T-38 advanced fliying problems

[avallillo 3]

I have had the T-38, both the original and now the advanced versions, for a few years now, and I have had the devil's own time flying both of them.  Now if I had not flown the real thing for over 100 hours in UPT I would perhaps not be so nonplussed, but either this thing has some serious flight model issues or else (and this is always a possibility!) there is something wrong with my computer or my disk version FSX installation (I had the same problems with it in FSXSE back when I had it installed in both).

Now I must confess up front that although I have time in the real airplane, it was all done back in 1972!  So I may have forgotten a thing or two over the intervening 46 years!  But in truth the T-38 is not an airplane that you forget. It flew beautifully.  So does this one, above about 300 knots.  But I always encounter horrendous stall buffet below around 175 knots, and it takes full burner to drag it to the flare.  It also buffets at rotation at 150 knots or so.  The real thing did not do this back then!  If it had, the Air Force would have had a much bigger pilot shortage a lot sooner than they got one now, because all of us would have been killed trying to fly it! 

Kids with just 100 total hours, most of that in the T-37, were able to learn to fly this without much fuss.  In my class (Craig, 72-08) we did not lose anybody in the T-38 phase, although that may have been a bit unusual.  But the airplane did not buffet and fall out of the sky below 170 knots - I recall our final approach airspeed being somewhere in the vicinity of 150 knots and over the fence even slower than that.  On my computer the airplane will not fly that slow at all!

I have thus never really had the opportunity to fly this airplane much, since each flight begins and ends with death staring you in the face!  I don't know if it is my computer, my FSX setup, or my stick.  The computer is a middle of the road Dell XPS with an I-7-3770 at around 3.5ghz with 8 gig or RAM, and an NVidia GTX 1050Ti with 4 gigs or VRAM.  The stick is the very nicd Thrustmaster HOTAS (not the one that looks like the real thing and costs as much, but rather the simpler one).. 

I should be able to fly this thing down final fully configured at less than MIL power at 150 knots with no buffet whatsoever, and make at least 30 degree banked turns in that configuration.  Again, if memory serves.  We did not have the AOA gauge back then and used the airspeed, but had no problems with that at all.  I recall never experiencing any buffet in the real thing except for the lesson involving accelerated stalls, where we induced the buffet deliberately just to experience it.

Ideas anyone?  Does anyone else have this same problem?

[hs118 707]

According to the flight manual, AOA speed is roughly 155 KIA plus 1 KIA for every 100lbs of fuel more than 1000 lbs. So if you have 1100 lbs of fuel, AOA speed would be approximately 156 KIAS. 

With 3500 lbs of fuel, approx. AOA speed would be 155 + (2500 /100) = 180 KIA.

That's been my experience...170-175 pretty typical approach speeds at 2.5 deg glideslope after taking off fat with gas. 

How does this compare to what you are seeing?

 

 

[Bob Scott 7,716]

155 + fuel + 15 knots if you're no-flap.  No mention of the flaps here so far.

At computed approach speed (AOA=0.6, green "donut"), the white rocket is in a continuous mild rumbling buffet that resembles driving down a well-maintained gravel road.  As you get slow (high AOA), you start getting bumps that resemble potholes at AOA between 0.65-0.75 (green donut plus red chevron), and then you get wing rocking and heavy bumps at AOA exceeding 0.8 (red chevron).

Flying approaches in the T-38 involved keeping a close eye on the critical performance triad--configuration, power setting, and AOA.  You can have two out of the three correct, leaving just one out, and still quickly drive the pointy-end into the dirt.  IIRC, it took ~92% N2 on a properly set-up final.

Cheers

[Milviz 919]

We had so many T-38A pilots (real life ones) fly this plane into the ground during testing...  We're pretty sure it's right.

If you feel that it's not... in some way... please get on our support forums and we will try to help you... though, honestly, the way it flies is something we're not likely to change.

[jcorstjens 63]

I also tried to get competent on landing this plane for several years now, but have the same concerns as Avallillo, the slow speed behaviour of this plane is a killer.

I only have PPL SEP 15yrs+ experience, but I talked to two T38 instructor pilots at the Nellis airshow 2017. Those Talon drivers told me that the T38 was easy to fly and establishes very forgiving approach and landing behaviour at speeds around and below 165kts, which is by far NOT the case in the Milviz  simulation.  The fact that Milviz confirms that T38 drivers testing the simulation also crashed during landings seems to confirm this observation. The T38 is the most nervous and critical Milviz jet (I do own them all) during approach and landing, and for a training airplane that is unusual!

 

 

[hs118 707]

8 hours ago, w6kd said:

155 + fuel + 15 knots if you're no-flap.  No mention of the flaps here so far.

Full flaps for my comments. 

In the Milviz model, I haven't experienced the mild buffeting but will tell you for sure if you get slow, the wings will rock and PIO can ensue.

[Milviz 919]

The buffeting is when you are close to a stall.

 

If you wish to speak with the T-38A drivers, feel free to join the forums and ask them their comments.  (FYI, yes, it's EASY to fly/land if you know what to do with the aircraft... i.e. have an instructor with you.  Otherwise... not so much)

[avallillo 3]

It was indeed a handful back in the day, in the first dozen or so lessons, which is why in UPT the student started out his or her T-38 training on instruments in the back seat (at least when I went through).  Landing an airplane that is going as fast as this one does would be a challenge even today, after flying over 20,000 hours in jet transports. 

That being said, however, I do not recall any mild buffeting on approach.  We were aware of the "pebbles, rocks, and boulders" of the high angle of attack regime, but I have no recollection of being in that regime on a properly flown approach, even in the flare.  Now it is true that we did not have AOA information, and all of our flying was done with reference to airspeed.  Perhaps we were flying it faster than it is now being flown using AOA, I have no idea. 

On the other hand, if real contemporary T-38 pilots are augering into the ground, that should be a master caution light going off!  Even allowing for possible unfamiliarity with PC based flight simulation with its utter lack of feedback cues other than visual, I would not expect a professional pilot current on a type to repeatedly crash an MSFS simulation, if it was accurate. 

Some years back, about halfway between today and when I graduated from UPT, I had the opportunity to "fly" the USAF Link Trainer for the T-38 - the same ones we flew in 1972.  Although by no means as sophisticated as a modern Level D simulator, they were state-of-the-art in the day.  The link did not misbehave on approach when I flew it (around 1995).

jcorstens hits the nail on the head - if the real plane flew like this it would indeed be a student killer (and an IP killer as well!), and totally unsuitable as a trainer.  The safety record of the Talon and the IP comments jcorstens quotes prove otherwise.

Make no mistake - this is an outstanding piece of work, and the appearance and operation (with the sole exception of takeoff and landing) is superb.  When that virtual cockpit pops up onscreen I feel like I have traveled back in time to 1972!  Indeed, the T-38 is one of two airplanes (the other is the Boeing 727) that I really wish I could fly one more time before I put the "W" under the lubber line of life.   If only.............

Where are the support forums of which you speak?  At Milviz' website I find only a general sort of forum with but a single page....

[hs118 707]

19 minutes ago, avallillo said:

...before I put the "W" under the lubber line of life.  

love this!

[Katoun 30]

Just now, avallillo said:

Where are the support forums of which you speak? 

Support forms are for verified customers. Send me your proof of purchase and I'll register you.

[Bob Scott 7,716]

7 hours ago, jcorstjens said:

I also tried to get competent on landing this plane for several years now, but have the same concerns as Avallillo, the slow speed behaviour of this plane is a killer.

I only have PPL SEP 15yrs+ experience, but I talked to two T38 instructor pilots at the Nellis airshow 2017. Those Talon drivers told me that the T38 was easy to fly and establishes very forgiving approach and landing behaviour at speeds around and below 165kts, which is by far NOT the case in the Milviz  simulation.  The fact that Milviz confirms that T38 drivers testing the simulation also crashed during landings seems to confirm this observation. The T38 is the most nervous and critical Milviz jet (I do own them all) during approach and landing, and for a training airplane that is unusual!

I flew the T-38 as an instructor, and "forgiving" was *never* a word I heard used to describe the T-38's flight characteristics.  We killed a lot of pilots in the traffic pattern in the T-38 over the years--it was meant to be an advanced training platform with flight characteristics representative of the high-performance fighters in the 60s, (e.g. F-104, F-4, F-102, F-100 etc) not to be "forgiving" or easy to fly.  The T-37 might have been more properly characterized that way, but not the white rocket.  It's a high-speed, high wing-loading, swept wing afterburning jet that will bite an inattentive pilot in the fanny in a heartbeat--we were losing around five a year to (usually fatal) accidents back when I flew them in the height of the Reagan Cold War buildup.

The Milviz panel uses gauge programming to simulate the wing rock at high AOA, and I have found it to be a fair bit overdone in its onset and intensity.  For the purposes of the sim, carrying a few extra knots of airspeed helps stay away from that anomalous behavior.

Regards

 

[Milviz 919]

We did the wing rock that way for sim purposes...  illusion is everything... you can't feel it but you can SEE it...

 

 

[hs118 707]

Funny story and the moment I became a Milviz fan, not a fan-boy but someone who really appreciated their work. 

After the F-4J/S came out, there were at least 2 big uproars about the model. One brouhaha was about the flight model. All the "experienced" and "serious" simmers claimed the flight model was wrong because they couldn't slow fly fat with gas. Nevermind they weren't looking at the AOA gauge and were trying to fly it with airspeed (uncompensated for weight). The bird would get slow and starting rocking and bucking. Especially the rocking was called into question. N'er did the serious ones read the NATOPS flight characteristics or check the performance limitations. 

Not long after the internet whining about the flight model, some repainters at another forum started complaining about a little bump on the left side of the fuselage between the wing root and the exhaust nozzles. Turns out this little bump was a light put there by the US Navy. When the bricks would come aboard at night, if the pilots were slow, the wings would rock and the light would appear to flash to the LSO. 

Anyway, after flying the original T-38A and the very first version of the F-4J/S, I was hooked (and did some hooking). 

EDIT: Don't want to start an internet shoestorm, but the very first alpha, the most raw product, of the KingAir flew the POH numbers closer than ANY other non-Blackhawk KA produced by any other developer.

[Milviz 919]

Henry.... 

Honestly, that is the nicest compliment of what the MV team has done.... I actually teared up.

Thanks for that, on behalf of the MV team... we appreciate it.

Colin

[hs118 707]

22 minutes ago, Milviz said:

Henry.... 

Honestly, that is the nicest compliment of what the MV team has done.... I actually teared up.

Thanks for that, on behalf of the MV team... we appreciate it.

Colin

No worries, no BS about it.