AOPA Pilot Blog: Reporting Points

Here’s a report from Lockheed test pilot Brett Luedke about his final production test flight in an F-22.

Bret Luedke flew most of the F-22 Raptor fleet, starting with Raptor 04 through Raptor 195 as a test and production pilot for Lockheed Martin. Luedke flew his “fini” flight in Raptor 195 on April 25, 2012. Below is his recollection of that flight.

How do you describe the last flight in an airplane that has been your life for the past 19 years? It is a flood of emotions, sensations and memories.

The unique, deep-throated rumble during engine start of the Pratt & Whitney F119 engines brings a sense of confidence and strength as they breathe life into the Raptor.

The multiple “deedle deedle” warning tones of the Caution and Warning system during engine start gives you a sense of assurance the Raptor is awaking as normal. Later, in flight, that same sound can bring an instant rush of adrenalin as you scan the cockpit to determine the severity of the malfunction.

Giving a friendly wave for the last time to the fire trucks, security guards and the Raptor Mobile truck brings a sense of sadness and a feeling of thanks for the hundreds of times they have patiently waited – just in case they were needed.

Lining up on the runway for that last takeoff, flashing back to the very first time you lined up on a similar runway more than 30 years ago for your first jet flight, and thinking in the next instant, “Please don’t let me screw this up.”

Once airborne, the feeling of pure enjoyment as the Raptor responds to your every whim. The smile that crosses your face and the sense of pride you feel in the hard work of everyone on the Raptor team as you hear the air traffic controllers ask passing traffic if they’ve ever seen a Raptor and call you out for a fleeting glimpse.

The chuckle you get when air traffic control asks you to give your “best rate of climb” or “best rate of descent” and then shortly thereafter asks what altitude you are passing because their radar can’t keep up with Raptor.

Sitting at Mach 1.5 and 44,000 feet with a feeling of quiet calm knowing the Raptor is at home here.

Rolling into an intercept, remembering the feeling of frustration of the F-16 pilot unable to find the Raptor, knowing it was out there, playing with you and getting ready to blow you out of the sky.

Enjoying the simple fun of watching the clouds go whizzing by as you maneuver around and over them marveling at their simple beauty.

As you come up initial for the last time, glancing over at “Trigger” tucked in tight on your wing and remembering the fighter pilot motto: “Better to die than look bad.”

As you are “beating up the pattern” for the last time, hoping all the folks out on the flight line are enjoying the heart pounding exhilaration that is the F-22 as you pull seven Gs in the closed pull-up and watch out of the corner of your eye the white vapor trails generated off the leading edges of the wings.

The sense of sadness you feel as you hear “Betty” say, “Bingo Bingo,” and you know the ride of your life has come to an end.

The pride you feel as you taxi back in for the last time looking at the smiling faces and waving hands of the people there on the flight line to celebrate with you, knowing that in some very small way you had a small part to play in nurturing and developing the F-22A Raptor into the unequaled master of the sky that it is.

That was my last flight in the Raptor.

Bret “Lowkey” Luedke
“Raptor 26”

UPDATED

Almost before the naysayers could finish expressing shock at the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of Hawker Beechcraft, an end to the bankruptcy is in sight.

Hawker Beechcraft Vice President Shawn Vick met with Aviation Week and other reporters at the three-day European Business Aviation Convention and Exhibition (EBACE) in Geneva, Switzerland, today to say the company, which filed for bankruptcy May 3, will emerge from bankruptcy before the year is out. When it does, former owners Goldman Sachs and Onyx will be bit players, while creditors owed the majority of the company’s $2.33 billion in debt will become the new owners. EBACE ends May 16. An interesting tidbit emerging from the press conference is the reluctance suppliers have had to fill orders from the Wichita-based manufacturer. The bankruptcy will allow the company to re-establish its supplier network using the $400 million it has to continue operations during bankruptcy. The refusal of some of the suppliers to fill orders may explain why the company has had two layoffs it attributed to a shortage of composite parts. Local Wichita reporters reported last year that other manufacturers were not experiencing the same shortage.

Vick also reported orders are picking up for the Hawker 900XP and 400XPR models, with 900XP orders running double those received last year.

The only drama remaining from Hawker’s trip to the brink and back is what the restructuring will look like. Court documents suggested various alternatives, including shutting down its jet line and concentrating on the King Air and piston markets. Given that Vick just announced increasing orders for the 900XP and 400XPR models, a total abandonment of the jet market doesn’t seem likely, but we will know more when the reorganization plan comes out at the end of June. Cessna officials have indicated interest in whatever may drop from Hawker’s table, as have others. The King Air line of turboprops is enticing to competitors–along with the service those aircraft require–but will Hawker Beechcraft want to sell it? Not likely. Also, the company has expressed a belief before the present management change that its Bonanza and Baron lines serve as a step-up to its jets, meaning it might not want to sell them. Even if it did, those models are less attractive to competitors.

Could the Chinese be Hawker’s savior? Not according to stock analyst Heidi Wood, who said China has settled on Cessna as a partner, and is no longer shopping.

UPDATED May 14

Hawker Beechcraft issued layoff notices to another 150 people yesterday, in addition to the 350 laid off three weeks ago. The Wichita Eagle reports that leaves levels in Wichita at 4,200. If it lays off a few hundred more the company will have to return tens of millions in financial aid gained from state and local governments.

Second issue: Is there confusion at United Technologies about the role that United Technologies is playing in the restart of Eclipse production? United Technologies Chief Financial Officer Greg Hays triggered the controversy during a phone call to financial analysts in April. United Technologies is the parent company of Sikorsky and Sikorsky owns aircraft manufacturer PZL Mielic in Poland.

Here’s Hays’ quote in answer to a question from stock analyst Howard Rubel of Jefferies & Company, who wanted to know why United Technologies is selling Rocketdyne but investing in Eclipse:

“Can I make it very clear we’re not going to invest any more money in Eclipse? We did make a small investment–less than $25 million–in Eclipse, really to service the aftermarket of the aircraft. I think there’s about 300 of those airplanes that have been delivered [incorrect--the actual number is 265]. But you know, we are not in the light jet business if you will. We’re in the aftermarket business supporting the planes that are out there, but we’re not in the manufacturing business for light jets. So, again, if we haven’t made that clear before…” He then asked Rubel if that was clear, and Rubel said, “Crystal.”

Very confusing, because Eclipse officials just signed a contract to build the jet with PZL Mielic that Sikorsky bought in March of 2007. So no, United Technologies does not build business jets, but Sikorsky’s subsidiary does. PZL makes the M-28 Skytruck in the King Air class of aircraft, but more importantly makes the S-70i Blackhawk. That’s the model that proves to the world that PZL is a first-class manufacturing facility, since nearly everyone in the world has heard of it. The United Technologies/Sikorsky/Eclipse will be well built.

The RV-1 is a simply dreadful airplane – and that’s what makes it so important.
Had it been fast, comfortable, efficient, well engineered, and good looking, there would have been no incentive for aircraft designer Richard Van Grunsven to address its many shortcomings by inventing the RV line of kit planes – far and away the most successful ever produced with more than 7,600 examples currently flying.
The RV-1 has few admirable qualities. It’s primitive, painful to sit in, and ergonomically awful.
Even with the improvements Van Grunsven made from the time he built the airplane in 1965 until he sold it three years later (he replaced the 65-horsepower engine with a 125-horsepower model, added a bubble canopy, and a cantilevered aluminum wing) he couldn’t transform the sow’s ear into a silk purse. So he sold the RV-1 and designed and built the RV-3 in 1971 from a clean sheet. And that single-seat airplane, and the two- and four-seat designs that sprang from it, are phenomenal.
The RV-1 languished largely forgotten for decades until Paul Dye, an RV pilot and builder, discovered the remnants in a hangar in Houston, Texas, and swung into action. The NASA flight director recognized the RV-1’s unique place in aviation history, and he put together a group of volunteers to make the RV-1 airworthy again. They also flew it, promoted it, and this summer (the 40th anniversary of Vans Aircraft) they will deliver it to the EAA Museum in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, for permanent display.
Until then, the RV-1 is touring the country, and a few fortunate, curious, and – if they know what’s good for them — short pilots (like me) get to move it Pony Express-style from one location to the next. (My 100-mile leg was from AOPA headquarters in Frederick, Maryland, to Pottstown, Pennsylvania, on May 6.)
Flying the RV-1, it’s easy to imagine the young Van Grunsven thinking about ways to address each fault in subsequent designs. From the seating position to the construction materials to the baggage compartment, trim system, and redesigned tail, little was left untouched. The RV-1 and the RV-3 are about the same external dimensions and used the same engine. But where the RV-1 is crude, ungainly, and uninspiring – the RV-3 that immediately followed is sleek, relatively roomy (once you’re actually in the seat), a model of efficiency, and an absolute delight.

Intro flight
My intro flight in the RV-1 took place on a mild spring evening with clear skies and light winds – ideal for getting to know a new airplane.
Preflight inspection showed the airplane has been carefully brought back to airworthy condition with a Catto fixed-pitch prop, new tires, new wiring, a Garmin SL40 radio, and an unscratched bubble canopy. The airplane hasn’t been restored to as-new condition, however. Its fabric is worn, the paint is faded and chipped, and the wings have scratches and dents from decades of accumulated hangar rash.
The RV-1 has a rudimentary fuel system (a single 22-gallon fuselage fuel tank and on on/off valve), a 14-volt electrical system (single battery and alternator) and minimal VFR avionics (no attitude indicator, gyros, or nav radios). Double-puck hydraulic brakes seem like overkill on such a light airplane, but they work. The steel-tube fuselage is fabric covered, and the aluminum wings with manual flaps appear quite similar to the RVs that followed. The wire-braced tail has manual elevator trim (ground adjustable tabs provide aileron and rudder trim), and the steerable, full-swivel tailwheel is solid rubber.
Climbing into the cockpit requires stepping on the seat with both feet and lowering yourself, carefully, into the non-adjustable, straight-backed seat. I’m barely 5 feet 8 inches tall, and the rudder pedals seem absurdly close with my shins and knees nearly banging on the fuel tank and instrument panel. The instrument panel also appears far too close to the pilot, and the throttle and flap handle are awkward to manipulate. The swing-over canopy locks into position in two places when the single lever is pushed forward, and a fresh air vent on the right side of the canopy provides almost no ventilation.
Engine start for the carbureted O-290 is normal, and taxiing requires S-turns to clear the path ahead. The pre-takeoff checklist is short: Fuel pump on, elevator trim set, canopy locked.
On takeoff, the tailwheel feels like it’s sliding on ice as the airplane accelerates through about 25 miles an hour, and it remains somewhat squirrely as long as it’s on the ground. Fortunately, aircraft acceleration is quick, and the RV-1 is flying before the lack of positive steering causes too much consternation.
Once in the air, the RV-1 has refreshingly light ailerons, its elevator is somewhat heavy, and the rudder is heavier still. The climb rate at 90 mph is 1,200 fpm (with full fuel), and the airplane had no trouble joining and maneuvering with the photo ship (an A-36 Bonanza with the rear doors removed) which was flying at 2,000 feet msl and 120 kias. Significantly faster speeds are possible, but the RV-1 runs out of nose-down trim at about 140 miles an hour, and higher speed requires constant forward stick pressure.
The RV-1 handled well enough during our 45-minute photo flight that I almost forgot the cramp in my left thigh, the contortions required to manipulate the throttle, and the discomfort of the straight-backed seat.
Approach and landing weren’t difficult as the RV-1 flies solidly in the landing configuration. There’s a nose-down moment when the manual flaps are deployed, and the flap handle itself makes the elevator trim difficult to reach. With two-thirds flaps and an approach speed of 70 mph there was no more nose-up trim available, so I made a main-wheel landing at that flap setting and kept the non-trustworthy tailwheel off the pavement as long as practical. Once the tailwheel touched down at about 20 mph, the RV-1 decelerated quickly to taxi speed.

