mmo
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:04 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Thu Aug 08, 2019 8:11 am

Spar,

Haven't read the file which Ozair linked but the link I posted had a total of 36 F-117s deployed which sounds about right considering some aircraft will be in for Depot work which will take about 20% of the fleet out of service, then you have another 20 having MX done in Dreamland at the time, then you have to consider the non-combat coded aircraft used for training and there is no way the entire fleet could be deployed.

The F-117s dropped 2.3% (Max) of the tonnage and only struck only 32 targets during the entire air phase. How is that such a dramatic effect? To be honest, I think the Secret Squirrel sortie did more strategic damage than the entire F-117 operation.
If we weren't all crazy we'd all go insane!
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2928
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Thu Aug 08, 2019 1:28 pm

Spar wrote:
We are spending our defense dollars very foolishly.


Here's a historical perspective that may or may not parallel the current argument.

At the entry of WWII the US Army had two main battle tank design concepts, the Sherman and the Pershing. While the Pershing was a leap in design and would rival the best of the German tanks, the US Army concentrate their effort on the Sherman because of the ability to churn out quantities. The Pershing was on a slower track and only made it to the war in the later stages.

Some would say that decision cost many lives of Sherman Tank crew, but the decision was made for logical reasons.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Spar
Posts: 443
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2019 7:37 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Thu Aug 08, 2019 5:40 pm

mmo wrote:
The F-117s dropped 2.3% (Max) of the tonnage and only struck only 32 targets during the entire air phase. How is that such a dramatic effect? To be honest, I think the Secret Squirrel sortie did more strategic damage than the entire F-117 operation.
The number of targets and tonnage are irrelevant in the stealth vs non-stealth analysis. That's more of a precision munition vs dumb bomb issue. The F-117 targets were all high value and were struck with precision munitions.

bikerthai wrote:
Sherman Tank
The only parallels I see are the use of obsolete technology in both the Sherman and the choice of a 21st century F-15. The fact that the Sherman was a lightweight tank was unavoidable as the allies were to be the attacking force thus had to provide transportation of the tank to the battle (tank transporters, landing craft and railroad cars) whereas the Axis forces were stationary and had fewer transportation related constraints.

The unfortunate choice of gasoline engines instead of diesel negatively impacted the US tankers vs the Germans (and the Russians) whose diesel powered tanks could ford rivers, had more dependable engines and of course didn't catch fire so easily. But there was also the matter of the offensive equipment: the guns. The builders of the US tanks apparently never did quite understand that it is necessary to be ahead of technology, not behind technology. The guns mounted on the Shermans would have been fine for WW1, but were a major handicap in WW2. The choice of low velocity 75 and later 90mm guns was made on the basis of manufacturing concerns, not battlespace considerations. Had they given more thought to the environment where the tanks were to be used, they might have opted for fewer tanks with bigger guns.

So maybe there are lessons to be learned from this comparison, the choice of an F-15EX is also being made on the basis of manufacturing concerns apparently without a thought to 21st century battlespace considerations.



I want to tack this thought on at the end of this post because it's something that has been nagging at me since the above discussion about EPAWSS. An assertion was made above that the National Guard units that are defending the US mainland would benefit from the use of EPAWSS when searching for aggressors bent on attacking the US mainland. But to me, this scenario seems highly implausible. The EPAWSS system is designed to spot microwave emissions as from a radar set and plot to derived information as if it were a radar return, presumably it also transfers this information to weapons systems. This concept works fine when used in an aggressor role against a SAM network but I see it to be of little or no use in a defensive air to air environment. Defensive BARCAP aircraft would have their radars turned when searching for an intruder, whereas offensive strike aircraft would be expected to have their radar turned off, at least until reaching their target area. Thus, I don't see that EPAWSS would be at all helpful for a defender.

And in the end it still comes down to the simple fact that if you need EPAWSS, you need stealth.
 
mmo
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:04 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Thu Aug 08, 2019 6:13 pm

Spar.......obviously you haven't read the unclassified Rand Report. A quick synopsis is the USAF should buy the F-15NG as they call it. But what do they know, Right? I am sure they would love a critique on their analysis.

For your reading pleasure: http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pag ... cific.aspx
If we weren't all crazy we'd all go insane!
 
Spar
Posts: 443
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2019 7:37 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Thu Aug 08, 2019 6:30 pm

mmo........ Have you ever heard the term "military industrial complex"?

Do you understand what the term means?

As for your link: The requested URL was not found.

But anyway, this is a discussion forum, it's your obligation to make your case here, not just post links or say "go look here".
 
mmo
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:04 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Thu Aug 08, 2019 7:37 pm

Spar wrote:
mmo........ Have you ever heard the term "military industrial complex"?

Do you understand what the term means?

As for your link: The requested URL was not found.

But anyway, this is a discussion forum, it's your obligation to make your case here, not just post links or say "go look here".


Spar,

I guess it's too much trouble to click on a link. Since it appears to be beyond your scope of work here is a direct link to the Mitre study. If you want I can read it to you but you'd have to call me in Spain.

http://www.airforcemag.com/DocumentFile ... -Study.pdf

My responsibility to make the case? Where is that in the forum rules. The study reiterates and reinforces what I and Ozair have been saying all along, and then some. But, you have a habit of only reading what you want and making all-encompassing statements without any sources.
If we weren't all crazy we'd all go insane!
 
Spar
Posts: 443
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2019 7:37 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Thu Aug 08, 2019 8:07 pm

mmo, I understand that you aren't happy with my posts, but you haven't made any coherent argument against any argument of mine.

In your post #804 you posted a link that came up as The requested URL was not found. Now you post a link to an off topic bit of bureaucratic boilerplate. This most recent link is to a study that principally concludes that the Air Force needs more overseas bases (Overall Recommendations "Air Force aircraft need to be significantly recapitalized, brought to a higher state of readiness, and provided with multiple new bases to operate from." and needs more aircraft: "The Air Force needs to increase many of its aircraft inventories." Surprise surprise, an Air Force study claims we need more Air Force. (I wonder what a Coast Guard study would conclude; maybe more Coast Guard bases and more Coast Guard Cutters?)

And you disclaim the obligation to even make a logical argument here in the forum while all this is done with a continuous dreary and unproductive level of snarkeyness.

Since you're unable to participate in the F-15EX discussion in a rational manner, I'm putting you on ignore.
 
HaveBlue
Posts: 2153
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:01 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Fri Aug 09, 2019 2:58 am

mmo wrote:
Some USAF pilots train in the T-38, which is not the F-5. The F-5 evolved from the T-38, other than the manufacturer, Northrup, that is the only similarity.


Wow, that is just simply not true. The T-38 and F-5 share almost identical aircraft profile/planforms/overall designs, have the same length, wingspan, height, top speed, engines, etc. The similarities are way much more than the differences, the differences being that the F-5 is single seat and plumbed for munitions/stores and other than that the differences are superficial (inlet and exhaust shapes). The F-5 and the T-38 have more in common than the legacy F-18 and the Super Hornets. Your comment is a bit disingenuous.
 
mmo
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:04 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Fri Aug 09, 2019 8:20 am

HaveBlue wrote:
mmo wrote:
Some USAF pilots train in the T-38, which is not the F-5. The F-5 evolved from the T-38, other than the manufacturer, Northrup, that is the only similarity.


Wow, that is just simply not true. The T-38 and F-5 share almost identical aircraft profile/planforms/overall designs, have the same length, wingspan, height, top speed, engines, etc. The similarities are way much more than the differences, the differences being that the F-5 is single seat and plumbed for munitions/stores and other than that the differences are superficial (inlet and exhaust shapes). The F-5 and the T-38 have more in common than the legacy F-18 and the Super Hornets. Your comment is a bit disingenuous.


I beg to differ. The F-5B and F-5F are two-seaters. The engines on the F-5 vs. T-38 produce more thrust in mil and A/B, higher gross weights, leading-edge devices on all F-5, tip tanks and on the E/F plumbing for a centerline fuel tank. The A/B has no radar but E/F does have radar. Different G limitations, different speed limits, T-38 M1.3 and F-5 is M 1.5 and IIRC command ejection on the F. The inlets designs are not "superficial" at all. They provide anti-icing while the T-38 has sever restrictions on a flight through icing, reported or forecast. The tail design is different due to the drag chute and hook and different engines. While I agree they have the same heritage, there are major differences between the two aircraft.
So, while having the same heritage there are significant differences between the two aircraft.
If we weren't all crazy we'd all go insane!
 
mmo
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:04 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Fri Aug 09, 2019 8:27 am

Spar wrote:
mmo, I understand that you aren't happy with my posts, but you haven't made any coherent argument against any argument of mine.

In your post #804 you posted a link that came up as The requested URL was not found. Now you post a link to an off topic bit of bureaucratic boilerplate. This most recent link is to a study that principally concludes that the Air Force needs more overseas bases (Overall Recommendations "Air Force aircraft need to be significantly recapitalized, brought to a higher state of readiness, and provided with multiple new bases to operate from." and needs more aircraft: "The Air Force needs to increase many of its aircraft inventories." Surprise surprise, an Air Force study claims we need more Air Force. (I wonder what a Coast Guard study would conclude; maybe more Coast Guard bases and more Coast Guard Cutters?)

