Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
kitplane01
Posts: 2116
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 5:58 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:43 am

Revelation wrote:
kitplane01 wrote:
The drone pilots are in a quiet room, with a second person, connected to all the relevant networks, with room to spread out maps and charts. It should be a good situation to make decisions.

The key thing would be the network, and the lag (latency) it introduces.

From the documentaries I've seen (i.e. non classified stuff) about drone strikes during the Obama era (so now dated) the drone has a satellite antenna in its nose which accessed one or more satellites. The drones were launched in a friendly ME country and the operators were seated in the equivalent of shipping containers at good old Creech AFB in Nevada USA.

My understanding is they were using geostationary satellites so the signal had to travel tens of thousands of miles from ground to satellite(s) to drone. Since it's a round trip from pilot to bird and back, double it. This probably means large fractions of a second between command and response. You might not think this matters, but it does when considering air combat maneuvers (ACM). There's a reason why gamers pay more money for low latency network connections.

The advantage of the geostationary satellite is you know where it's going to be so it's easier to retain coverage wherever the drone goes anywhere in the satellite's footprint. The disadvantage is the latency. The military can do what SpaceX is doing with Starlink and deploy dozens of satellites in lower orbits but that takes a lot of time and money (and for all I know they've done so already) but so far I haven't heard of reports of them doing so. In any case they'd then have to make a moving drone hit a moving satellite with tiny margins for error since the drone can't afford to waste too much battery generating its signal to the satellite.

Then consider ACM: How do you keep a satellite dish pointed at the satellite while you're throwing yourself all over the sky? The answer is you do not. It's pretty much a given that the signal will be lost for some non-trivial amounts of time during ACM, I would think. Therefore the drone will need some sort of way to have a "safe mode" to make sure the signal isn't lost when you're pointing at the earth at a high rate of speed. Since this is all happening while you're in a fight, I can imagine you'd want some AI to have the drone do something other than get back to straight and level flight.

Even in non-ACM situations (i.e. drone strikes in the documentaries I've watched) the operators were frustrated since they would have loss of signal especially when turning the aircraft. I can imagine things have gotten better, but it's still a hard problem to solve. Could you imagine being in a fight with the signal coming and going as someone's trying to shoot your drone down? It wouldn't be fun.

I suppose this is why the "loyal wingman" approach is being taken. The signals now become very short (line of sight) so latency is small ,and signal energy needed is low so omni-directional antennas become appropriate.

It's also a sign that they know they can't solve the issues I've raised with a satellite based solution.

And again, this is a non-professional analysis based on non-sensitive information, just for the record.

Now, how about that T-7? :biggrin:


I didn't think we were talking about dogfighting. That would be different.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Topic Author
Posts: 4332
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:20 pm

If dog fighting us not involved, and only ground attack is comptemplated, then a drone may be an option.

But then if you look at the Serbian situation, would you want a system that relies on US satellites?

From a maintenance stand point, would a T-7 be easier to maintain than a sophisticated drone?

That is an interesting comparison. What is an effective life span of a Predator drone vs a T-7. How much would it cost to keep the drone operational for 30 years vs the T-7?

bt
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Topic Author
Posts: 4332
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Fri Jul 31, 2020 1:02 pm

Ozair wrote:
Ha, I spoke too soon although this is a response from Boeing to the RAAF's RFI for replacement of the Hawk 127 for a dedicated advanced trainer. There is no expectation the T-7A would be used as a light attack aircraft in RAAF service.


If working relationship between Boeing and the RAAF have any weigh in the decision process, then the T-7 will have the in side track for this deal.

Any word if industrial offsets will be included in this campaign?

bt
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27044
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Fri Jul 31, 2020 2:09 pm

kitplane01 wrote:
I don't understand this. It should not be hard to mount a 4K camera on a Predator drone, and feed the video to a 180-degree-surround simulator like screen. This wold offer much *better* vision to the drone pilot than a manned aircraft pilot, since one can see straight down. (Yes, I know the F-35 pilot can see *through* the airframe .. this could be just like that). The real problem is likely one of bandwidth, not hardware. But bandwidth increases every year.

