General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Puma44 on March 11, 2020, 01:47:14 PM
Title: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 11, 2020, 01:47:14 PM
Had the good fortune of participating in a Canadian Forces Maple Flag Exercise during one of my F-4E tours. We had just bombed an exercise target with six BDU-33 practice bombs. As we turned toward our egress heading, my wingman called out a Red Air threat coming down hard from high altitude. So, we stroked the burners in an attempt to out run the threat. At somewhat less than 200’, we crossed a ridge to see an exercise threat simulator on the ground directly ahead of us. I quickly rolled and pulled to avoid over flying the manned site. We weren’t supposed to over fly the manned sites, especially supersonic. Well, I tried.........
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 11, 2020, 02:19:40 PM
Fixed
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Shuffler on March 11, 2020, 02:35:09 PM
Hmmm
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 11, 2020, 02:43:58 PM
So, we stroked the burners in an attempt to out run the threat. At somewhat less than 200’, we crossed a ridge to see an exercise threat simulator on the ground directly ahead of us. I quickly rolled and pulled to avoid over flying the manned site. We weren’t supposed to over fly the manned sites, especially supersonic. Well, I tried.........
As the Slow Children guy in the crowd...did the Wirble virtually shoot you down...?
- oldman
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 11, 2020, 09:46:00 PM
As the Slow Children guy in the crowd...did the Wirble virtually shoot you down...?
- oldman
Luckily, the boom startled them enough that the couldn’t get a good virtual track on us and we extended virtually out of range. “Speed is Life!”
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 12, 2020, 09:03:44 AM
...and of course there is the rest of the story. Overcast skies with a weather alternate for our recovery base, CFB Cold Lake. More to come on that later today.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: morfiend on March 12, 2020, 12:49:13 PM
Ahhhh but did you get to sample some fine Canadian maple syrup?
:salute
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 12, 2020, 03:08:38 PM
So, after booming the manned threat simulator, we established our prebriefed express heading out of the exercise airspace. At low altitude and supersonic speed (660 knots ish), the airflow around the canopies created a lot of noise. This made it difficult to hear anything on the radios and somewhat so over the crew intercom. As we continued our supersonic egress, something very garbled was coming over the radio. Something neither of us could make out. It repeated a couple of times. At first, I wasn’t too concerned. I was intently concentrating on not hitting anything at our low altitude and airspeed. Occasionally I would glance at my wingman. Both guys in #2 were Lieutenants on their first full up, go for it exercise. The front seater was my star pupil, eager to learn, and quick to soak up any new knowledge or techniques that experienced guys had to offer. So, with a quick glance accompanied by the unintelligible radio noise, I saw him aggressively rocking his wings back and forth (normally a radio silent signal by lead to bring wingmen into close formation). Something was wrong. I rocked my wings, he quickly closed to close formation, and was signaling for a fuel check. He signaled 1200 lbs. I signaled back that I was at 4800 lbs. We were about 100 miles from CFB Cold Lake. I immediately turned us to point straight at Cold Lake and set our speed for max endurance.
Let me back track about three months in time to when we started constantly flying practice low levels to tactical pop up attacks in preparation for this Maple Flag Exercise. During every pre and post brief, I harshly emphasized the need to check your gas constantly and not run yourself dangerously low on fuel racing around at high speed/low altitude with your hair on fire.
Back to Maple Flag. Establishing us on a heading straight to CFB Cold Lake, I dialed in transponder code 7700 (EMERGENCY). Our heading was going to fly us straight through the Canadian version of the highly restricted airspace north of Nellie AFB. Any deviation off heading was going to run #2 out of fuel. This was going to be tight. Somewhere in here a radio call came across guard channel “All Maple Flag aircraft be advised that CFB Cold Lake is now IFR, alternate is CFB Moosejaw”. We always carried alternate fuel for a diversion in the event of an incident at Cold Lake. Normally it was Calgary International airport, about 140 miles away. Moosejaw was 300+ miles from Cold Lake. From our position it was 200 miles away. In any event, #2’s only chance of landing was at Cold Lake. For reference, we typically planned 1,000 lbs of fuel consumption per 100 miles cruising at 20,000 feet. So, the guys in #2 definitely had seat cushion being sucked into their sphincters.
