You certainly have a point. Not sure about their air worthiness, as you said. Didn't France sold a whole lot of SEM to Argentina some years ago ?
 
You certainly have a point. Not sure about their air worthiness, as you said. Didn't France sold a whole lot of SEM to Argentina some years ago ?

Only if five is "a whole lot."

 
Sell?!! At 12M€ the lot of 5 (fully operational), it's a gift
See the Great aircraft Bazaar thread
5 Super Etendard for 12.55M€ (5 Super Etendards, along with a simulator, eight spare engines, and a large batch of spares and tooling including barracuda jammer) - 3 directly put into service, 2 used as spare to regenerate airframe already in service
 
Last edited:
As written extensively in the mentioned thread (sorry for that), 2 airframe are to be used for spare for the ones they have already and 3 are to be put immediately in service. Simulator is included in the deal hence. .. Alas, no Training for the French industry.
 
Last edited:
Spin off question, carbon panels and sections, recycled, how?
 
As written extensively in the mentioned thread (sorry for that), 2 airframe are to be used for spare for the ones they have already and 3 are to be put immediately in service. Simulator is included in the deal hence. .. Alas, no Training for the French industry.

Who do you think will run that simulator? Who do you think will train the operators and maintainers? There are going to be French techreps there as long as the planes are in service.
 
As written extensively in the mentioned thread (sorry for that), 2 airframe are to be used for spare for the ones they have already and 3 are to be put immediately in service. Simulator is included in the deal hence. .. Alas, no Training for the French industry.

Who do you think will run that simulator? Who do you think will train the operators and maintainers? There are going to be French techreps there as long as the planes are in service.
It's possible. But after 40 years of Etendard flying, they might not need to burden the budget for expensive expats...

For example, Latin America countries have flown their Sabre, T-33 or T-37 without US personnel for years.
 
It's possible. But after 40 years of Etendard flying, they might not need to burden the budget for expensive expats...

For example, Latin America countries have flown their Sabre, T-33 or T-37 without US personnel for years.

Perhaps not. But at least then the French got some money for aircraft that would otherwise be scrap metal. If you think there's a market somewhere that will pay top dollar for used 1970s/80s vintage aircraft, you're mistaken.
 
I have not seen any word on where the production line is to be set up. Hope St. Louis so I can catch some flying but anyone know where?

Enjoy the Day! Mark
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have not seen any word on where the production line is to be set up. Hope St. Louis so I can catch some flying but anyone know where?

Enjoy the Day! Mark
I have not seen any word on where the production line is to be set up. Hope St. Louis so I can catch some flying but anyone know where?

Enjoy the Day! Mark
I have not seen any word on where the production line is to be set up. Hope St. Louis so I can catch some flying but anyone know where?

Enjoy the Day! Mark
https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2019/05/08/saab-to-build-new-t-x-plant-in-indiana/ Saab will build most of the sections in Indiana then sent it to St Louis for final assembly.
Thanks - guess I'll see some new aircraft flying! Mark
 
See the RFI enclosed
 

Attachments

  • 200512 UJTS RFI.pdf
    668.6 KB · Views: 60
I think it's really interesting that Boeing opted to "revert" back to producing an all aluminium aircraft and possibly heralds a new era for metal aircraft. Despite any weight and flexibility advantages composites would've given them, aluminium can be, formed, welded, and even installed with fewer human hours on it....... The composite craze really only seems necessary for military aircraft riding a bleeding edge in performance and capability (in particular for stealth), or particular edge cases (corrosion resistance for naval aircraft). Otherwise, the production savings of metal seem to well out-weight the amount of man-hours composites really require, conforms very well to new digital manufacturing systems, and offers easier maintainability.

Composites could win in the economy of scale in civil aircraft with potential production runs into the thousands, but a few hundred airframes will be more cost and time sensitive, making all metal construction very applicable in the T-7A's case. Replacing metal panels with composites would be a worthwhile upgrade if a larger production run becomes established.

That's my guess, and I think more analysis on aircraft manufacturing processes would be a welcome topic on this site.
 
The great advantage of Aluminium for aerospace comes from being totally recyclable at low cost across a wide spectrum of industries.
 
Were any specs released for the T-7A, I've had no luck finding it.
I know that we had the RFI posted on an other website (Key aero). I haven't checked it back but remember that Bio posted the KPP from which I remember I extracted some key requirements (G and transonic speed - 7g sustained, 700kt (my mem only)).
 
Were any specs released for the T-7A, I've had no luck finding it.
I know that we had the RFI posted on an other website (Key aero). I haven't checked it back but remember that Bio posted the KPP from which I remember I extracted some key requirements (G and transonic speed - 7g sustained 700kt (my mem only)).

The data that is remarkably absent is basic stuff like length, width, weight, etc. The only numbers I've seen are from "Militaryfactory.com" and they are at best guesses. It's slightly unusual that Boeing hasn't put out a datasheet with some basic specs by now.
 
The militaryfactory.com T-7A numbers are not guesses, they are simply the exact specification numbers of an entirely different aircraft: the T-38.

They used to be, but not anymore (I looked yesterday).
 
The comments of the Boeing engineers was very similar to what I heard the Bell engineers say when they were putting the V-280 together. There is also public comment on how the reconnaissance helicopters are going together. As mentioned elsewhere by others I think the "craftsmanship" of assembly will become another note of a bygone era.
 
Wing rock doesn't seem uncommon at high angles of attack in tactical aircraft. Gonna go ahead and guess that they're looking at software tweaks to manage it rather than a dramatic redesign.
 
Most vendors are dealing with sub-contractor difficulties. The pandemix of course hammered the subs. In some cases subs on the margin closed there doors. Now vendors have to find alternates, or worse bootstrap new subs.
 
IIRC wing rock afflicted the Super Bug too. I think there was some physical fix implemented (which doesn't mean software was part of the solution too).
 
Do we know how it was shipped?
Air or sea?

The Saab parts for the demonstration aircraft were flown to the US. Probably the same for this example. Ultimately they'll be made in the US, and will likely be trucked between sites.
Saab plans on setting up a production facility in Indiana once the production contract was firmed up.

Enjoy the Day! Mark
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom