• 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
3,640
Reaction score
534
Goshawk in Navy and Redhawk in Airforce.

Is there any possibility that Navy would show interest about the Redhawk?
Possibility, certainly. Cost of adapting it for carrier is a big unknown though. Might be an Agressor candidate first, which would not require carrier modifications.

 

Desertfox

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
218
Reaction score
73
Boeing (McD) already has experience in converting a trainer for carrier ops, they should be quite capable of doing the same to the T-7A. What I'm more interested in seeing is if Boeing comes out with a single seat light fighter/attack version ala Hawk 200/F-5. There's plenty of F-5s, Mig-21, and early model F-16s out there needing replacing.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,640
Reaction score
534
Boeing (McD) already has experience in converting a trainer for carrier ops, they should be quite capable of doing the same to the T-7A. What I'm more interested in seeing is if Boeing comes out with a single seat light fighter/attack version ala Hawk 200/F-5. There's plenty of F-5s, Mig-21, and early model F-16s out there needing replacing.
That was 30 years ago, and the process wasn't exactly painless.

Boeing is certainly thinking about light attack, but I suspect they will be reluctant to throw money at it until the T-7 is well along. Maybe if there is a serious USAF light fighter program, but the USAF isn't going to have the money either, thanks to B-21, F-35, and NGAD (plus hypersonics, GBSD, etc.)
 

kaiserd

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
966
Reaction score
270
Boeing (McD) already has experience in converting a trainer for carrier ops, they should be quite capable of doing the same to the T-7A. What I'm more interested in seeing is if Boeing comes out with a single seat light fighter/attack version ala Hawk 200/F-5. There's plenty of F-5s, Mig-21, and early model F-16s out there needing replacing.
While a light fighter version (similar to the rival FA-50) is possible (even likely) I think the potential market size can be exaggerated.
We’ve not exactly seen a lot of FA-50s sold and my understanding is that the light fighter version of the Aermachi M-346 is on the back burner.
And there really aren’t that many F-5 or MIG-21 operators out there anymore and many of those that are (China and export customers for Chinese MIG-21 variants, Iran etc.) don’t appear likely future users.
The F-16 successes has largely killed the Western lightweight fighter with even the Gripen moving away from its lightweight roots to becoming a bigger heavier aircraft (Gripen E).
A fighter version of a lllo “Redhawk” should be more successful than someof these predecessors l
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,194
Reaction score
164
The Navy was involved in some of the preliminary work that went into setting T-X requirements, and is certainly paying attention to how things are going. I wouldn't expect a program of record right soon, but I'm kinda hoping the team puts out a concept image or two of a navalized T-7 just to get the juices flowing.
 

AeroFranz

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
2,201
Reaction score
81
Boeing (McD) already has experience in converting a trainer for carrier ops, they should be quite capable of doing the same to the T-7A. What I'm more interested in seeing is if Boeing comes out with a single seat light fighter/attack version ala Hawk 200/F-5. There's plenty of F-5s, Mig-21, and early model F-16s out there needing replacing.
That was 30 years ago, and the process wasn't exactly painless.
My thoughts exactly. Unless Navy requirements were factored in from the beginning, fuggedaboutit. That's not to say i wouldn't want to see a Navy RedHawk, it's just that history shows 'marinization' of an aircraft is hard under the best of circumstances.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
25,742
Reaction score
2,725
A clearer view to AIDC AT-5.
 

Attachments

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,649
Reaction score
337

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,640
Reaction score
534

What a strange idea... you order the losing contender to refine the winning one?!
Kinda makes sense, though, since these aircraft are currently available in small numbers (I doubt either order is new production). So they rent a small number to validate their training curriculum in parallel with development of the T-7 aircraft and associated simulators. This is faster than waiting for the ultimate aircraft to be available in sufficient numbers for curriculum development.
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,306
Reaction score
174
So what will happen to the loosing contenders once Boeing gets the T-7 production ramped up to at least normal? This is a bit crazy for the USAF to go down this route.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,640
Reaction score
534
So what will happen to the loosing contenders once Boeing gets the T-7 production ramped up to at least normal? This is a bit crazy for the USAF to go down this route.
They get returned to the manufacturers. This is just a lease of a dozen aircraft or so, all told.
 

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,189
Reaction score
299

helmutkohl

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
82
Reaction score
45
hm yeah they should have went with the TA-50 in the end, they wouldn't have this problem.

but I guess they were worried about giving Lockheed everything
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,194
Reaction score
164
hm yeah they should have went with the TA-50 in the end, they wouldn't have this problem.

but I guess they were worried about giving Lockheed everything
Little to do with "giving Lockheed everything," and an early run of 4-8 aircraft wasn't included in the requirements. Notably, T-X required US production and this small lease of some test airframes is going to be of aircraft produced in Korea (assuming T-50 survives the lawsuit). Lockheed may have gotten US production of their existing aircraft up faster than Boeing will get the Red Tail out, but not so much more so that USAF thought it was decisive or that it outweighed the Boeing-Saab's other advantages.
 

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
2,805
Reaction score
214
Website
beyondthesprues.com
FMV Procures New Training Aircraft for the Swedish Armed Forces
(Source: Swedish Defence Matériel Agency, FMV; issued May 04, 2020)
(Unofficial translation by Defense-Aerospace.com)

The [Swedish] Air Force's current training aircraft, the Saab SK 60, has many years of service, but now the government has given FMV an authorization to procure a complete flight training system for the first phase of the pilot training. This includes aircraft, simulators, safety equipment and maintenance.

Before the Swedish Armed Forces pilots flew Gripen, they had spent many hours side by side with an instructor in an SK 60, or Saab 105 as the plane is named in its civilian version. The twin-engined training airplane has been the basis of all flight training for pilots since the 1960s, now FMV is working to procure a new school airplane with associated equipment.

The Air Force is in great need of a new school airplane as well as all associated systems for training future pilots. The existing school aircraft, SK60, flew for the first time in 1963. Since then, much has happened in the aviation industry and in the Air Force, both in terms of technology but also how it is intended that future pilots should be trained.

“The procurement that FMV is now carrying out and which the government has authorized is a complete so-called Basic Trainer Aircraft system for the first phase of the training,” says Andreas Säf Pernselius, FMV project manager.

The goal is for the education system to be ready at Malmen in Linköping for the first batch of pilot students in the summer of 2023. And before that, flight instructors should be able to fly into the system.

“It is a very tight timeline but the Air Force's clear requirement is that the system should be based on existing products and that there should be no Swedish special solutions. The supplier will also be responsible for maintenance for the first three years with an option for another two years. The idea then is to postpone the competitive maintenance contract,” says Malin Olofsson, strategic buyer.

It is a team effort to develop the documentation required for a competitive procurement of this kind. It is important that the bidders receive a good basis for their tenders, which also facilitates when we evaluate the tenders. This is stated by strategic buyer Malin Olofsson and project manager Andreas Säf Pernselius.

Quick handling

FMV has conducted feasibility studies at different times and with different intensity, conducted a market study via a so-called RFI and developed a basis for the procurement of a complete education system. Due to various reasons, the procurement has on several occasions been postponed in the future. When FMV received information that the government was close to deciding on the issue, a project team was quickly put together.

“We gathered staff from different areas of expertise within FMV. The team worked on compiling the procurement documentation such as the technical specification, the specification for the undertaking and the request documentation,” says Malin Olofsson.

The challenges during the completion of the tender documentation for the procurement have been to gather all stakeholders affected by the school aviation system, including several departments and competencies within FMV. The project also works closely with the Air Force's representatives.

“Creating such a comprehensive foundation as we have now done is not possible without all the stakeholders from the beginning and that everyone has an open mind to the task and can handle rapid changes, it is best done together as a team,” says Andreas Säf Pernselius .

Facts
The parts that will be included in the contract and the contract are:
-- aircraft
-- flight safety equipment (helmets, mask, lifejacket, parachute, etc.)
-- simulators
-- Part Task Trainer (simpler PC type simulators)
-- CBT (Computer Based Training)
-- TLS (Through Life Support), engineering support for the product's life
-- aircraft maintenance (operational aircraft on the line and heavy maintenance)
-- maintenance of simulators

The tender documentation will be available on the eAvrop website until 31 July 2020.

FMV then starts evaluating the tenders that have been received.

-ends-
I would imagine the the Boeing/Saab T-7 Red Hawk would be the lead candidate for this though I wonder if the target date will preclude it.
 

NUSNA_Moebius

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
147
Reaction score
22
So they really need a supersonic trainer though? Gripen is their only supersonic platform and they have conversion trainers for it. I envision a version of the T-7A with a non-afterburning F404 being up their alley to reduce costs but maybe even with a wider span/chord wing to keep wing loading low for trainees new to jet flight. That would give it improved carrying ability in armed training and secondary combat roles as well.
 
Last edited:

_Del_

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
431
Reaction score
74
I doubt it. It says "basic trainer". Not lead-in or advanced trainer. Just want something new and cheap with modern glass cockpits, I suspect. Least that's how that article reads to me.

Have to think it's a turboprop like Super Tucano, Texan, PC-21, etc. Maybe outside chance of a Hawks, M-346, or something similar if it comes cheaply enough.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,640
Reaction score
534
I would imagine the the Boeing/Saab T-7 Red Hawk would be the lead candidate for this though I wonder if the target date will preclude it.
This isn't for a jet trainer at all, but rather a prop trainer for basic training. The plan appears to be to retire the Sk60s and use a combination of prop planes as basic trainers and older Gripens as advanced trainers. A few years down the road, the T-7 might be an option to replace the Gripens as they age out.

 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,738
Reaction score
177
My understanding is they've been wanting to buy PC-21s for awhile. I wonder if they're thinking if they buy PC-21s, Switzerland will buy Gripens?
 

eagle

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
My understanding is they've been wanting to buy PC-21s for awhile. I wonder if they're thinking if they buy PC-21s, Switzerland will buy Gripens?
Maybe that was planned. But that ship has sailed as Switzerland will not buy Gripen.

I think for only a basic trainer the PC-21 is overkill anyway. Something like a PC-9 / T-6 comes to mind. With advanced training on Gripen D for now, possibly on T-7 later.
 

Hood

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,644
Reaction score
795
Will depend on the bidding consortia but the T-6II, PC-21 and Super Tucano are likely to make an appearance.
My hunch is the PC-21 might pip the post, jumping into a Gripen from a Texan or Tucano would be a stretch - not impossible, but it is a leap, the PC-21 closes that gap more.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
1,462
Reaction score
321
Regarding the next generation trainer for the SwAF, I don't understand why you would buy a 21 to replace the Sk60 when you can fly a 345 for next to the same price (sustainement included - 15000 hr guys!!! ).


On the long term, It would be like trading your Saab Aero for a used VW Beetle...

The T-7 is an advanced trainer that might have better alpha output than a Gripen. But even so, it could open Sweden to challenging dissimilar aircraft training like aggressors.
 
Last edited:

Hood

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,644
Reaction score
795
Regarding the next generation trainer for the SwAF, I don't understand why you would buy a 21 to replace the Sk60 when you can fly a 345 for next to the same price (sustainement included - 15000 hr guys!!! )

On the long term, It would be like trading your Saab Aero for a used VW Beetle...

The T-7 is an advanced trainer that might have better alpha output than a Gripen. But even so, it could open Sweden to challenging dissimilar aircraft training like aggressors.
Because the T-7 is not a basic trainer, you can't just take a student out of a piston elementry trainer and throw him into a high-end advanced trainer like the T-7. Operating costs has little to do with it in this case.

Why would Sweden buy T-7s over Gripens for operational conversion training and agressor training? Gripens mean Swedish jobs at SAAB are protected and lowers Gripen production costs, the T-7 doesnt do either.

Really the Sk60s should have been replaced some time ago, its replacement has been a drawn out saga.
 

Lc89

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Aug 10, 2019
Messages
91
Reaction score
29
Are there plans for USAF to build a light attack variant of the T-7? The T50 and M346 have variants dedicated to light attack.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
1,462
Reaction score
321
@Lc89 : no there isn't (as confirmed by program's officials)

@Hood : yes, that is my opinion also. I merged two different ideas under the same post: early-on I discuss how an Aermarchi 345 could be better suited (costs Vs in-service performances) and then why T-7 could be overrated as a Sk60 replacement.

Regarding Swedish worker's jobs, a fix percentage of airframe value* is designed to be built by Saab... Given the size of the contract in number, this ensure a smooth decade of work to them...


*Forgot the value but exact nbr should be up in this thread.
 
Top