Why does the USAF fly 4 planes that were designed in the 50s?

[IdahoMauleMan]

@Johnny_L.A

I had a layover in St. Louis once. Soul patch, earring, using a Mac, and a good video camera (read: ‘Artist’). Oh, and I drive a Prius. I got to chatting with a guy who is my political opposite. We talked about guns. See, even though I’m a Leftie, I do enjoy shooting. We would not have agreed about most things, but we had an enjoyable time chatting about a common interest.

I see that IdahoMauleMan posted. I disagree with everything he posts in political threads, and I’m sure that if he notices my posts at all he thinks I’m an idiot for my political views. But if we ran into each other at an airport we’d have a great time chatting about flying things. (And as it happens, I think Maules are some of the coolest GA aircraft made. )

It’s good when people can find common interests. And aircraft are the best.

Well put. Aircraft rule.

Although unfortunately, I’d bet $20 that in 20 years a Regular Joe won’t even be able to get a PPL anymore, much less shoot instrument approaches. General Aviation is usually the poster child for an industry that has practically been litigated, and regulated, almost out of existence. For no other reason than most people on a tort jury and/or voters don’t understand it at all.

I’d also bet you $20 that I could be hanging out at your favorite bar and you couldn’t pick me out of the crowd.

[ElvisL1ves]

@flyboy

I would be curious to know, at that point, what parts (if any) would be original.

There’s a better answer than “wing spars”, actually, and that would be “data plates”. The little pieces of metal with the model and serial number stamped on them are the legal path of continuity of existence for airplanes and engines alike. You could literally assemble a new B-52 or 707 from all new spare parts, slip it under a 50 year old data plate, make the entries in the maintenance log, and it would legally be a 50 year old airplane. Since all the life-limited parts would be replaced, it would legally be zero time, too.
I’m always amazed how many of my fellow aviation lovers can still be so stubborn and ignorant about other topics.

[Johnny_L.A]

@ElvisL1ves

There’s a better answer than “wing spars”, actually, and that would be “data plates”. The little pieces of metal with the model and serial number stamped on them are the legal path of continuity of existence for airplanes and engines alike.

I’ve seen Hughes 269As for sale that were in various stages of disrepair, that were being sold without the data plate. Some of these were advertised as flyable. Only without the data plate, they didn’t really exist. So a certified aircraft would have to be registered in the Experimental category.

[caligynephobia]

Gliders count as planes? The USAF Academy currently flies TG-10Cs (L-13 Blanik) which is a design that dates back to the 50s. Curiously, in 2002 it replaced the TG-9 (ASK 21), which is a 1970s design. The TG-10s were new builds when the AF bought them, the same year they replaced the 60’s-era TG-4 (SGS 2-33) with TG-10B (80’s-designed L-23 Super Blanik). Interesting also that these replacements meant upgrading to tailwheel-configured gliders, with the main gear moved from aft to forward of the CG.

[JRDelirious]

@carnivorousplant

Damn, my link didn’t work. There are some chopped up airliners to the right of the B-52s.

If you pan and zoom around, the link address will remain that of the shot you started from.

I zoomed and panned around the area (in Google rather than Bing) and what airlinerlike things I saw near the 52s look like some 135s being used for parts, and some C141s

[carnivorousplant]

@JRDelirious

If you pan and zoom around, the link address will remain that of the shot you started from.

I zoomed and panned around the area (in Google rather than Bing) and what airlinerlike things I saw near the 52s look like some 135s being used for parts, and some C141s

I figured that out. Thanks!