Register here

Author Topic: Boeing T-X designation  (Read 1564 times)

Offline Arjen

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2132
  • It's turtles all the way down
Re: Boeing T-X designation
« Reply #15 on: October 11, 2018, 08:14:44 am »
Because fashion.

Offline kcran567

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 644
Re: Boeing T-X designation
« Reply #16 on: October 11, 2018, 01:09:16 pm »
Not just fashion...although looks count for something in aircraft and fighters/trainers?

You're right and I agree...

Yet was just hoping for more inspiration in the design and something more versatile (like the Mako
Heat) something that could have filled other roles like a viable "Red Air" threat. Why not design a future trainer with Aggressor role, training role (currently), and also as an affordable alternative that could be produced in numbers. 

I was hoping that affordable manufacturing was going to make a high performance Bird of Prey or Mako Heat type of aircraft. The Bird of Prey was testing low cost manufacture tech itself wasn't it?

Trainer, Red air, and as a "numbers" aircraft that could supplement more expensive. And if stealth is the main focus of US fighter doctrine, why not make the trainer look like it was meant to operate in a 21st century environment.

Offline TomcatViP

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 532
  • Hellcat
Re: Boeing T-X designation
« Reply #17 on: October 11, 2018, 03:30:26 pm »
I very much think that red air is part of what T-X will do. The kind of Red-Air the T-38 embedded in F-22 squadrons do presently: deploy and provide dynamic training at squadron level sparing Raptor flight hours and logistics. 
The T-X is build to be easily/cheaply maintained while providing range and dynamics flight hours as suited.