T-X Trainer - Boeing T-7A Red Hawk

[NUSNA_Moebius]

Anybody seen NG's Model 400 lately? Any word if they'll continue further development?

It has gone rather quiet for Northrop Grumman recently, hope they don't quit the T-X program, but then they do also have the B-21 Raider bomber program to contend with.

NG is not bidding on T-X. Can't imagine they'll go forward with the Model 400 is they aren't bidding on the largest trainer contract going.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/northrop-grumman-drops-out-of-t-x-trainer-competition

I thought Northrop Grumman would drop out. What will happen to the sole flying T-X prototype? Hope it goes to a museum.

It'll probably go on to be a research and testbed aircraft, like so many planes built by Scaled Composites.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Makes sense. I mean they got Ares up and running again, right?

 

[kcran567]

Northrop/ Scaled composites should develop it and sell it to anyone interested (if they can) that's what Boeing and Saab said they would do it they lost TX. Model 400 seems like a very updated f-5/T-38, nice looking aircraft. Was my favorite of the clean sheet designs.

 

[Sundog]

Northrop isn't going to try and sell a plane that doesn't have the backing of the U.S. Military/DoD behind it. They have more important programs to concentrate on, such as the B-21.

 

[kcran567]

I'm aware of that, just speculating...I thought that Boeing and Saab stated they would still go forward with their TX even if they lost the contract for the trainer. Was hoping Northrop would do the same.

 

[TomS]

I'm aware of that, just speculating...I thought that Boeing and Saab stated they would still go forward with their TX even if they lost the contract for the trainer. Was hoping Northrop would do the same.

I can't find anything from Boeing saying that. Sweden doesn't seem to think so; the Swedish AF has said that if the Boeing/Saab aircraft loses, it will probably opt for a turboprop trainer instead of another T-X offering. That,suggests that they don't think the Boeing/Saab product would be available if they lose T-X.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/swedish-air-force-interested-in-boeing-saab-trainer-jet-but-probably-not-other-t-x-options

 

[martinbayer]

I can't see why a museum would display the Model 400. It's not historically significant in any way.

I think in that respect it's comparable to the Fairchild T-46 (other than that being the last project of the Fairchild Republic Corporation), but all three prototypes of that design are now in different museums. Similarly, a Northrop YA-9 prototype, which lost against the A-10, is for example displayed at March Field Air Museum.

Martin

 

[_Del_]

That,suggests that they don't think the Boeing/Saab product would be available if they lose T-X.

Probably says more about price point and economies of scale than availability, but other customers will have similar thoughts. I agree with your main point, and I'm not sure why Boeing and Saab would heavily invest beyond elimination in an already saturated market.

 

[TomS]

I can't see why a museum would display the Model 400. It's not historically significant in any way.

I think in that respect it's comparable to the Fairchild T-46 (other than that being the last project of the Fairchild Republic Corporation), but all three prototypes of that design are now in different museums. Similarly, a Northrop YA-9 prototype, which lost against the A-10, is for example displayed at March Field Air Museum.

Martin

I understand what you're saying, but the Model 400 isn't quite in the same class as these examples. The T-46 was actually offered in competition, won, and was in development until the whole program came crashing down in a highly public and newsworthy way. The A-9 was at least part of the A-X competition. It's sort of borderline IMO, but it shows an interesting alternative technical approach to the A-10, which has proved to be a very important aircraft.

 

[FighterJock]

Anyone know when the T-X fly off would likely start? Late this year or sometime next year?

 

[TomS]

I don't think it's set up with an actual competitive fly-off.

 

[bring_it_on]

There is no fly-off. Submissions will decide on who the winner is. The competitors were flying prototypes to de-risk design and to provide tested technical performance data.

 

[FighterJock]

There is no fly-off. Submissions will decide on who the winner is. The competitors were flying prototypes to de-risk design and to provide tested technical performance data.

Pity, I was looking forward to a fly-off. So it is all down to who has the strongest submission, I would not like to be the person who has to make the final decision.

 

[bring_it_on]

...

 

[lantinian]

...

I'd give it to Boing just based on that photo. Their T-X is just so much better looking. No sure if its just marketing but Boing seams to have made the most effort so far into winning this bid. I expect their design to be more expensive to field but a lot less expensive to operate. I also see Boing to having a more innovative training program.

 

[Mach42]

...

I'd give it to Boing just based on that photo. Their T-X is just so much better looking. No sure if its just marketing but Boing seams to have made the most effort so far into winning this bid. I expect their design to be more expensive to field but a lot less expensive to operate. I also see Boing to having a more innovative training program.

Can you expand your thoughts on 1 and 2? I think Boeing will promise lower costs but I don't see the technology that will make it so. I also haven't seen much material on the specific Boeing design but to my knowledge the capabilities of each of the T-X GBTSs seem to be equal.

It is a sexy airframe though.

 

[GTX]

If you want the safe, low risk solution my money would still be on the T-50A.

 

[Ian33]

That's very unforgiving landing gear for a trainer. Wowser.

 

[Sundog]

That's very unforgiving landing gear for a trainer. Wowser.

It's the F-16s Landing gear.

 

[Mach42]

If you want the safe, low risk solution my money would still be on the T-50A.

Obviously for the T-50A, Lockheed can point at the ROKAF, give all the facts and figures, explain all the costs and benefits, expound on how the improved T-50A and their GBTS only improves those numbers, and leverage their maintenance and support history with the USAF.

