Page 19 of 19

Re: T-X Thread

Unread postPosted: 05 Jul 2019, 14:31
by mixelflick
Scorpion1alpha wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:Suspect the Boeing cross-sell team is in market overdrive. USAF is starting to look at what the T-X can do beyond training.

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-sho ... -aircraft/


I don’t doubt that Boeing is pushing for the T-X to fill the lower density light attack jet and the aggressor role (in particular). For the AF, it was always in the cards. Just nobody mentioning it out loud.

Although any of the competing T-X designs could / would have fill these roles with little to no problem, I feel the Boeing / Saab design is the best out of the submitted designs to fulfill these additional roles (three particular design features), if the decision will be made, which there seems to be little doubt it will be.

I feel if Boeing and Saab keeps their design KISS, advanced where it needs to be and simple where it can be (to reduce complexity, cost and weight), it will be successful in these additional roles.


Makes a lot of sense in both roles, especially given the "do more with less" reality. If memory serves, it has a sprightly thrust to weight ratio, and while not perfect in either role having 350 on hand would be an important force multiplier. Particularly in the red air role, WVR. Maybe even BVR if its sensors and small RCS are anything to write home about. Cost per flight hour is the biggie, they're going to be using this for a lot more than training aircrews..

Re: T-X Thread

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2019, 00:36
by jetblast16
The Air Force’s all-new advanced trainer aircraft, the T-X, has officially been named the T-7A Red Hawk.
...
“The name Red Hawk honors the legacy of Tuskegee Airmen and pays homage to their signature red-tailed aircraft from World War II,” Donovan said. “The name is also a tribute to the Curtiss P-40 Warhawk, an American fighter aircraft that first flew in 1938 and was flown by the 99th Fighter Squadron, the U.S. Army Air Forces’ first African American fighter squadron.”

Source: https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display ... -red-hawk/

Re: T-X Thread

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2019, 13:49
by jetblast16

Re: T-X Thread

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2019, 13:51
by jetblast16
You know, I had a thought, probably a dumb one, but ... why build a new trainer? Why not overhaul some older Block 50/52 F-16Ds that have been replaced by F-35As? I mean, the performance would certainly be there :D

Re: T-X Thread

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2019, 16:10
by sprstdlyscottsmn
cost of operation?

Re: T-X Thread

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2019, 16:51
by rheonomic
F-16Ds also wouldn't meet many of the requirements the AF wanted for T-X.

Performance is not one of the primary requirements for a trainer.

Re: T-X Thread

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2019, 03:48
by madrat
There is no 'subspecies' of hawk that Red Hawk refers to, it simply implies a hawk in its first year.

I see no reason to tie it with the Tuskegee airmen and all that divisive political discussion.

Re: T-X Thread

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2019, 16:10
by mixelflick
madrat wrote:There is no 'subspecies' of hawk that Red Hawk refers to, it simply implies a hawk in its first year.

I see no reason to tie it with the Tuskegee airmen and all that divisive political discussion.


I agree 100%

Simply a PR move by USAF to keep the lib reps/senators happy. The Tuskegee airmen have been plenty celebrated over the years, everyone knows their story. This is pure PC nonsense, and that was then. The USAF has been an integrated force now for a LONG time. It's time to let go of the past, and look more toward the future.