On Mar 24, 11:30*am, Brad wrote:
On Mar 23, 8:03*am, " wrote:

There is a LOT of history regarding the amazingly wasteful procurement
and use of glider/motorglider/light aircraft resources in the USAF(A)
that JS and others have direct knowledge of. *Thus the perceived
negativity of their posts.

I am sure that everyone will agree that soaring is a fantastic
introduction to aviation for the Cadets but like most .gov entitites
many people with direct knowledge believe that they have not spent our
resources very effectively.

But heck, what's $5 million? *It's for the children.

How does getting training in a DG-1000 prepare young kids when it's
likely all they will do is sit behind a monitor and fire missiles via
a Predator!

But, I am in full agreement, if it's for the children it must be a
good thing! And that would be the children making the gliders as well
as those flying them....booooyah!

Brad

For one thing, Brad, the Predator pilot doesn't target the weapons -
that's done by the sensor operator. The pilots job is the same as if
he were physically sitting in the Predator - he flies it where it's
needed and maneuvers it as required to get in a position to employ
it's weapons or support the troops on the ground. So having
experience in a DG-1000 is excellent training - it probably flies more
like a predator than anything else in the Air Force inventory.

But equally important, it's about motivation and acquiring "air sense"
early on in a pilots career - If those DG-1000 rides at the Zoo result
in an AF pilot staying in for 20 instead of bailing to the airlines,
then the price of the gliders is insignificant!

And if a skill learned in a DG-1000 later saves a B-2 or F-22, that
would be well worth it.

I'm glad to see the Academy acquire a fleet of modern gliders, and
support an active XC, contest, and acro program (something it couldn't
do when it was stuck with those nasty Schweizers!). I think it would
be cool if all the service academies had glider programs and teams
that competed.

Kirk
66
USAFA 74