Then, another guard channel call advised that CFB Cold Lake weather was 1,000 ft overcast with light snow falling and to expect vectors to the TACAN holding fix for sequencing to instrument approaches. Well, that wasn’t gonna happen for us. Shortly, after that we checked in with Cold Lake approach, I advised that we’re an emergency, #2 is at a critically low fuel state, and we were coming to initial (visual overhead break). The controller replied that the overhead was closed and expect vectors to the holding pattern. At this point, I shed all professional bearing and told the controller to clear the pattern and that we would enter the overhead at 800 ft agl (normally 1500 ft agl) and get my #2 on the ground ASAP. The controller replied “copy, understand, contact tower”.
So, we checked in with tower, told him what we were going to do, set up for initial, and were cleared to land. At the approach end of the runway, l signaled #2 to pitch out and we followed five seconds later. We extended our pattern until he was sure to land and followed for landing. We both exited the runway, went through the normal end of runway checks and taxied back to the chocks. After shutdown and deplaning, the four of us joined up on the ramp for the walk to maintenance debriefing. Both of them were completely soaked with sweat. As we approached, I asked the front seater how much fuel they shut down with. He relied with “You’ll be proud of me boss. I shut an engine down after touchdown to conserve fuel”. I agreed that was a good call and again asked him how much shutdown with and he mumbled something unintelligible. We went back and forth a couple of times with no results and him only telling me I didn’t want to know. So, I explained the two ways this could play out. One, he could keep it a secret, the crew chief would refuel the jet, report to his line chief how much fuel it didn’t have when it was shutdown, the line chief would tell the maintenance officer, and he would tell the Deputy Chief of Maintenance who then tell our squadron commander, who would tell the ops officer, who would then come to me with this huge pile of guano, and be quite pissed off about the way he heard about it. Two, he could tell me, I would go to the ops officer and explain how it happened and that you had been thoroughly debriefed, butt chewed, and it would NEVER happen again. The ops officer would then feed the properly resolved issue up channel. I asked him which option he would like. He said “I shut down with 350 lbs showing on the gauges”. The F-4 fuel gauge accuracy tolerance was +-350lbs. I briefed our ops officer.
So, surely curious minds want to know. How did this happen?
Our attack heading on the bombing target was generally northwest. Our prebriefed egress heading was southeast in order to deconflict with other exercise aircraft. We were starting a right hand turn when the threat was called out and I stroked the burners. So did #2. (Important flight lead tip here, and it works in game). When I stroked the burners, the throttles were pushed to the forward stops and pulled back half way, to give #2 some power advantage to stay in position. My wingman was on the left side during our hard charging right hand turn. He elected to stay on the outside of the turn and in max afterburner throughout the turn and a good distance on our egress heading, instead of cutting across my turn circle to the egress heading and reducing burner. At some point, he checked his fuel, scared the crap out of the two of them, simultaneous came out of burner, and started rocking his wings.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 12, 2020, 03:15:08 PM
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Rocco on March 12, 2020, 03:28:33 PM
Great story Puma, love all your stories! :salute
Just curious why Calgary was the usual alternate and not Edmonton (which is a lot closer)? If I remember right CFB Namao just north of Edmonton was still an air base in the '80s and early '90s as well. Was it just the chances of Edmonton sharing Cold Lake's weather too high?
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 12, 2020, 03:47:00 PM
Just curious why Calgary was the usual alternate and not Edmonton (which is a lot closer)? If I remember right CFB Namao just north of Edmonton was still an air base in the '80s and early '90s as well. Was it just the chances of Edmonton sharing Cold Lake's weather too high?
