Boeing shows F/A18 Replacement thoughts

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 9 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Boeing has released two new impressions of its proposed F/A-18E/F replacement for F/A-XX which includes an almost 'Sukhoi-esque' two seater treatment.

[img]
[/img]

The two designs are quite different from each other and the final aircraft will almopst certainly be different again, but they are an interesting pointer

www.flightglobal.com...




posted on May, 9 2010 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


Thats interesting. I though the F-35 naval variant was the replacement for the F-18? Odd. Maybe they think the JSF program is going to fail?



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Wow that looks alot like the A-12 Avenger doesn't it? well not really but the idea is close enough!



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   
I think the most striking thing is that both designs are tailless. be interesting to see how they pull this off with control issues!



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   
That planes look cool, very nice design.

They look like a Hummingbird.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   
The key to control would be advanced computer systems. Even in the F-16s we didn't truly fly them, but simply direct the computers where to direct the aircraft.

Those are cool looking aircraft, but would need air brakes to slow them down enough for a safe carrier landing, especially in uneven seas, unless they also had some type of thrust vectoring capabilities.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
The tailles design, espicially in the upper one, seem to draw quite a bit from the X-44. I would expect that TVC would be absolutely essential in this design too, not only for agility, but also for rapid control response. FBW means that it would be perfectly workable without it, but less desirable, or so I think.

I have to say that I think a two seat development of the F-35 seems a more likely solution to F/A-XX to me (and includes the possibility of an RAF order too). But I still find these proposals very interesting.

[edit on 9-5-2010 by waynos]



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


I agree, fly by wire is pretty much a given and has been for any front line fighter of the last 20 years. And thrust vectoring is really the only way you could get the agility required from a fighter whilst still being stable and not having a tail.

The real question, as stated before is where does this fit in with relation to the JSF?



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by uptheirons!
reply to post by waynos
 


The real question, as stated before is where does this fit in with relation to the JSF?


Its a competitor touting a competing project at a time when Lockheed are getting a lot of flack for cost overruns and problems.

It doesn't need to fit in, its Boeing running interference.


jra

posted on May, 10 2010 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


It looks so disproportionate without any tail, but I like it. Especially the first one.

After a bit of searching I found some more images here. It looks like they have two different versions, one piloted, the other a UAV variant.

Thanks for posting this waynos. I look forward to seeing how this evolves and develops over time.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 03:57 AM
link   
Looks, ugly, I hate the style of these new fighters, they look sleek, yet bulky at the same time. Just odd. Plus they're outrageously expensive. The F18 is fine for now. If they're so worried about keeping the pilots the best in the world, then find better ways to train them.

Israel's Ari Force is very unique in the way they select their pilots. 100 pilots go to school and only 1 is selected.

[edit on 10-5-2010 by DeltaCommando5]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by uptheirons!

The real question, as stated before is where does this fit in with relation to the JSF?


As I understand it the F-35C is slated to replace the USN's current F-18C/D models. The F/A-XX is a USN study to find a replacement specifically for the E/F (and possibly G) models after 2025.

This is why I think a further developed F-35 will turn out to be the most likely answer to the requirement.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 06:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeltaCommando5

Israel's Ari Force is very unique in the way they select their pilots. 100 pilots go to school and only 1 is selected.

[edit on 10-5-2010 by DeltaCommando5]


So does any military where their primary intake is conscription - every Israeli is required to undergo military service for a period of time.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:53 AM
link   
Boeing already had a prototype for the JSF, but Lockheed's got selected instead. What happened to that? You'd think they could just go w/ that one instead, alot of work went into it already. Maybe it was just too ugly for the Navy's brass!



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by JJRichey
Boeing already had a prototype for the JSF, but Lockheed's got selected instead. What happened to that? You'd think they could just go w/ that one instead, alot of work went into it already. Maybe it was just too ugly for the Navy's brass!


The X-32 was retired, as it was a fast-built pre-prototype capability demonstrator and nothing more.

The Lockheed X-35 was seriously better than the Boeing X-32, which is why it won.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeltaCommando5
Looks, ugly, I hate the style of these new fighters, they look sleek, yet bulky at the same time. Just odd. Plus they're outrageously expensive. The F18 is fine for now. If they're so worried about keeping the pilots the best in the world, then find better ways to train them.

Israel's Ari Force is very unique in the way they select their pilots. 100 pilots go to school and only 1 is selected.

[edit on 10-5-2010 by DeltaCommando5]



That is a pure function of the applicant pool size vs the selection ratio.
I know for a fact that selection ratio are EXTREMELY lopsided in highly populous countries (India, China) where there are tons of applicants.
The selection criteria also reflect the luxury a selection board has in filtering applicants.

E.g: Until recently(?) the Indian Air Force did not allow applicants with vision less than 20/20. Notably, corrected vision (Laser-altered) was also disallowed.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
As I understand it the F-35C is slated to replace the USN's current F-18C/D models. The F/A-XX is a USN study to find a replacement specifically for the E/F (and possibly G) models after 2025.

This is why I think a further developed F-35 will turn out to be the most likely answer to the requirement.

I personally would like to see a stealthier revision of the F-18 airframe in the Navy's arsenal. That way you would have:
1. A twin engine attack aircraft that won't splash if one engine flames out
2.A less expensive aircraft available in overwhelming numbers
3. A bomb truck to carry out attacks after the more stealthy F-35's have "kicked the door down".

Natalie~



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by JJRichey
Boeing already had a prototype for the JSF, but Lockheed's got selected instead. What happened to that? You'd think they could just go w/ that one instead, alot of work went into it already. Maybe it was just too ugly for the Navy's brass!

Well, it was uglier than homemade sin... and as Richard Price said, the X-32 was an inferior aircraft to the X-35.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:32 AM
link   
I'm far from being an expert on military aircraft, but I enjoy these threads and I appreciate others with expertise sharing their thoughts.

What came to mind when I saw these plane designs was Boeing's JSF X-32, particularly its large one piece wing. Did they ever perfect a way to build the large one piece wing? As I recall they ran into some really big problems when it came time to "bake" the wing.

Has that problem been overcome?



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by METACOMET
What came to mind when I saw these plane designs was Boeing's JSF X-32, particularly its large one piece wing. Did they ever perfect a way to build the large one piece wing? As I recall they ran into some really big problems when it came time to "bake" the wing.

Has that problem been overcome?

Yes, Boeing has advanced to become one of the industry leaders in rapid prototyping and you have to look no further than the Dreamliner 787's fuselage to see how far they have come in one piece composite assembly.

Natalie~





top topics
 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join