Boeing rolls out T-X trainer prototype

aviation analysis wing ^ | September 13, 2016

[sukhoi-30mki]

Boeing unveiled the first prototype of its trainer aircraft for U.S. Air Force T-X advanced pilot trainer program co-developed with the Saab.

The aircraft was rolled out from Boeing's facility in St.Louis, Missouri were the F/A-18 and F-15 fighters are assembled.

The clean sheet design will be offered to replace the 55 year old Northrop Grumman T-38 fleet operated by USAF for pilot training.

The aircraft features anhedral wings and tail fin with side mounted engine air intakes. What makes the Boeing's T-X design unique from the other three competitors is the twin canted tail plane.

Other competitors in the program include the Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and Lockheed Martin.

Northrop and Boeing are offering clean sheet designs while the other two are pitting pre-existing designs. Northrop's design was revealed during high speed taxi trials in Mojave in August, who have partnered with BAE Systems and L-3 for the bid.

Lockheed Martin is offering a modified version of the T-50 fighter co-developed with South Korean KAI, while Raytheon partnering Honeywell and CAE is offering the Italian Leonardo M-346 trainer as the T-100.

Final assembly of theses T-X trainers will be shifted to U.S. from South Korea and Italy respectively if Lockheed/Raytheon's bid wins.

Around 500 Talons are to replaced with the new T-X trainers, which will train USAF's fifth generation fighter pilots.

Except the T-100, all the other three T-X trainers are powered by a single GE F404 after-burning turbofan engine with around 80 kN thrust.

[Steely Tom]

80kN = ~18000 lbs.

[RayChuang88]

But I'll still give the contract to Lockheed. Mostly because Lockheed already worked to build a trainer that meets this very need with Korean Aerospace Industries (KAI) T-50 Golden Eagle trainer--and Lockheed has plentiful production floor space needed to build this trainer at their Marietta, GA assembly line.

[pfflier]

First take - It looks to "foreign" in design. I know, I know, the T-45 is a British design.

NGs T-X looks more "traditional".

[pfflier]

Forgot to mention Lockheed's entry. Looks a lot like an F-16. It looks "too traditional", like an imitation.

All in all though, if it lookas and more importantly, acts like an F-16 it will be sweet to fly. Just what you want in a trainer.

[Steely Tom]

That's 18,000 lbs with afterburner.

The F404's thrust specs are almost exactly the same as the venerable J-79 of fifty years ago; about 11,000 lbs dry, 18,000 lbs with afterburner.

The F404 has just a little bit better fuel consumption than did the J-79, 0.81 lb/lb-hr vs 0.85 for the J-79 (dry).

Big difference seems to be in weight and size.

F404 is about four feet shorter than the J-79, and is about half the weight.

[amorphous]

Looks like they’re pushing the envelope with that eensey weensey nose wheel! Short coupled too, with close proximity to the CG maybe.

[JimRed]

A nice toy for the wealthy; like a high end sports car is for drivers.

[PAR35]

Makes you wonder what else Boeing screwed up with the plane if they can’t even get the press release right.

“The aircraft was rolled out from Boeing’s facility in St.Louis, Missouri were the F/A-18 and F-15 fighters are assembled.”

Someone should have yelled, “Where the ‘h’ is the ‘h’? in ‘where’”

Checked the site - they still haven’t fixed it.

[Secret Agent Man]

Pics?

[Yo-Yo]

Someone should have yelled, “Where the ‘h’ is the ‘h’? in ‘where’”

Checked the site - they still haven’t fixed it.

The word wasn't highlighted with a red squiggly underline, so it's fine.

[Yo-Yo]

Pics are in the post on my computer.

[Secret Agent Man]

I dont see pics for the lockheed f16 lookalike.

[BatGuano]

This error is the result of people relying on spell check.
No actual, eyeball, editing might be cheaper but embarrassing mistakes will happen.

[BatGuano]

I would have loved to fly this new trainer. I didn't even get to fly the T-38 Talon. Was stuck in the T-37 and T-33 for my training. The “T-bird engine produced 3,500 lbs of thrust for a 15,100 Gross Weight airplane. Nothing like this new bird.

[Yo-Yo]

Oops, I misread your post.

Lockheed T-50 and F-16:

[liberty_lvr]

Makes you wonder what else Boeing screwed up with the plane if they can’t even get the press release right.

Except that particular line is not in the official Boeing press release -at all. It is direct copy from the host site this posting links back to.

But go ahead and trash Boeing anyway since you obviously have some axe to grind.

[Steely Tom]

Maybe I’m seeing things, but that airplane looks like it could become an actual fighter plane with the addition of weapons.

I’m referring specifically to the full-area control surfaces on the tail. These make it suitable for supersonic flight, correct?

[NorthMountain]

It's supposed to replace the T-38 Talon, which is supersonic ... that's the whole point. It's a supersonic trainer for pilots who will transition to supersonic fighters.

[pfflier]

Lockheed T-50 Data:

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/aero/documents/t-50/t50_product_card_dom_a11-34324d001.pdf

Northrop Grumman T-X Data:

http://www.combataircraft.net/2016/08/19/northrop-grummans-t-x-breaks-cover/

Boeing Data in thread and here:

http://www.aviationanalysis.net/2016/09/boeing-rolls-out-t-x-trainer-prototype.html