• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

T-X - A Future USAF Trainer

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,264
Reaction score
149
Harrier said:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-wins-92b-t-x-trainer-contract-with-usaf-452263/

IOC 2024
FOC 2034

Ten years to add what? Presumably weapons and software/simulation if the airframe is 'production ready', as claimed.
Ten years to build out the 300+ aircraft and 30+ additional simulators needed after IOC, for starters. That FOC date was baked into the T-X RFP, so it's not based on this specific aircraft but rather on what the Air Force wants to spend on the whole program. This isn't going to be a high-rate production program, because the Air Force wants to keep the budget impact relatively low year-over-year.
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,161
Reaction score
148
I wonder, if the Boeing engineers are already planning or have in their backmind a USN variant to replace the T-45 Goshawk in 15-20 years or so.
 

totoro

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
277
Reaction score
8
Website
www.youtube.com
I would say the large twin tails may have already been designed partly in mind for that very competition. Carrier ops do need even more tail control at slow speeds... I'd say Boeing-SAAB is in better position to win that one than T-50.
 

harrier

BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
1,014
Reaction score
50
TomS said:
Harrier said:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-wins-92b-t-x-trainer-contract-with-usaf-452263/

IOC 2024
FOC 2034

Ten years to add what? Presumably weapons and software/simulation if the airframe is 'production ready', as claimed.
Ten years to build out the 300+ aircraft and 30+ additional simulators needed after IOC, for starters. That FOC date was baked into the T-X RFP, so it's not based on this specific aircraft but rather on what the Air Force wants to spend on the whole program. This isn't going to be a high-rate production program, because the Air Force wants to keep the budget impact relatively low year-over-year.
I can't believe nothing will be learned or added in that time. Low rates make fiddling more likely unless it is very clear it is all good from the get go. That would be an achievement.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,264
Reaction score
149
Harrier said:
TomS said:
Harrier said:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-wins-92b-t-x-trainer-contract-with-usaf-452263/

IOC 2024
FOC 2034

Ten years to add what? Presumably weapons and software/simulation if the airframe is 'production ready', as claimed.
Ten years to build out the 300+ aircraft and 30+ additional simulators needed after IOC, for starters. That FOC date was baked into the T-X RFP, so it's not based on this specific aircraft but rather on what the Air Force wants to spend on the whole program. This isn't going to be a high-rate production program, because the Air Force wants to keep the budget impact relatively low year-over-year.
I can't believe nothing will be learned or added in that time. Low rates make fiddling more likely unless it is very clear it is all good from the get go. That would be an achievement.
I never said that there would be no changes. I'm sure we'll see several blocks within T-X aircraft manufacturing, and significant evolution in the training infrastructure and curriculum between IOC and FOC.

But I don't think we'll see major changes in aircraft capabilities between IOC and FOC; it will have to perform pretty much the full mission range at IOC. Pilots who start the APT pipeline in the T-X will have to complete the whole curriculum in that aircraft -- no way they will want trainee pilots to fly two advanced jets in the same course.

T-X FOC basically coincides with the T-38C end-of-service date, so achieving FOC is mostly based on having enough T-X aircraft and associated infrastructure in place to take over the full Advanced Pilot Training program.
 

harrier

BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
1,014
Reaction score
50
TomS said:
Harrier said:
TomS said:
Harrier said:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-wins-92b-t-x-trainer-contract-with-usaf-452263/

IOC 2024
FOC 2034

Ten years to add what? Presumably weapons and software/simulation if the airframe is 'production ready', as claimed.
Ten years to build out the 300+ aircraft and 30+ additional simulators needed after IOC, for starters. That FOC date was baked into the T-X RFP, so it's not based on this specific aircraft but rather on what the Air Force wants to spend on the whole program. This isn't going to be a high-rate production program, because the Air Force wants to keep the budget impact relatively low year-over-year.
I can't believe nothing will be learned or added in that time. Low rates make fiddling more likely unless it is very clear it is all good from the get go. That would be an achievement.
I never said that there would be no changes. I'm sure we'll see several blocks within T-X aircraft manufacturing, and significant evolution in the training infrastructure and curriculum between IOC and FOC.

But I don't think we'll see major changes in aircraft capabilities between IOC and FOC; it will have to perform pretty much the full mission range at IOC. Pilots who start the APT pipeline in the T-X will have to complete the whole curriculum in that aircraft -- no way they will want trainee pilots to fly two advanced jets in the same course.

T-X FOC basically coincides with the T-38C end-of-service date, so achieving FOC is mostly based on having enough T-X aircraft and associated infrastructure in place to take over the full Advanced Pilot Training program.
Ah,OK, thanks. The capability is not meant to change in a technical sense, just numbers.

Would be interesting to know more about what makes Boeing both certain that they will not have changes and at such a low cost.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,631
Reaction score
232
Why do they use the old F404 and not the Superbug F414 ? Because Grippen ?
 

kaiserd

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
748
Reaction score
83
Archibald said:
Why do they use the old F404 and not the Superbug F414 ? Because Grippen ?
Well for a start presumably the Boeing T-X will generally operate at significantly lower weights than a Gripen-E so just doesn’t need the extra thrust. And that’s before you getting into things like cost, fuel efficiency, etc.
The latest developments of the F404 remains very up to date engines (used in the Indian LCA, Gripen C/D, T-50, etc.)
 

