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

I hope this program is not going to turn out to be shades of the NGT.
 
TomcatViP said:
great!

If I may, flattened nose reduces also trim drag at transonic speeds.
Click to expand...

Yep. it could, however, increase of minimum drag can also be possible. Indeed, it is not easy to evaluate drag easily
 
I wonder what a prospective single seater will look like. Cockpit towards the back would increase room in the nose for avionics, maybe even an internal gun B) Then it really would be a baby-Hornet.
 
From this article
The sortie included a thorough mission brief, flight, and debrief in the T-X trainer, as well as time in the T-X simulator, which will provide student pilots with the skills needed to transition to 4th and 5th generation fighter, bomber, and other future Mach-21 aircraft.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming Mach-21 is the road map for the 21st century, not a Mach 21 aircraft. Someone would have heard or seen that! It's just written poorly to make it sound like we're developing a whole bunch of Mach-21 aircraft. Of course, there is the new reusable launch vehicle from Boeing. ;)
 
Yeah, definitely an odd usage. Air Education and Training Command uses it a lot in the context of "MACH 21 airmen," to denote their 21st Century training approach. Never seen it applied to aircraft, though.

https://www.aetc.af.mil/News/Article/1437119/aetc-releases-2018-strategic-plan/
 
Halving just upgraded their Hawks, the RAAF won’t be in the market for another 10yrs.
 
GTX said:
Halving just upgraded their Hawks, the RAAF won’t be in the market for another 10yrs.
Click to expand...

Which is just about the point that T-X might be available for export. It isn't even slated for USAF IOC until 2024.
 
AvWeek article on the ways Boeing says it was able to drop T-X costs so low. Highlights include massively reduced man-hours, trim code, and effective use of in-house suppliers.
 
I hope they haven't cut too many corners, though at least they seem to have cut down on the outsourcing a bit.
 
Interesting. I wonder if the economics of using external sources have run their finacial and political utility?
 
With the chaos Boeing in general is going through at the moment, SAAB may have to ride herd on it's partner to make sure both quality control and schedules are kept up.
 
The T-X will largely be an aluminum airplane, Torgerson told Air Force Magazine, and the only composite structure on the jet will be the nose. A metal airplane is easier to manufacture and easier to repair, he said, and the use of lighter-weight materials wasn’t a requirement as “we didn’t have to squeeze every speck of performance” out of the design, given that it’s not intended to be a front-line combat airplane. Even so, the T-X is described as having the ability to pull more than 8Gs.
Click to expand...
Interesting
 
I noted that as well - the Yak-130 (as opposed to the M346 and the Yak-130D demonstrator) followed as similar philosophy.
 
Video posted by Boeing on YouTube on July 1, 2019, with the commencement of the T-X Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase of flight test.

YouTube - Boeing: Boeing T-X Begins EMD Flight Tests
 
So does this become the T-7 or the T-54 in the US military aircraft designation series?
 
litzj said:
Goshawk in Navy and Redhawk in Airforce.

Is there any possibility that Navy would show interest about the Redhawk?
Click to expand...

Possibility, certainly. Cost of adapting it for carrier is a big unknown though. Might be an Agressor candidate first, which would not require carrier modifications.

www.defensenews.com

The Air Force’s new trainer jet is attracting the Navy’s and Marine Corps’ interests

As a number of armed services eye the T-X trainer program, one might wonder if the jet will be able to take off from and land on an aircraft carrier in the future.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com
 
Boeing (McD) already has experience in converting a trainer for carrier ops, they should be quite capable of doing the same to the T-7A. What I'm more interested in seeing is if Boeing comes out with a single seat light fighter/attack version ala Hawk 200/F-5. There's plenty of F-5s, Mig-21, and early model F-16s out there needing replacing.
 
Desertfox said:
Boeing (McD) already has experience in converting a trainer for carrier ops, they should be quite capable of doing the same to the T-7A. What I'm more interested in seeing is if Boeing comes out with a single seat light fighter/attack version ala Hawk 200/F-5. There's plenty of F-5s, Mig-21, and early model F-16s out there needing replacing.
Click to expand...

That was 30 years ago, and the process wasn't exactly painless.

Boeing is certainly thinking about light attack, but I suspect they will be reluctant to throw money at it until the T-7 is well along. Maybe if there is a serious USAF light fighter program, but the USAF isn't going to have the money either, thanks to B-21, F-35, and NGAD (plus hypersonics, GBSD, etc.)
 
Desertfox said:
Boeing (McD) already has experience in converting a trainer for carrier ops, they should be quite capable of doing the same to the T-7A. What I'm more interested in seeing is if Boeing comes out with a single seat light fighter/attack version ala Hawk 200/F-5. There's plenty of F-5s, Mig-21, and early model F-16s out there needing replacing.
Click to expand...

While a light fighter version (similar to the rival FA-50) is possible (even likely) I think the potential market size can be exaggerated.
We’ve not exactly seen a lot of FA-50s sold and my understanding is that the light fighter version of the Aermachi M-346 is on the back burner.
And there really aren’t that many F-5 or MIG-21 operators out there anymore and many of those that are (China and export customers for Chinese MIG-21 variants, Iran etc.) don’t appear likely future users.
The F-16 successes has largely killed the Western lightweight fighter with even the Gripen moving away from its lightweight roots to becoming a bigger heavier aircraft (Gripen E).
A fighter version of a lllo “Redhawk” should be more successful than someof these predecessors l
 
The Navy was involved in some of the preliminary work that went into setting T-X requirements, and is certainly paying attention to how things are going. I wouldn't expect a program of record right soon, but I'm kinda hoping the team puts out a concept image or two of a navalized T-7 just to get the juices flowing.
 
TomS said:
Desertfox said:
Boeing (McD) already has experience in converting a trainer for carrier ops, they should be quite capable of doing the same to the T-7A. What I'm more interested in seeing is if Boeing comes out with a single seat light fighter/attack version ala Hawk 200/F-5. There's plenty of F-5s, Mig-21, and early model F-16s out there needing replacing.
Click to expand...

That was 30 years ago, and the process wasn't exactly painless.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. Unless Navy requirements were factored in from the beginning, fuggedaboutit. That's not to say i wouldn't want to see a Navy RedHawk, it's just that history shows 'marinization' of an aircraft is hard under the best of circumstances.
 
A clearer view to AIDC AT-5.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    604.4 KB · Views: 311

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom