http://www.northropgrumman.com/AboutUs/BusinessSectors/AerospaceSystems/Documents/magazine/IA_Magazine_Mar_Apr_2016.pdf
 

Attachments

  • IA_Magazine_Mar_Apr_2016.jpg
    IA_Magazine_Mar_Apr_2016.jpg
    691.1 KB · Views: 484
I do hope NG wins, as that'd mean a fair chance of their plane getting extra variants during the project's lifetime, including an actual low-cost fighter for poor countries. (f-20/f-5 reborn!) And unlike LM with T50 which seem to be against any TA/Fa50 sale they fear might endanger their own used f16 sales, i could see NG actually market it as such as NG doesn't have anything else in the fighter roster.

That being said, with NG winning the bomber competition, i somehow don't see it winning this as well. :(
 
totoro said:
I do hope NG wins, as that'd mean a fair chance of their plane getting extra variants during the project's lifetime, including an actual low-cost fighter for poor countries. (f-20/f-5 reborn!) And unlike LM with T50 which seem to be against any TA/Fa50 sale they fear might endanger their own used f16 sales, i could see NG actually market it as such as NG doesn't have anything else in the fighter roster.

That being said, with NG winning the bomber competition, i somehow don't see it winning this as well. :(

Considering LM has the F-35 I'd say they're equally as likely. I would probably scratch the Boeing/SAAB joint venture from the list. Apparently Raytheon is in the mix as well? Probably scratch them as well. Just my opinion.
 
flateric said:
http://www.northropgrumman.com/AboutUs/BusinessSectors/AerospaceSystems/Documents/magazine/IA_Magazine_Mar_Apr_2016.pdf

Hey flateric, thanks for posting this link. I've been watching for this issue for weeks. Got busy this last week and didn't look at all.

I hope NG remembers, don't give them what they ask for, give 'em what they want!
 
sferrin said:
totoro said:
I do hope NG wins, as that'd mean a fair chance of their plane getting extra variants during the project's lifetime, including an actual low-cost fighter for poor countries. (f-20/f-5 reborn!) And unlike LM with T50 which seem to be against any TA/Fa50 sale they fear might endanger their own used f16 sales, i could see NG actually market it as such as NG doesn't have anything else in the fighter roster.

That being said, with NG winning the bomber competition, i somehow don't see it winning this as well. :(

Considering LM has the F-35 I'd say they're equally as likely. I would probably scratch the Boeing/SAAB joint venture from the list. Apparently Raytheon is in the mix as well? Probably scratch them as well. Just my opinion.

I just can't get over how badly Boeing has screwed up the tanker project. And with the issues in the SCS, buying Korean jets might be a good political move. That being said, I'd love for NG to win this.

You know there is a lot of company pride going into this project. The T-38 is an icon. This is all about the "rest of the system". Hopefully BAE/L3 is as good as I'm sure the airframe will be.
 
sferrin said:
Considering LM has the F-35 I'd say they're equally as likely. I would probably scratch the Boeing/SAAB joint venture from the list. Apparently Raytheon is in the mix as well? Probably scratch them as well. Just my opinion.

I just fear that with LM being twice as large company it will have significantly more clout lobbying wise. After one two punch with f-22 and f-35 that wasn't enough, but since NG was given piece of the cake with the new bomber and since it's enough for it to survive a decade or more - LM might have the upper hand.

Politics aside, (which can never really be set aside) i'd say the cheapest plane should win here. Providing it meets the requirements. It doesn't seem as if USAF will reward extra capability. So a wholy new design seems just unlikely to win. That'd put Boeing/Saab out of the running. LM is in good position as it's a developed plane, though it *may* be too much of a plane for a trainer. MEaning in the long run, with the ops costs - it may be too pricey. Raytheon/Alenia actually seem to have a very good product there - unless requirements are higher than what m346 offers (though i doubt it). But if requirements are higher then that's right up in the LM's alley with T-50. (Of course, politics dictate low-ish chances for Raytheon/Alenia)

NG says it will be offering a new design - sounds too costly. Though if it is, in reality, a reworked f-5/t-38 then it might actually work. Especially if requirements are for a smaller plane like that, not something in the class of T-50.

AirLand Scorpion seems like a no-go to me. They'd need a substantially reworked plane from Scorpion to compete and even if they somehow manage, they have next to zero influence on the Hill to make it work.

If transsonic performance is not a requirement and if low fuel consumption will be rewarded extra for going lower than the required 10% below T38 fuel consumption - then i'd say M346 and reworked T38 have best chances. And out of those, due to politics, NG might even have better chances. But with politics and large money sacks of LM included - who knows.
 