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,749
Reaction score
13
With the T-X competition complete and the winner announced, would it not be wise to start a new thread for the Boeing aircraft's subsequent development, and keep this thread for any further information about the losing competitors . . . ?


cheers,
Robin.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
1
Harrier said:
Thanks Sundog.

Scaled have never built anything that entered proper series production. The Beech Starship was the closest, and that got re-engineered.

The Model 400 looks like another POC design, which is a general aviation way of building a non certifiable prototype. So likely they would need to re-engineer and build another set of prototypes to meet USAF needs. More time, more money.

Boeing went for production ready out of the box.
But oh so sexy. Better looking than anything in the teen/20 series save for Tomcat. Off the top of my head I can't think of an ugly design by Northrop. Was it just an engineering exercise to keep their talent pool warm on fighters?
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,161
Reaction score
148
A Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) spokesperson confirmed to Yonhap that Boeing’s bid for the U.S. Air Force’s T-X competition was “unbeatably low.”
The company’s share lost 29.8 percent after the winner of the contract was announced.
Source: http://www.koreatimesus.com/s-korea-loses-u-s-military-trainer-jet-bid/
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,014
Reaction score
199
I hope this program is not going to turn out to be shades of the NGT.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
954
Reaction score
56
great!

If I may, flattened nose reduces also trim drag at transonic speeds.
 

litzj

BLOG : http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
227
Reaction score
8
Website
jaesan-aero.blogspot.com
TomcatViP said:
great!

If I may, flattened nose reduces also trim drag at transonic speeds.
Yep. it could, however, increase of minimum drag can also be possible. Indeed, it is not easy to evaluate drag easily
 

NUSNA_Moebius

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
130
Reaction score
12
I wonder what a prospective single seater will look like. Cockpit towards the back would increase room in the nose for avionics, maybe even an internal gun B) Then it really would be a baby-Hornet.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,631
Reaction score
42
From this article
The sortie included a thorough mission brief, flight, and debrief in the T-X trainer, as well as time in the T-X simulator, which will provide student pilots with the skills needed to transition to 4th and 5th generation fighter, bomber, and other future Mach-21 aircraft.
I'm assuming Mach-21 is the road map for the 21st century, not a Mach 21 aircraft. Someone would have heard or seen that! It's just written poorly to make it sound like we're developing a whole bunch of Mach-21 aircraft. Of course, there is the new reusable launch vehicle from Boeing. ;)
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,264
Reaction score
149
Yeah, definitely an odd usage. Air Education and Training Command uses it a lot in the context of "MACH 21 airmen," to denote their 21st Century training approach. Never seen it applied to aircraft, though.

https://www.aetc.af.mil/News/Article/1437119/aetc-releases-2018-strategic-plan/
 

Hood

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,357
Reaction score
213

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
2,693
Reaction score
48
Website
beyondthesprues.com
Halving just upgraded their Hawks, the RAAF won’t be in the market for another 10yrs.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,264
Reaction score
149
GTX said:
Halving just upgraded their Hawks, the RAAF won’t be in the market for another 10yrs.
Which is just about the point that T-X might be available for export. It isn't even slated for USAF IOC until 2024.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
48
AvWeek article on the ways Boeing says it was able to drop T-X costs so low. Highlights include massively reduced man-hours, trim code, and effective use of in-house suppliers.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,014
Reaction score
199
I hope they haven't cut too many corners, though at least they seem to have cut down on the outsourcing a bit.
 

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,016
Reaction score
97
Interesting. I wonder if the economics of using external sources have run their finacial and political utility?
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,014
Reaction score
199
With the chaos Boeing in general is going through at the moment, SAAB may have to ride herd on it's partner to make sure both quality control and schedules are kept up.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
954
Reaction score
56
The T-X will largely be an aluminum airplane, Torgerson told Air Force Magazine, and the only composite structure on the jet will be the nose. A metal airplane is easier to manufacture and easier to repair, he said, and the use of lighter-weight materials wasn’t a requirement as “we didn’t have to squeeze every speck of performance” out of the design, given that it’s not intended to be a front-line combat airplane. Even so, the T-X is described as having the ability to pull more than 8Gs.
Interesting
 

Trident

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
846
Reaction score
27
I noted that as well - the Yak-130 (as opposed to the M346 and the Yak-130D demonstrator) followed as similar philosophy.
 

Boxman

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
284
Reaction score
22
Video posted by Boeing on YouTube on July 1, 2019, with the commencement of the T-X Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase of flight test.

YouTube - Boeing: Boeing T-X Begins EMD Flight Tests
 

Nick

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
65
Reaction score
7
So does this become the T-7 or the T-54 in the US military aircraft designation series?
 

litzj

BLOG : http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
227
Reaction score
8
Website
jaesan-aero.blogspot.com
Goshawk in Navy and Redhawk in Airforce.

Is there any possibility that Navy would show interest about the Redhawk?
 
Top