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

[TomS]

I'd say mockup. No sign of air data sensors, which you'd expect somewhere around the pointy end of a flyable plane.

 

[AeroFranz]

No sign of fasteners anywhere, antennas, hatches, or anything else required on a real airplane.

 

[FighterJock]

Definitely a mock-up, without a doubt. You don't need to have a second glance at the photo to know.

 

[kcran567]

Interesting! looks like a more "swept" winged version of the Scorpion? Will be a competitor to the Scorpion, and a TX contender? Lets see the rear 1/2 and planform.

 

[Airplane]

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

Is it common these days to flight test aircraft without landing gear doors?

 

[TomS]

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

Is it common these days to flight test aircraft without landing gear doors?

Looks like Scorpion did it too. I guess if you don't plan to raise the landing gear, it's one drag item you can take off.

 

[litzj]

maiden flight do not retract gear

so it is not needed

 

[litzj]

selction of t-x is delayed, but usaf did not present specific reason.

is there any one who can speculate this reason?

 

[Moose]

selction of t-x is delayed, but usaf did not present specific reason.

is there any one who can speculate this reason?

Budget. Until there's an appropriations bill the Defense Department is locked into the current Continuing Resolution rules which bar it from the sort of spending which awarding a contract like T-X requires. The current CR expires on December 8th, and prospects for a new appropriations bill before then look grim. That being the case, they delayed T-X until later in hopes there is actually money then.

 

[ScrutorAudax]

Some interesting flow devices are present on the Boeing T-X,
similar to the strakes on some F-16XL wind tunnel models.

 

[LowObservable]

What really puzzles me is those thingamajigs on the outer leading edges. They are in the same position in every picture and there's no visible airflow gap, but there certainly seems to be a step between them and the upper wing skin.

I think Saab put them there so the little beast would never go supersonic, ensuring that it could not threaten Gripen sales...

 

[totoro]

With Saab being the junior partner there, I'd say if Boeing wants to have a supersonic capable plane - it will have one in their T-X design. (whether the design is indeed meaningfully supersonic capable is a different matter)

And with Gripen E/F moving into higher weight and cost class - having a very low cost combat plane option would likely not impact their sales negatively. For every gripen sale they might lose explicitly due to T-X, they might gain xx more sales of T-X, even if they earn just a smaller part of overall pricetag.

 

[ScrutorAudax]

What really puzzles me is those thingamajigs on the outer leading edges. They are in the same position in every picture and there's no visible airflow gap, but there certainly seems to be a step between them and the upper wing skin.

What features do you mean? The actuator fairings? The dog-tooth?

 

[ScrutorAudax]

I found this on GrabCAD. Not mine, but decent.

 

[Tailspin Turtle]

What really puzzles me is those thingamajigs on the outer leading edges. They are in the same position in every picture and there's no visible airflow gap, but there certainly seems to be a step between them and the upper wing skin.

I think Saab put them there so the little beast would never go supersonic, ensuring that it could not threaten Gripen sales...

My guess is that they are leading edge flaps that can be angled up for a particular flight regime. The F8U leading edge flaps had a cruise setting in between high-speed (up) and approach (fully down) that provided much of the benefit of a fixed cambered leading-edge wing without the penalties.

 

[Mike Pryce]

What really puzzles me is those thingamajigs on the outer leading edges. They are in the same position in every picture and there's no visible airflow gap, but there certainly seems to be a step between them and the upper wing skin.

I think Saab put them there so the little beast would never go supersonic, ensuring that it could not threaten Gripen sales...

Boeing have form with dressing LEs differently.

 

[marauder2048]

Boeing have form with dressing LEs differently.

Like this particularly grotesque costume not seen since the EMD Halloween party.

 

[TomS]

My guess is that they are leading edge flaps that can be angled up for a particular flight regime. The F8U leading edge flaps had a cruise setting in between high-speed (up) and approach (fully down) that provided much of the benefit of a fixed cambered leading-edge wing without the penalties.

I agree. In some of the in-flight photos, there seems to be a shadow at the trailing edge of this structure, suggesting that it can be articulated slightly to change the effective wing shape.

 

[red admiral]

Difficult to see how they would be articulated even if they are. Looks more like a fixed slat/slot which'll keep the flow attached over the wing for lower induced drag. Dogtooth and inboard fence give small, controllable vortices that increase lift and potentially increase fin effectiveness at higher AoA. Might be a notch hear the tip that'll create another vortex and stop any inboard movement of the tip vortex.

Easy when you don't have to be LO...

Biggest impact might be on meeting that high speed sustained turn rate requirement through increased lift and lowered induced drag. Won't help zero lift drag, but no supersonic requirement anyway. Can't see much impact on production or maintenance costs.

 

[AeroFranz]

I found this on GrabCAD. Not mine, but decent.

Nice find. Worthwhile download

 

[flateric]

...

 

[hesham]

Tell me what is the different ?;

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3229.msg317468.html#msg317468

http://aviationweek.com/defense/why-boeing-hasn-t-been-flying-its-two-t-x-trainers

 

[djfawcett]

About $10 million per copy

 

[hesham]

Hi,

I heard that,there is a competitor called Model-400,what is this ?.

 

[Arjen]

Northrop-Grumman Model 400.

 

[TomS]

Mentioned dozens of times in this very thread.

 

[flateric]

NG T-X horizontals

 

[NeilChapman]

You guys find awesome pictures.

 

[kcran567]

A few Saab TX Vs. Lockheed T-50

 

[kcran567]

F-20 Tigershark Vs. Tx (Saab)
Some comparisons?

F-20
F404 GE-100 17,000lbs thrust
Maximum Speed Mach 2 class
Sea level rate-of-climb 52,800 feet/minute
Combat ceiling 54,700 feet
Takeoff distance 1,600 feet
Takeoff Distance 4,200 feet
Scramble order to brake release 52 seconds
Scramble order to 29,000 feet 2.5 minutes
Time to 40,000 feet from brake release 2.3 minutes
Acceleration Time 0.3M to 0.9M, at 10,000 feet 28 seconds
Sustained Turn Rate 0.8M at 15,000 feet 11.1 degrees/second
Maximum Load Factor 9g
Length 46 ft 6 in
Height 13 ft 10 in
Wing Span 26 ft 8 in
Internal Fuel 5,050 lbs
External Fuel 6,435 lbs
Takeoff Weight clean 18,005 lbs
Combat Thrust/Weight ratio 1.1
Combat Weight 50% fuel, 2 AIM-9 missiles 15,820 lbs
Maximum Weight 27,500 lbs

Saab T-x
installed power: 1x GE F404 17,200lbs thrust and afterburner
Standard day performance: 808 mph
range: 994NM
33,500 ft/min climb
EMPTY WEIGHT: 7165 lbs
MAX Take-off wgt: 12125 lbs
length: 46.42 ft
Width: 32.81 ft

My Observation: roughly similar weights? T-x a bit lighter.
Why the big performance difference?
Is the Saab T-x "Draggier" with less fineness ratio than the F-20?

 

[Sundog]

F-20 Tigershark Vs. Tx (Saab)
Some comparisons?

F-20
F404 GE-100 17,000lbs thrust
Maximum Speed Mach 2 class
Sea level rate-of-climb 52,800 feet/minute
Combat ceiling 54,700 feet
Takeoff distance 1,600 feet
Takeoff Distance 4,200 feet
Scramble order to brake release 52 seconds
Scramble order to 29,000 feet 2.5 minutes
Time to 40,000 feet from brake release 2.3 minutes
Acceleration Time 0.3M to 0.9M, at 10,000 feet 28 seconds
Sustained Turn Rate 0.8M at 15,000 feet 11.1 degrees/second
Maximum Load Factor 9g
Length 46 ft 6 in
Height 13 ft 10 in
Wing Span 26 ft 8 in
Internal Fuel 5,050 lbs
External Fuel 6,435 lbs
Takeoff Weight clean 18,005 lbs
Combat Thrust/Weight ratio 1.1
Combat Weight 50% fuel, 2 AIM-9 missiles 15,820 lbs
Maximum Weight 27,500 lbs

Saab T-x
installed power: 1x GE F404 17,200lbs thrust and afterburner
Standard day performance: 808 mph
range: 994NM
33,500 ft/min climb
EMPTY WEIGHT: 7165 lbs
MAX Take-off wgt: 12125 lbs
length: 46.42 ft
Width: 32.81 ft

My Observation: roughly similar weights? T-x a bit lighter.
Why the big performance difference?
Is the Saab T-x "Draggier" with less fineness ratio than the F-20?

