T-45 Replacement Update
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 07. 2024
- What is the Navy looking for in tomorrow's jet trainer?
**Please Like and Subscribe!**
Every Monday at 8PM ET, Mover (F-16, F/A-18, T-38, 737, helicopter pilot, author, cop, and wanna be race car driver) and Gonky (F/A-18, T-38, A320, dirt bike racer, author, and awesome dad) discuss everything from aviation to racing to life and anything in between.
Send your voice message for the show: podcasters.spo...
Looking for a good book? www.cwlemoine.com
Kids Coloring and Activity Books!
www.amazon.com...
Want to create live streams like this? Check out StreamYard: streamyard.com...
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
Views presented are my own and do not represent the views of DoD or its Components. - Zábava
I think Pail from Growler Jams would make a great guest on the show to talk about this stuff. He's T-45C instructor in Advanced in Kingsville and he flew Growlers in the fleet and mentioned PLM many times in his videos.
Mover, your face during the "commercials" was priceless😂
google clearly hitting the mark with their targeted ads 🤣🤣
The sad thing about the current situation with military aircraft contracts is that if you want an aircraft delivered and operational 10 years from now, you would've needed to start working on it 5 years ago...
The T-50s and F/A-50s are operational. People are "hoping" the problems of the T-7A are corrected. I think the T-50, which was designed with flying F-35s in mind is such a capable trainer, lead in fighter and even light fighter. Never found out why the USAF chose the T-7 over the T-50. The T-50 looks to be ready to add so many more capabilities.
Probably corruption
Boeing just pleaded guilty to defrauding the US DoD
Boeing dropped pants on the cost. The T-7 was less than half of the T-50. Little did the USAF know it was just a paper plane. The costs on the T-7A will balloon up.
T-7 looks a bit like a mini Super Hornet
Youre not wrong, like the go kart version of a super hornet
Watching this live I was dieing over Movers face during the ad, now we have an even better edit of it! Priceless 😂😂😂
Keep what they have. I flew aircraft older than me in training and in the fleet. T28B and KC130.
When we (T-6 sim IPs civilian) briefed about wings at the of T-6s and then off to your follow on training school, heavies after a few hours of CRM training in the T-1 sim. The question was asked if there were going to survey the C-5, C-17 school on what they thought about their new graduates, the answer was they were not😥 this was a General’s baby, and by god it was going to work! You’ll never know the answer if you never ask the question.
BTW (as a F2F genius) the FAA🤢 took it away, “we were doing Area Navigation without the required equipment or fail safe modes”. We pointed out that we had been doing it for decades and nobody squawked about it. They were not pleased😀
The Hawk has been a great aircraft over the years 👏
Leonardo just announced the start of design of M-346 Block 20 that will have Large Area Display, new Helmet Mounted Display, new Digital Video and Data Recorder, new Flight Management System, new Identification Friend or Foe, but also modifications and new software integration to the Ground Based Training System.
I trained in the (T-2) Buckeye, and now its replacement is being replaced? I feel old.
Great video guys, and great discussion.
The T-45 could be rebuilt to better standard already developed by BAE and HAL for their Advanced Hawk and other projects. New wings, new engines, new avionics. BAE already stated that they can upgrade current aircraft to the new standards or have customers do it themselves from parts kits. Maybe not the best possible product but it is available now without delay.
Off the shelf right now is so far ahead of military standards. It's insane.
It's like the difference between Dragon and Starliner.
In Ukraine, apparently they are using off-the-shelf tablets as middleware to make us missiles fully functional on very obsolete Russian aircraft.
Avionics should be able to run on internal batteries by this point and take up the space of a calculator.
Dragon 2 has triple redundant computers, in different locations. That big touch screen, is literally just for show. Because NASA can't not have some sort of control panel.
Technically Dragon 2 can be operated via smartphone app. Even then Dragon 2 is never truly in a "manual" mode. Everything is still going through the flight computers. Computers that I'm pretty sure aren't even actively cooled. None of this calculations should be drawing that much none of these calculations should be drawing that much power.
Old aerospace is dangerously addicted to Fortran and Cobal. Moving to C and C++ alone, should make avionics and compute a power, weight, and volume rounding error.
Today's smart watches have more compute power than super computers in the '80s. Power draw and heat shouldn't be getting worse, it shouldn't be a problem at all.
“Fix-to”fix” or navy point-to-point wasn’t about basic navigation; it built to air-to-air intercepts. But no one realized that.
If human civilization last another 10 million years there will never be a pair of humans that talked more often about military trainer jets.
What would you like us to talk about instead?
@@themoverandgonkyshow lol I'd listen to you talking about lawn care. Just taking the piss as they say.
M346 is not a simple trainer A/C but is considered a Training "system" fot 5th generation fighter.
Is not only the aircraft but also an integrated simulation system and environment.
Today is the system adopted at the international flight training school at decimomannu Sardinia.
But I don't think is certified for carrier ops!!