But the Boeing plane, being a new design, can optimistically promise more, even if they end up under-delivering later.

 

[bring_it_on]

It is not a case of under promising or over promising. The winner, like the B-21, will be picked based on the ICE process for all proposals and based on what was floated in the RFI stage of the program proposals will get decrements in their overall assessed cost based on how closely the performance estimates (also independently verified) align with objective performance (up to a point).

 

[NUSNA_Moebius]

........but to my knowledge the capabilities of each of the T-X GBTSs seem to be equal.

It is a sexy airframe though.

Each has it's trade-offs, yes.

I'm already predicting a win for Boeing, since they need the work and the government won't want to possibly lose such a large company in the combat aircraft business.

Though I think I have my heart set on the Leonardo T-100, for how useful it would be in the low-intensity warfare of the modern age. It's got many of the qualities of the A-10 in a faster. smaller package, with dual engine safety, a large wing for plenty of stores and along with it great subsonic maneuvering performance that the other two very likely require afterburner for. Plus it's got a second seat for an observer/mission specialist and the obvious training requirement this whole thing is really about. Being transonic, it's still fast enough to be a patrol fighter.

 

[sferrin]

since they need the work and the government won't want to possibly lose such a large company in the combat aircraft business.

If that were a factor at all there would be a protest (and rightly so).

 

[bring_it_on]

There is incentive for a company to more aggressively pursue its bid in terms of spending a lot of out of pocket IR&D money to increase the likelihood of their success. If Boeing "was" to get this just based on any industrial concerns, they wouldn't have needed to develop an industrial partnership and invest millions in company money to produce not 1 but 2 prototypes and make sure they fly in support of their technical submission.

 

[TomcatViP]

The 346 is only supersonic in a ... Dive. This as stated by the manufacturer.

I like it but my preference goes for the 345 that got all needed for a training syllabus b/w, let's say a Grob and a roadrunner to simulate a 5th high perfi/high alpha airplane. The 346 made its time, didn't meet its public thanks to the end of the cold war and voilà.

To say that the 346 is a mini A10 is not something that I could read static. Same mission profile (at best), less weapon (more time of exposure) and no... armor.

IN your Mini you're gonna die MAXI. Not sure if that makes a good pitch for Aermacchi.

 

[Mach42]

T-X Marketing heats-up on USAF 70th anniversary.

Boeing and Saab jointly announce @AFA's Air, Space & Cyber Conference, that Saab will construct their share of the T-X in the USA.

<a href="https://t.co/6ktdicitf4">Location is TBD</a> US content increase seems to be the upside with risk (in building and starting new manufacturing) increasing being the downside.

On the T-50A side, it flew @Andrews Air Show https://www.facebook.com/lockheedmartin/videos/10156453488483538/
and is pushing 'Mission X', basically a showcase of the T-50A's GBTS https://twitter.com/LockheedMartin/status/909809361593217029
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1GsXGNrSB4
The message continues to be Low Cost, Low Risk, Fast.

On a lighter note, the so-called 'Stavatti Aerospace' has pegged the First Flight of its Javelin for 2019. https://twitter.com/StavattiAero
Has an F125 and AL-322 powered variant. I wonder what Honeywell and Progress think about this guy with basically an excel spreadsheet design asking for engines.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Stavatti, huh? Ya don't say.

 

[GTX]

This has probably been answered already (sorry 51 pages of thread discussion is a looooonnnnngggg set to go through) but what is the expected decision date for the T-X program?

 

[Mike Pryce]

Stavatti. Here he is: https://twitter.com/StavattiAero/status/876946949181775872

I always wondered what happened to System Of A Down. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSvFpBOe8eY

 

[Mach42]

This has probably been answered already (sorry 51 pages of thread discussion is a looooonnnnngggg set to go through) but what is the expected decision date for the T-X program?

By the end of December 2017.

 

[GTX]

Thank you

 

[FighterJock]

Saab has offered the production of it's T-X design to be based in the U.S.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/saab-offers-us-based-production-capability-for-t-x-trainer-aircraft-300521140.html

 

[flateric]

Meantime, at #SETP conference...
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10155008198430658&id=358436530657

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Finally!

 

[litzj]

thx to share these photos

Northrop truely knows how to design handsome aircraft

 

[litzj]

what is recent atmosphere of t-x? saab-boeing looks aggresive

 

[fightingirish]

Here first pictures of Sierra Nevada Corp's "Freedom Aircraft" prototype/mock-up, now promoted for pilot training (T-X) and light attack (A-X) competition.

Link: https://twitter.com/JamesDrewNews/status/911268704813494272

 

[kcran567]

Wow! thanks for posting the Northrop-Grumman-Scaled TX pictures Flateric. It looks great, is it still flying? Those are the old test flight pictures.
I hope they produce it still, maybe for some other contract?

 

[Triton]

Here first pictures of Sierra Nevada Corp's "Freedom Aircraft" prototype/mock-up, now promoted for pilot training (T-X) and light attack (A-X) competition.

Link: https://twitter.com/JamesDrewNews/status/911268704813494272

 

[Mach42]

Here first pictures of Sierra Nevada Corp's "Freedom Aircraft" prototype/mock-up, now promoted for pilot training (T-X) and light attack (A-X) competition.

Link: https://twitter.com/JamesDrewNews/status/911268704813494272

Anyone with more expertise want to chime in on whether it's a Mock-up vs Genuine Article?