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

T-X - A Future USAF Trainer

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,407
Reaction score
234

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
2,897
Reaction score
344
Website
beyondthesprues.com
People are reading too much into the TA-50 Block 2 announcement. If you read on KAI's own website it is pretty obvious that Block 2 simply refers to the the second mass-production deal:

 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,911
Reaction score
845
People are reading too much into the TA-50 Block 2 announcement. If you read on KAI's own website it is pretty obvious that Block 2 simply refers to the the second mass-production deal:

Yes. As you get closer to the Korean original press release, references to TA-50 Block 1 disappear and the announcement just says that TA-50 is an upgraded version of the T-50 trainer.

 

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
2,897
Reaction score
344
Website
beyondthesprues.com
Exactly. I think people have missed the subtle element of the story: ... TA-50 aircraft, an advanced T-50 trainer variant...

Add in the Block 2 part and people jump to conclusions, however the reality is far simpler: They are comparing the TA-50 version to the T-50 and yes, the TA-50 is a more advanced version but it has also been around for a while plus they are also talking about Block 2 being the second mass production deal.
 

Mach42

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
78
Reaction score
12
It simply just means the second production run. However, the second production one is distinct from the first in that the dedicated assembly line for the TA-50 was converted to the FA-50 a long time ago, thus this TA-50 is practically just the FA-50 with link-16 removed.
 

helmutkohl

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
172
Reaction score
159
It simply just means the second production run. However, the second production one is distinct from the first in that the dedicated assembly line for the TA-50 was converted to the FA-50 a long time ago, thus this TA-50 is practically just the FA-50 with link-16 removed.
how simple is it to convert a TA-50 to an FA-50?
so far I think Philippines is the only customer of the FA version
all other exports (Iraq, Indonesia, etc) use just the trainer version
I think S.Korea uses all 3?
 

Mach42

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
78
Reaction score
12
It simply just means the second production run. However, the second production one is distinct from the first in that the dedicated assembly line for the TA-50 was converted to the FA-50 a long time ago, thus this TA-50 is practically just the FA-50 with link-16 removed.
how simple is it to convert a TA-50 to an FA-50?
so far I think Philippines is the only customer of the FA version
all other exports (Iraq, Indonesia, etc) use just the trainer version
I think S.Korea uses all 3?
This should probably be moved to a different thread but here is the short version: Main difference is in the vertical stabilizer. 'Original' TA-50 has a clipped vert. stab. identical to the T-50. While the FA-50 has a (very F-16 like) vert. stab. with a (housing for the) antenna for the rwr on top. So if you check the T-50i, T-50IQ, T-50A they are all actually 'FA-50's in a way. So I would say it is difficult to convert the 'original' TA-50s but for most of the exported T-50 family flying currently, its simply a matter of adding the missing avionics/systems.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,773
Reaction score
231
While I'm sure some of those countries may buy it, there are some that definitely won't. For instance, I definitely don't see France or anyone within the EU buying it. They'll want their own solution for their on manufacturers. I can't say I blame them, we want the same thing here. I don't see Brazil buying them because because they're now building their own Gripens. I could see the navy using them to replace F-5s in the aggressor role, especially if they buy some as T-45 replacements for the advanced training role. They still have their maintenance set up to handle F404s for the Marine's F-18s, so it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to get them integrated into service.

It seems to me like this program is moving slow, for how fast we got the prototypes.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,693
Reaction score
1,251
France has not wanted a supersonic trainer since the Jaguar fiasco :p

More generally, still no replacement in view for the Alphajets - or maybe I just can't remember.

EDIT: France decided to go the opposite way. PC-21s everywhere, except for the ETO and Patrouille de France.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
1,794
Reaction score
534
Great brief:
Boeing’s chief test pilot for Air Force programs, Dan “Dragon” Draeger, reported that the aircraft has been flown to its highest speed and has proved its fuel-flow system in inverted flight. It has exceeded its threshold angle-of-attack requirement of 20 degrees, and also its objective target of 25 degrees. It meets requirements of both instantaneous and sustained turn rates, and has been demonstrated at loads above the threshold figure of 6.5 g as it approaches the objective of 7.5 g. It is also “very well-behaved in a crosswind environment,” reported Draeger.
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,407
Reaction score
234
I cannot see Serbia buying the T-7 anytime soon, since the military in Serbia are so linked with Russia.
 
Top