Now that you mention it, I remember Edmonton was the original/normal alternate. We planned to overfly and go to Calgary if wx was an issue at Edmonton. That day things changed for the worst all the way around. Thanks for knocking the rust off my memory. :salute
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Rocco on March 12, 2020, 04:46:51 PM
No worries, it's a minor detail from 30 years ago. I only asked because I'm from Edmonton. As a kid we used to go camping up by Cold Lake every summer. Seeing the CF-18's fly by at low level was always a highlight. Never was boomed though!lol
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Busher on March 12, 2020, 05:18:21 PM
Now that you mention it, I remember Edmonton was the original/normal alternate. We planned to overfly and go to Calgary if wx was an issue at Edmonton. That day things changed for the worst all the way around. Thanks for knocking the rust off my memory. :salute
Hey Puma <S>, I always enjoy your posts. I always felt I missed something not having the chance to fly a military jet in my career. Do you recall.... Could you fly to civil limits in crappy weather? Did you have to do a GCA or maybe you had an ILS receiver? The Airline I flew for used to send us to Trenton (RCAF base) to keep us proficient at GCA's. Those guys on the ground were amazing.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 12, 2020, 06:58:35 PM
Hey Puma <S>, I always enjoy your posts. I always felt I missed something not having the chance to fly a military jet in my career. Do you recall.... Could you fly to civil limits in crappy weather? Did you have to do a GCA or maybe you had an ILS receiver? The Airline I flew for used to send us to Trenton (RCAF base) to keep us proficient at GCA's. Those guys on the ground were amazing.
Hey Busher! Thanks!
Wx mins were dependent on the command. For instance, my first assignment was as a T-33 pilot in the Aerospace Defense Command. We were trained to fly to field minimums wherever it might be. As a brand new, fresh out of the schoolhouse, 2nd Lt T-33 pilot, I led a four ship of T birds from Colorado Springs to Prince Edward Island, Canada. It was pretty much as far northeast as we could go on the continent. Of course, I had a very experienced, old head, crusty, seeing eye Major in my back seat. I had the responsibility for all the flight planning, fuel stops, etc for four jets and seven other pilots. We stopped at Scott AFB for fuel, food and pressed on, arriving at Prince Edward well after dark in a raging snow storm. We all flew PAR approaches to minimums. That was a half mile vis if memory serves me correctly. The T-33 didn’t have anything close to an instrument T or six pack on the instrument panel but, did have ILS capability. It was pretty much a hodgepodge of instruments that took some time to get good with.
In comparison, a visit with one of my pilot training buds during his six month Tactical Air Command F-4 school, revealed that his wx minimums were 1500 and 5 until he had X number of F-4 hours after the schoolhouse. It then ratcheted down as he got more hours in the jet. I think the lowest wx mins an experienced F-4 jock could get to was 500 and 3. I may be slightly off on the numbers but, it was surprising that the leading tactical fighter was so limited. At the time, Phantoms didn’t have ILS, only non precision TACAN, and the trusty old PAR.
Agree, the PAR controllers could work magic. That was always a fun and gratifying approach to fly. :salute
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Busher on March 12, 2020, 07:41:15 PM
Wx mins were dependent on the command. For instance, my first assignment was as a T-33 pilot in the Aerospace Defense Command. We were trained to fly to field minimums wherever it might be. As a brand new, fresh out of the schoolhouse, 2nd Lt T-33 pilot, I led a four ship of T birds from Colorado Springs to Prince Edward Island, Canada. It was pretty much as far northeast as we could go on the continent. Of course, I had a very experienced, old head, crusty, seeing eye Major in my back seat. I had the responsibility for all the flight planning, fuel stops, etc for four jets and seven other pilots. We stopped at Scott AFB for fuel, food and pressed on, arriving at Prince Edward well after dark in a raging snow storm. We all flew PAR approaches to minimums. That was a half mile vis if memory serves me correctly. The T-33 didn’t have anything close to an instrument T or six pack on the instrument panel but, did have ILS capability. It was pretty much a hodgepodge of instruments that took some time to get good with.
In comparison, a visit with one of my pilot training buds during his six month Tactical Air Command F-4 school, revealed that his wx minimums were 1500 and 5 until he had X number of F-4 hours after the schoolhouse. It then ratcheted down as he got more hours in the jet. I think the lowest wx mins an experienced F-4 jock could get to was 500 and 3. I may be slightly off on the numbers but, it was surprising that the leading tactical fighter was so limited. At the time, Phantoms didn’t have ILS, only non precision TACAN, and the trusty old PAR.
