Boeing getting out of the fighter Business?

[sublight_]

So, "never". Thus, my 3rd place comment. The fact that Boeing is teamed with LM on the new bomber (no doubt for their stealth expertise) is evidence of that.

Boeing is teamed up with Lockheed because 50% of an NGB contract is better than 0% of a contract. X-32?

 

[LowObservable]

http://www.constitution.org/col/blind_men.htm

 

[sferrin]

http://www.constitution.org/col/blind_men.htm

Don't want to back up your comment huh? Why am I not surprised?

 

[sferrin]

So, "never". Thus, my 3rd place comment. The fact that Boeing is teamed with LM on the new bomber (no doubt for their stealth expertise) is evidence of that.

Boeing is teamed up with Lockheed because 50% of an NGB contract is better than 0% of a contract. X-32?

Mutual benefit. Boeing gets access to LM's stealth expertise and LM can say "look, we're not a monopoly and you really need to throw Boeing a bone."

 

[sublight_]

So, "never". Thus, my 3rd place comment. The fact that Boeing is teamed with LM on the new bomber (no doubt for their stealth expertise) is evidence of that.

Boeing is teamed up with Lockheed because 50% of an NGB contract is better than 0% of a contract. X-32?

Mutual benefit. Boeing gets access to LM's stealth expertise and LM can say "look, we're not a monopoly and you really need to throw Boeing a bone."

I think Boeing has much more classified stealth related R&D than you give them credit for....

 

[sferrin]

So, "never". Thus, my 3rd place comment. The fact that Boeing is teamed with LM on the new bomber (no doubt for their stealth expertise) is evidence of that.

Boeing is teamed up with Lockheed because 50% of an NGB contract is better than 0% of a contract. X-32?

Mutual benefit. Boeing gets access to LM's stealth expertise and LM can say "look, we're not a monopoly and you really need to throw Boeing a bone."

I think Boeing has much more classified stealth related R&D than you give them credit for....

I'm sure LM and NG do as well. My point is that Boeing has never put a stealth aircraft into production. Not once. LM has the F-22, F-35, JASSM, etc. NG has the B-2. Sure, maybe Boeing has a top secret, super stealth whatever, but speculation is just that. (And my money would be that that super secret stealth whatever says, "LM" or "NG' on the side.)

 

[LowObservable]

Is it normal for the company controlling the key enabling technology to be assigned the subcontractor role?

 

[sferrin]

Is it normal for the company controlling the key enabling technology to be assigned the subcontractor role?

Depends. There are all kinds of reasons LM could be the sub. (The least of which is, "because their stealth technology is inferior to Boeings".) Ask yourself why Boeing didn't go it alone like NG is if their stealth expertise is so high.

 

[LowObservable]

Obviously, Boeing wanted to tap into LM's expertise at delivering combat aircraft on time and on budget.

 

[sferrin]

Obviously, Boeing wanted to tap into LM's expertise at delivering combat aircraft on time and on budget.

"Sour grapes . . ."

 

[Triton]

I'm sure LM and NG do as well. My point is that Boeing has never put a stealth aircraft into production. Not once. LM has the F-22, F-35, JASSM, etc. NG has the B-2. Sure, maybe Boeing has a top secret, super stealth whatever, but speculation is just that. (And my money would be that that super secret stealth whatever says, "LM" or "NG' on the side.)

No, I don't understand your point. Considering that Boeing owns the legacy assets of North American Aviation and McDonnell Douglas, bashing Boeing yet again for not having built a production fighter aircraft since the P-26 Peashooter is a bunch of nonsense. The X-32 and the Phantom Ray aren't sufficient evidence to you that Boeing can manufacture stealth aircraft? What about the F-15 Silent Eagle or the F-18 Advanced Super Hornet? Should they just close the doors on the Phantom Works? Your anti-Boeing bias is unfair and a bunch of malarkey. Boeing isn't a start-up aerospace firm looking for venture capital. It has employees, production capacity, and has done business with the Department of Defense.

 

[marauder2048]

Is it normal for the company controlling the key enabling technology to be assigned the subcontractor role?

Assuming the key enabling technology isn't the same key enabling technology for almost all recent advancement in aviation: the propulsion stack. In which case,
Boeing's propulsion engineers' greatly familiarity with the state-of-the-art and current trends might be decisive.

 

[sferrin]

I'm sure LM and NG do as well. My point is that Boeing has never put a stealth aircraft into production. Not once. LM has the F-22, F-35, JASSM, etc. NG has the B-2. Sure, maybe Boeing has a top secret, super stealth whatever, but speculation is just that. (And my money would be that that super secret stealth whatever says, "LM" or "NG' on the side.)

No, I don't understand your point. Considering that Boeing owns the legacy assets of North American Aviation and McDonnell Douglas, bashing Boeing yet again for not having built a production fighter aircraft since the P-26 Peashooter is a bunch of nonsense.

Where did I say that?

The X-32 and the Phantom Ray aren't sufficient evidence to you that Boeing can manufacture stealth aircraft?

Well, the X-32 lost and the Phantom Ray seems to have quietly died.

What about the F-15 Silent Eagle or the F-18 Advanced Super Hornet?

Whoa, are you REALLY going to use those as examples of stealth? (And that's completely aside from the fact they're both paper planes.)

Should they just close the doors on the Phantom Works? Your anti-Boeing bias is unfair and a bunch of malarkey. Boeing isn't a start-up aerospace firm looking for venture capital. It has employees, production capacity, and has done business with the Department of Defense.

None of which changes the fact that Boeing has never put a stealth aircraft into production. It's got nothing to do with an "anti-Boeing" bias. The facts speak for themselves, no bias required.

Where did I say anything about the Phantom Works? One would hope they'd put all McDonnell Douglas's research in hypersonics to good use but they seem to have dropped the ball there.[/quote][/quote][/quote]

 

[phrenzy]

It was reported in the local Wichita press that Boeing had a hand in designing and developing the Textron Scorpion which can accommodate a swept wing and higher
thrust engines. No price was quoted for that configuration but $25 mil doesn't seem outrageous...

That's certainly close to the mark. If you could put JDAMs and aim-9s on an upgraded version I think they do have a market. I'd be curious to hear more about Boeing's involvement.

 

[marauder2048]

I'm sure LM and NG do as well. My point is that Boeing has never put a stealth aircraft into production. Not once. LM has the F-22, F-35, JASSM, etc. NG has the B-2. Sure, maybe Boeing has a top secret, super stealth whatever, but speculation is just that. (And my money would be that that super secret stealth whatever says, "LM" or "NG' on the side.)

No, I don't understand your point. Considering that Boeing owns the legacy assets of North American Aviation and McDonnell Douglas, bashing Boeing yet again for not having built a production fighter aircraft since the P-26 Peashooter is a bunch of nonsense. The X-32 and the Phantom Ray aren't sufficient evidence to you that Boeing can manufacture stealth aircraft? What about the F-15 Silent Eagle or the F-18 Advanced Super Hornet? Should they just close the doors on the Phantom Works? Your anti-Boeing bias is unfair and a bunch of malarkey. Boeing isn't a start-up aerospace firm looking for venture capital. It has employees, production capacity, and has done business with the Department of Defense.

Boeing was compelled to backpedal on its RCS reduction claims on the F-15SE once real, paying customers began to scrutinize it. From what the USN program manager has been saying, the ASH signature reduction ("greater than 50%") demonstrated during flight tests appears to match prediction.... which can be parsed in a variety of ways. Both of these efforts are worthwhile and I for one have (and had) high hopes for them but they were long overdue and their timing does smack a bit of desperation.

 

[LowObservable]

There are two traceable strands of stealth research out of St Louis, ASH/SH representing one of them. Note also that ASH was designed to a criterion totally different from "Brand X" - I believe that's been published.


Marauder - valid point about engine integration but I doubt that's relevant to the current subject. Also, is there a citation for the previously unreported Boeing involvement in Scorpion?

 

[bobbymike]

After SK backed out of buying F-15SE the writing was on the wall? - cross posted on F-35 News Only Thread
-----------------------------------------------------

F-35 Official for South Korea

9/25/2014


The Republic of Korea has formally selected the F-35A version of the Joint Strike Fighter as the winner of its F-X fighter competition, and will soon sign letters of offer and acceptance with the US government for 40 of the aircraft, to be delivered starting in 2018, announced manufacturer Lockheed Martin on Wednesday. The value of the deal was not immediately released, but is expected to be in excess of $7 billion. The choice brings the number of countries that will operate the F-35 to 12; Israel and Japan have previously signed up as Foreign Military Sales customers for the jet, joining the US and eight countries partnered in its development. An ROK statement said the jet prevailed following negotiations over “technical conditions, price, and offset,” the latter being F-35 production work to be done by Korean companies. The ROK previously selected 60 Boeing F-15SE “Silent Eagles” for the F-X competition but backpedaled earlier this year, effectively re-opening the contest and allowing Lockheed Martin to quote prices reflecting lower costs on recent production lots. JSF program leader Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan said “this is a good day for the F-35 and we look forward to working with” the ROK government

 

[phrenzy]

What's the parts commonality like between the SE and regular F-15? Just thinking it might not have been as obvious a choice for the ROK since they don't have the any F-15 inventory but that it might have been a better choice for Japan.

 

[TomS]

ROKAF does have about 60 F-15Ks.

 

[sferrin]

ROKAF does have about 60 F-15Ks.

AFAIK the F-15Ks are some of the better F-15s. I think only the SGs (Singapore) are better. Love this shot. F-15Ks and F-15Js.