Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/military/read.main/112200/

Topic: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2009-10-03 07:31:38 and read 32767 times.

Flightglobal reports that Boeing is contemplating a completely new jet trainer as its entry for the planned USAF T-X competition. But with first delivery targeted for 2014 and IOC in 2017, would Boeing have enough time to develop a clean-sheet design?

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Dunn - Global Aviation Resource


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...new-airframe-to-replace-t-38s.html

Quote:
"Boeing could propose developing a "purpose-built" airframe as one of several options to replace the US Air Force's fleet of Northrop T-38 jet trainers, say industry officials.

[.....]

According to industry officials, the Boeing concept pre-supposes that the USAF does not want to select a future trainer aircraft that was developed in a previous decade. The service plans to reach initial operational capability for the T-X fleet in 2017 and operate the type for 30-40 years.

Boeing's concept also may add a 'homegrown' dimension to a competition dominated by aircraft developed substantially in foreign countries."



The home turf advantage is real but timeframe is very tight. However, the potential order plus any subsequent navalised and light attack variants compel major manufacturers to have their own candidate, instead of just fronting for someone. Might Boeing have a design all ready for development, or would they settle for a sweeter partnership with Alenia?

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Par13del
Posted 2009-10-03 08:48:02 and read 32767 times.



Quoting DEVILFISH (Thread starter):
would Boeing have enough time to develop a clean-sheet design?

Not picking on you per se, but we see this all the time so my question would be this: When you say have the time do you mean the time it would take to use their massive computer technology to design, test and build a clean sheet new a/c or do you mean the time it would take for the program design stage to contribute positively to the bottom line, the development phase have produce enough test frames to significantly impact next ROI, earnings etc. and the production phase ensure that the company is viable for the next 10-20 years producing sufficient frames for the US and other export customers?

Years ago a/c were designed and built using slide rules and less exotic materials, even when such materials were used it never took the decades that we talk about today, wind tunnel test were either a water tank or a full size production frame being flown by a human. If an OEM chooses they can design and build a test frame within a year faster if they use an engine already in production, the issue in my line of thinking is not whether they can, but whether some financial person justifies the financial decision to them, in which case we should be looking at financial data such as last quarter earning, current income, expenses, projects in the pipeline, future initiative, stimulus packages hoped for, next economic upturn / downturn etc. and not whether there is a need for a new a/c, how efficient it should be, easy to fly, adequately train pilots for a/c presently in inventory etc. etc. etc.

I guess this whole post was a rant, apologies.  Smile

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: GDB
Posted 2009-10-03 09:43:35 and read 32767 times.

I doubt a clean sheet design.
Likely a US version of the Macchi M-346 or the Korean aircraft.

When was the last time the US built a clean sheet trainer.
1982, the BAe Hawk was picked for the USN.
The T-6 'Texan' is a modified Swiss design.
Just two examples off the top of my head.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: L-188
Posted 2009-10-03 11:38:16 and read 32767 times.



Quoting GDB (Reply 2):
When was the last time the US built a clean sheet trainer.
1982, the BAe Hawk was picked for the USN

Not clean sheet either, As you note it was a Hawk derivitive.

I would go for the Slingsby Firefly, which was unsuccessfully used by the USAF Acadamy.

Of course they where replaced by the Katana, so that probably can be called the latest trainer.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2009-10-03 12:01:32 and read 32767 times.

I doubt that Boeing would have time to design a clean sheet trainer. Does the USAF want a supersonic trainer like the T-38 is? If so, I doubt anyone could deliver a new airplane by 2014 with an IOC of 2017.

Boeing may be wanting to join up with someone else who already has a trainer in production. Perhaps the Japanese Kawasaki T-4, if they reopen the production line?

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: GDB
Posted 2009-10-03 16:46:38 and read 32767 times.



Quoting L-188 (Reply 3):
I would go for the Slingsby Firefly, which was unsuccessfully used by the USAF Acadamy.

That was a somewhat bizarre case, since the Firefly is used successfully enough by other AF's and/or contractors.
Not sure if they ever got to the bottom of that.

My money, for the T-38 replacement, is on a US version of the Macchi M-346, it's being touted as suitable for training modern generation combat aircraft, in terms of both it's systems and aerodynamics.
Which is the rationale, apart from age, of replacing the T-38's.

While I'd love to see the USAF buy the latest BAE Hawk version, or to be more correct, a new 'de-navalised' T-45 version, which could systems wise do the job, I suspect the USAF will want something more modern aerodynamically.
(The Hawk's best shot at the USAF was about 20 years ago, when it was briefly considered for the lower end of the T-38 mission, restricting the subsequent modernization of the T-38 to just the newer frames for the upper end part of the training syllabus).

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Oroka
Posted 2009-10-03 17:13:41 and read 32767 times.

Depends on what the USAF wants. I am sure that Boeing could field a simple design. No light attack version, no crazy high tech new gear, using existing or lightly modified avionics, current engines... just a simple trainer. If they want to develop more capacity after the fact, sure, but if they want to get a order, they better follow the KISS mentality.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: L-188
Posted 2009-10-03 21:15:11 and read 32767 times.



Quoting GDB (Reply 5):
That was a somewhat bizarre case, since the Firefly is used successfully enough by other AF's and/or contractors.
Not sure if they ever got to the bottom of that.

I don't think it was an airframe issue, it was an engine problem, it would vapor lock at the high density altitudes at Colorado Springs in the summer.

I don't think that anybody else used that engine/frame combo.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: BMI727
Posted 2009-10-03 22:16:32 and read 32767 times.



Quoting GDB (Reply 5):
or to be more correct, a new 'de-navalised' T-45 version

T-45 production should be ending soon. Kind of a shame since I enjoyed seeing those flying around STL. I think that Boeing could, and should come up with a clean sheet design for the T-X. The T-38 is a great plane, but its time may have come.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: EBJ1248650
Posted 2009-10-04 09:31:59 and read 32767 times.



Quoting DEVILFISH (Thread starter):
Flightglobal reports that Boeing is contemplating a completely new jet trainer as its entry for the planned USAF T-X competition. But with first delivery targeted for 2014 and IOC in 2017, would Boeing have enough time to develop a clean-sheet design?

Would it be that hard to field a simple jet trainer in four years and have it fully operational in seven? I suspect that Boeing has already done some initial design work and has a good idea what they want to propose for the competition. That being the case, their head start would give them an edge and make possible the proposed service introduction.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Jackonicko
Posted 2009-10-04 12:21:21 and read 32767 times.

It should be a T-45 derivative.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Spacepope
Posted 2009-10-04 16:44:37 and read 32767 times.



Quoting L-188 (Reply 7):
I don't think it was an airframe issue, it was an engine problem, it would vapor lock at the high density altitudes at Colorado Springs in the summer.

I'm on the other side of the hill from the USAFA, and we're only at 6,700 feet. The Piper Cubs are up here all day every day towing gliders, and the T-41s soldier on. Nothing that couldn't be fixed with the correct fuel.

I'd be wary about a vapor locking engine at this low altitude, but I suppose it could happen.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Kukkudrill
Posted 2009-10-05 00:44:11 and read 32767 times.



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 9):
Would it be that hard to field a simple jet trainer in four years and have it fully operational in seven?

But would an all-new design be competitive financially, assuming that an existing design like the M-346 can meet the USAF's requirements?

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Jackonicko
Posted 2009-10-05 03:03:45 and read 32767 times.

Good point.

The adoption of an advanced T-45 derivative by the USAF would be low cost (the line is up and running) and would provide massive savings in logistics and support costs thanks to commonality with the Navy's T-45 fleet.

The USAF could usefully build on some of the work already undertaken for the Hawk 128, and might look hard at some of the support and training system solutions now being delivered to the UK RAF.

With such a potentially large order, though, it would be desirable for the US to take on the remaining airframe manufacture of the T-45 (at the moment the rear fuselage still comes from Brough), cutting BAE Systems out of the loop.

Providing supersonic performance imposes significant cost and compromises on a trainer design and has been proven to be irrelevant to the advanced training role.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: CTR
Posted 2009-10-05 03:50:00 and read 32767 times.



Quoting DEVILFISH (Thread starter):
But with first delivery targeted for 2014 and IOC in 2017, would Boeing have enough time to develop a clean-sheet design?

Twenty years ago the answer would have been yes. Today? I seriously doubt they could pull it off.

The problem is that after losing the JSF to Lockheed, Mc Boeing in St Louis has lost most of the critical personel with the skills required due to retirement, layoffs and departure to Lockheed for the F-35.

Have fun,

CTR

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Spacepope
Posted 2009-10-05 05:53:57 and read 32767 times.



Quoting Jackonicko (Reply 13):
The adoption of an advanced T-45 derivative by the USAF would be low cost (the line is up and running) and would provide massive savings in logistics and support costs thanks to commonality with the Navy's T-45 fleet.

You have a lot of good points in your post, but I think the T-45 is fundamentally wrong for one reason:

If this trainer is intended to be workhorse advanced trainer for fighter, bomber, and transport types, I think it really needs to have two engines. This would enable "engine-out" flight that simply would not be paralleled in a simulator. I suppose you could do engine-out in a goshawk, however that's an entirely new can of worms. I think this and the supersonic capability on the M-346 make it a much better option.

As I understand it, the T-45 is substantially changed from the basic Hawk. Would the USAF T-45 retain most of these Navy options?

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2009-10-05 07:42:24 and read 32767 times.

Well, it looks like most here think the M-346 would be the best replacement for the USAF T-38s. I just don't see the USAF buying into a modified T-45, mostly because the USAF considers it a "USN aircraft".

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-06-21 19:18:10 and read 32767 times.

Update:

Some clarifications on the program requirements and signs it could be moving ahead.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-prepare-for-t-38-replacement.html

Quote:
"The US Air Force may be within months of launching a contest to replace the Northrop T-38 Talon trainer that was introduced in 1962.

At least five companies are plotting potential bids to win the contract to replace 450 T-38s and become the go-to trainer option worldwide for Lockheed Martin's fifth-generation fighters - the F-22 and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter."



The usual suspects are lining up to fill the bill --- with the renamed T-100 (M-346) leading the pack.....


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Simone Bovi
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Fabio Ferioli - Spot IT


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Remco Donselaar - Touchdown Aviation
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Stuart Freer - Touchdown-aviation


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Flyingvietcolin
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © KianHong



However, most intriguing would be Northrop Grumman's response.....

Quote:
"As the legacy T-38 supplier, Northrop's preferred route may be offering a service life extension programme for the Talon fleet.

Dave McDonald, a plans, programmes and requirements manager for the Air Education and Training Command (AETC), confirms 'extending the life of the baseline system' remains one of the options on the USAF's list.

Northrop also has the ability to surprise the competition by producing an all-new, clean-sheet design. In addition to its long heritage in the trainer market, the company owns a major stake in Burt Rutan's Scaled Composites.

Among several ambitious design projects over the years, Scaled designed and built a jet-powered replacement for the Fairchild A-10 ground-attack aircraft in the early 1990s called the agile response effective support aircraft."


What could it be --- a two-seat version of the Tigershark?      

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Carlisle

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Oroka
Posted 2010-06-21 23:56:24 and read 32767 times.

Burt Rutan + F-20= 0_o

At least Northrop would get some return on the F-20.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-06-22 02:39:13 and read 32767 times.

From a distance, it seems the Italians have the best papers (again may I say).

It's modern/digital, proven, has engine redundancy, fighter like maneuverability.

http://www.aermacchi.it/files/M346A2523_0.jpg

It's original designers live in Russia, at Yakovlev, but thats a long story..

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: GDB
Posted 2010-06-22 10:38:02 and read 32767 times.

Big article in this week's Flight about the USAF trainer requirement.
The Korean design, done with major US design/technology input, always had the USAF T-38 requirement in mind.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-prepare-for-t-38-replacement.html

[Edited 2010-06-22 10:40:17]

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-06-22 11:12:24 and read 32767 times.