Agree, the PAR controllers could work magic. That was always a fun and gratifying approach to fly. :salute
Thanks for that, Puma. I forgot to ask you, what was a typical Vref for the Phantom?
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 12, 2020, 08:22:35 PM
142 knots at 33,000 lbs gross weight, plus 2 knots per 1,000 lbs over 33,000 lbs.
Thank you. I thought it might be higher but that's quite manageable. A former FO of mine flew 104's in the RCAF and he told me they were typically 200 over the fence.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 12, 2020, 09:29:48 PM
Thank you. I thought it might be higher but that's quite manageable. A former FO of mine flew 104's in the RCAF and he told me they were typically 200 over the fence.
That makes sense with those tiny wings.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: ACE on March 13, 2020, 11:32:10 AM
You guys ever try slapping a cold air intake on those phantom? Prolly give ya some more horses.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Shuffler on March 13, 2020, 04:02:10 PM
Another great read...
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: streakeagle on March 18, 2020, 08:08:01 PM
I love all of your stories, but F-4 stories are my favorite :)
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 18, 2020, 08:17:59 PM
I love all of your stories, but F-4 stories are my favorite :)
Thanks! Glad you enjoy them. The Rhino was my favorite heavy lifter. Anything the could be strapped to the bottom could be taken out and dropped on someone’s head, not to mention the noise it could make.
The F-106, or “Iron Triangle” as some often called it was basically the Lamborghini of fighters. Pure sex appeal and high speed, no drag. I was always amazed how much airplane was behind me after unstrapping and climbing down the boarding ladder. It was incredibly nimble for its size.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Oldman731 on March 18, 2020, 09:23:15 PM
The F-106, or “Iron Triangle” as some often called it was basically the Lamborghini of fighters. Pure sex appeal and high speed, no drag. I was always amazed how much airplane was behind me after unstrapping and climbing down the boarding ladder. It was incredibly nimble for its size.
Next to the 105, it's always been my favorite century series.
Although almost all of them were a kid's dream planes. A pity they were unsafe by modern standards.
As others have said, we envy your experience, Puma. Please keep the tales coming.
- oldman
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 19, 2020, 07:48:06 AM
Perhaps I was over-inclusive. The accident rates for the F-100 and F-104 are famous. Hard to tell with the F-105 which of the losses were combat and which were accidents, but nearly half of the total production was destroyed. Everyone seems to have liked your 106 (see Jack Broughton's article, here: https://www.airforcemag.com/PDF/MagazineArchive/Documents/2012/September%202012/0912century.pdf). May well be that the problem was training pilots to handle the fast new jets (there's a study out there somewhere).
- oldman
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: morfiend on March 19, 2020, 09:11:11 AM
So Puma,did you get paid to have all that fun? Seems like you should have had to pay them not the other way around!
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
:salute
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Busher on March 19, 2020, 09:34:12 AM
Puma, if you don't mind me asking, why did you leave the Air Force in favor of civil aviation? In Canada where I live it's an obvious choice - Pilots are removed from flying far too soon and assigned a desk - if they stay in.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 19, 2020, 09:42:56 AM
Perhaps I was over-inclusive. The accident rates for the F-100 and F-104 are famous. Hard to tell with the F-105 which of the losses were combat and which were accidents, but nearly half of the total production was destroyed. Everyone seems to have liked your 106 (see Jack Broughton's article, here: https://www.airforcemag.com/PDF/MagazineArchive/Documents/2012/September%202012/0912century.pdf). May well be that the problem was training pilots to handle the fast new jets (there's a study out there somewhere).
- oldman
I thought that was where you were going with your statement but, just wanted to inquire. Yeah, the swept wing Hun was pretty scary at first but was proven to be flown safely after some notable pilots demonstrated it. The F-104, referred to as the “Zipper” was obviously a key to be handled carefully. Definitely not slow speed dogfighter. :D
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 19, 2020, 09:45:30 AM
So Puma,did you get paid to have all that fun? Seems like you should have had to pay them not the other way around!
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
:salute
Oh yeah, I got paid to do it. That’s the fantastic part of military aviation. I never told anyone, but I would have paid to do it. Shhhhhh! Don’t tell anyone. :x
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Mister Fork on March 19, 2020, 09:53:04 AM
Seriously Puma, you need to write down your stories into a book. And I'm sure you have some great ones as a SouthWest cattle hauler. My wife was a FA for 10 years, and man, the stories I heard when she came back from a pairing.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 19, 2020, 10:13:36 AM
Puma, if you don't mind me asking, why did you leave the Air Force in favor of civil aviation? In Canada where I live it's an obvious choice - Pilots are removed from flying far too soon and assigned a desk - if they stay in.
Busher, I retired at the end of 21 years and after PCS to my desired retirement assignment. I did get stuck at a desk the last few years due to the administration at the time drawing (historically typical with democratic administrations) down the military. I volunteered to fly anything, anywhere on the planet just to get back in the cockpit. I was basically told by my assignments handler to “go pack sand”. The USAF also had/has an “Every man a general officer” mentality, meaning EVERYONE had to do professional military education (PME) that had nothing to do with flying and fighting. Without this PME, promotion to higher ranks wasn’t going to happen. So, pilots were/are forced to use time and effort on this stuff that didn’t make for a better war fighter, but a very small chance of being a general officer. And they couldn’t, and still don’t, understand why pilots were bailing in droves to go to the airlines. So, at some point, the pilots get pissed off enough to step over the side for a much better life style. I could go on for pages.........
A couple of years ago, I was “birthday retired” from the airlines after 21 years.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Busher on March 19, 2020, 10:30:31 AM
Busher, I retired at the end of 21 years and after PCS to my desired retirement assignment. I did get stuck at a desk the last few years due to the administration at the time drawing (historically typical with democratic administrations) down the military. I volunteered to fly anything, anywhere on the planet just to get back in the cockpit. I was basically told by my assignments handler to “go pack sand”. The USAF also had/has an “Every man a general officer” mentality, meaning EVERYONE had to do professional military education (PME) that had nothing to do with flying and fighting. Without this PME, promotion to higher ranks wasn’t going to happen. So, pilots were/are forced to use time and effort on this stuff that didn’t make for a better war fighter, but a small chance of being a general officer. And they couldn’t, and still don’t, understand why pilots were bailing in droves to go to the airlines. So, at some point, the pilots get pissed off enough to step over the side for a much better life style. I could go on for pages.........
A couple of years ago, I was “birthday retired” from the airlines after 21 years.
Thanks for that. As a check airman and instructor for the airline, I heard basically the same story from so many former military pilots (who as I mentioned before were a joy to train - way beyond just the basic initial endorsement stuff).
I never could understand military "thinking". To allow a very experienced resource to get separated from flying and from all the young candidates that crave the knowledge they have just seems kinda dumb.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 19, 2020, 10:48:21 AM
Thanks for that. As a check airman and instructor for the airline, I heard basically the same story from so many former military pilots (who as I mentioned before were a joy to train - way beyond just the basic initial endorsement stuff).
I never could understand military "thinking". To allow a very experienced resource to get separated from flying and from all the young candidates that crave the knowledge they have just seems kinda dumb.
Agree, a very expensive, highly experienced resource gone to waste. When I graduated USAF UPT, just over a million dollars had been spent on my training. That’s just a base line pilot. Then there are survival schools, the first operational aircraft, and continuing flight training/proficiency in that aircraft.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 19, 2020, 10:54:07 AM
Seriously Puma, you need to write down your stories into a book. And I'm sure you have some great ones as a SouthWest cattle hauler. My wife was a FA for 10 years, and man, the stories I heard when she came back from a pairing.
Thanks Fork! You guys are convincing me slowly but surely.
Your wife is a Super Hero! I could have never handled what FAs put up with and always supported them when it was time for a bad actor pax to get off the aircraft. Like a bull rider tries to make 8 seconds on the beast, I could have never lasted in the back without getting fired. 8 seconds? No way!
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Mister Fork on March 19, 2020, 12:52:47 PM
Thanks Fork! You guys are convincing me slowly but surely.
Your wife is a Super Hero! I could have never handled what FAs put up with and always supported them when it was time for a bad actor pax to get off the aircraft. Like a bull rider tries to make 8 seconds on the beast, I could have never lasted in the back without getting fired. 8 seconds? No way!
From unruly passengers, amazingly trashy public hygiene issues, sexual misconduct of passengers (AND staff), and then, there are just the scary landings. She could write a book as well.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Arlo on March 19, 2020, 04:28:56 PM
From unruly passengers, amazingly trashy public hygiene issues, sexual misconduct of passengers (AND staff), and then, there are just the scary landings. She could write a book as well.
I encourage her, too.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Busher on March 19, 2020, 05:18:27 PM
From unruly passengers, amazingly trashy public hygiene issues, sexual misconduct of passengers (AND staff), and then, there are just the scary landings. She could write a book as well.
I had in my crew some truly wonderful ladies (yes the majority were ladies back then) looking after the customers. I know the kind of abusive passenger behavior these days would lead me to have the cops meet a lot of airplanes.
We enjoyed the teamwork... they used to joke - do you know what separates a Flight Attendant from the lowest form of scum on the earth... the cockpit door. It was all in good fun.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 19, 2020, 09:32:06 PM
From unruly passengers, amazingly trashy public hygiene issues, sexual misconduct of passengers (AND staff), and then, there are just the scary landings. She could write a book as well.
Oh, my.....trashy public hygiene issues! In the 737, the forward law is directly behind the Captain’s seat. Up front we could hear and smell everything that was or wasn’t happening in the lav. For instance, we could hear if the soap dispenser was used, or not, the water faucet was used, or not, or if paper towels were pulled out of the dispenser, or not, and if the lav door was locked or not. Especially disturbing was if all the above were “or nots” and the door was unlocked and opened, after an eye irritating odor seeped into the cockpit. :x
Busher, I’m suspect you and I could fill a multi page thread of adventures with the traveling public.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Busher on March 20, 2020, 12:13:05 PM
Busher, I’m suspect you and I could fill a multi page thread of adventures with the traveling public.
You flew in the airlines so I know you meant to say "a multi page thread of aggravations with the traveling public". I always thought FedEx would be a better seat.
Now let's get back to the jets you flew and that I would have loved to fly.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Spitter on March 20, 2020, 02:37:05 PM
Thanks for that. As a check airman and instructor for the airline, I heard basically the same story from so many former military pilots (who as I mentioned before were a joy to train - way beyond just the basic initial endorsement stuff).
I never could understand military "thinking". To allow a very experienced resource to get separated from flying and from all the young candidates that crave the knowledge they have just seems kinda dumb.
If it's any consolation, the USAF still hasn't learned this lesson. (I'm a civilian contractor at Hill AFB and we get a lot of 'retired' pilots that just want to fly.)
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 21, 2020, 12:05:02 PM
If it's any consolation, the USAF still hasn't learned this lesson. (I'm a civilian contractor at Hill AFB and we get a lot of 'retired' pilots that just want to fly.)
No doubt about that at all. The ongoing joke, and maybe reality, is that when pilots get promoted to O-6 and above, they go to a secret place, get a pre frontal lobotomy, and lose all sense of reality about being one of the troops in the trenches. They become more concerned with the politics of making the next rank, more stars on their shoulders, and forget how much political games piss off those they “lead”.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Puma44 on March 21, 2020, 12:09:29 PM
Really enjoyed the video. At the of it there's an F-4 moving away in the distance, can tell by the dark exhaust smoke. Was that you Puma?
Glad you liked it Shifty. Yes, that was us. We were supersonic and had come out of burner trying to understand what was coming over the radio, which turned out to be my drastically short of fuel wingman. Our jet had yet to be converted to the smokeless engines. As a side note, we jokingly referred to coming out of burner to be an excellent defensive move with a bandit closing on us. Along with the thick smoke came the associated cinders that would hopefully obscure the opponent’s vision.
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Shifty on March 28, 2020, 04:33:28 PM
:rofl Awesome! :aok
Title: Re: Trolling the Canadian Forrest in the Phantom
Post by: Oldman731 on March 28, 2020, 07:19:56 PM