And you disclaim the obligation to even make a logical argument here in the forum while all this is done with a continuous dreary and unproductive level of snarkeyness.

Since you're unable to participate in the F-15EX discussion in a rational manner, I'm putting you on ignore.


So, you expect me to regurgitate what I and Ozair have previous written many, many times? How did you come up with "off topic"? Did you even read the rand report? It specifically made significant recommendations about the F-15NG, for one it recommended replacing the current F-15E with the NG for reasons such as common fleet, lower overall maintenance costs for the entire fleet. But, since I am on "ignore" I suppose it makes no difference to you. Obviously, that is your "out" for continuing the discussion when more and more evidence against your position is presented. You must have a different version of A.net than I do because I have been looking for an ignore button since I started reading your incoherent postings.
If we weren't all crazy we'd all go insane!
 
Spar
Posts: 443
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2019 7:37 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Sat Aug 10, 2019 1:40 am

HaveBlue wrote:
Wow, that is just simply not true. The T-38 and F-5 share almost identical aircraft profile/planforms/overall designs, have the same length, wingspan, height, top speed, engines, etc. The similarities are way much more than the differences, the differences being that the F-5 is single seat and plumbed for munitions/stores and other than that the differences are superficial (inlet and exhaust shapes). The F-5 and the T-38 have more in common than the legacy F-18 and the Super Hornets. Your comment is a bit disingenuous.

The F-5 and the T-38 seem to have more in common than the F-35 A and the F-35 C, which have different wing sizes.
Also the F-5 and the T-38 have more in common than various models of the 737, or even between different models of the Citabria, which have different wings and different engines (Champ and Decathlon).

Good call HaveBlue.
 
mmo
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:04 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Sat Aug 10, 2019 9:50 am

The F=5 and T-38 have very different wings and different variants of the J-85. Plus the T-38 has no ability to carry nose weapons, the T-38B has a centerline gun pod but that's about it. The list really goes on and on. T-38, no anti-skid, F-5 anti-skid and better tires. After flying the T-38 for over 1500 hours the F-5 seems to have all the shortcomings of the T-38 built-in already.
But, it was politics which is why the F-5 wasn't sold in more numbers to the USAF and politics killed the F-20 which was a great aircraft.
If we weren't all crazy we'd all go insane!
 
HaveBlue
Posts: 2153
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:01 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Sat Aug 10, 2019 7:26 pm

mmo wrote:
But, it was politics which is why the F-5 wasn't sold in more numbers to the USAF and politics killed the F-20 which was a great aircraft.


That I agree with 100%, loved the Tigershark.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 3194
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:33 am

mmo wrote:
The F=5 and T-38 have very different wings and different variants of the J-85. Plus the T-38 has no ability to carry nose weapons, the T-38B has a centerline gun pod but that's about it. The list really goes on and on. T-38, no anti-skid, F-5 anti-skid and better tires. After flying the T-38 for over 1500 hours the F-5 seems to have all the shortcomings of the T-38 built-in already.
But, it was politics which is why the F-5 wasn't sold in more numbers to the USAF and politics killed the F-20 which was a great aircraft.

The F-5 wasn't bought by the USAF for operational use because the USAF didn't have a need for a lightweight fighter, especially the F-5 because it was too short legged for operations, and the F-20 was an aircraft that pushed the base design too far, with no upgradeability. The F-16 at the time was a more capable aircraft in the air to air role, and in the air to ground role, and could be easily be upgraded. Furthermore, foreign customers didn't want to buy an aircraft the USAF didn't operate; having the USAF operate the same aircraft type enables many foreign customers to leverage USAF infrastructure and expertise, compared to other options.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2928
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Mon Aug 12, 2019 3:23 pm

ThePointblank wrote:
The F-16 at the time was a more capable aircraft in the air to air role, and in the air to ground role, and could be easily be upgraded.


Wasn't the 16 one of the first production fighter that was inherently aerodynamically unstable, thus allowing it to be much more maneuverable than the 20?
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
mmo
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:04 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Mon Aug 12, 2019 3:39 pm

Like I said politics.

