Notices
Military Military Aviation

Boeing Trainer

Old 12-20-2016, 03:59 PM
  #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,716
Default Boeing Trainer

Boeing T-X jet fighter trainer makes maiden flight
iceman49 is offline  
Old 12-20-2016, 07:29 PM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,169
Default

I'm sure it'll be on time and under budget.
Grumble is offline  
Old 12-22-2016, 06:24 AM
  #3  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,100
Default

Originally Posted by Grumble View Post
I'm sure it'll be on time and under budget.

They haven't won the contract yet.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 12-22-2016, 11:00 AM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
tomgoodman's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Default

Originally Posted by Grumble View Post
I'm sure it'll be on time and under budget.
Northrop Grumman claims that all T-38s were delivered on time, at or below the contract price, and met the promised performance goals. If true, that's a rare accomplishment in defense procurement.

T-38 Talon
tomgoodman is offline  
Old 12-22-2016, 12:05 PM
  #5  
Moderate Moderator
 
UAL T38 Phlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Default

Irony: it was being chased by a T-38....

Impressions:

Surprisingly large left rudder input just a few seconds into the takeoff roll.

Canopy seems way too big. Yeah, you don't want the claustrophobia of the T-38, but it seemed overkill. Does it really help vis, or is it to meet a "Same size as an F-16" criteria?

It's a big airplane, and even with a much more efficient turbofan than the J85s, I seriously doubt the flying cost per hour will be equal to---let alone be less than---the Talon.

Narrow-base F-16/F-104 style gear. How wobbly will that be for neophytes?

It looks cool, and I'm sure high-AoA characteristics will be far superior to the 38.

Waiting to see the Northrop entry.

Northrop Grumman claims that all T-38s were delivered on time, at or below the contract price, and met the promised performance goals. If true, that's a rare accomplishment in defense procurement.
As I recall, the first ones (FY61) were $440k each, and the final ones were $960k.
UAL T38 Phlyer is offline  
Old 12-22-2016, 01:20 PM
  #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
tomgoodman's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Default Jaw-dropping

Not many things can generate nostalgia for Webb AFB (Big Spring, TX), but the T-38 does. We new students were shown a slide and told: "This particular aircraft set a record -- brake release to 40,000 feet in 90 seconds. You can fly it, because it's sitting out there on the ramp."
tomgoodman is offline  
Old 12-23-2016, 02:56 AM
  #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
BDGERJMN's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Walmart Greeter
Posts: 694
Default

Originally Posted by UAL T38 Phlyer View Post
Irony: it was being chased by a T-38....

Impressions:

Surprisingly large left rudder input just a few seconds into the takeoff roll.

Canopy seems way too big. Yeah, you don't want the claustrophobia of the T-38, but it seemed overkill. Does it really help vis, or is it to meet a "Same size as an F-16" criteria?

It's a big airplane, and even with a much more efficient turbofan than the J85s, I seriously doubt the flying cost per hour will be equal to---let alone be less than---the Talon.

Narrow-base F-16/F-104 style gear. How wobbly will that be for neophytes?

It looks cool, and I'm sure high-AoA characteristics will be far superior to the 38.

Waiting to see the Northrop entry.



As I recall, the first ones (FY61) were $440k each, and the final ones were $960k.
Would be interesting to see what the larger two seat canopy does for the departure characteristics, it was a problem early on with the F/A-18 B/D before the updated flight control computer software mitigated some of that.

The left rudder inputs aren't a big deal there IMHO, my sense is like the Hornet/SuperHornet, the rudders are tied to NWS so you'll see them deflect with even small inputs to the rudder pedals(NWS). My guess is that the rudder effectiveness at that low of an airspeed is nil. Just my $.02.
BDGERJMN is offline  
Old 12-24-2016, 12:19 PM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,716
Default

Build more T38s, best ever!
iceman49 is offline  
Old 12-24-2016, 07:06 PM
  #9  
Moderate Moderator
 
UAL T38 Phlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Default

Originally Posted by BDGERJMN View Post
Would be interesting to see what the larger two seat canopy does for the departure characteristics, it was a problem early on with the F/A-18 B/D before the updated flight control computer software mitigated some of that.

The left rudder inputs aren't a big deal there IMHO, my sense is like the Hornet/SuperHornet, the rudders are tied to NWS so you'll see them deflect with even small inputs to the rudder pedals(NWS). My guess is that the rudder effectiveness at that low of an airspeed is nil. Just my $.02.
Agreed on departure characteristics. I've been told the two-seat Eagles are the same way (easy to depart).

My point on the rudder input: usually, especially on a first-flight, a guy is going to line-up VERY straight. On brake release, unless there is a sizeable crosswind (or the ABs don't light symmetrically...but wait!! This only has one) it is rare to see such a huge stabbing motion of an input.

Yes, All the tactical planes I flew in the Air force had the rudder tied to the NWS, so that's not surprising.

If it was crosswind, we'd have probably seen a series of progressively smaller---or just one small steady---input(s).

It seemed like it didn't want to go where he wanted it, whether initial line-up, a dragging brake, a crosswind...and took a surprisingly (to me) large boot-full to fix it.
UAL T38 Phlyer is offline  
Old 12-27-2016, 08:40 AM
  #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,169
Default

Originally Posted by UAL T38 Phlyer View Post
Agreed on departure characteristics. I've been told the two-seat Eagles are the same way (easy to depart).

My point on the rudder input: usually, especially on a first-flight, a guy is going to line-up VERY straight. On brake release, unless there is a sizeable crosswind (or the ABs don't light symmetrically...but wait!! This only has one) it is rare to see such a huge stabbing motion of an input.

Yes, All the tactical planes I flew in the Air force had the rudder tied to the NWS, so that's not surprising.

If it was crosswind, we'd have probably seen a series of progressively smaller---or just one small steady---input(s).

It seemed like it didn't want to go where he wanted it, whether initial line-up, a dragging brake, a crosswind...and took a surprisingly (to me) large boot-full to fix it.
Maybe the pilot is a tail wheel guy, flight control gains at low speed, nose wheel steering gain at high speed or with power up, short coupled gear, rudder gain at low speed, etc etc etc

I wouldn't read too much into it. It's a Boeing product so whatever happens, handeling will be the least of its problems.
Grumble is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
iceman49
Union Talk
11
12-06-2013 10:19 PM
vagabond
Safety
0
06-14-2012 03:24 PM
vagabond
Union Talk
0
07-13-2009 05:45 PM
ToiletDuck
Hangar Talk
26
03-03-2008 11:35 AM
captain_drew
Hangar Talk
0
12-30-2005 07:03 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices