SlowManT-X is a politically rigged competition similar to Indian MMRCA.
Politics don’t favor the T-50, because both Italy and UK are JSF partners, while the early word has its that Korea rejected the F-35. Secondly, the US prime contractor for the USAF T-50 would be Lockheed Martin, which is hardly loved at the Pentagon.
T-50 has as much US made components as any other localy designed aircraft, badly foreign origin.
T-50 Mark I(55% US content) did. T-50 Mark II(30% US content) isn’t. The Mark II is completely redesigned inside out for combat role, and has the avionics suite replaced by a Korean system. The USAF T-X bid(Essentially an F/A-50 variant) is supposedly based on the Korean avionics system and not the old Lockheed’s system because this Java-based system is much more “modern” than the F-16 based avionics that Lockheed used to supply, potentially raising the source code control issue. Although I am sure KAI will make the source code available to the USAF.
So KAI and Lockheed must sit together and discuss which parts production must be moved to the US in order to raise the US content back to 60%, while keeping the cost still low enough to win the bid.
SlowManMaybe NG will dust off the T-38 design and go F125, fbw, and whatnot. It makes as much sense as T-50.
Northrop joined the BAE Hawk camp.
I don’t get it.. why do USAF have such a different requirements about advanced trainers compaired to all other AF??
Because they are ordering at least 350 units, so they can ask for sky and can get it..
Or is this the good old protectonism, where US want to produce their own shiny toys?
All four T-X candidates are of foreign origin. The USAF specifically banned an all new domestic airframe by Boeing due to cost/timing reasons.
Based on the USAF requirements, M-346 and Hawk are unlikely; not only they need redesigned airframe, they are too small to carry all the electronics gear, chaff/flair dispensers, etc. It is basically a F/A-50 vs Gripen fight now.
SlowManI did some reading on each T-X bidder’s spec and only the T-50 meets the KPP as i t stands. The KPP requires 6.5 G sustained turn, and only the T-50 has this. M-346’s figure is 5.5 G max, and Hawk would be lower than M-346’s figure.
In other word, the M-346 requires an airframe modification while the T-50(The USAF proposed model is actually said to be a customized F/A-50 with an F414 engine) can meet the requirements as is.
Edit : I forgot about the Gripen trainer. The Gripen too would meet this requirement, making this a T-50 vs Gripen showdown.
SlowManT-X KPP document released.
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-releases-draft-t-x-kpps-377693/
USAF releases draft T-X KPPs
The KPPs include a requirement for the prospective aircraft to have an operational availability of no less than 64.7%. It must also be able to sustain 6.5Gs for no less than 15 seconds using no more than 15 degrees nose low attitude at 80% fuel weight between an altitude of 10,000 and 20,000 feet.
Key system attributes (KSA) include the ability to attain a minimum of 7.5G and an onset rate of 3Gs per second. The USAF wants the T-X to be able to attain at least a 12° per second instantaneous turn rate with a sustained turn rate of 9°. It should also be able to conduct angle-of-attack maneuvering at greater than the 20° angle-of-attack. It also needs to have enough fuel for visual range dogfighting and it needs to be able to make dry contacts with an aerial refueling tanker. Other KSAs for the T-X aircraft include having simulated radars, data-links, radar-warning receivers, situational awareness displays and a full glass-cockpit similar to the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor and F-35. The T-X must also have the ability to simulate a wide range of air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons including the AIM-120 and Small Diameter Bomb onboard.
https://www.fbo.gov/utils/view?id=517f912be4db8a348e0e88a4803b5c4f
SlowManbut the price remains high around 32 million euros per plane.
The price probably includes maintenance/logistics support. Afterall, Iraq paid $4.6 billion for 36 F-16 Block 50s before.
I wonder what price the Korean T-50 and were shown a strong competitor for those aircraft L-159 ?
I don’t think T/A-50 competed with L-159; it would be a separate deal.
Iraqi Airforce doesn’t have a lot of aircraft in its inventory and will be buying lots of jets for a while.
SlowManSome times you have to wonder if Taiwan is even interested in self-defense anymore and has simply given up on it and sees the Chinese takeover as an inevitable fate.
Taiwan’s air force was doomed when Taiwanese government decided to stop purchasing new Ching Kuos when F-16 A/Bs became available. Had Taiwan continued to fund the Ching Kuo program and bought 300 units in several blocks, then they would not be in such a dire situation that they are today.
SlowManRussia and India cannot be retaliated against?
They cannot be, because they have no business interests in or economic ties with China.
India is a particularly attractive option since India is the sworn enemy of China.
SlowManRecently we have seen how Japanese didn’t pull a finger to stop the fishing flotilla stunt of mainland but when Taiwanese boats tried to emulate them aproaching to Diaoyu islands there was no shortage of water cannons from Japanese Coast Guard vessels.
Chinese ships didn’t enter Japan’s 12 nm territorial water. Taiwanese ships did.
So what is Taiwan looking at?
F-35B.
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2012/05/08/2003532288
Abandon F-16s, seek F-35s: senior military officials
Senior military officers may be considering abandoning a long-stalled bid to procure F-16C/D aircraft from the US because of rising costs and could instead reserve budgets for an eventual F-35B bid, reports said yesterday.
The Ministry of National Defense maintains that the air force remains committed to acquiring 66 F-16C/Ds, but the rising costs associated with the package — now estimated at US$10 billion, from an initial US$8 billion, according to local reports — added to the about US$3.7 billion it expects to pay for upgrades to the nation’s 145 F-16A/Bs, could be shifting the argument in favor of abandoning the bid for the new aircraft.
If for example the US were to sell Japan and SK the F-35
Japan already bought 42, mostly due to US diplomatic pressures, not because they needed it. Internally JASDF officers are complaining that they should have bought the Super Hornet instead because they could have bought 100 Super Hornet units for the same money.
Korea rejected the F-35 in spite of an intense US pressure to buy them. mostly because of Korea’s ability to resist US pressures when it doesn’t serve their needs.
Taiwan will have to rely on the East Asian security umbrella for air superiority.
There is no East Asian security umbrella. Asian NATO, it if ever comes to exist, will not include Taiwan.
SlowManWell, as SlowMan said, I can hardly see Russia or India.
Only Lockheed, Russia, and India are immune from the Chinese retaliation.
Waht about some Indianized Rafale in 10 years ? :diablo:
France would oppose the deal as China would surely retaliate against French businesses in China.
SlowManWhat about a design from Korea or Japan?
They won’t work with Taiwan because 20~25% of their exports go to China, and are biggest foreign investors in China. Korea in particular is running a massive trade surplus against China(Yes, there are non-OPEC countries running a trade surplus against China, the other being Taiwan), so they can’t help Taiwan directly, only indirectly by training Taiwanese cadets on their naval ships and in the army tactics.
SlowManIn the US, Lockheed is the only possible seller of jet fighters to Taiwan because Boeing has a vast commercial business jet interests in China, but Lockheed is unable to do a co-development project because of all the problems with F-35 at the moment.
France will no longer supply fighter jets to Taiwan.
This leaves Taiwan with just two options, Russia and India. Neither cares what China threatens them with.
SlowManJapan does not have an offensive capability. It can defend, but not offend. Japan doesn’t even have an effective amphibious landing capability. The US forces Japan is Japan’s “offensive” arm, which isn’t interested in Kurils. The only disputed islands that the US agreed to cover is Diayu Islands.
SlowManThe F-22 Mark II will have an avionics suite comparable to F-35’s by simply transplanting F-35’s avionics suite, and will likely be export-ready since the quantity for the USAF alone doesn’t make economic sense and must have export orders to bring the cost down, because there is a ready-made export market for at least 150 to 200 units to countries like Israel, Australia, Japan, and Korea.
Having said that, the F-22 Mark II won’t happen unless the F-35 program is scaled back, as the US DoD doesn’t have the money to fund both.
SlowManA J-20 using 2500 T/Rs at 100 watt peak a piece
1. T/R module count is inversely proportional to the output. More powerful the T/R module is, less of them you can put on the panel. The latest F-22 AESA radar has fewer, not more, T/R modules because of this.
2. Chinese do not have 100 watt T/R modules. Chinese do not have the GaN fabrication industry needed to produce such devices. Chinese would be lucky to get single digit watt output from whatever the T/R module they have in production.
SlowManPutin disagrees, in fact he wants to try talking about the islands again this weekend
The Russian position is quite clear, they are not returning any island. Putin wants to talk about LNG gas pipe to Japan(Japan is desperate for LNG to power its power plants after the nuclear power shut down).
None that you can think of? Then you don’t know anything about it. It’s been done, many times.
Examples please?
And who said anything about paying it off? I said reduced.
Which is a pay-off, which cannot be done.
Japan is in exactly the opposite situation. Both the government & the citizenry have massive net foreign assets
Private sector, yes.
Government, no.
Japan is still spending on pointless infrastructure. Have you seen Japanese roads? There’s money to be saved there, & a vast amount of that past infrastructure spending was waste, taking value from the productive economy, no more useful than making things & throwing them in the sea. Cutting it is not a bad thing.
And all the construction workers go unemployed.
It could, for example, do the economy & public finances a power of good by re-starting all the nuclear power plants which have remained closed
And how does that increase tax collection and cut spending on social welfare?
Sign In