Just a point of clarification, the F-5 was out long before the F-16 was even built. I went through pilot training in 76 at KCHD (Williams AFB) and there was an F-5E/F training squadron there and the F-16 wasn't operational until later than that. If you are talking about the F-20, I agree.
If we weren't all crazy we'd all go insane!
 
firemansparky
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2017 2:33 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:08 pm

bikerthai wrote:
ThePointblank wrote:
The F-16 at the time was a more capable aircraft in the air to air role, and in the air to ground role, and could be easily be upgraded.


Wasn't the 16 one of the first production fighter that was inherently aerodynamically unstable, thus allowing it to be much more maneuverable than the 20?


Getting of topic a bit, but yes it was. This is pretty good reading. What they call "Relaxed Static Stability" is described almost halfway through the article:

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/f16_arti ... tem_id=131
 
Ozair
Posts: 4145
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:11 am

F-15EX has passed another hurdle for acquisition by the USAF. I don’t think this has removed any of the requirements stipulated on acquisition of the EX past the two test aircraft but as previously indicated those shouldn’t be too hard to do.

The other good news is the F-35 additional airframes were also funded so the USAF will get 12 above the SAR with a total of 96 delivered to the US services out of this budget.

Senate Appropriators Back F-15EX, Add Space Initiatives

Members of the Senate’s defense appropriations subcommittee on Sept. 10 endorsed the Air Force’s plan to buy the F-15EX from Boeing, signaling authorizers and appropriators in the House and Senate will all back the idea in the final defense policy and spending bills.

The panel’s version of the 2020 defense spending bill includes nearly $1 billion for eight of the new fighter jets, two of which will be used as test aircraft, according to a summary of the bill. Earlier this year, the Senate and House Armed Services committees as well as the House Appropriations Committee included eight F-15EXs in their own legislation, and lawmakers in both chambers must now agree on how much money to offer the program.

Senate appropriators also offer nearly $1.9 billion to plus up the Pentagon’s request for F-35s, bringing total Joint Strike Fighter procurement to 96 airframes in 2020. That includes an extra 12 F-35As for the Air Force and 60 overall for the service. The summary also notes an additional $156 million to jumpstart F-35A procurement in fiscal 2021.

...

http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pag ... tives.aspx
 
Ozair
Posts: 4145
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:25 am

Looks like further changes may have been made to the spending bill to limit what can be spent on the F-15EX until Boeing and the USAF provide the requested documents. While I don’t see this as a major impediment to the USAF getting the F-15X, it may take them longer to acquire and perhaps some additional scrutiny around the deal and the justification. Interestingly enough though, the budget does continue to remove funding for F-15C/D upgrade work including new radars, EPWSS, longerons and the mission computer.

Senate appropriators question F-15EX acquisition strategy

Senate appropriators want more details about the Air Force's F-15EX procurement plan, including its reasoning for pursuing a sole-source buy of Boeing-made jets. The Senate Appropriations Committee's fiscal year 2020 defense spending bill, which the committee approved today, would bar the Air Force from spending more than $37.2 million on long-lead materials until the service approves an F-15EX acquisition strategy and program baseline as well as a test and evaluation master plan, life-cycle sustainment plan, a post-production fielding strategy and...


https://insidedefense.com/daily-news/se ... n-strategy
 
estorilm
Posts: 682
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:07 am

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:15 pm

Ozair wrote:
Looks like further changes may have been made to the spending bill to limit what can be spent on the F-15EX until Boeing and the USAF provide the requested documents. While I don’t see this as a major impediment to the USAF getting the F-15X, it may take them longer to acquire and perhaps some additional scrutiny around the deal and the justification. Interestingly enough though, the budget does continue to remove funding for F-15C/D upgrade work including new radars, EPWSS, longerons and the mission computer.

Senate appropriators question F-15EX acquisition strategy

Senate appropriators want more details about the Air Force's F-15EX procurement plan, including its reasoning for pursuing a sole-source buy of Boeing-made jets. The Senate Appropriations Committee's fiscal year 2020 defense spending bill, which the committee approved today, would bar the Air Force from spending more than $37.2 million on long-lead materials until the service approves an F-15EX acquisition strategy and program baseline as well as a test and evaluation master plan, life-cycle sustainment plan, a post-production fielding strategy and...


https://insidedefense.com/daily-news/se ... n-strategy

GOOD!

Initially this was looking FAR too easy for Boeing; something that was starting to look suspiciously expected on their part.

This is exactly what should have happened - new planes don't just get punched-out to IOC in a year or two these days, I don't care what the commonality is. Price (dev and per frame), IOC date, and mx / reliability goals MUST be me for this project to offer value over a mature and "leaned-out" F-35 program. I'm not completely against it (since the USAF was awarded those extra F-35s they wanted after all) however, they'll need strict oversight during this project.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2928
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:46 pm

Ozair wrote:
Interestingly enough though, the budget does continue to remove funding for F-15C/D upgrade work including new radars, EPWSS, longerons and the mission computer.


This tells me that the Senate already know much of what they are requesting from the F-15EX. They just want it documented and made official. I would also suspect that Boeing wouldn't mind seeing the AF's plans. It would give them a sense of how to align their future business effort.

estorilm wrote:
This is exactly what should have happened - new planes don't just get punched-out to IOC in a year or two these days, I don't care what the commonality is.


How quickly did they go from contract award to first flight for the T-X? (Is the two current flying frames pre-contract award or post?)

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Oroka
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:47 pm

bikerthai wrote:
How quickly did they go from contract award to first flight for the T-X? (Is the two current flying frames pre-contract award or post?)



Because the T-X really isnt any new technology. These days it isnt the airframe that takes time to work out the bugs, its all the features. The T-X airframe is nothing revolutionary, no stealth (im sure its optimized), it uses an existing engine, probably existing avionics... the revolutionary part of the T-X is how non-revolutionary it is. The F-35 was pretty much structurally complete and flying since 2006 (minus the cracking bulkhead redesign), the last 13 years have been working out the kinks in the revolutionary bits. The F-35 airframe itself is nothing special, its the guts that puts it above everything else. Imagine how long it will take to design and build something that can trump an F-35? Other than some tweeks, the T-X is practically complete.
 
estorilm
Posts: 682
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:07 am

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:19 pm

Oroka wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
How quickly did they go from contract award to first flight for the T-X? (Is the two current flying frames pre-contract award or post?)



Because the T-X really isnt any new technology. These days it isnt the airframe that takes time to work out the bugs, its all the features. The T-X airframe is nothing revolutionary, no stealth (im sure its optimized), it uses an existing engine, probably existing avionics... the revolutionary part of the T-X is how non-revolutionary it is. The F-35 was pretty much structurally complete and flying since 2006 (minus the cracking bulkhead redesign), the last 13 years have been working out the kinks in the revolutionary bits. The F-35 airframe itself is nothing special, its the guts that puts it above everything else. Imagine how long it will take to design and build something that can trump an F-35? Other than some tweeks, the T-X is practically complete.

Right - I mean look at Boeing and the KC-46 as a perfect example. It's a "shell" of a plane they've been building for decades, with a fuel boom stuck on the back. Super simple right? They even have extensive experience with refueling systems too. Hah NOT so much.

So yeah, I expect most of this process to revolve around avionics, systems, sensors, targeting methods, weapons/pylon/loadout integration, and of course testing.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2928
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Fri Sep 13, 2019 7:18 pm

estorilm wrote:
So yeah, I expect most of this process to revolve around avionics, systems, sensors, targeting methods, weapons/pylon/loadout integration, and of course testing.


Remember that the EX will be based on the QA or SA. So the amount of development with respect to the above system will evolutionary, not revolutionary.

If my guess is right, much of the initial development schedule will be eaten up by engineering changes relating to aligning the fuselage to advanced manufacturing techniques. That is where Boeing is banking on providing the savings that is the base for their "low" bid. The same advanced manufacturing techniques that allow them to go from contract to first flight of the T-X in a relatively short amount of time. After first flight, you gets to dink around with upgrading systems, sensors, avionics etc.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1429
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: USAF Considering New Build F-15X

Sat Sep 14, 2019 8:23 pm

bikerthai wrote:
Ozair wrote:
Interestingly enough though, the budget does continue to remove funding for F-15C/D upgrade work including new radars, EPWSS, longerons and the mission computer.


This tells me that the Senate already know much of what they are requesting from the F-15EX. They just want it documented and made official. I would also suspect that Boeing wouldn't mind seeing the AF's plans. It would give them a sense of how to align their future business effort.

estorilm wrote:
This is exactly what should have happened - new planes don't just get punched-out to IOC in a year or two these days, I don't care what the commonality is.


How quickly did they go from contract award to first flight for the T-X? (Is the two current flying frames pre-contract award or post?)

bt


The two T-X flying are pre-award. Program review found that the wetted surface is unchanged so are valid for testing. The program recently completed the 100 test flight milestone. It is surprisingly on track, but Boeing will be sure to screw up the execution at some point like the KC-46 has been.

The T-X is not revolutionary tech wise, but its computers on board are current generation with the trainers using the same software. More of a business jet or automobile approach vs a fighter. Had to do that to reduce the unit cost.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 747classic, Vinka and 23 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos