Boeing unveils its T-38 replacement

[sqwatch]

If anyone needs to be thrown a bone it's Boeing.

And BQzip's mom


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tk1313]

8 hours ago, Dynamite said:

I'm sure Boeing will have something to say if the contract goes to some other company.

That's not how it's supposed to work, though. You don't just get to put out something weaker than the competition, then cry about not getting selected and say "But it's my turn now!"...

And I honestly don't understand why more companies didn't bid for the contract... As an aerospace engineer, it seems there are a lot worse things to be working on than a supersonic trainer for future fighter pilots.

[HerkPerfMan]

2 hours ago, tk1313 said:

As an aerospace engineer, it seems there are a lot worse things to be working on than a supersonic trainer for future fighter pilots.

Working on a new-design supersonic jet? Hell yes. That's a very rare occurrence these days. But the engineers don't make the decisions anymore.

[tk1313]

17 minutes ago, HerkPerfMan said:

Working on a new-design supersonic jet? Hell yes. That's a very rare occurrence these days. But the engineers don't make the decisions anymore.

I got lucky. But I work with people who are like "eh... I could see how people think fighter jets are cool... I just want a paycheck." It goes against every instinct I have to NOT apply knuckle to cranium.

[Marco]

21 hours ago, Majestik Møøse said:

"It's not T-38-y enough!" Why don't we just build some new T-38s and get it over with. Bigger wings, bigger tires, more efficient motors; whatever it takes to keep Stanley Student from killing himself. No datalinks or any of that bullshit. Then send the old ones to CAF/MAF bases for CPT programs since they're cheaper and harder to fly than every other Air Force jet. Fuel budget down, morale up, and NG gets thrown a bone.

They did. It's called the CF-5D, license built by Canadair back in the day.  Bigger wing, leading edge flaps, -15 engines (J85-13 core with a smattering of -21 internal components), beefier landing gear, bigger wheels and tires.  Even modded them with CF-18 HUD and HOTAS.  Canadians used them as LIFT aircraft for a number of years before retiring them.  They even SLEP'd their birds before putting them in storage.  Great jets.

[HuggyU2]

Marco, 

I had a chance to go to Botswana 3 years ago and do some teaching in those CF-5's.  I was sure tempted.  But my looming retirement, and the complications of teaching foreign military while still on active duty was just more than I was willing to tackle.  

You're right though.  The Canadians did a nice job on them.  

[Marco]

4 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

Marco, 

I had a chance to go to Botswana 3 years ago and do some teaching in those CF-5's.  I was sure tempted.  But my looming retirement, and the complications of teaching foreign military while still on active duty was just more than I was willing to tackle.  

You're right though.  The Canadians did a nice job on them.  

Huggy,

As we have discussed before, probably a wise choice.  I love these little hot rods.  I've been involved with them in some fashion or the other since 2008.  Right now, mine are torn apart (just wrapped up a year's worth of client projects, so we're diving back into our jets now).  I've got new MB ejection seats coming, and just spec'd out the components for a glass cockpit upgrade that we'll install this summer concurrently when we do the seats.  I'm looking forward to having some fun this year. :)

[AZwildcat]

Try doing this in a T-38  

 

[BashiChuni]

4 hours ago, AZwildcat said:

Try doing this in a T-38  

 

ill bite...take off and do an aileron roll? color me unimpressed.

[HU&W]

13 hours ago, AZwildcat said:

Try doing this in a T-38  

 

I have

[Inertia17]

Pretty sure those are the first two items on a dollar ride in the T-38.

[Hacker]

22 hours ago, AZwildcat said:

Try doing this in a T-38 

Yes, T-38 students do both things successfully daily, and have for the last 50 years.

[Kenny Powers]

I assume AZ was being sarcastic...

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[AZwildcat]

4 hours ago, Kenny Powers said:

I assume AZ was being sarcastic...

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 

Pretty much...Takeoff!  Aileron roll!  F**k yeah!    But...I will say it looks like a better thrust to weight if it can climb like that after takeoff.

[GKinnear]

looks like a better thrust to weight if it can climb like that after takeoff.

What was it's t/o weight? Even a C-17 can climb when it's empty/light. Just saying...

Sent from my SM-N920T using Baseops Network Forums mobile app

[AZwildcat]

17 hours ago, GKinnear said:

 

What was it's t/o weight? Even a C-17 can climb when it's empty/light. Just saying...

Sent from my SM-N920T using Baseops Network Forums mobile app
 

 

Good question, plus I don't know if that video was initial T/O or a touch and go or what the weight was.  By comparison, a T-38C with the PMP mod only puts out about 6.6K lbs of thrust in full AB at sea level.  (A model is slightly less, about 5.8K lbs).  If you've ever tried to do a respectable AB climb in the 38 it takes a long ass time to accelerate, even light weight.  Anyway, I'm assuming the T-X is going to have a better thrust to weight, which will be nice.  It sure as sh*t won't be worse.  T-38 is about .65, and by comparison, the interwebs says the T-50 is .95.