Mach 2 performance wasn't part of the requirement. As such, a higher aspect ratio wing makes more sense for efficient subsonic cruise, since that is where the aircraft will spend the majority of it's time.

 

[Moose]

The KAI/Lockheed bid is likely to come under additional scrutiny now. Hopefully the whole program doesn't get derailed.

 

[LowObservable]

Kcran - where did those weights come from? I find it hard to believe that OEW is a tonne less than a Hawk.

The THINGS on the outer LEs still look horrible.

 

[sferrin]

The KAI/Lockheed bid is likely to come under additional scrutiny now. Hopefully the whole program doesn't get derailed.

He should just tell them it was for a speech he gave at a luncheon. I thought that was SOP in Washington?

 

[litzj]

F-20 Tigershark Vs. Tx (Saab)
Some comparisons?

F-20
F404 GE-100 17,000lbs thrust
Maximum Speed Mach 2 class
Sea level rate-of-climb 52,800 feet/minute
Combat ceiling 54,700 feet
Takeoff distance 1,600 feet
Takeoff Distance 4,200 feet
Scramble order to brake release 52 seconds
Scramble order to 29,000 feet 2.5 minutes
Time to 40,000 feet from brake release 2.3 minutes
Acceleration Time 0.3M to 0.9M, at 10,000 feet 28 seconds
Sustained Turn Rate 0.8M at 15,000 feet 11.1 degrees/second
Maximum Load Factor 9g
Length 46 ft 6 in
Height 13 ft 10 in
Wing Span 26 ft 8 in
Internal Fuel 5,050 lbs
External Fuel 6,435 lbs
Takeoff Weight clean 18,005 lbs
Combat Thrust/Weight ratio 1.1
Combat Weight 50% fuel, 2 AIM-9 missiles 15,820 lbs
Maximum Weight 27,500 lbs

Saab T-x
installed power: 1x GE F404 17,200lbs thrust and afterburner
Standard day performance: 808 mph
range: 994NM
33,500 ft/min climb
EMPTY WEIGHT: 7165 lbs
MAX Take-off wgt: 12125 lbs
length: 46.42 ft
Width: 32.81 ft

My Observation: roughly similar weights? T-x a bit lighter.
Why the big performance difference?
Is the Saab T-x "Draggier" with less fineness ratio than the F-20?

How did you estimate initial climbing rate of Boeing's T-X jet?

If Boeing's one have smaller weight than F-20, T-X's is easy to beat heavier F-20 in climbing rate with same engine.
But if it is not, it means T-X is much much draggier than F-20 because initial climbing rate is proportional to (T-D)/W

Yeah, it look very obvious T-X is draggier than F-20, and it is easy to expect that F-20 has better performance than T-X supersonic condition.
However, without weight information, climbing rate is not easy to predict.

In my opinion, T-X probably has better turn rate, high AoA characteristics, subsonic cruise performance than F-20, and vice versa.

 

[Archibald]

I didn't even realized the T-X was so long in development. I instantly fell in love with Northrop entry. What a cute little jet, shame Northrop retired. Boing and SAAB, how about that. The T-50 is far less a surprise.

 

[GTX]

The KAI/Lockheed bid is likely to come under additional scrutiny now. Hopefully the whole program doesn't get derailed.

Indeed, this was a stupid move by KAI. They were already arguably the front runner in this competition but now if they do win there will always be a shadow cast over the selection.

 

[sferrin]

What is it with Lockheed and bribes?

 

[GTX]

My understanding is that LM was not part of this. It was KAI alone. Would love to have heard the discussion between LM and KAI though when it broke...

 

[sferrin]

My understanding is that LM was not part of this. It was KAI alone. Would love to have heard the discussion between LM and KAI though when it broke...

With hearing protection in place of course.