I think Mover was more interested in the exfoliating soap ad there for a second... Maybe Mover needs to lather up? 👀
It's surreal living in Kingsville because the daily news mostly just consists of which taco truck is in town for the day but also the base trains like 50% of onboarding naval pilots.
The M-346 is basically a Western Yak-130 - the airframe design was licensed to Aeromacchi in a partnership with Yakovlev during the friendly years. Yak was to market to the former Warsaw Pact, and Aeromacchi to Europe.
It is nort licensed. They split the world market for the design Yak/AEM-130.
Yakolev the CSI countries, India, Slovakia and Algeria, to Aermacchi NATO countries and many other countries
The two aricraft share only the basic design, the one of Yak/AEM-130,, than each one evolved the project following their ideas/need for the project,
The design was heavily modified after Yakolev - Aermacchi split the project in 1999 due to design development conflicts.
Thanks!
John thank you for the support!!
Your comment about all the mods to the T45 is not fully correct. The wing was redesigned to suit carrier based landing by BAESystems in the UK, the mods included a slatted wing and changes aerodynamically to the rear fuse. I think they also redesigned the intakes to add in extra fuel tanks, a design that was adopted throughout future hawk versions. The slatted wing was perhaps the biggest change to aircraft.
Mover said something bad about Boeing. Someone needs to check on him to make sure he hasn't had some sort of accident.
You can't fly a helicopter without airconditioning? But... you have a big fan on top, don't you? ;-)
I've seen some terrible thermal management in the computer repair business.
Sometimes I think old aerospace never even heard of it.
I've had a number of cars without working A/C and had to drive many hours in 90+ summer heat... I cannot imagine flying anything, let alone a helicopter, without air conditioning... That's just cruel and unnecessary.
What happens when the automatic systems go haywire? If the pilots don't learn how to fly manually and the magic carpet goes down on a stormy night, do they just ditch in the general vicinity of the carrier and hope really hard?
Modern fighter jets sre so unstable that they are impossible to fly without the automatic system.
And if it goes haywire…
czcams.com/video/k6yVU_yYtEc/video.htmlsi=mxUr2oCcT5qU7I7n
A Navy trainer with no carrier capability? Doesn't make sense to me. Landing on an aircraft carrier is one of the key skills a navy pilot needs. It reminds me of boot camp where there were people who didn't know how to swim. Why would you join the NAVY(!!) if you can't swim!?? What good a trainer what can't land on a carrier?
People go through SEAL training never having even seen water before. That's the joy of military training. You don't need to know, they'll teach you.
Before you learn to land on a carrier you need to learn to fly and to use the electronic systems.
Mover misses the point where there are 2 parts to magic carpet the aircraft n the BOAT if the boat stops working what do you do??
Guys, you talked about the COD (C-2) and it being replaced; then the Osprey goes the way of the DoDo. What about the CH-47, the newest variant, as a carrier on board delivery aircraft? Its rugged, has the capacity, but does it have the legs?
It doesn't have the legs, but more cargo volume than the CV-22B
So they're really waiting for the rollout for NGAD(ARV).
The M346 is the Italian version of Russia's Yak-130 Mitten that has been modified for Western customers.
Looks like the Japanese are sporting a spiffy little trainer ... I wonder if anyone has looked at that?
Boeing and H&K seem to have something in common: Hating their users.
Check out pitch black 2024!
KAI was considering a naval version of their kf-21. How long for a prototype of a trainer?
@5:12 Boeing did not do the mods, McAir did all the flight testing, Boeing did not absorb us until 1997, we left on Friday and came to work on Monday with new badges, we remove the wings so many time and installed upgrades it was not funny.... NAS Pax hanger 201 (strike test)
Thank you for the comment! I didn't know that. When I was at Boeing they only talked about after 1997.
Not too keen on the passengers, either.
They just got grounded again for yet again engine issues. Jeez. These engines are done.
The Chinese 🇨🇳 seem to plan for pure land-based training of naval pilots, too.
Just have a look at the new „navalized“ AVIC Guizhou JL-9 Mountain Eagle.
So maybe even they have come to the conclusion, that learning how to land a flying computer once the computer has crashed is pointless, as there just is no way to still land it on an aircraft carrier 🤷🏻♂️
Boeing used to make iconic planes. Seemed to have lost their nerve; I wish they would take risks again and make an airliner that saves a crap load of fuel.
I guess simulation and magic carpet probably allow trainers to skip actual carrier landings but seems like a loss.
Leonardo is a non-starter, we’re not buying anything based upon a Russian design.
let's see what plane they choose while bankrupt :D
I predict LATE 2030s.
Airline Boy son scared a recent FO by performing a "no automation" approach. The FO had NEVER performed a 'manual' approach. I avoid commercial aviation now.
Boeing only cares about the bottom line.
This is boring and stupid...
Refreshing to see that honesty still exists; some comments can indeed be boring and stupid...