T-X Thread

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1148
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post03 Oct 2018, 13:22

Fulcrum? Not even remotely similar in its detail.


The nose and especially the actual shape and proportions of the LERX, the Hornet's are longer.
Offline

strykerxo

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 432
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 04:40

Unread post04 Oct 2018, 23:08

What is the possibility that the AF ends up with the T-X as a F-16 replacement for the Thunderbird's. Considering the cost of F-22/35, the T-X would have the performance at substantially less costs. The SH is slated for the Navy Blue Angels at a considerable cost, but not much more performance.
You can't shot what you can't see - Unknown
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3185
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post05 Oct 2018, 15:57

strykerxo wrote:What is the possibility that the AF ends up with the T-X as a F-16 replacement for the Thunderbird's. Considering the cost of F-22/35, the T-X would have the performance at substantially less costs. The SH is slated for the Navy Blue Angels at a considerable cost, but not much more performance.


Certainly possible. A lot more possible if another energy crunch hits, in the same way the team switched from F-4's to T-38's in the 1970's. As a young boy, I saw the T-38 team and was really impressed. They were fast, maneuverable and inspired awe.
I'm betting I would have LOVED the F-4 team a lot better though.

The Thunderbirds really need a new bird to fly. I've seen so many demo's with F-16's, I actually start leaving the show early to beat the traffic. If they were flying F-35's, you can bet I'd be there studying every move. Hopefully, they can bring the cost per flight hour down. God knows it'd be an incredible aircraft to showcase American air power. The post stall stuff alone would be worth it..
Offline

strykerxo

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 432
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 04:40

Unread post17 Oct 2018, 17:15

mixelflick wrote:
strykerxo wrote:What is the possibility that the AF ends up with the T-X as a F-16 replacement for the Thunderbird's. Considering the cost of F-22/35, the T-X would have the performance at substantially less costs. The SH is slated for the Navy Blue Angels at a considerable cost, but not much more performance.


Certainly possible. A lot more possible if another energy crunch hits, in the same way the team switched from F-4's to T-38's in the 1970's. As a young boy, I saw the T-38 team and was really impressed. They were fast, maneuverable and inspired awe.
I'm betting I would have LOVED the F-4 team a lot better though.

The Thunderbirds really need a new bird to fly. I've seen so many demo's with F-16's, I actually start leaving the show early to beat the traffic. If they were flying F-35's, you can bet I'd be there studying every move. Hopefully, they can bring the cost per flight hour down. God knows it'd be an incredible aircraft to showcase American air power. The post stall stuff alone would be worth it..


I wouldn't doubt the T-X will have F-18/35 type performance, The Blue Angels F-18 already has post stall capability, but is not showcased in their routine. The Fry's Patriots team has a segment that 2 or 4 jets pull into the vertical climb a couples thousand feet and preform a simultaneous stall and recovery.
You can't shot what you can't see - Unknown
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4183
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post17 Oct 2018, 17:19

strykerxo wrote: The Fry's Patriots team has a segment that 2 or 4 jets pull into the vertical climb a couples thousand feet and preform a simultaneous stall and recovery.

The back to back tailslides?
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

strykerxo

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 432
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 04:40

Unread post18 Oct 2018, 17:08

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
strykerxo wrote: The Fry's Patriots team has a segment that 2 or 4 jets pull into the vertical climb a couples thousand feet and preform a simultaneous stall and recovery.

The back to back tailslides?


Right, if a 40 year old plane can do that what can a modern 5th? gen. trainer do. twin tails, chines, FCS, engines controls etc. If a legacy F-18 can do these kinds of maneuvers, the T-X at least can replicate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf5A13atLHQ
You can't shot what you can't see - Unknown
Offline
User avatar

KamenRiderBlade

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2632
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
  • Location: USA

Unread post20 Oct 2018, 16:56

I'm sure Boeing would be chomping at the bits to get the Blue-Angels / Thunderbirds to choose the T-X as their demonstrator plane.
Offline

strykerxo

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 432
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 04:40

Unread post22 Oct 2018, 23:07

KamenRiderBlade wrote:I'm sure Boeing would be chomping at the bits to get the Blue-Angels / Thunderbirds to choose the T-X as their demonstrator plane.


I think the T-X will be nimble and quick enough to be a nice Demo AC for the services, as well as overall cost and maintenance value. The Blues have already selected the Super as its next demo plane, but I believe it is a high value AC and could be better off being used operationally. Navy, lets hear a big hell no to using an AF AC!!!! I wonder if the services used service specific F-4 as their demo AC?
You can't shot what you can't see - Unknown
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5389
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post23 Oct 2018, 06:42

The Boeing T-X is not a Naval Type. So, forget the USN/USMC.... 8)
Offline

strykerxo

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 432
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 04:40

Unread post23 Oct 2018, 17:13

Corsair1963 wrote:The Boeing T-X is not a Naval Type. So, forget the USN/USMC.... 8)


Yeah, The F-4 demo were service specific. Thunderbird's F-4E USAF, Blue Angels F-4J USN
I would imagine the Navy/Marines are going to need a modern trainer beyond the capabilities of the Hawk and maybe an aggressor squadron.
You can't shot what you can't see - Unknown
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5389
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post24 Oct 2018, 01:27

strykerxo wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:The Boeing T-X is not a Naval Type. So, forget the USN/USMC.... 8)


Yeah, The F-4 demo were service specific. Thunderbird's F-4E USAF, Blue Angels F-4J USN
I would imagine the Navy/Marines are going to need a modern trainer beyond the capabilities of the Hawk and maybe an aggressor squadron.


Point is the USN isn't going to operate a non-Naval Type with the Blue Angels.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post24 Oct 2018, 02:00

Didn't know the Goshawks are originally "naval" types...that's a first.
Offline
User avatar

KamenRiderBlade

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2632
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
  • Location: USA

Unread post26 Oct 2018, 16:34

With all the retiring F-18's / F-16's are there not enough spare parts to keep the "Blue Angels" / "Thunder Birds" going?
Offline

strykerxo

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 432
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 04:40

Unread post12 Nov 2018, 21:17

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/201 ... apitalism/

of interest: export sales, aggressor trainer and a naval version
You can't shot what you can't see - Unknown
Offline
User avatar

KamenRiderBlade

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2632
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
  • Location: USA

Unread post20 Jan 2019, 10:55

My only issue with the design is the "Side Opening" canopy.

Other than that, I'm really likeing the Boeing / Saab T-X winner.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: loke and 13 guests