45 PM - Re: Re: T-3 FIREFLY (teamgrumman@aol.com)
6. 09:48 PM - Re: T-3 FIREFLY (Ed Chmielewski)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I'd sure like to know what those things were that were "overlooked"
in the design of the fuel delivery system, having just designed one
for my 540. Can you share that bit of knowledge?
Gary Casey
Lancair ES, IO-540
On Sep 21, 2006, at 11:56 PM, Engines-List Digest Server wrote:
>
> I did some of the testing at Edwards regarding the propulsion
> system. Whoever installed the 540 overlooked a lot of little things
> regarding fuel delivery. 'nuf said.
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Doug Dodson" <dodsond@qnet.com>
All true... the operation of the aircraft was abominable. The engine
installation needed work, but was not flawed beyond repair.
It took a lot of political pressure to get the USAF to accept the T-6A (a
turbo-prop) to replace the T-37 (a pure jet) for primary training at UPT.
That culture is finally fading from the USAF, but not quickly. I strongly
believe the T-3 mishaps and incidents were a directly a result of forcing
pilots to fly it that were trained not only on pure jet equipment but also
with the attitude that non-jets were beneath them. The aircraft were not
respected by mid-level leadership, and so that rubbed off on the pilots. I
know some felt they were being "left out" of the "real Air Force". Their
approach to the mission reflected that.
Still, the planes were goofy as you said. The USAF also got Slingsby to
re-configure the cockpit so the primary pilot seat was on the right... so
the mid-cockpit throttle would be in the left hand. Ridiculous. If given
one of the aircraft, I would take out the instruments, radios and other such
goodies, remove the engine and propeller, and scrap the airframe. Not that
it was unsafe, but it didn't fly "well". It was a dog performance-wise.
-Doug Dodson
Edwards AFB 1998-2006
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
teamgrumman@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 9:45 PM
Subject: Re: Engines-List: T-3 FIREFLY
--> Engines-List message posted by: teamgrumman@aol.com
-----Original Message-----
From: dodsond@qnet.com
Sent: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 5:09 AM
Subject: RE: Engines-List: T-3 FIREFLY
I was not directly involved in the testing at Edwards, but I worked on
other
concurrent projects with those that were.
I did some of the testing at Edwards regarding the propulsion
system. Whoever installed the 540 overlooked a lot of little things
regarding fuel delivery. 'nuf said.
Also, we were told that the students were instructed NOT to lean and to
treat the plane as if it were a jet ... i.e., single lever: the
throttle. Flying at the Springs at density altitudes into the teens
without leaning is poor instruction at best. I think the T-3A could
have been fixed and flown as a trainer by a competent instructor.
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: Jeff Boatright <jboatri@emory.edu>
So we've now had several people in the know tell us that the airplane
had problems, many of them brought on by the USAF higher-ups. The
USAF brass does the dirty deed (maybe they took lessons from
Chicago's Mayor Daley?) and then blames it on potential torts.
Hm.
I'd find them more believable if: 1) there was a history of similar
suits (there's an awful lot of military surplus equipment out there -
googling finds no cases brought against the feds due to selling Joe
Civie something that ended up killing him) and 2) if they didn't have
such a vested interest in making this all go away, what with being
(apparently) part of the original problem and then remaining
aggressively stupid about dealing with it.
There may be tons of surplus equipment tort cases out there
justifying blaming the litigation boogey man, so apologies if I
missed them. And apologies in advance if this opinion offends tender
sensibilities, but this sure smacks of classic CYA.
My less than two cents. Have great weekend, I'm off to fly the Piet!
--
_____________________________________________________________
Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD
Associate Professor, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, GA, USA
Senior Editor, Molecular Vision, http://www.molvis.org/molvis
mailto:jboatri@emory.edu
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: teamgrumman@aol.com
My Commander at Edwards was on the board that approved it. He tried to
talk the committee out of getting it, saying existing planes like a
T-34 would be cheaper and it was a known quantity from a certified
supplier. He was out voted.
Gary Vogt
Edwards AFB, 1982-1998
-----Original Message-----
From: Subject: RE: Engines-List: T-3 FIREFLY
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Doug Dodson" <dodsond@qnet.com>
It took a lot of political pressure to get the USAF to accept the T-6A
(a
turbo-prop) to replace the T-37 (a pure jet) for primary training at
UPT.
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: teamgrumman@aol.com
1. don't put the gascolator above the exhaust pipe
2. use at least 3/8 inch fuel line (not the 5/16 inch stuff like the
FireFly)
3. keep the boost pump as low as practical
- - the tests we did at SAIC showed a lot of pump cavitation when the
pressure at the carb was low
- - - although the fuel in the float bowl of the carb was probably
fine.
-----Original Message-----
From: glcasey@adelphia.net
Sent: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 5:26 AM
Subject: Engines-List: Re: T-3 FIREFLY
I'd sure like to know what those things were that were "overlooked"
in the design of the fuel delivery system, having just designed one for
my 540. Can you share that bit of knowledge?
Gary Casey
Lancair ES, IO-540
On Sep 21, 2006, at 11:56 PM, Engines-List Digest Server wrote:
I did some of the testing at Edwards regarding the propulsion
system. Whoever installed the 540 overlooked a lot of little things
regarding fuel delivery. 'nuf said.
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Ed Chmielewski" <edchmiel@mindspring.com>
Well said, Jeff!
Ed in JXN
MkII/503
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Boatright" <jboatri@emory.edu>
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 5:03 PM
Subject: RE: Engines-List: T-3 FIREFLY
(Snip)
> There may be tons of surplus equipment tort cases out there
> justifying blaming the litigation boogey man, so apologies if I
> missed them. And apologies in advance if this opinion offends tender
> sensibilities, but this sure smacks of classic CYA.
>
> My less than two cents. Have great weekend, I'm off to fly the Piet!
> --
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD
> Associate Professor, Emory Eye Center, Atlanta, GA, USA
> Senior Editor, Molecular Vision, http://www.molvis.org/molvis
> mailto:jboatri@emory.edu
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|