USAF T-3 trainers to be scrapped?

Cvairwerks · **Posted:** Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:53 pm

Actually, the temp limitation is a structural one and not a fuel one. If you read the TC closely and the documentation that was used to make the change, the problem is that there is a high potential for inter-layer debonding under certain combinations of flight loads, airframe soak temps and CG. The problem seems to have never risen in a flight capable T-3A, but only in the static test aircraft. Either way, it was enough of a problem that Slingsby ammended the TC with the preflight structural temp limitation to cever their butts.

As to the fuel problem, I have never seen any documentation released that categorically states that the fuel starvation/vapor problem was solved completely. I know that there were a number of fixes tried, but as far as I know, none ever proved out to be a complete solution.

jwc50 · **Posted:** Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:37 pm

The USAF Chief of Staff at the time, General McPeak,

Oh, you had to mention General McPeak. Well at least the disastrous uniform changes he imposed on the Air Force will be undone in the next few years by pending changes to drop the "Business Suit" uniform and return to something more miltary looking so that that Air Force members will look respectable alongside their counterparts in combined services functions.

The Slingsby T-3 is one airplane that I won't miss either.

Ztex · **Posted:** Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:00 pm

Not to hijack the thread...but...

Quote:

pending changes to drop the "Business Suit" uniform and return to something more miltary looking

like these new blue suits?

King · **Posted:** Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:10 am

They are almost done chopping them up. They are using a large excavator to smash them and then rip the engines out.

I have not had time to go over there and get my own pictures but here is an article from the San Antonio newspaper.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/ ... a3454.html

airnutz · **Posted:** Thu Sep 14, 2006 9:22 am

Quote:

"Some people are very emotional about it. We're not," said Young, whose crew records each step in the salvage process in photos and written reports. "We had some old boy out here this morning cussing and yelling at us."

Did I forget to mention my trip to Hondo to buy an airplane?

Simply Amazing...

Quote:

The only cost to the Air Force, besides staffing the demolition site, is $12,000 to ship its four remaining Fireflies here from Edwards AFB in California, Smith said.

Jack Cook · **Posted:** Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:12 am

Quote:

The USAF Chief of Staff at the time, General McPeak,

We had a BBQ at the hanger once and both jcw and Gen McPeak were there. I think ol Jeff hissed at him
like a freaking Cobra ready to strike the whole time.

David J Burke · **Joined:** Sat Nov 27, 2004 4:52 am **Posts:** 189

Why didn't they just give them to technical schools? This seems a bizarre waste !

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:01 pm

oh how i love how my tax $$$$$ is pissed away!! :bs:

bdk · **Joined:** Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am **Posts:** 11324

If one of you guys really wants one bad, you can paint this one in US markings:

http://www.barnstormers.com/ad_detail.php?ID=124713

Jan · **Joined:** Fri Apr 08, 2005 7:18 am **Posts:** 28

This may be of some interest. Scroll down to read the two articles on the Slingsby T-3A. http://cessnawarbirds.com/articles/wichita.html

Regards,

Jan

airnutz · **Posted:** Fri Sep 15, 2006 10:17 am

bdk wrote:

If one of you guys really wants one bad, you can paint this one in US markings.

69K and not in a box? I had $550, Farm Implement stencils, and a hooker
who owed me a favor. Couldn't find a politician that day... :cry:

RickH · **Posted:** Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:06 am

Today's article on Aero News and their is a similar article on AvWeb.

Quote:

One Week From Deadline, T-3A Fleet Nearly Gone When They Said "Scrapped," They
Meant "Trashed"

When ANN reported last week
the entire fleet of Air Force Slingsby T-3A Firefly training
airplanes would be scrapped by September 25, it was widely assumed
that while the airframes would be destroyed, the Air Force would
certainly salvage valuable component parts of the plane that had
nothing to do with the controversy.

After all, that's what they do with just about every military
aircraft that has ever been sent to the boneyard.

Well, assume nothing when it comes to liability issues,
embarrassment, and the military. Besides the airplanes, ANN
has learned that TOTALL Metal Recycling Company in Hondo,
TX has also been scrapping avionics, radios... even torching holes
into brand-new engines, still strapped on their pallets.

All of the spare parts inventory -- including tires, wheels and
all of the tools used to work on the aircraft -- are also being
destroyed. Not one of the radios, propellers, or other
aviation-related (and therefore expensive) parts are being
recovered.

Any piece of equipment, evidently, that was even remotely
associated with the T-3A is being systematically eliminated
from the aviation universe. None of these parts share serial
numbers with the doomed airplanes, so no liability exposure for the
Air Force would seem possible... leaving many in the aero-community
to question the "slash and burn" approach the USAF is taking.

According to the San Antonio Express-News, it takes
approximately 30 minutes to reduce the aircraft to a mass of
unrecoverable fiberglass and other non-recyclable materials. One of
the dismantlers told the paper he thought the holed engines might
bring about $100 in scrap value.

One person who witnessed the scrapping (aero-cide?) being
perpetrated told the EAA, "It seems quite apparent that the
Air Force is embarrassed by this awful action. Guards are in place
around the clock to keep everyone away, especially the
press. The destruction contractor has been told to put up a
vision-proof barricade so that the actual mangling cannot be
observed."

(Editor's Note -- In a correction to our
earlier story, we must report that the recycling company did not
pay $12,000 for the airplanes. Rather, the Air Force
paid them $12,000 to get four Fireflys the heck out of
Edwards AFB.)
FMI: www.af.mil

David J Burke · **Joined:** Sat Nov 27, 2004 4:52 am **Posts:** 189

What is incredibly sad to me is that a U.K company approached the USAF to purchase two of these machines and the answer was no. The aircraft would have been training future U.K forces pilots in exactly the same way as the current U.K Firefly fleets. A strange and bizarre way to exact seemingly revenge.

B-29 Super Fort · **Joined:** Wed Sep 01, 2004 11:12 am **Posts:** 871

Years of sitting idle in only to meet this end? Why not have the Government auction these off, eBay it or whatever would surely have been less costly than to pay a contractor to dispose of them.

tom d. friedman · **Posted:** Mon Sep 18, 2006 6:29 pm

the demiltarization polices / procedures are a farce & an insult to the military collector or just plain ole "joe overburdened" tax payer. the dod (dept of defense) goes to painstaking depths to render the dumbest things inoperable, sells them to scrap dealers etc. they go to these lengths after losing face some years back as some more strategically sensitive stuff made it through the cracks & into some naughty 3rd world nation's hands. that kind of stuff i can understand..... ordinance components, computer stuff etc, this is what slipped through. yes!!! destroy it!!! but filing cabinets, desks, flight helmets, control sticks, smashed ejection seats, etc will do no terrorist any good. we waste the money to destroy harmless, redundant items, pay the schmucks to do it, & they cash in on the scrap. the disposers should get a fee for their services & uncle sam should get the scrap value back to put into the govt's wallet. senseless waste!! :badpc:

Warbird Information Exchange

USAF T-3 trainers to be scrapped?

Who is online