Jump to content

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Navy Bird said:

Not s lot of detail, but why not?

X-planes have existed before... and waiting 20+ years is not always an option if you want new things... (F-22, F-35 come to mind...)

 

Still far away from an operational fighter I assume!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, exdraken said:

Still far away from an operational fighter I assume!

 

No doubt. I wonder if this is related to the revival of the "Century Series" that was talked about a few years back.

 

Cheers,

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a  Skunk Works or Phantom Works program.

 

Broken records? As in performance/low observability/etc. or design time, affordability, etc. type records? The world wonders. I take all this with a grain of salt. Nothing's ever as good as it's advertised to be.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Slater said:

Broken records?

Not necessarily records relating to flight performance at all. Could be related to any aspect of an industrial design and manufacturing programme they want to claim. 

The whole thing is rich with the odour of spin over substance though. From the first line... because the Air Force definitely hasn't built anything.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder if they will resurrect the 'Mustang' name for it.

 

Regards

Robert

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the look of it in that top pic.  A bit too stealthy if you ask me :hmmm:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Truro Model Builder said:

 

They sent Mitchell Gant to Tehran to steal it.

He has to think in Farsi.

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Work In Progress said:

The whole thing is rich with the odour of spin over substance though. From the first line... because the Air Force definitely hasn't built anything.

 

The article (quoting the speaker) seems to go on and on and on and on about "digital engineering"...

 

That's nothing new, CAD, CFD, FEA, CAM and many other design and analysis tools have been used for decades. Undoubtedly, we have better digital design tools then ever before.

 

The claim that "you do not have to have huge facilities, huge workforces [and] expensive tooling,” has either been taken out of context, or is incorrect. If you want to build an aircraft, a huge amount of people are required (either distributed among many companies or otherwise) and a huge amount of tooling is required - you can't make a plane out of nothing.

 

“It is letting us take aircraft assembly back to where we were in the [19]70s and prior to it... with small, but very good teams, of engineers and mechanics." Again, nothing new, that's just a reflection of the massive supply chain and different tiers of aerospace manufacturing. It's the same in the UK, the big aerospace companies don't do much manufacture, they assemble, manufacturing is done by tier 3 companies, who supply parts and small assemblies to tier 2 companies, that create large assemblies and supply them to tier 1 OEMs.

 

I don't doubt that new technologies/aircraft are being developed, but this article just seems like a lot of talking about nothing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if this is a manned aircraft? Perhaps it is a fighter drone - possibly using off the shelf components as a technology demonstrator

 

Cheers

 

Colin

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the times, it would be  wise to  treat this announcement with some scepticism. It does sound like spin.

 

Anybody can design and build an aeroplane. A flying prototype is nothing  more than that. It's the systems that take the time to perfect. The F35 proved that. 

 

It seems to me to be another attempt to reduce the costs of modern military aircraft. 

 

Look forward to seeing it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2020 at 11:46 AM, noelh said:

Given the times, it would be  wise to  treat this announcement with some scepticism. It does sound like spin.

Guess someone felt upstaged at hearing of the Tempest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I found the statement "It is letting us take aircraft assembly back to where we were in the [19]70s and prior to it... with small, but very good teams, of engineers and mechanics" as something quite funny. US aircraft in the '60s and '70s did not come from small "cottage industry" firms but from large companies that employed hundred or thousand of people and occupied plants that were as big as a small town. Granted, with the concentration that occurred years later the same companies today are mastodontic in comparison but aerospace has stopped being a small enterprise business many years ago. at least when it comes to something like fighter design.

 

Said that, I don't doubt that the US industry are capable of designing and building a combat aircraft prototype in complete secrecy, afterall they did in the past and sure have the resources to do it again. If this announcement is just propaganda, we'll find out at some point, but I wouldn't be surprised to see something real flying. If this someting will take 1 or 10 year to become operational it's then a whole different story

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...