A bit of background perspective.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th...reviewing-t-x-the-biggest-usa.html

Quoting Oroka (Reply 18):
Burt Rutan + F-20= 0_o

There are a few composite frames being offered with EDF engines (but no afterburners), mostly from China.   

Quoting Oroka (Reply 18):
At least Northrop would get some return on the F-20.

They'd have to build it first and win. But wouldn't it be some poetic justice if they did?   


Quoting keesje (Reply 19):
It's original designers live in Russia, at Yakovlev, but thats a long story..

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dmitry Zherdin
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dmitry Shirenin


Now, that would be the ultimate irony - "American trainer reverse-engineered from Russian design"!

Quoting GDB (Reply 20):
Big article in this week's Flight about the USAF trainer requirement.

The real 'biggie' according to the blog above is this.....

Quote:
"But there is one thing holding this story back, and it's a 'biggie'. So far, the USAF hasn't put any real funding into the budget for T-X, despite plans to award a full-scale development contract before 2013. Industry expects that oversight to be cleared up in the Fiscal 2012 budget request that will be released in early February."



[Edited 2010-06-22 11:22:28]

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: AirRyan
Posted 2010-06-22 19:05:09 and read 32767 times.

I'm not sure Boeing knows how to design and bring from the drawing board to reality, a modern military aircraft since they bought out McDD. Sure, the Super Hornet was a whole new aircraft, but not according to Boeing who said to the US Congress that it wasn't, so that they wouldn't need their financial blessing for the project. So what's that, the early 1980's since they won a bid for a newly designed military fighter jet aircraft? Personally, I think Boeing no longer has the muster to pull off the task, but I sure would like to see them try and prove me and all of us wrong.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: kanban
Posted 2010-06-22 22:38:35 and read 32767 times.

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 22):
I'm not sure Boeing knows how to design and bring from the drawing board to reality, a modern military aircraft since they bought out McDD

ST Loius is McDD... lock, stock and barrel...and they run the company. that's why on the commercial side the feeling is McDD bought Boeing just didn't chnage the name...

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-06-23 04:08:51 and read 32767 times.

Who will be the partner for the 346? NG?

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: trex8
Posted 2010-06-23 17:09:14 and read 32767 times.

one other possible "off the shelf" option and a proven design would be a updated Taiwanese IDF trainer variant, though you would think LM would be the preferred partner as GD was involved in that program, then there's always Bs brown nosing to Beijing to squash any idea of B using it. But maybe NG would be interested, over 200 F5Es were made by AIDC in Taiwan.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-06-23 20:10:55 and read 32767 times.

Quoting GDB (Reply 20):
The Korean design, done with major US design/technology input, always had the USAF T-38 requirement in mind.

The KAI T-50 is perhaps unique among the candidates in that it was envisioned from the outset to be an advanced, supersonic jet trainer tailored for 4.5 and 5th Gen fighters. It also doesn't do any harm that the five required training tasks are already covered under its LIFT envelope. Add to these LockMart's financial and political clout --- and you've got a formidable combination indeed.

Quoting keesje (Reply 24):
Who will be the partner for the 346? NG?

As stated in the Flight report, Boeing has an agreement with Alenia for marketing and international sales of the M-346 (T-100 for this tender). However, seeing how the JCA deal had gone, it could be a tenuous arrangement. Maybe that is why Boeing was considering a clean-sheet design, but they might compromise for the Master if the drop-dead date remained. Whichever the case may be, Northrop Grumman will almost surely be there to be the "significant other."

Quoting trex8 (Reply 25):
one other possible "off the shelf" option and a proven design would be a updated Taiwanese IDF trainer variant, though you would think LM would be the preferred partner as GD was involved in that program,

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dennis Chang


The Ching-Kuo is hampered by its engines, and will always be haunted by the mainland's ghost. Should it be able to cast those aside, LM isn't likely to cut its ties with KAI for what was virtually zero involvement in the IDF program.


Of course, any new design incorporating the Eurojet engine would be expected to take on all comers and prevail, though it goes without saying that it would be more expensive and take longer to develop.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2010-06-24 09:52:29 and read 32767 times.

Perhaps Boeing is thinking about shrinking the F/A-18F Super Hornet as a proposal, possibly with F-404 engines instead of the F-414 the SH has. Shrinking the SH to something smaller then even the F/A-18B/D Hornet, with no armorment, shorter range, and just a weather radar, and non-CVN landing gear could be a game winner for Boeing.

LM could do the same with a shrunk F-16B/D.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-06-24 13:06:52 and read 32767 times.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 27):
Perhaps Boeing is thinking about shrinking the F/A-18F Super Hornet as a proposal, possibly with F-404 engines instead of the F-414 the SH has. Shrinking the SH to something smaller then even the F/A-18B/D Hornet, with no armorment, shorter range, and just a weather radar, and non-CVN landing gear could be a game winner for Boeing.

Wouldn't this essentially be Northrop's YF-17 Cobra, though with tandem seats and GE F404s instead of the old GE YJ101?

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...illa:en-US:official%26tbs%3Disch:1

http://media.photobucket.com/image/y...tterf14/Hornets%2520Nest/YF-17.jpg

http://yanagi.0kr.net/aircraft/us/fighter/yf17/yanagi.0kr.net_YF-17_5273.jpg
http://yanagi.0kr.net/aircraft/us/fi...yf17/yanagi.0kr.net_YF-17_5273.jpg


Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 27):
LM could do the same with a shrunk F-16B/D.

The T-50 Golden Eagle as well as the F-CK-1D Hsung Ying (Goshawk) are already just about 80% of the F-16's size.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © S.L. Tsai



Though for the M-346, living down the Russian connection may not matter much.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Piotr Biskupski
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kral Michal



[Edited 2010-06-24 13:26:10]

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2010-06-24 13:44:46 and read 32767 times.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 28):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 27):
Perhaps Boeing is thinking about shrinking the F/A-18F Super Hornet as a proposal, possibly with F-404 engines instead of the F-414 the SH has. Shrinking the SH to something smaller then even the F/A-18B/D Hornet, with no armorment, shorter range, and just a weather radar, and non-CVN landing gear could be a game winner for Boeing.

Wouldn't this essentially be Northrop's YF-17 Cobra, though with tandem seats and GE F404s instead of the old GE YJ101?

Well, it could be, but smaller. The YF-17 evolved into the F/A-18A/B. Northrop, now part of NG worked with MDD on the F/A-18, I believe they built the aft sections. NG and Boeing could make a joint offer for something like this, although NG wants to rebuild/rewing the T-38s.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: trex8
Posted 2010-06-24 15:54:01 and read 32767 times.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 26):
The Ching-Kuo is hampered by its engines

in what way? the hawk and M346 variants are slower, and the M346 actually uses a non afterburning version of the IDF CKs engine and Honeywell even tried to sell the navy on upgrading the T45 to the same F124 engines. if you want higher thrust there were 12K thrust variants on the drawing board before the F16s were released to Taiwan in 92

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-06-24 17:59:39 and read 32767 times.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 29):
Well, it could be, but smaller.

Maybe if they do away with the afterburner. I'm trying to find a photo of the stepped-cockpit N-285 carrier version to no avail. What I did find are rare photos of N-156F.....

http://www.flickr.com/search/?ss=2&w...266%40N07&q=Northrop+N-156F&m=text

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 29):
Northrop, now part of NG worked with MDD on the F/A-18, I believe they built the aft sections.

They may still be doing it at the El Segundo plant.....

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question...lanes/lwf/f18ef-northrop-plant.jpg

Quoting trex8 (Reply 30):

in what way? the hawk and M346 variants are slower, and the M346 actually uses a non afterburning version of the IDF CKs engine

It was deemed that a power boost was the simplest and cheapest way to offset certain performance shortfalls of the F-CK-1A, though it could rightly be the airframe's problem. It's not known how much credit the USAF would assign to a contestant's speed, but it is plausible supersonic ability would be looked upon favorably as more closely representing the F-22 and F-35 fighters.

Quoting trex8 (Reply 30):
if you want higher thrust there were 12K thrust variants on the drawing board before the F16s were released to Taiwan in 92

I think costly ITEC work on the 12,000 lbf thrust TFE1088-12 was abandoned after the F-16A/Bs were made available.

[Edited 2010-06-24 18:03:42]

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DiamondFlyer
Posted 2010-06-24 18:28:41 and read 32767 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 19):
From a distance, it seems the Italians have the best papers (again may I say).

It's modern/digital, proven, has engine redundancy, fighter like maneuverability.

It looks good too. But alas, looks alone aren't going to win the contest.

-DiamondFlyer

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2010-06-25 04:44:08 and read 32767 times.

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 32):
But alas, looks alone aren't going to win the contest.

If it did, we would have never had the A-10.

              

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-06-25 08:03:27 and read 32767 times.

Looking at the AIDC F-CK-1B Ching Kuo I wondered if its a real trainer, it's a bit of an F16.

Probably it was better to name it a trainer..

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7d/IDF_Pre-production.jpg/800px-IDF_Pre-production.jpg

Single seater..

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-06-25 09:15:17 and read 32767 times.

Too bad Keesje doesn't have the MAKO to cheer for anymore.....

http://static.rcgroups.com/forums/at...-197-eads_mako_10.jpg?d=1141053928

.....the description is similar to the Ching-kuo --- Advanced Trainer and Light Attack Aircraft  yes 

http://www.airforce-technology.com/p...ojects/mako/images/eads_mako_3.jpg

[Edited 2010-06-25 10:08:40]

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-06-30 09:41:17 and read 32767 times.

A little more insight into Boeing's thinking.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ospects-for-us-trainers-swiss.html

Quote:
"But Chadwick predicts that the USAF will favour a clean-sheet design to replace more than 450 T-38s over the next two decades.

'My perspective is the customer would prefer that,' Chadwick says. 'That may seem like an obvious statement, but in today's constrained budget one could see that they could move in a different direction.'

In such an environment, the reverse may be true. With three viable off-the-shelf candidates to replace a trainer, spending billions to develop an all-new design may not seem the obvious path for the USAF.

But Chadwick disagrees that a natural replacement exists to fulfil the USAF's requirements for a T-38 replacement.

'Depending on what the requirement is, do you have to modify those existing platforms?' Chadwick asked. 'And, if you have to modify them and the cost is 'X', then is it potentially better to at least to look at what industry might go and provide?'

Chadwick's comments appear to further distance Boeing from teaming up with BAE's Hawk or Alenia's M-346 derivative for T-X."



I think Boeing's design (if ever) would feature a bit of stealth, be thoroughly up-to-date and supersonic. It might also have vectored thrust, like that proposed by Eurojet for the Tejas.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ng-thrust-vectoring-ej200-for.html


In that sense, it could be like the Mako in its own time, but with a clearer prospect. Now, wouldn't it be absolutely flabbergasting if Boeing licensed EADS' prior work, develop and upgrade it further, and enter it in the T-X competition?    From the first letters of the type description, ATTILA the Hun would be a phonetically close name.....

http://gryphonscry.files.wordpress.c.../05/attila_the_hun.jpg?w=290&h=353

[Edited 2010-06-30 10:49:21]

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2010-07-01 04:14:56 and read 32767 times.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 36):
I think Boeing's design (if ever) would feature a bit of stealth, be thoroughly up-to-date and supersonic. It might also have vectored thrust, like that proposed by Eurojet for the Tejas.....

Since this will be a pilot trainer, I don't see any need for stealth. Vectored thrust would not be desireable in a trainer, as that type training would have to come at a later time, not in the first year of training for new pilots. Supersonic capability is fifferent, the T-38 has proven that. A maximum airspeed of 1.25M to 1.5M would be all that is needed.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-07-01 07:37:26 and read 32767 times.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 36):
Chadwick's comments appear to further distance Boeing from teaming up with BAE's Hawk or Alenia's M-346 derivative for T-X.

Or strenghten it´s negotiation position towards those parties.

''We don´t really need you..´´ is so much better then ''We have no choice..´´

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2010-07-02 04:08:12 and read 32767 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 38):
Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 36):
Chadwick's comments appear to further distance Boeing from teaming up with BAE's Hawk or Alenia's M-346 derivative for T-X.

Or strenghten it´s negotiation position towards those parties.

''We don´t really need you..´´ is so much better then ''We have no choice..´´

That could be true. The RFP is scheduled to be released in early 2011 with the first delivery scheduled for 2014. It would be very tough to design a new clean sheet trainer, but not impossible.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: joecanuck
Posted 2010-07-02 08:27:49 and read 32767 times.

Quoting Oroka (Reply 18):
At least Northrop would get some return on the F-20.
http://home.claranet.nl/users/wbergmns/2max/f20.jpg

That's the ticket...

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2010-07-03 09:08:33 and read 32767 times.

I also think the F-20 would be a great trainer and replacement for the T-38. But the USAF rejected the F-20 as a light weight fighter back in the '80s.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Oroka
Posted 2010-07-03 22:17:13 and read 32767 times.

Rejected as a light weight fighter... sure, but with a new engine, some material refinements, upgraded avionics the F-20 would be a nice trainer. The selling point would be using an existing design to save money.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2010-07-04 04:52:42 and read 32767 times.

Perhaps. It would share a lot of the current T-38 design, and the engine could be upgraded from the F-404 to the F-414.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-07-04 07:08:51 and read 32767 times.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 37):
Since this will be a pilot trainer, I don't see any need for stealth.

If it'd purely be a pilot trainer, yes. If Boeing were looking for plenty of LCA sales later on the side, then some stealth shaping would be helpful, eliminating the need for another airframe.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 37):
Vectored thrust would not be desireable in a trainer, as that type training would have to come at a later time, not in the first year of training for new pilots.

Again, that is a function of what they would want to do in the future. They could design it in (with an override for normal thrust) from the outset and have the most advanced pilot candidates transition from it to the F-35s and F-22s; or incorporate the feature in later batches, while progressing the training on current 4th Gen fighters in combination with simulator time.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 37):
Supersonic capability is fifferent, the T-38 has proven that. A maximum airspeed of 1.25M to 1.5M would be all that is needed.

And I believe the Tigershark betters that at 2.0M clean.

Quoting keesje (Reply 38):
Or strenghten it´s negotiation position towards those parties.

''We don´t really need you..´´ is so much better then ''We have no choice..´´

Alenia doesn't really have much of a leverage here. As the JCA contract had shown, even winning the competition was no assurance of great times ahead.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 39):
The RFP is scheduled to be released in early 2011 with the first delivery scheduled for 2014. It would be very tough to design a new clean sheet trainer, but not impossible.

As pointed out by the blog, there's still no solid funding for this program. In these tough times, that could mean a while - which would give Boeing ample time to refine their design. They must have some detailed studies lying about waiting for the opportune moment of a need surfacing (they might be pushing the requirement, for all we know). Also, gigabytes of data on scale model wind-tunnel tests on the YF-23 which could be useful. Factor in the diminishing engineering work at Boeing and the trainer's position in the USAF's "wants list" and one will have a clearer picture.

Quoting Oroka (Reply 42):
but with a new engine, some material refinements, upgraded avionics the F-20 would be a nice trainer. The selling point would be using an existing design to save money.
http://www.x-plane.org/home/jacobp51/F414.JPG

Successful integration of the second seat, information processing and fusion would be the keys. The F-20 was already very agile and 9g capable. However, it will still be looked at as an 80's design.

[Edited 2010-07-04 07:37:46]

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2010-07-04 08:16:46 and read 32767 times.

While I always like the F-20, I just don't see it selected as the T-X. Even with updates, it is still a single engine airplane and it would depend on the RFP which should state the number of engines wanted. For an advanced trainer, I would think the USAF would prefer two engines.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-07-04 08:43:36 and read 32767 times.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 44):
Again, that is a function of what they would want to do in the future.
Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 44):
If it'd purely be a pilot trainer, yes.

If you make the trainer supersonic and stealth it will probably be 2-3 x as expensive as competing trainers and trainers flying around with expensive capabilities not needed. It doesn't sound like a smart strategy.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-07-04 09:37:09 and read 32767 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 46):
If you make the trainer supersonic and stealth it will probably be 2-3 x as expensive as competing trainers and trainers flying around with expensive capabilities not needed. It doesn't sound like a smart strategy.

Was it those which killed the Mako?..... for it was described here thusly.....

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/mako/

Quote:

Mako airframe

"The fuselage is of aluminium construction, with mainly carbon fibre air intakes and tail unit. The tailplane is all-moving.

Stealth technology is incorporated into the design. Mako has a radar cross-section of only 1m² at a 44km range. The forward section of the aircraft is chinned to give a low signature. Similarly, the wing and fuselage surfaces are blended and the shaped (non-right-angled) air intakes give low radar cross-section.

Performance

The Mako advanced trainer aircraft can fly at an altitude of 14,400m. The maximum speed of the aircraft is Mach 1.5. The airstrip take-off run and airstrip landing are 450m and 750m respectively. The ferry range of the aircraft is 3,700km."



No doubt Boeing would be grateful for the advice.   

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-07-04 10:54:31 and read 32767 times.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 47):
Was it those which killed the Mako?..... for it was described here thusly.....

Probably (don't know the "Mako") it seems inbetween a fighter and a trainer, not good at both.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-07-04 12:56:47 and read 32767 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 48):
Probably (don't know the "Mako")

Really?.....Here's an introduction then.....

http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRAT2000.htm

Quoting keesje (Reply 48):
it seems inbetween a fighter and a trainer, not good at both.

Paradoxically, both the T-38 and the F-5 excelled at their respective roles.   


[Edited 2010-07-04 13:13:47]

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Oroka
Posted 2010-07-04 21:40:47 and read 32767 times.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 44):
Successful integration of the second seat, information processing and fusion would be the keys. The F-20 was already very agile and 9g capable. However, it will still be looked at as an 80's design.

Both should be somewhat easy, being based on the F-5/T-38. Take the cockpit from something in production, dumb it down a bit.

In todays budget climate, if Northrop teamed with Boeing or LM and showed up at the table in a few months with F-20 based trainer, for a really good price, it would be a shoe-in (IMO). You dont need stealth, you dont need insane speeds... simple existing engine, simple cheap airframe, simple existing common gear... good value, with a good sales team pushing the jet. Kinda a anti-F-22 anti-F-35.

$1.2b was already spent on this program... it would be like getting lost money back.

[Edited 2010-07-04 21:53:56]

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-07-05 15:37:11 and read 32767 times.

It was really interesting to see how a project begins, and ends with the various proponents finally competing with each other as in the case of the airframers Aermacchi, EADS, Yakovlev; and Eurojet, GE, SNECMA among the engine makers. I guess the 2,500 airframe replacement market enticement over 25 years is lagging in development.

Quote:
History (Geschichte)
"The original concept for the Mako (previously known as AT-2000) stretches back to 1989 and a joint Dornier/Aermacchi study into future trainer requirements. These contacts later dissolved and Dasa was working on advanced trainer concepts alone. News of the programme first broke at the Seoul Airshow in October 1996. At that time, it was even said that work on a prototype could begin in 1997 for a first flight in 2000.

At the beginning of 1998, Dasa (now EADS) did a fair amount of analytical and wind-tunnel work concerning the new supersonic trainer. Radar cross-section tests were also conducted, with very good results (1 sq m at 45 km). Dasa did cooperate with Hyundai of South Korea and Denel Aviation of South Africa, two countries in which it saw a requirement for a total of 150 new trainers and perhaps 100 more lead-in fighters."


Quoting Oroka (Reply 50):
In todays budget climate, if Northrop teamed with Boeing or LM and showed up at the table in a few months with F-20 based trainer, for a really good price, it would be a shoe-in (IMO).

  The idea is so contrary to "enshrined" procurement philosophy that the Unholy Trinity would probably rain down upon thee untold calamity to banish such heresy!   

Quoting Oroka (Reply 50):
You dont need stealth, you dont need insane speeds... simple existing engine, simple cheap airframe, simple existing common gear... good value, with a good sales team pushing the jet. Kinda a anti-F-22 anti-F-35.


  The F-20 died due to such blasphemy. A second death would be utter ignominy!   

Quoting Oroka (Reply 50):
$1.2b was already spent on this program... it would be like getting lost money back.

   Or losing twofold twice.                  

I'd really like a resurrected 'Shark, even a two-seat trainer variety - honestly.   But Boeing and LockMart would be there to join the party.   

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2010-07-05 18:20:32 and read 32767 times.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 51):
The F-20 died due to such blasphemy. A second death would be utter ignominy!

Correct.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-07-08 07:49:34 and read 32767 times.

In a related development, the T-50 has just been eliminated from the Singapore contest.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ounce-m-346-trainer-selection.html

Quote:
"Singapore is about to announce that it has shortlisted the Alenia Aermacchi M-346 for its advanced jet trainer requirement, after eliminating the Korea Aerospace Industries/Lockheed Martin T-50 from the competition.

'The South Koreans have been informed that the T-50 is no longer in contention, even though Singapore has not yet signed a contract with Aermacchi,' says an industry source familiar with the discussions."



This could influence Boeing's decision whether to proceed or not with their clean-sheet approach.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2010-07-09 04:45:36 and read 32767 times.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 53):
In a related development, the T-50 has just been eliminated from the Singapore contest.....

I don't know if that will or will not have an impact on the new USAF trainer.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-07-21 10:52:58 and read 32767 times.

No definite way forward yet for Boeing on the T-X.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...n-clean-sheet-design-for-t-38.html

If Boeing's indecision is any indication, then the M-346's selection by Singapore and the UAE might point where they would head.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-09-13 17:44:04 and read 32767 times.

Update:

Manufacturers seem upbeat and eager, even for a program with no clear source of funding yet.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...as-tentative-prime-contractor.html


Could the reported Boeing/NG partnership have this competition in its sights?

Might the following new pronouncement influence the T-X procurement's direction?.....

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o.../blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=192

Quote:
"U.S. Northern Command's new leader says that, for homeland security missions, he wants aircraft that can do slow and low.

'F-16s don't fly slow very well,' said Navy Adm. James Winnefeld, who has been in charge of NORTHCOM and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) since May.

Winnefeld told reporters in Washington D.C. Thursday that he's watching closely studies and tests on a variety of hardware 'to see what the art of the possible is with a light fighter-type aircraft.' Something other than an F-16 would be better for loitering during large outdoor events or political conventions, he said."

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2011-02-02 10:39:06 and read 32767 times.

Here's the latest declarant.....is U.S. Aerospace pulling another stunt?.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th...eport-chinese-aircraft-propos.html

China set to bid on major US aerospace programmes

Quote:
"Chinese President Hu Jintao's high-profile visit to the US looks set to be followed by ambitious bids from China to supply platforms to meet two major US military aircraft procurement programmes.

State-owned Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) is preparing proposals, in partnership with existing partner US aviation services group US Aerospace (USAE), to bid for the US Navy's VXX helicopter programme and the US Air Force T-X project to procure advanced jet trainers (AJT)."



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Pearl Su
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Weimeng


Looks like General Dynamics' original study for Taiwan's IDF and interestingly, named "Falcon" as well!   

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2011-02-26 10:01:57 and read 32767 times.

Update:

No palpable sense of urgency despite funding increase.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ps-tenfold-in-latest-spending.html

Quote:
"US Air Force funding for a new advanced jet training system has jumped tenfold in the latest five-year spending plan, but top officials remain non-committal about the schedule and strategy for fielding a new aircraft.

The five-year spending plan unveiled by the air force on 14 February includes $306 million for the T-X training system, which will replace the Northrop T-38C Talon and its simulators.

That represents a huge jump from about $30 million inserted in the service's five-year plan last year, and is perhaps enough to field an off-the-shelf aircraft on schedule in fiscal year 2017."

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2011-05-25 08:39:43 and read 32435 times.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 17):

However, most intriguing would be Northrop Grumman's response.....

Quote:
"Northrop also has the ability to surprise the competition by producing an all-new, clean-sheet design. In addition to its long heritage in the trainer market, the company owns a major stake in Burt Rutan's Scaled Composites.

Among several ambitious design projects over the years, Scaled designed and built a jet-powered replacement for the Fairchild A-10 ground-attack aircraft in the early 1990s called the agile response effective support aircraft."

What could it be --- a two-seat version of the Tigershark?

Apparently not. The Dew Line hints at NG's possible candidate.....


.http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/graham-warwick/Ares%20then.jpg

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th...s-the-super-talon-northrop-gr.html

Quote:
"The question is what exactly the Super Talon represents? Could it be a rebuilt T-38, with 9g manoeuvring, embedded training and digital cockpit wrapped inside a traditional Talon's shell? Or is it perhaps merely based on the Talon, but offers far greater performance and power than an aircraft that actually first flew in 1961? Or is it perhaps in the mould of Northrop's latest experiments with unmanned and optionally manned aircraft, with Scaled Composites as the rapid prototyping designer? Scaled has some experience in this area. Who remembers Burt Rutan's ARES concept?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zG9LlHcX8lg


Meanwhile, LM/KAI's T-50 is getting a lot of press lately.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...re-engining-for-t-x-programme.html


Wither be Boeing's entry?

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2011-06-08 16:09:15 and read 31678 times.

Boeing sees a delay of "several years" for the T-38 replacement tender.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...y-promotes-new-jet-to-replace.html

Quote:
"Boeing executives expect the US Air Force to delay replacing the Northrop T-38C Talon by several years as the company continues to promote the costlier option of developing a new jet trainer.

On 7 June, Boeing Phantom Works president Darryl Davis opened discussion on the T-X programme, saying he 'understands' budget pressures have already forced USAF officials to delay a T-38 replacement by several years.

But Boeing Military Aircraft president Chris Chadwick softened that message, saying he 'can see [T-X] slipping to the right a year or two' as part of broader budget pressures."



However, the USAF and AETC don't seem to share Boeing's pessimism.....

"Boeing's gloomy outlook for launching the T-X programme on schedule within the next two years came as a surprise to the USAF and at least one competitor. Since 2008, the Air Education and Training Command (AETC), which operates the T-38C fleet, has been committed to fielding the first operational T-X jet in fiscal year 2017.

'The air force has not, at this point, delayed T-X [initial operational capability],' AETC said when asked for a response. It said it is continuing with its budgeting process to have the IOC of T-X in FY2017."



Meanwhile, journos touring Boeing's simulation facility were guessing a two-place digital image looking like the YF-23 prototype hinted at Boeing's clean-sheet entry.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Carlisle
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Edward Gronenthal



Again, $ $ $ could be the biggest stumbling blocks.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2011-09-20 08:03:08 and read 28722 times.

Alas, Northrop Grumman is not teaming up with Boeing nor fielding something revolutionary.....

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...rop-team-for-usaf-trainer-bid.html

Quote:
" ARLINGTON, Virginia --- BAE Systems, Inc. and Northrop Grumman Corporation today announced an exclusive strategic partnership to compete in the U.S. Air Force's 'T-X' program for the replacement of the aging T-38 trainer with BAE Systems' Hawk Advanced Jet Training System (AJTS). BAE Systems, Inc. will prime this pursuit and Northrop Grumman will serve as the manufacturing partner for the new Hawk aircraft."


Drat, a two-seat Trainer 'Shark would have been cool.   

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: cosmofly
Posted 2011-09-20 11:49:17 and read 28637 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 34):
Single seater..

It has a 2 seater version. See pic #3 in the link.

http://www.timesunion.com/news/artic...s-upgraded-fighter-jet-1446823.php

A better pic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AIDC_F-CK-1_Brave_Hawk.jpg

Quoting keesje (Reply 19):
It's modern/digital, proven, has engine redundancy, fighter like maneuverability.

The IDF has all the above.


It will be ironic if Taiwan exports this to US since Obama just rejected selling "new fighters" to them. May be this is best excuse to help Taiwan upgrade their defense, by buying from them and "modifying" for US use.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Garyck
Posted 2011-09-20 16:18:22 and read 28563 times.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 61):
Alas, Northrop Grumman is not teaming up with Boeing nor fielding something revolutionary.....

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...rop-team-for-usaf-trainer-bid.html

Quote:
"ARLINGTON, Virginia --- BAE Systems, Inc. and Northrop Grumman Corporation today announced an exclusive strategic partnership to compete in the U.S. Air Force's 'T-X' program for the replacement of the aging T-38 trainer with BAE Systems' Hawk Advanced Jet Training System (AJTS). BAE Systems, Inc. will prime this pursuit and Northrop Grumman will serve as the manufacturing partner for the new Hawk aircraft."


Drat, a two-seat Trainer 'Shark would have been cool.

Two Hawk T2 departed BAE Systems Warton with longrange tanks on today en-route to the USA. I understand them to be ZK020 & ZK029. They have spent the last week flying around at EGNO/Warton.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ron Kellenaers


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Markman



Would be good for BAE Systems/Northrop Grumman to get an order for 500 of these.....

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2011-09-21 07:08:33 and read 28360 times.

And finally, Boeing's new trainer concept is revealed......

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th...2011/09/19/Boeing%20TX%20thumb.jpg

Very nice.....I guess it's worth the long wait?

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: AirRyan
Posted 2011-09-26 18:41:38 and read 27679 times.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 64):
Very nice.....I guess it's worth the long wait?

But it cannot possibly compete with a design already readily available for production.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2011-09-26 19:13:11 and read 27705 times.

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 65):

But it cannot possibly compete with a design already readily available for production.

There may be some breathing room to catch up.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...stuck-in-usaf-budget-limbo-362360/

Quote:
"But Donley's list of top priorities left at least four major programmes - involving new helicopters and trainers - in limbo, awaiting the USAF's next moves in either the acquisition or budget processes.

Neither Donley nor Gen Norton Schwartz, USAF chief of staff, rose to defend or even mention the service's commitment to these four programmes, for T-X advanced jet trainers, light attack trainers, utility helicopters under the common vertical lift support programme (CVLSP) and combat search and rescue (CSAR) helicopters."



I bet proponents and congressional supporters in the affected constituencies would try their darndest and throw a monkey wrench into the process just so their candidate could be accommodated.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2012-02-17 23:43:21 and read 23959 times.

As it turns out, there's plenty of time to fine tune the design, build and test prototypes, and mature a production standard demo trainer.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...rainer-replacement-to-2020-368456/

Quote:
"The US Air Force has confirmed its latest budget proposal delays fielding a replacement for the Northrop T-38 Talon advanced jet trainer by three years. The Fiscal 2013 budget proposal unveiled on 13 February postpones the initial operational capability for the T-X programme from FY2017 to FY2020, according to the Air Education and Training Command (AETC).

Contract award is also delayed one year to FY2016, the AETC said.

The command remains committed to replacing the T-38s, which entered service 51 years ago."



......while awaiting funding for the program.            

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: ebj1248650
Posted 2012-02-19 10:07:51 and read 23624 times.

Looks like a cross of the F/A-18D and the YF-23A. Interesting concept.

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2012-02-22 14:34:57 and read 23026 times.

Quoting ebj1248650 (Reply 68):
Looks like a cross of the F/A-18D and the YF-23A. Interesting concept.

Almost what was said of the ATG Javelin being a blend of the T-38 and F/A-18. Alas, that twin Williams FJ33 powered prototype initially meant as a personal business jet, and later on pushed for the Israeli Air Force's jet trainer requirement to avail of development funds, was not able to raise the additional $200M needed.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrei Bezmylov
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Colin Hunter - AirTeamImages


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © M-A Veillard - Geneva Spotters
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sergey Ryabtsev - Russian AviaPhoto Team



With the M-346 winning that one, maybe Boeing's single-engine interpretation of this concept would have better luck in USAF's T-X competition.....

.
http://images.gizmag.com/gallery_lrg/4154_14060594810.jpg

.
http://images.gizmag.com/gallery_lrg/4154_15060572314.jpg

.
http://images.gizmag.com/hero/4684_1100571119.jpg


http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/javelin-ajt/


[Edited 2012-02-22 15:36:48]

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2012-07-11 14:01:05 and read 19702 times.

This report from AvWeek shows the silhouette of a very familiar, conventional airframe.....

.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....e-xml/awx_07_11_2012_p0-475701.xml

July 11, 2012

Quote:
"After a long flirtation with the concept of a partnership to offer a foreign fast-jet trainer to the U.S. Air Force as a T-38C replacement, Boeing will forgo an off-the-shelf bid in favor of a new-build design or opt not to bid at all.

'We have looked at a lot of different options. But our belief is the aerospace industry and the defense industry need somebody who can come in and provide disruptive innovation,' says Chris Chadwick, president of Boeing Military Aircraft, in an interview with Aviation Week. 'By year end, we will have agreed internally how we are going to move forward, and how and if we team for a clean-sheet design'."



It seems Boeing would forego the competition if it could not enter its twin-tailed concept design?

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: checksixx
Posted 2012-07-11 22:41:47 and read 19524 times.

I would keep it simple if I were bidding. A new build T-38, kind of like what happened with the Hornet/Super Hornet. Take a T-38 design and simply make it slightly larger. Larger/thicker wing, update the engines with newer afterburning engines, and also updated avionics/glass in the slightly larger cockpit. Give it LEF on the wings like the F-5's...All around new airplane, updated design = far cheaper than clean sheet. We already know the -38 is a successful trainer...beef it up, sell it low and they'll buy......IMO

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: cosmofly
Posted 2012-07-12 14:21:59 and read 19284 times.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 70):
This report from AvWeek shows the silhouette of a very familiar, conventional airframe.....

A NASA T-38
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:T-38_Silhouette.jpg

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2012-10-15 19:44:46 and read 14770 times.

Boeing is still presumed to be fielding a clean-sheet design.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...af-releases-draft-t-x-kpps-377693/

Quote:
"The US Air Force has released a set of draft key performance parameters (KPP) for its prospective T-X jet trainer requirement which would replace the long-serving Northrop T-38 Talon.

The service requires not only an aircraft, but also simulators and computer-aided learning courseware for the new system. The USAF might need as many as 350 T-X aircraft to replace T-38s currently being used for undergraduate pilot training and the introduction to fighter fundamentals course.

[.....]

The avionics and other systems must be modular and open architecture and upgradable overtime. Life-cycle costs are required to be no more than $35.3 billion over 20 years in then-year dollars."



This release of the draft KPPs provides further impetus to the project. Hopefully, the stipulated cost limitation would keep the program pragmatically scoped.


http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....l/asd_10_15_2012_p03-01-506696.xml

[Edited 2012-10-15 19:51:45]

Topic: RE: New Boeing Trainer For T-X Contest
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2012-10-22 09:47:57 and read 13928 times.

Just a "teaser" for now.....

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=bf983f70891e8607c86ef426a87a87e3&tab=core&_cview=0

Quote:
"There is no further status to provide at this time. Please continue to monitor FedBizOpps as it will be used to communicate with industry in the future.

For all correspondance relating to T-X, please contact the T-X Contracting Officer in the Training Aircraft Division, Mr Thomas Rickey, 937-904-4173 or email Thomas.Rickey@wpafb.af.mil."


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/