Author Topic: This Might Be The USAF's New Trainer  (Read 2087 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 83,505
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,460
This Might Be The USAF's New Trainer
« on: June 21, 2016, 19:20:51 »
The T-38 is about to be retired and this T-50 seems to be a good fit for training future pilots.Its based on the F-16.Might be a smart decision. :)

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a21437/lockheed-t-50a-training-aircraft/


Online Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 99,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,661
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: This Might Be The USAF's New Trainer
« Reply #1 on: June 22, 2016, 10:25:07 »
Interesting, by the time this contract is done, the Hawks we use will be getting pretty old.

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 52,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,462
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: This Might Be The USAF's New Trainer
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2017, 15:18:38 »
Leonardo alone?

Quote
Raytheon, Leonardo End Partnership for T-X Trainer Program

Raytheon and Leonardo have decided they will no longer "jointly pursue" the US Air Force's T-X trainer competition.

The companies made the announcement Wednesday in a short statement that said the "companies were unable to reach a business agreement that is in the best interest of the U.S. Air Force."

Although Raytheon spokesman B.J. Boling confirmed that Raytheon will not longer be bidding on the program, the split does not rule out Leonardo continuing to pursue the T-X competition with its T-100 offering. Leonardo has already sold the M-346, on which the T-100 is based, to Italy, Israel, Poland and Singapore.

Tensions have existed between the two companies over the business arrangement for the plane, with the partnership in danger during the fall before an Oct. 14 meeting seemed to clear the air. Sources tell Defense News the issue has focused on where the work on the plane would actually be done...

Leonardo was originally teamed with General Dynamics on the T-100, but GD dropped out in March 2015. Defense News was first to report Raytheon would be joining the T-100 bid in September of that year. The companies made the partnership official in February of 2016.

Raytheon's withdrawal leaves at least four potential entrants to the T-X competition. Lockheed Martin plans to offer the T-50A, a modified version of Korean Aerospace Industries' T-50 trainer flown by South Korea and Indonesia, among other nations. Boeing and Northrop Grumman are separately pursuing clean sheet designs. And Sierra Nevada quietly teamed with Turkish Aerospace Industries to design the "Freedom Trainer," the latest entrant into the field.

The Air Force plans to buy 350 T-X aircraft and expects to downselect to a single vendor this year.
www.defensenews.com/articles/raytheon-leonardo-end-partnership-for-t-x-trainer-program

Any Trump effect? 

Lovely plane:



Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 161,070
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,642
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: This Might Be The USAF's New Trainer
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2017, 15:44:11 »
Not to be outdone - Boeing.


Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 52,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,462
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: This Might Be The USAF's New Trainer
« Reply #4 on: January 25, 2017, 16:21:03 »
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 52,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,462
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: This Might Be The USAF's New Trainer
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2017, 14:02:32 »
Looks like down to two competitors for USAF T-X trainer:

Quote
OPINION: The dwindling pool of T-X bidders

Back in October 1986, the US Air Force was faced with a difficult decision. It had received seven responses to a request for proposals to build two prototypes for the advanced tactical fighter competition that ultimately yielded the Lockheed Martin F-22. In the wake of later industry consolidation, the USAF, it seemed, would never again enjoy such a wealth of bids.

Supposedly, the competition for the $16 billion T-X advanced pilot training system would be different. Lucrative enough to catch any defence contractor’s eye, yet basic enough to attract a diverse field of off-the-shelf and clean-sheet proposals, this seemed destined for a rare, multi-bid showdown. That is what happened from programme launch in 2012 until the last week of January, when the field suddenly dwindled to two.

Lockheed Martin and Korea Aerospace Industries still intend to offer a slightly modified T-50A. Boeing and Saab will bid their clean-sheet T-X design. But gone suddenly is a Northrop Grumman/BAE Systems team with the clean-sheet Model 400 and Raytheon and Leonardo with the T-100 – a modified Aermacchi M-346. Other potential players, including a suggested Sierra Nevada team with Turkish Aerospace Industries and Textron AirLand’s Scorpion, remain publicly mute with the bidding deadline only weeks away.

It is clear that the USAF drove a hard bargain with contractors on this deal: enough to provoke half of the expected field to walk away from the biggest military trainer contract in more than 50 years. Indeed, the T-50 and M-346 were designed 20 years ago with an eye on replacing the USAF’s vast fleet of Northrop T-38 jets to train fighter and bomber pilots.

When the USAF launched the bidding phase of the T-X competition in March 2015, service officials tied the contract to the “Bending the Cost Curve” initiative. The goal was to craft a set of requirements that met its performance needs, while accepting as little risk as possible for the taxpayer. A similar strategy played out in the KC-X tanker competition, and has cost Boeing’s winning bid more than $2.1 billion in pre-tax charges since contract award.

That strategy only works if industry plays along. Despite investing millions in prototypes and industrial preparation, Northrop and Raytheon determined T-X was not worth the effort. It is now up to Boeing and Lockheed to answer the USAF’s call. In a fight between an off-the-shelf T-50A and a clean-sheet alternative, the former should have the advantage on risk and cost.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/opinion-the-dwindling-pool-of-t-x-bidders-433778/

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.