There's an old saying in computer networking: you can buy bandwidth, but you can't buy latency. See my earlier post or talk to any internet gamer.
 
User avatar
kitplane01
Posts: 2116
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 5:58 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Fri Jul 31, 2020 5:53 pm

Revelation wrote:
kitplane01 wrote:
I don't understand this. It should not be hard to mount a 4K camera on a Predator drone, and feed the video to a 180-degree-surround simulator like screen. This wold offer much *better* vision to the drone pilot than a manned aircraft pilot, since one can see straight down. (Yes, I know the F-35 pilot can see *through* the airframe .. this could be just like that). The real problem is likely one of bandwidth, not hardware. But bandwidth increases every year.

There's an old saying in computer networking: you can buy bandwidth, but you can't buy latency. See my earlier post or talk to any internet gamer.


That's a cute saying. I'll share it with my students (if the University actually opens!!).

Right now ping time from the US to Kabul is about 100 milliseconds. I'm suggesting Predator-like drone attacks. 1/10 of a second is fine. Heck .. 10 times as much is fine.
 
Ozair
Posts: 5582
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Sat Aug 01, 2020 12:24 am

bikerthai wrote:
Ozair wrote:
Ha, I spoke too soon although this is a response from Boeing to the RAAF's RFI for replacement of the Hawk 127 for a dedicated advanced trainer. There is no expectation the T-7A would be used as a light attack aircraft in RAAF service.


If working relationship between Boeing and the RAAF have any weigh in the decision process, then the T-7 will have the in side track for this deal.

Any word if industrial offsets will be included in this campaign?

bt

The program, AIR6002 https://adbr.com.au/rfi-released-for-ra ... placement/ will likely not have any offset process and the relationship between Boeing and the RAAF will have no bearing. The broader US alliance may have but even then the best aircraft for the job at the right price is still the one that will likely win.

The Hawk fleet is fading fast and I expect this to become more urgent in the next few years. T-7 is certainly in with a good chance as the RAAF has no hesitation in selecting an in development aircraft. The question is how soon could they get airframes given the ramp up the USAF is looking for.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Topic Author
Posts: 4332
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:34 am

This is just an RFI. They still have competative bidding right? If they are looking at the T-7, there is nothing like an active production line with 300 + frames to take advantage of bulk buy. The way Boeing tout their digital assembly process, the should be able to accommodate a small surge for he RAAF.

Too bad that the timing is slightly off as current manufacturing capacity is high with the slow down in commercial aviation. Who knows where we will be a year from now.

bt
 
User avatar
kitplane01
Posts: 2116
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 5:58 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Sat Aug 01, 2020 2:56 am

Why would Australia buy a T-7 vs something like an M346? One can get an M346 now, and it comes in both Trainer and Attack versions. I assume an M346 costs less.

I understand that a T-7 has better performance/cockpit, but the M346 is also an upgrade over the Hawk's they have now.

I would guess an attack version of the T-7 is a decade away at best.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 3860
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Sat Aug 01, 2020 3:46 am

The Canadians are also looking to replace their Hawk fleet as well, though the training fleet is contractor managed under the NATO Flying Training Canada (NFTC) and the Contracted Flying Training and Support (CFTS).

The current arrangement under NFTC expires in 2023, with a possible 1 year extension to 2024, and the CFTS expires in 2027. Based upon what I've read, the Canadians are expecting a full suite solution, with solutions for in class, simulator, advanced training, and lead in fighter training.
 
Ozair
Posts: 5582
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Sat Aug 01, 2020 4:22 am

kitplane01 wrote:
Why would Australia buy a T-7 vs something like an M346? One can get an M346 now, and it comes in both Trainer and Attack versions. I assume an M346 costs less.

I understand that a T-7 has better performance/cockpit, but the M346 is also an upgrade over the Hawk's they have now.

As I said, the RAAF will seek the best aircraft at the best price, that might not necessarily be the most capable aircraft. It will depend on when the project looks to acquire as to whether the T-7 is a viable option but it is very early days. Apparently they haven't even defined the requirements for LIFTS yet so plenty of time for the T-7 to reach production but also for the M346, T-50 and even the Textron Scorpion to present strong cases. The T-7 will have the advantage of offering High AoA compared to other offerings but that isn't a show stopper.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Topic Author
Posts: 4332
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Sat Aug 01, 2020 4:30 am

Don't the trainers comes with advance simulators as well? Why not glum on to the USAF and get new state of the art simulators as well? And don't forget the time and money the USAF is currently spending on perfecting the curriculum.

bt
 
Ozair
Posts: 5582
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Sun Aug 02, 2020 12:07 am

bikerthai wrote:
Don't the trainers comes with advance simulators as well? Why not glum on to the USAF and get new state of the art simulators as well? And don't forget the time and money the USAF is currently spending on perfecting the curriculum.

bt

The T-X tender was for a whole training system so simulators are part of the overall package, just as the RAAF are creating the AIR 6002 project for LIFTS (Lead in Flight Training System). Hence simulators will be part of the procurement. That doesn't mean a nation cannot acquire the T-7 without a simulator, it just doesn't make a lot of sense to not do so.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2692
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Sun Aug 02, 2020 7:11 am

Ozair wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
Don't the trainers comes with advance simulators as well? Why not glum on to the USAF and get new state of the art simulators as well? And don't forget the time and money the USAF is currently spending on perfecting the curriculum.

bt

The T-X tender was for a whole training system so simulators are part of the overall package, just as the RAAF are creating the AIR 6002 project for LIFTS (Lead in Flight Training System). Hence simulators will be part of the procurement. That doesn't mean a nation cannot acquire the T-7 without a simulator, it just doesn't make a lot of sense to not do so.


Two big things: The simulators run on the same software as the trainer so their updates are in sync with the planes.

There are two levels of flight control computers - a basic level where the actual control is done (possibly evolving from the Gripen) and an upper level where things like radar can be 'sim'ed in and it can mimic an F-35, F-15, F-16 or ?. I'm sure it won't feel like an F-35, but much more real to be in the air than in the actual F-35 sim on the ground.

It's getting driven by the time it takes to train a pilot, wanting to cut a year out of it, also not spend 1/4 of actual hours on the fighters just in basic training flights, turn that into advanced training flights.
https://www.airforcemag.com/article/world-11/
 
Ozair
Posts: 5582
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Wed Dec 02, 2020 12:46 am

Boeing is assembling the first simulators for the T-7 contract impressively using 8k projectors and motion seats.

Boeing starts production of T-7 training jet simulators

Boeing has begun production of the first T-7A ground-based training systems, preparing the way for the company to make its first deliveries in 2023.

Workers at Boeing’s plant in St. Louis, Missouri, are currently assembling the first two weapon systems trainers and one operational flight trainer, the company said in a news release Tuesday. Those assets will be among the first simulators the company expects to deliver to Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph, Texas, in 2023.

The high-fidelity simulators include 8K native projectors that supports imagery that is 16 times the clarity of high-definition video, and the crew stations are equipped with motion seats that simulate the sensation of flight, Boeing stated.

The ground-based trainers will be able to connect to a physical T-7A, meaning that pilots virtually training can team up with those performing live flights in the T-7 aircraft. Because the simulators were built with an open-architecture backbone, it can be easily modified with new software applications.

“The Red Hawk’s training system is arguably the most advanced in the world. It’s a game changer,” said Chuck Dabundo, Boeing’s vice president of the T-7 programs. “This system is 100% integrated with the pilot’s real-world experience, offering ‘real-as-it-gets’ simulation. We’re working closely with the U.S. Air Force and look forward to testing and fielding the devices.”

...

https://www.defensenews.com/training-si ... imulators/
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 6028
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Wed Dec 02, 2020 3:14 am

Am I the only one who would love to see the Thunderbirds take T-7s? (For that matter - the Super Hornet is far too much metal for the Blue Angels.)
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 7539
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Wed Dec 02, 2020 4:03 pm

N328KF wrote:
Am I the only one who would love to see the Thunderbirds take T-7s? (For that matter - the Super Hornet is far too much metal for the Blue Angels.)

I would too.....and a sequel to Top Gun or Iron Eagle with the Red Hawk in a starring role! :bigthumbsup:

They could train the actors in this..... :goodvibes:

https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing ... 00.article


And the baddies could fly a refueling probe equipped FA-50! :box:

https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/ka ... 12.article
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2692
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Thu Dec 03, 2020 12:32 pm

I could see ANG units around CONUS getting the T-7 trainers along with a light attack variant of it. Lots of pilots will see the T-7 to keep current as its cost per hour is like half or less than flying a fighter.

What is really needed is a trainer the pilots love to fly and get realistic training in it. I hope the T-7 meets this.
 
texl1649
Posts: 1963
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Thu Dec 03, 2020 1:24 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
I could see ANG units around CONUS getting the T-7 trainers along with a light attack variant of it. Lots of pilots will see the T-7 to keep current as its cost per hour is like half or less than flying a fighter.

What is really needed is a trainer the pilots love to fly and get realistic training in it. I hope the T-7 meets this.


I don't know about light attack variants but the flying time costs argument is correct. I think it's probably closer to 1/5th the per hour cost of a stealth aircraft (nominally just ballparking F-35 costs. But even that is a rolling estimate; F-35 cost around $40K/hour in 2018, and I think the goal is to get down to around $20K (I assume the goal for the T-7A is somewhere closer to $4K).

Leonardo has cited, even for the twin engine M-346, 80 percent lower per flight hour costs vs. heavier platforms.

https://www.leonardocompany.com/en/news ... -multirole
 
User avatar
kitplane01
Posts: 2116
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 5:58 am

Red Tail T-7

Fri Feb 19, 2021 9:05 pm

Suppose you're the czar of T-7 acquisition. Would you have picked the design that Saab/Boeing design that won, or the KAI T-50, or the M346 variant, BAE Hawk variant, or the Textron Scorpion?

I'm surprised the KIA T-50 didn't win. I would have thought that was the lowest cost design with good performance.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2507
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Red Tail T-7

Sat Feb 20, 2021 6:12 am

The T-7 Red Hawk has the highest thrust to weight ratio and it has the most advanced aerodynamics compared to all of the other trainers. The large leading edge extensions and twin canted tails allows it to have F-35 or Eurofighter levels of speed and agility. In terms of training the T-7 can help further reduce flight hours on the expensive high end fighters by its ability to dogfight at the highest level. This saves the Air Force money.

The T-7 has far fewer parts than the other trainer aircraft due to 3d printing and advanced machining so that improves production and maintenance costs. This is why Boeing can offer such a superior product at such a low price.
 
art
Posts: 4252
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Red Tail T-7

Thu Feb 25, 2021 3:14 pm

Boeing begins T-7A Red Hawk production

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... production
 
superbizzy73
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:43 am

Re: Red Tail T-7

Thu Feb 25, 2021 6:54 pm

I'm assuming that this is only the beginning for that airframe design. The future looks pretty bright for the T-7 (in my opinion, anyways). Lightweight fighter, attack, adversary, demonstration teams, etc.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2692
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Red Tail T-7

Fri Feb 26, 2021 2:44 pm

The T-7 trainer system has some great unique aspects, such as a virtual cockpit that controls the underlying avionics. This allows it to mimic a F-16, F-35, F-22, F-15, or F-18 cockpits as to instrument arrangement and performance feel. No the T-7 won't match the F-35 but it will have higher commonality than being in a T-50 for a F-35 pilot.

It also has the systems linked so the ground trainers update with the planes to the latest version and allow for training in groups. Probably can have synthetic sensor displays created by the ground computer to replicate 'attack center' information.

All this for billions less than what the other competitors bid, LM thought it was 'shockingly low' at the time. Something like 12B not 16B for the program.
 
LightningZ71
Posts: 624
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 10:59 pm

Re: Red Tail T-7

Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:05 pm

I wonder how good it could be as a light fighter with an F414-EPE as the powerplant.
 
User avatar
kitplane01
Posts: 2116
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 5:58 am

Re: Red Tail T-7

Fri Feb 26, 2021 5:39 pm

The T-7 might make a fine lightweight fighter. This group just had a large discussion trashing lightweight fighters. And the USAF does not seem interested in lightweight fighters (except for one comment about making a new F-16 .. otherwise they've not wanted anything less than an F-16 for decades.)
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Topic Author
Posts: 4332
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Fri Feb 26, 2021 7:05 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
LM thought it was 'shockingly low' at the time


One way to measure whether Boeing underbid is whether they can deliver the frames in time. Cost over run escalate exponentially with schedule delay.

So if they can deliver on schedule, then their bid would be spot on.

bt
 
angad84
Posts: 2136
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:04 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Wed Mar 03, 2021 2:04 pm

bikerthai wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
LM thought it was 'shockingly low' at the time


One way to measure whether Boeing underbid is whether they can deliver the frames in time. Cost over run escalate exponentially with schedule delay.

So if they can deliver on schedule, then their bid would be spot on.

bt

yep. flight test appears to be going really well, so doesn't look like any nasty surprises on that front. which leaves only production and [*cough*KC46*cough*] QC to screw things up for them. Very impressive thus far, totally Boeing's to screw up now.
 
aumaverick
Posts: 174
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:40 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Wed Mar 03, 2021 4:24 pm

angad84 wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
LM thought it was 'shockingly low' at the time


One way to measure whether Boeing underbid is whether they can deliver the frames in time. Cost over run escalate exponentially with schedule delay.

So if they can deliver on schedule, then their bid would be spot on.

bt

yep. flight test appears to be going really well, so doesn't look like any nasty surprises on that front. which leaves only production and [*cough*KC46*cough*] QC to screw things up for them. Very impressive thus far, totally Boeing's to screw up now.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but assembly will be done in St. Louis, a completely different assembly line away from Seattle (Everett) where the 767/KC-46 frame is manufactured. I think the QC gremlins prefer the coastal locations and will not appear for the Red Hawk.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Topic Author
Posts: 4332
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Wed Mar 03, 2021 5:50 pm

aumaverick wrote:
I think the QC gremlins prefer the coastal locations and will not appear for the Red Hawk.


The QC problem mainly occured in the commercial side. There are fewer issues with Puget Sound or Philly Military operations.

They typically see high QC problem when there's a high turn over in personnel, during times of ramp up or layoff.

bt
 
RHoom101
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 5:17 pm

Re: Red Tail T-7

Wed Mar 17, 2021 6:36 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
The T-7 trainer system has some great unique aspects, such as a virtual cockpit that controls the underlying avionics. This allows it to mimic a F-16, F-35, F-22, F-15, or F-18 cockpits as to instrument arrangement and performance feel. No the T-7 won't match the F-35 but it will have higher commonality than being in a T-50 for a F-35 pilot.

It also has the systems linked so the ground trainers update with the planes to the latest version and allow for training in groups. Probably can have synthetic sensor displays created by the ground computer to replicate 'attack center' information.

All this for billions less than what the other competitors bid, LM thought it was 'shockingly low' at the time. Something like 12B not 16B for the program.


What is your source for this assertion that T-7 can mimic other cockpits?
 
texl1649
Posts: 1963
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Red Tail T-7

Wed Mar 17, 2021 8:09 pm

RHoom101 wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
The T-7 trainer system has some great unique aspects, such as a virtual cockpit that controls the underlying avionics. This allows it to mimic a F-16, F-35, F-22, F-15, or F-18 cockpits as to instrument arrangement and performance feel. No the T-7 won't match the F-35 but it will have higher commonality than being in a T-50 for a F-35 pilot.

It also has the systems linked so the ground trainers update with the planes to the latest version and allow for training in groups. Probably can have synthetic sensor displays created by the ground computer to replicate 'attack center' information.

All this for billions less than what the other competitors bid, LM thought it was 'shockingly low' at the time. Something like 12B not 16B for the program.


What is your source for this assertion that T-7 can mimic other cockpits?


They've touted this ability for a while; it's yet to be shown in detail/proven in flight/operation. Roughly simulating a layout (visually with huge touchscreens), with dumbed down throttle/direction input responses for strategic aircraft for instance, is my guess what they are mainly talking about.

What the Air Force needed was a new training system, not just a plane, that would catapult young pilots into the age of digital technology. T-7 does that with a training system that can be easily adjusted to mimic the displays and handling qualities of every fighter and bomber in the Air Force fleet.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthomp ... 0bfe4b5f7c
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2692
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Red Tail T-7

Wed Mar 17, 2021 10:49 pm

texl1649 wrote:
RHoom101 wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
The T-7 trainer system has some great unique aspects, such as a virtual cockpit that controls the underlying avionics. This allows it to mimic a F-16, F-35, F-22, F-15, or F-18 cockpits as to instrument arrangement and performance feel. No the T-7 won't match the F-35 but it will have higher commonality than being in a T-50 for a F-35 pilot.

It also has the systems linked so the ground trainers update with the planes to the latest version and allow for training in groups. Probably can have synthetic sensor displays created by the ground computer to replicate 'attack center' information.

All this for billions less than what the other competitors bid, LM thought it was 'shockingly low' at the time. Something like 12B not 16B for the program.


What is your source for this assertion that T-7 can mimic other cockpits?


They've touted this ability for a while; it's yet to be shown in detail/proven in flight/operation. Roughly simulating a layout (visually with huge touchscreens), with dumbed down throttle/direction input responses for strategic aircraft for instance, is my guess what they are mainly talking about.

What the Air Force needed was a new training system, not just a plane, that would catapult young pilots into the age of digital technology. T-7 does that with a training system that can be easily adjusted to mimic the displays and handling qualities of every fighter and bomber in the Air Force fleet.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthomp ... 0bfe4b5f7c


Thank you Tex for the Forbes article, it was one of those I was remembering. A pertinent articles regarding Reforge, the new training plan is below.

https://www.airforcemag.com/article/ref ... -training/

What I recall from several articles that I can't find now is that the T-7 has an upper level program that is the plane to be mimicked - be it F-35, F-22, F-15EX, F-16, etc. The glass cockpit changes the displays the pilot sees to match the mimic aircraft. This upper level program controls the underlying program which is the one actually certified for flight. This allows for a single configuration to be certified - sort of like basic law in other planes. This interface between the upper and lower programs is that the ground trainers just need to mimic the underlying actual conditions, the upper level program is the same on the ground as in the air.

It also allows for simulated radar and weapon controls, as well as group training.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27044
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Red Tail T-7

Thu Mar 18, 2021 6:19 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
Thank you Tex for the Forbes article, it was one of those I was remembering. A pertinent articles regarding Reforge, the new training plan is below.

https://www.airforcemag.com/article/ref ... -training/

What I recall from several articles that I can't find now is that the T-7 has an upper level program that is the plane to be mimicked - be it F-35, F-22, F-15EX, F-16, etc. The glass cockpit changes the displays the pilot sees to match the mimic aircraft. This upper level program controls the underlying program which is the one actually certified for flight. This allows for a single configuration to be certified - sort of like basic law in other planes. This interface between the upper and lower programs is that the ground trainers just need to mimic the underlying actual conditions, the upper level program is the same on the ground as in the air.

It also allows for simulated radar and weapon controls, as well as group training.

That's an awful lot of software to develop/debug/test/maintain.

Hope it goes well for them.
 
texl1649
Posts: 1963
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Red Tail T-7

Thu Mar 18, 2021 7:35 pm

Revelation wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
Thank you Tex for the Forbes article, it was one of those I was remembering. A pertinent articles regarding Reforge, the new training plan is below.

https://www.airforcemag.com/article/ref ... -training/

What I recall from several articles that I can't find now is that the T-7 has an upper level program that is the plane to be mimicked - be it F-35, F-22, F-15EX, F-16, etc. The glass cockpit changes the displays the pilot sees to match the mimic aircraft. This upper level program controls the underlying program which is the one actually certified for flight. This allows for a single configuration to be certified - sort of like basic law in other planes. This interface between the upper and lower programs is that the ground trainers just need to mimic the underlying actual conditions, the upper level program is the same on the ground as in the air.

It also allows for simulated radar and weapon controls, as well as group training.

That's an awful lot of software to develop/debug/test/maintain.

Hope it goes well for them.


It could be simplified for military purposes with a simple "press red button to abort simulated control algorithms" type of arrangement, where it isn't used below for instance 5,000 feet. My guess is it's one of those abilities that is rolled out quite slowly, over a period of 5-20 years, after IOC. To the contracting team, it makes the whole platform that much tougher to ever replace, however so they will be perhaps motivated to both develop/maintain it. I'm pretty suspicious it will be a bit cruder than some of us might imagine.

Frankly, with a 'virtual helmet visualization system' a la F-35 or however you want to call it, it might make more sense down the road for this to be accomplished for only the trainee, vs. some sort of screen simulation in the cockpits.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2692
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Fri Mar 19, 2021 2:08 am

"simplified for military purposes" is an interesting concept. Sometimes it is the real practical simple and other cases it is the most complicated simple ever seen.

Boeing has so much on the line with the T-7 and the MQ-25, separately Boeing Australia's Loyal Wingman. A leap into the true digital design and manufacture as well as remote/ autonomous flight. If they can pull off the T-7 where the Air Force loves it, priced where it can afford it, and efficient manufacturing where they can build it profitably at it's 'value' pricing, it will turn into a huge program in the 1,000's built instead of just a few hundred.

Long term, it is Boeing's chance for every Air Force pilot to fly a Boeing plane, great PR if they love to fly it like they love to drive a Corvette, rather than the Chevy Nova.

The cockpit needs two red buttons "Abort simulated", and "Land Me Now!", where it flies itself home or to the nearest airfield.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Topic Author
Posts: 4332
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Wed Mar 24, 2021 1:13 pm

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.milita ... k.html/amp

Did not hear about this, but it is only logical that Boeing will offer the T-7A for the Navy trainer replacement program.

bt
 
VMCA787
Posts: 264
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2020 9:31 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Wed Jun 16, 2021 9:26 pm

Apparently, the T-7A (or more precisely eT-7A) full-rate production decision has been delayed a year due to supply line problems and instability in the roll axis at high angles of attack. Not good news, but not insurmountable problems to fix.

https://www.airforcemag.com/technical-p ... -decision/
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27044
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Wed Jun 16, 2021 10:00 pm

VMCA787 wrote:
Apparently, the T-7A (or more precisely eT-7A) full-rate production decision has been delayed a year due to supply line problems and instability in the roll axis at high angles of attack. Not good news, but not insurmountable problems to fix.

https://www.airforcemag.com/technical-p ... -decision/

TFA says:

The Air Force, in a statement, said there are multiple issues inhibiting the Red Hawk’s progress toward production. For example, the Milestone C decision, or full-rate production, slipped from 2022 to 2023 because of supplier’s critical parts shortages, initial design delays, and the need for more testing after the “discovery of aircraft wing rock,” which means the T-7 can be unstable in the roll axis when flying at high angles of attack.
...
The Air Force has touted the use of digital engineering for the T-7, with then Air Force Secretary Barbara M. Barrett announcing in September 2020 that Boeing’s Red Hawk trainer jet would be the first plane to earn an “e” designation, as the eT-7A, signifying it was designed and tested using digital engineering. Digital engineering uses advanced computer modeling and simulation, and technology like virtual and augmented reality, to quickly draw up hardware blueprints and vet how various configurations would work in the real world without building a physical prototype.

I guess "advanced computer modeling and simulation, and technology like virtual and augmented reality" wasn't able to detect "wing rock" in advance.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Topic Author
Posts: 4332
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Thu Jun 17, 2021 12:42 am

So they will continue with LRiP until they figure out the wing rock. Sometimes it's a matter of semantics.

Hopefully with the digital design, they can figure a way to resolve the wing rock issue more quickly. Time to take that data and feed it back into the modeling.

bt
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2507
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Fri Aug 06, 2021 1:25 pm

https://youtu.be/RXmM9jTl58A

It is performing well
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2692
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Fri Oct 15, 2021 2:02 am

Not much new news but some nice video of the T-7, Saab delivered the 3rd aft section, it was joined within 30 minutes at assembly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wW2BFY-L_PA
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2507
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: T-X becomes T-7A Red Hawk

Sat Oct 23, 2021 5:04 am

RJMAZ wrote:
"Boeing is already looking at light attack and aggressor training opportunities for the aircraft and it says it has already identified locations for hardpoints under the wings."

https://combataircraft.keypublishing.co ... t-fighter/


"However, Boeing could grow to two hardpoints per wing plus the centerline point without changing the aircraft’s design.

“This is all about the trainer,” he says. “If we choose to go down that path, we built something with a lot of growth potential.”

- Darryl Davis, president of Boeing Phantom Works

https://www.flightglobal.com/boeing-unv ... 89.article


RJMAZ wrote:
The T-7A fighter variant will definitely come.

So it looks like I was right and a fighter variant of the T-7 is coming as I have been saying for the last year.

https://www.airforcemag.com/air-force-w ... like-t-7s/

The RFI states: “adversary air support,” and as a “tactical fighter surrogate of existing and future”

This does not sound like a trainer aircraft with weapon capabilities but more like a light fighter aircraft. I could see two versions.

1) A twin seat T-7 with no weapon capability, no AESA but it simulates weapons for advanced training. This is a version that is flying.

2) A single seat version with extra fuel in the back, AESA in the nose, two underwing hardpoints and one centre hardpoint. I expect 90% commonality between the two versions.
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 6191
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Sat Oct 23, 2021 4:19 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
https://youtu.be/RXmM9jTl58A

It is performing well


I can't really compare to other fighter jets, but the T-7 cockpit looks spacious!
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2507
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Sat Oct 23, 2021 11:41 pm

flyingturtle wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
https://youtu.be/RXmM9jTl58A

It is performing well


I can't really compare to other fighter jets, but the T-7 cockpit looks spacious!

It would be interesting to compare but I think it has to do with the wide angle lense on the cockpit camera. Also the fact the cockpit is so large in proportion to the small aircraft size.
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 6191
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: T-7A Red Hawk News and Discussion Thread

Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:38 am

RJMAZ wrote:
wide angle lense on the cockpit camera


Oh, yes. Good observation!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: wingman and 14 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