Constructive dissatisfaction
The RV-1’s shortcomings are many – and they mostly serve to highlight the amazing progress experimental aviation has made in the nearly half-century since this airplane first flew. We take for granted that speed, efficiency, control harmony, superior construction materials, and brilliant avionics were somehow inevitable. But such extraordinary advancements only came about because a few visionary and restless people (Van Grunsven chief among them) believed they could do better.
The rest of us are beneficiaries of the fact that they were right.
Hopefully, there are some similarly gifted future designers out there flying today’s best airplanes with the same sense of constructive dissatisfaction.
We all look forward to the wonders they produce.

To follow RV-1’s tour:

http://rv-1.org/

During a lesson this week, one of my students and I discussed the recent news about a California man whose attempt to steal a Cessna 152 was foiled by a tiedown. The man was a former student of the flight school, according to news reports, and reportedly threatened employees with a gun in order to get the keys to the aircraft. Police apprehended the man after he shut down the aircraft because he was unable to taxi out of the tiedown spot–the tail was still tied down.

First, I told my student I was glad I would never have to worry about her pulling a gun on me or trying to steal our Cessna 172 trainer. Then, we turned to tiedowns and preflight inspections. Early in our training, I would walk around the airplane with my student during the preflight to mention any missed items and the importance of checking them; however, I wouldn’t point out if she forgot to untie the tail or wings or remove the chocks. I recommended a big-picture walkaround after the preflight to catch any obvious oversights, such as tiedowns or chocks, so she would always pick up on it then.

To help stress the importance of untying the aircraft, I also shared an embarrassing story of my own. During my initial flight training, I had untied my wing and my instructor untied his side, but neither of us got the tail and I didn’t do a big-picture walkaround. When I tried to taxi out of the tiedown spot, we didn’t budge. We added more power–nothing. I have never seen anyone shut down an aircraft as fast as my instructor did when he realized what had happened. We had pulled the rope so tight that he actually had to cut it. Making the matter even more embarrassing was the fact that we were tied down in front of a flight school with floor-to-ceiling windows so that everyone had a clear view of the ramp. That story has stuck with my student, and she’s never forgotten to untie the aircraft.

Unfortunately, now she has another reminder of the importance of a thorough preflight, but this one with illegal intentions. In the case of this California man, the tiedowns turned out to be the last line of defense preventing him from stealing the aircraft. For the rest of us trying to get in the air legally and safely, they can be an unforgiving (and embarrassing) reminder of the importance of a proper preflight.

Matevž Lenarčič of Slovenia, is back in Slovenia with this video from his just-completed trip around the world. Scroll down to “Flying around the world is not always fun.” At least the scenery was spectacular even when exhaustion set in. GreenLight WorldFlight used a speedy Rotax-powered Pipistrel and included a stop in Antarctica plus a flight next to Mt. Everest. He was bugged by aircraft problems (structural cracks in the tail) and engine problems (carbon buildup in the oil return line). International paperwork and airspace approvals provided constant headaches. A skilled photographer, he will produce a book of his adventures from sea level to 29,413 feet, and from 100-degree deserts to sub-zero airports. Also a scientist, he was taking data on soot in the air and the world’s drinking water supply–or lack  of it.

I was among the thousands of people who flocked to the National Air and Space Museum’s Udvar-Hazy Annex at Washington Dulles International Airport on Tuesday to see the arrival of the space shuttle Discovery.

For many of them, it was a bittersweet experience, and understandably so. It’s hard to imagine NASA without a space shuttle; for a couple of generations, the winged, reusable vehicle has represented the space program. But for me it also represented a first, and last, chance to see the veteran orbiter in flight–albeit on the back of a jumbo jet.

Back in 1984, as a newspaper photographer in Florida, I was credentialed for the launch of mission STS 41D: Discovery’s maiden flight. We set up remote cameras in the swamps near launch pad 39A (NASA mandated a buddy system for setting up remotes, to prevent local wildlife–particularly alligators–from creeping up on an unwary photographer). I even managed to snag a pass for the Fire Tower, then the closest that civilians were allowed during a launch (it ceased to be a media option after the Challenger disaster). I was standing on that tower on a hazy, humid Florida morning, squinting at the pad through an 800-mm lens, when the countdown was halted and the launch scrubbed.

I recall driving back down to Kennedy Space Center a week or two later for a second scheduled launch, which also was postponed. When 41D finally lifted off, I was out of state and missed the event. Later, I did get to see a shuttle launch, and it’s an experience I will always remember–the vibration as the shock waves slowly roll over you, so long after liftoff that it almost takes you by surprise. That wasn’t Discovery, however; the orbiter eluded me until its very last flight.

Carlos Rodriguez, decked out in a red, white, and blue jacket and hat, also was waiting for Discovery at Dulles Airport. He had traveled from Virginia to Florida, twice, to see Discovery lift off–and he, too, was stood up both times. Eventually he did get to see Endeavour launch, but he still wanted to see Discovery fly, and welcome the orbiter to its new home.

Discovery’s delivery to the National Air and Space Museum was uneventful, but as the spacecraft was landing, there was a little drama for those who brought along an aviation receiver. As the Boeing 747 shuttle transporter glided down the ILS to Runway 1 Right at Dulles, the pilot not flying radioed the tower controller that its NASA T-38 escort was fuel critical. Not missing a beat, the controller very professionally worked the jet past a row of news helicopters hovering just east of the airport, and brought it around for an expedited landing. We all appreciated the safe outcome, as well as the controller’s helpful updates on the orbiter’s location.

Some events are just, well, so cool and rare that you’ll do whatever it takes to capture the moment and pray that you can at least convey a glimpse of the magic to those who couldn’t be there in person. The timed departure of 20 World War II bombers from the Grimes Gathering of B-25s is one of those events.

We received permission to do an aerial shoot during the takeoff and briefed the intended flight path and altitude with the event organizers the day before the mass departure. We worked with Mad River Air, a flight school on the field, to set up their Cessna 172 as a photo platform for AOPA photographer Mike Fizer and go over the route with the school’s chief pilot, Aaron Coleman, who would fly the mission.

Then, we set our alarm clocks for the 4 a.m. hour.

Admittedly, getting up at 4:40 a.m. wasn’t that bad. As if my shower didn’t wake me up, our hotel fire alarm went off at 5 a.m., ushering us and many veterans and guests visiting for the B-25 gathering outside in the dark (I’ve never seen so many bomber jackets at that hour). I grabbed my work laptop, headset, and purse. AOPA’s videographer Paul Harrop started evaluating what order to evacuate his video equipment, and Mike came out with all of his photo equipment. Thankfully it was a false alarm. But, by that time, we were loaded and ready to head to the airport; then the fire trucks pulled in. Paul directed us through the only narrow exit the fire trucks left open.

At 5:30 a.m., we were getting the Cessna 172 ready while the B-25 crews performed their preflight inspections. Mike and Aaron needed to be wheels up by 6 a.m. to not disturb the ceremony set to take place before the B-25s started up. While they orbited the airport, Aaron had to dodge other GA traffic making last-minute approaches to the airport to witness the mass exodus. Paul and I took video and photos on the ground. The organizers sent an escort with us so that we could move to different locations instead of staying corralled with the rest of the media. After hitting one bump before crossing a taxiway, Paul nearly fell off the back of the golf cart…thankfully he regained his balance—and grip. Our friend Collis Wagner thought he was going to have to scrape him off the taxiway.

Aaron and Mike orbited the airport for two hours, from dark through sunrise to daylight, until the last B-25 took off. We booked it back to the hotel about five minutes away. I started writing in the car while Paul took side streets to avoid the traffic (dozens of people had lined the airport to watch from the side of the road). Less than two hours after leaving the airport, we had our story and video back to our team at Frederick, and photos for a slide show followed shortly (thankfully, Mike was able to work with the photos I shot from the ground).

Then it was back to the airport to finish some more assignments and on to the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force in Dayton for some information gathering about the Doolittle Tokyo Raiders. We’ll have the chance Wednesday to briefly interview the five remaining raiders. We hope you’ll enjoy the sights, sounds, and history of the B-25 gathering and Doolittle Tokyo Raider’s seventieth reunion.

As anticipated, Hawker Beechcraft has released its Form 10-K to the Securities and Exchange Commission reporting an operating loss of $481.8 million and a net loss of $632.8 million on sales of $2.44 billion for 2011. (Net losses were $451.6 million in 2009 and $304.9 million in 2010.) The company is $2.33 billion in debt. At the bottom of this paragraph is a link to the actual report, and you can read about the loss figures on page 47. On page 50 is the previously expected comment that there is doubt the company can continue. That said, Hawker Beechcraft will continue, possibly through sales of assets alone, but the more likely scenario is a Chapter 11 bankruptcy that allows it to reorganize. The company has completed agreements with several lenders using aircraft as collateral to pave the way. The publication Corporate Jet Investor reports a restructuring plan could be announced April 30, or if all lenders agree, it could be delayed to May 15.  Here is the actual filing.

Here from the report is what Hawker Beechcraft is required to say by company-hired accountants in the just-released report: “As of December 31, 2011, Management has concluded that there is substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. This conclusion was reached based on a variety of factors, including those described below. We determined not to pay our interest obligations under the Notes on April 2, 2012 and anticipate an inability to pay interest on the Notes on future interest payment dates. Furthermore, we will be required to repay or refinance our Senior Secured Credit Facilities and the Senior Tranche Advance prior to the repayment of the Notes and we will be required to repay or refinance the Senior Notes prior to the repayment of the Senior Subordinated Notes. The Company has suffered recurring operating losses resulting in a significant net shareholder’s deficit that raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. The Company is operating under a forbearance agreement with its lenders which defers interest payment obligations and provides relief from loan covenants through June 29, 2012. Due to the fact that we have recurring negative cash flows from operations and recurring losses from operations, we will need to seek additional financing. There is substantial doubt that we will be able to obtain additional equity or debt financing on favorable terms, or at all, in order to have sufficient liquidity to meet our cash requirements for the next twelve months.”

Here’s some analysis of what is going on from Morgan Stanley manager Heidi Wood, as reported by AOPA Editor at Large Tom Horne.

 

If you can get to North Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, or Illinois this summer, you’ll have a chance to drink in some mighty nice antique aircraft and hang out with the folks who fly them. The American Barnstormers Old-Fashioned Tour is making its every-other-year appearance in August. Weather permitting, you’ll see 14 aircraft and their costumed pilots, and even purchase a ride.

The airplanes will swoop into five cities this year. Pilot and PR coordinator Sarah Wilson says the tour has been scaled back just a bit from previous years (when it debuted in 2006, there were 15 biplanes and they toured nine cities).

“We just weren’t sure we could do it this year,” she says. Pilots come from all over the nation–in airplanes that average speeds 100 mph or less–to form the tour. But the “core group”–those pilots who have participated from the beginning–said, “Please, let’s do another one,” Wilson says. The pilots will remain three days at each stop, giving them more time between legs.

Here’s the schedule:

• Aug. 9-11: Fargo Air Museum at Hector International Airport, Fargo, North Dakota
• Aug. 12-14: Brainerd Lakes Regional Airport, Brainerd, Minn.
• Aug. 16-18: Chippewa Valley Regional Airport, Eau Claire, Wis.
• Aug. 19-21: Manitowoc County Airport, Manitowoc, Wis.
• Aug. 23-26: De Kalb Taylor Municipal Airport, De Kalb, Ill.

New to the tour this year are Wilson’s 1929 Stearman Model 4E; a 1937 Waco YKS-7, and a Curtiss Pusher.

My colleagues Al Marsh and Mike Fizer joined the group for their inaugural tour in 2006. (You can see the article, video, and photos here.) Al recalls without the least bit of nostalgia the heat wave that ensnared Michigan that July. With temps reaching 105, he wondered how the tour pilots handled it in their heavy costumes.

Still. Flying with biplane pilots on a tour of the heartland? Steven Tyler, you can keep your Rock ‘n’ Roll fantasy camp. This one’s more my speed.