T-50A takes flight

Lockheed Martin announced today it completed a successful first flight of its offering for the Air Force's next-generation T-X competition.

The company's T-50A features a fifth-generation cockpit and was developed jointly with Korea Aerospace Industries. Lockheed is currently standing up its assembly and checkout site for the aircraft in Greenville, SC.

To date, Lockheed's competitors on T-X include a Raytheon, Finmeccanica and CAE team offering the T-100; a Boeing-Saab team putting forward a clean-sheet design; and a Northrop Grumman, BAE and L-3 team also proposing an original design.
 
Here's a photo of the aircraft in flight along with the accompanying press release from the LockMart site:
Cj9MiWlUUAA1xJW.jpg

http://lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2016/june/T50AFirstFlight.html
Lockheed Martin Flies First T-50A Upgraded Aircraft for T-X Competition
Fort Worth, Texas, June 2, 2016 – Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) successfully completed the initial flight test of its T-50A configured aircraft. The T-50A is the company’s aircraft offering in the U.S. Air Force’s Advanced Pilot Training competition.
“The aircraft in its new configuration with the 5th Gen cockpit and other upgrades performed flawlessly,” said Mark Ward, Lockheed Martin T-50A lead test pilot, after his flight in Sacheon, South Korea. “I have no doubt this aircraft will close the gap which currently exists between the trainer fleet and 5th Generation fighters.”
The T-50A is low risk and ready now. It builds on the proven heritage of the T-50 with more than 100 T-50s flying today—100,000 flight hours and counting—and more than 1,000 pilots trained.
The T-50A is the only offering that meets all APT requirements and can deliver those capabilities on schedule at the lowest risk to the customer. Lockheed Martin teams studied clean-sheet alternatives and determined they pose prohibitive risk to APT cost and schedule requirements. The T-50A delivers the performance and capabilities needed to prepare pilots to fly, fight and win with 5th Generation fighter aircraft.
Lockheed Martin is currently standing up its T-50A Final Assembly and Checkout site in Greenville, South Carolina.
The T-50A was developed jointly by Lockheed Martin and Korea Aerospace Industries. The accompanying T-50A Ground-Based Training System features innovative technologies that deliver an immersive, synchronized ground-based training platform.
 
Looks like a baby big-spine F-16 from that angle.
 
Basically mini-F-16 back end married to Ching Kuo/IDF front end, it seems to me.

Ugly SOB, in any case.
 
TomS said:
Basically mini-F-16 back end married to Ching Kuo/IDF front end, it seems to me.

Ugly SOB, in any case.

And that's the NICE looking entry.
 
I kind of like the T-100. It does look like someone took a piece out of the middle (big cockpit, big tail, no center), but at least it has clean lines.

Who knows what the others will look like? I'm hoping Being's offer looks like the old T-X slides they threw out a few years ago (basically a baby MDD JSF).
 
TomS said:
Donno, I kind of like the T-100. It does look like someone took a piece out of the middle (big cockpit, big tail, no center), but at least it has clean lines.

They're all kinda stumpy looking compared to the classic T-38 lines. :(
 
I find the T-100/M-346 relatively easy on the eyes. The really amusing thing about this entrant winning though would be that it'd arguably represent the first time since the C-47/Li-2 60+ years ago that the armed forces of Russia (or the USSR at the time), the People's Republic of China, Israel and the US all operated variants of the same basic aircraft design in significant numbers :)
 
seruriermarshal said:
Yes It is ugly .

Such comments are completely partial. Beauty, the eye of the beholder, bla bla...
To me, "ugly" is the Japanese Shinshin, which other forum members find absolutely cute.
And for nearly every aircraft design, there will be lovers and haters..

That is why adding a slight disclaimer, as in "Personally I find it ugly" may prevent endless and pointless "ugly vs. beautiful" arguments such as we've had in the past elsewhere! At the very least it doesn't sound so much like the person is trying to impose their tastes upon others or make it sound like the proponents of good aeronautical taste... ;-)
 
It looks like an F-16 without the ventral inlet and the large spine reminds me of the F-16's with the large spine. It obviously has less thrust and a greater aspect ratio than an F-16, but I don't see anything ugly about it. I just keep trying to visualize it in the Thunderbirds paint scheme, as I think it's obvious that whatever the next T-X is, it is what the Thunderbirds will be flying once the F-16 is retired.
 
Skyblazer said:
seruriermarshal said:
Yes It is ugly .

Such comments are completely partial. Beauty, the eye of the beholder, bla bla...
To me, "ugly" is the Japanese Shinshin, which other forum members find absolutely cute.
And for nearly every aircraft design, there will be lovers and haters..

That is why adding a slight disclaimer, as in "Personally I find it ugly" may prevent endless and pointless "ugly vs. beautiful" arguments such as we've had in the past elsewhere! At the very least it doesn't sound so much like the person is trying to impose their tastes upon others or make it sound like the proponents of good aeronautical taste... ;-)

I agree beauty or the lack of it in the eye of the beholder.
Apart from early post war Soviet night/all weather jet fighters (some prototypes only). Virtually all as ugly as sin :)

Unless your happy to do a Gnat and make the cockpit too small for many pilots jet trainers always likely to look a bit dumpier than their jet fighter contempories

Don't think any of the known T-X entries are hard in the eye; both are fine proven aircraft capability wise.
 
TomS said:
I kind of like the T-100. It does look like someone took a piece out of the middle (big cockpit, big tail, no center), but at least it has clean lines.
It'll be kinda weird if the USAF chooses the T-100; having both the US and Russia using training aircraft with the same roots / base design.
 
Anyone noticed this ?

https://twitter.com/GripenNews/status/742334400415858688
 
Most interesting!!

Thanks for sharing Deino.

I suspect a delta canard planform in the making: after the "lil draken" the "lil gripen"? ;D

Regards.
 

Attachments

  • Saab T-X 2.jpg
    Saab T-X 2.jpg
    137.5 KB · Views: 390
Indeed, but the question is: is it a new design, or based on the Gripen-trainer ???
 
Boeing and Saab have both specifically said that T-X is a clean-sheet design and definitely not a Gripen.
 
I'd say it's a new design, the wing position looks higher than on the Gripen.

As a side note...I think they had some issues while trying to load it onto the Il-76.
In one picture (like most in the set) it's getting loaded rear side first, but in another picture it's front first ???
Change of plans at the last minute?

Regards.
 

Attachments

  • Jas39-unkwn_comparision.jpg
    Jas39-unkwn_comparision.jpg
    111.9 KB · Views: 331
  • front side.jpg
    front side.jpg
    68.2 KB · Views: 324
  • rear side.jpg
    rear side.jpg
    65.2 KB · Views: 335
Its also possible they sent more than one. One for flight and one for ground testing, for instance.
 
I don't think there were two. There's a Swedish news story here with a few other pictures. There were two trucks, one with the fuselage and one with an enclosed cargo cab. It looks to me like they did pick up the pallet and turn it around on the truck bed before loading it. Possibly a fit problem of some sort?

http://www.corren.se/nyheter/linkoping/har-ar-den-hemliga-lasten-om4176561.aspx
 
So arguably the Boeing/Saab T-X had its first flight (... inside a Il-76TD-90) :D
 
Most likely the wrong thread but fitting the topic !

Does anyone knows what this design is ?
 

Attachments

  • T-X unknown trainer concept.jpg
    T-X unknown trainer concept.jpg
    141.8 KB · Views: 1,044
The two aircraft in the picture have different wings (see the difference in sweep). I thought i had seen something similar in another thread, a proposal from some startup, definitely not one of the primes. I'm going to say it was a British company. Sorry, not being super helpful here!
 
AeroFranz said:
The two aircraft in the picture have different wings (see the difference in sweep). I thought i had seen something similar in another thread, a proposal from some startup, definitely not one of the primes. I'm going to say it was a British company. Sorry, not being super helpful here!

You're probably thinking of the DART modular trainer.
 
I also can confirm, that that picture shows the British DART modular trainer.
I saw this picture on Twitter a few days ago. Dart Jet might be present at Farnborough International Airshow 2016.
Source: https://twitter.com/RAeSTimR/status/747428369105563648
 
Thank You so much ! ;)
 
Grey Havoc said:
AeroFranz said:
The two aircraft in the picture have different wings (see the difference in sweep). I thought i had seen something similar in another thread, a proposal from some startup, definitely not one of the primes. I'm going to say it was a British company. Sorry, not being super helpful here!

You're probably thinking of the DART modular trainer.

That's the one - thanks for filling the blanks! ;)
 
So this new Dart design follows the idea introduced on the Scorpion to offer both a straight-wing and a swept-wing variant? Is this a new trend? Are there more examples of this thinking?
 
CiTrus90 said:
I'd say it's a new design, the wing position looks higher than on the Gripen.

As a side note...I think they had some issues while trying to load it onto the Il-76.
In one picture (like most in the set) it's getting loaded rear side first, but in another picture it's front first ???
Change of plans at the last minute?

Regards.


No news of where it was dropped off? Where is Boeing doing this work?

Thanks!
 
NeilChapman said:
No news of where it was dropped off? Where is Boeing doing this work?

Thanks!

It went to St Louis.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom