I would be surprised if CFD can accurately depict some of the flight characteristics that defined flying the T-38 and the century-series fighter jets it was designed to mimic.

Most notable during normal flight would be the rumble you hear/feel when flying at the target 0.6 AoA on patterns/approaches (resembling driving down a gravel road), progressing to pothole-like "bumps" as you increase AoA to around 0.8, and then increasing to sharp short and increasingly large wing rocks and finally a large sink rate rather than a clean-break stall if you get up near 1.0 AoA.  The Milviz T-38 in FSX/P3D did capture some of that, but their implementation of the wing rock effect spoiled it--it was massively over-exaggerated to the point the jet would depart into unrecoverable uncontrolled flight rather than transition into a sink (think of a leaf fluttering down from a tree) or recover when you lit the blowers and relaxed the back pressure.  The white rocket does not really stall, it goes into a fluttering vertical sink, and that rapid sink developing in the final turn of an overhead pattern or on final approach (due to low speed, incorrect configuration, insufficient power, or trying to reef the jet around at high AoA correcting for an overshoot to final) has killed multiple pilots over the years.  I watched a solo student put one right into the trees like that when I was a student, and as an instructor, I experienced and recovered from the early stage of those sinks when students didn't pay attention to one or more of the big-four gotchas (speed, config, power, and AoA).

The rudder on the T-38 has a limiter than prevents large deflections (>7 deg IIRC) with the gear up, but you get the full 30 degrees when configured.  Tromping on the rudder during an approach is bad juju--a quick and violent way to find yourself inverted and looking up to see the ground coming up to smite thee.

The ailerons on the short, swept wings lose some of their effectiveness as you increase the AoA, so when doing high-G maneuvering like in formation extended trail, you had to learn to blend in the rudder to turn with your flight lead.  It's not just simple coordinated flight--you actually roll the jet with aid of the rudder as the ailerons lose their mojo.

Another interesting idiosyncrasy is the loss of slab (elevator) authority as you transition through the transonic region into supersonic flight, because the shock waves that "attach" and come off near-vertically from the wings blank out much of the airflow over the tail--and the opposite effect--the sudden resumption of full elevator authority as you slow back down out of supersonic flight and lose the shock wave, which presents a golden opportunity to over-G the jet if you let the jet slow down while you're manhandling the controls during a controllability demo on a "boom" ride.

If either of the add-ons get half of that stuff right, I'll be impressed.

12 minutes ago, Bob Scott said:

I would be surprised if CFD can accurately depict some of the flight characteristics that defined flying the T-38 and the century-series fighter jets it was designed to mimic.

Most notable during normal flight would be the rumble you hear/feel when flying at the target 0.6 AoA on patterns/approaches (resembling driving down a gravel road), progressing to pothole-like "bumps" as you increase AoA to around 0.8, and then increasing to sharp short and increasingly large wing rocks and finally a large sink rate rather than a clean-break stall if you get up near 1.0 AoA.  The Milviz T-38 did capture some of that, but their implementation of the wing rock effect spoiled it--it was massively over-exaggerated to the point the jet would depart into unrecoverable uncontrolled flight rather than transition into a sink (think of a leaf fluttering down from a tree) or recover when you lit the blowers and relaxed the back pressure.  The white rocket does not really stall, it goes into a fluttering vertical sink, and that rapid sink developing in the final turn of an overhead pattern or on final approach (due to low speed, incorrect configuration, insufficient power, or trying to reef the jet around at high AoA correcting for an overshoot to final) has killed multiple pilots over the years.  I watched a solo student put one right into the trees like that when I was a student, and as an instructor, I experienced and recovered from the early stage of those sinks when students didn't pay attention to one or more of the big-four gotchas (speed, config, power, and AoA).

The rudder on the T-38 has a limiter than prevents large deflections (>7 deg IIRC) with the gear up, but you get the full 30 degrees when configured.  Tromping on the rudder during an approach is bad juju--a quick and violent way to find yourself inverted and looking up to see the ground coming up to smite thee.

The ailerons on the short, swept wings lose some of their effectiveness as you increase the AoA, so when doing high-G maneuvering like in formation extended trail, you had to learn to blend in the rudder to turn with your flight lead.  It's not just simple coordinated flight--you actually roll the jet with aid of the rudder as the ailerons lose their mojo.

Another interesting idiosyncrasy is the loss of slab (elevator) authority as you transition through the transonic region into supersonic flight, because the shock waves that "attach" and come off near-vertically from the wings blank out much of the airflow over the tail--and the opposite effect--the sudden resumption of full elevator authority as you slow back down out of supersonic flight and lose the shock wave, which presents a golden opportunity to over-G the jet if you let the jet slow down while you're manhandling the controls during a controllability demo on a "boom" ride.

If either of the add-ons get half of that stuff right, I'll be impressed.

GREAT perspective - many thanks 🙏 

5 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

GREAT perspective - many thanks 🙏 

Indeed. I love such  real wold insights.

Just now, jon b said:

Indeed. I love such  real wold insights.

Well, you frequently pay it forward, too, so thanks to YOU also!

My ramblings aren’t as exciting as flying a T38, but thanks anyway 👍

4 hours ago, Bob Scott said:

I would be surprised if CFD can accurately depict some of the flight characteristics that defined flying the T-38 and the century-series fighter jets it was designed to mimic.

Most notable during normal flight would be the rumble you hear/feel when flying at the target 0.6 AoA on patterns/approaches (resembling driving down a gravel road), progressing to pothole-like "bumps" as you increase AoA to around 0.8, and then increasing to sharp short and increasingly large wing rocks and finally a large sink rate rather than a clean-break stall if you get up near 1.0 AoA.  The Milviz T-38 in FSX/P3D did capture some of that, but their implementation of the wing rock effect spoiled it--it was massively over-exaggerated to the point the jet would depart into unrecoverable uncontrolled flight rather than transition into a sink (think of a leaf fluttering down from a tree) or recover when you lit the blowers and relaxed the back pressure.  The white rocket does not really stall, it goes into a fluttering vertical sink, and that rapid sink developing in the final turn of an overhead pattern or on final approach (due to low speed, incorrect configuration, insufficient power, or trying to reef the jet around at high AoA correcting for an overshoot to final) has killed multiple pilots over the years.  I watched a solo student put one right into the trees like that when I was a student, and as an instructor, I experienced and recovered from the early stage of those sinks when students didn't pay attention to one or more of the big-four gotchas (speed, config, power, and AoA).

The rudder on the T-38 has a limiter than prevents large deflections (>7 deg IIRC) with the gear up, but you get the full 30 degrees when configured.  Tromping on the rudder during an approach is bad juju--a quick and violent way to find yourself inverted and looking up to see the ground coming up to smite thee.

The ailerons on the short, swept wings lose some of their effectiveness as you increase the AoA, so when doing high-G maneuvering like in formation extended trail, you had to learn to blend in the rudder to turn with your flight lead.  It's not just simple coordinated flight--you actually roll the jet with aid of the rudder as the ailerons lose their mojo.

Another interesting idiosyncrasy is the loss of slab (elevator) authority as you transition through the transonic region into supersonic flight, because the shock waves that "attach" and come off near-vertically from the wings blank out much of the airflow over the tail--and the opposite effect--the sudden resumption of full elevator authority as you slow back down out of supersonic flight and lose the shock wave, which presents a golden opportunity to over-G the jet if you let the jet slow down while you're manhandling the controls during a controllability demo on a "boom" ride.

If either of the add-ons get half of that stuff right, I'll be impressed.

Bob,

Its pretty clear you need to purchase this aircraft and report back to the community how the flight model holds up! 😉 

Edited December 4, 2025Dec 4 by odourboy

10 hours ago, jon b said:

I’m a big fan of the Milviz T38A in P3D, and it still smarts that I missed out on their C version so I’ll definitely pick this up with both the A and C included.

It looks very nice in this Avangel review. The best thing about the milviz T38 is the ADV flight model, if the new blackbird is a famous flyer then I doubt it will have the ADV flight model and so it will be more of a level playing field when compared to the infinity version.

 

When they showed off the blackbird one the dev overspeed the flaps and tried retracting them, losing control of the plane. That is exactly how the advanced model behaved, If you tried retracting the flaps after overspeed; it would try to roll like crazy. Leads me to believe it is the same flight model.

I'll have to boot it back up and look at the AoA gauge like bob said, i just always aimed to keep it at 170 knots on final turn, rarely did i have to crank the burners. Landing with full fuel did make a difference though. Probably a decent handful of avsimmers that can say they flew the talon for training, always interesting to take little tid bits of knowledge from them. I recently met someone who flew out of Reese AFB many many moons ago. 

Edited December 4, 2025Dec 4 by Sweetd31

I would be interested in Bob‘s opinion on both versions. I flew the T-38A in the 1980‘s at Sheppard AFB as a student and really liked it. A good rendition on that bird would get a lot of flying hours in my sim!