User avatar
himself
Topic Author
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:02 am

Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Sep 27, 2018 8:05 pm

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... er-program

"Boeing Co. beat Lockheed Martin Corp. in a U.S. Air Force contest valued at as much as $9.2 billion to build training jets to hone the flying skills of future aviators, the biggest prize in a September flurry of defense contract awards."

Surprised? I was! I'm totally biased, and I hoped Boeing would win, but the T-50 looked really good on paper. Maybe Boeing really did "shatter the cost curve."
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 11810
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Sep 27, 2018 8:14 pm

As expected I guess. Congratulations Boeing / Saab and USAF! I seemed the most optimized design for the requirements.

It might be relevant for the lingering Lightweight Fighter requirement too, although maybe it is still too advanced/ expensive.

Also strategically T-X is probably preferable, because Boeing badly needed a brand new program in this segment. Counter balancing LM a bit.

https://www.boeing.com/features/2018/09 ... 09-18.page
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Ozair
Posts: 2986
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Sep 27, 2018 9:04 pm

himself wrote:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-27/boeing-beats-lockheed-for-9-2-billion-air-force-trainer-program

"Boeing Co. beat Lockheed Martin Corp. in a U.S. Air Force contest valued at as much as $9.2 billion to build training jets to hone the flying skills of future aviators, the biggest prize in a September flurry of defense contract awards."

Surprised? I was! I'm totally biased, and I hoped Boeing would win, but the T-50 looked really good on paper. Maybe Boeing really did "shatter the cost curve."

Congratulations to Boeing, it has certainly been a big couple of weeks. I would say that Boeing has taken some very low margins on their recent wins, including this, but hopefully this doesn't end up like the KC-46.
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 972
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Sep 27, 2018 10:01 pm

I'm not sure I could say any specific reason why aside from being based on an existing design, but I rather expected the T-50 to snare this one.

Maybe I just liked the baby F-16 look too much to root for Boeing.
 
User avatar
himself
Topic Author
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:02 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:41 pm

Tons of stories popping up on Google News about this, but none really answer the juicy questions, like:
  • Will Lockheed Martin and/or Leonardo protest?
  • What the actual bids were?
  • Did it just come down to price; how much did risk & capability play into the award?
  • What they are going to call the plane. What number will replace 'X'
 
tjh8402
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:20 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:17 am

While I don't know the specifics of Lockheed's offer, apparently Boeing took the same risk with this as they did the KC-46, MH-139 and MQ-25, which was offering a fixed price contract (although there are incentives in the initial phase). Wonder if the Pentagon is getting more cautious about program cost overruns. Still, good news for taxpayers. Nice to see competition among the DoD contractors finally paying off for us.

Additionally, Boeing assumes the preponderance of the risk with the T-X program, which starts as a fixed-price incentive fee contract, but at the fifth lot will transition to a firm-fixed price structure, Roper and Bunch said.


https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-ne ... ining-jet/

Congrats to Boeing. Nice to see them finally winning some good competitions again.
 
426Shadow
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:13 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:36 am

I just found out via email from Communications that we lost. It didn't say to who. Now I know and I am so happy. The Corporate Greed that was riding on the T-50 was unbelievable.


"Aeronautics Team –

Today we learned our T-50A offering in the Advanced Pilot Training (APT) competition was not selected by the U.S. Air Force.

We presented a very strong solution, and will eagerly await the customers’ debrief to hear details regarding their decision, before deciding on any course of action.

Although we are disappointed with this outcome, this does not mark an end to our interest in the T-50 program. We are highly optimistic that this aircraft will continue to see international sales and prove to be the trainer of choice.

To the T-50A team, I offer my most sincere thanks for the countless hours, late nights, weekends and holidays that you spent working on our offering. Your hard work and dedication to our customers has not gone unnoticed. Thank you for your commitment to performing with excellence. We are very proud of you.
"


Boeing deserved that contract, and they got it. We have more fish in the sea to catch.
AKA Andre3K
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:33 am

426Shadow wrote:
I just found out via email from Communications that we lost. It didn't say to who. Now I know and I am so happy. The Corporate Greed that was riding on the T-50 was unbelievable.


"Aeronautics Team –

Today we learned our T-50A offering in the Advanced Pilot Training (APT) competition was not selected by the U.S. Air Force.

We presented a very strong solution, and will eagerly await the customers’ debrief to hear details regarding their decision, before deciding on any course of action.

Although we are disappointed with this outcome, this does not mark an end to our interest in the T-50 program. We are highly optimistic that this aircraft will continue to see international sales and prove to be the trainer of choice.

To the T-50A team, I offer my most sincere thanks for the countless hours, late nights, weekends and holidays that you spent working on our offering. Your hard work and dedication to our customers has not gone unnoticed. Thank you for your commitment to performing with excellence. We are very proud of you.
"


Boeing deserved that contract, and they got it. We have more fish in the sea to catch.


Nice position to be in when you take a loss in stride.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 11810
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 10:15 am

What I like in the design is the build in flexibility. The F404 engine isn't the newest but a safe bet. If some much better comes along in 20 yrs an upgrade seems very doable. Same for the cockpit, open, spacey.

Image

Boeing and Saab successfully mystified the fuselages were largely developed & build in Sweden and shipped to St Louis. In a very short period, using Lean design & manufacturing techniques. 90%+ of T-X will be build in the US.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 956
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 11:11 am

As i said in the T-X thread 3 weeks ago.

RJMAZ wrote:
Boeing will win easily.

We consider fighter aircraft as 4th gen and 5th generation etc.

The design, development and testing can also be measured in similar generations. The Boeing trainer is the only one to use the latest generation of digital design. The Boeing 797 will probably be the first airliner to be designed using it. The main benefit is thatbthe trainer was designed in a fraction of the time and no prototypes are required. It will have fewer parts and significantly less labour to assemble. This gives Boeing a massive advantage. The Boeing design would actually be much lower risk for this reason.

Heaps of people still don't understand it. Sort of like the F-35 10 years ago nearly everyone doubted it.
 
Flighty
Posts: 9723
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 11:21 am

The F-35 was a lot more trouble than the manufacturer originally said. By any normal standard, the F-35 was a failure. The program has produced 320 jets at, by my reckoning, a cost of 800 million or so per jet. As of 2014, the program was 163 billion dollars over budget and seven years behind schedule. Not 163 million, which would be a serious problem and potentially a criminal matter. 163 billion. A thousand people should be in jail for that.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 18970
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 11:50 am

https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardabo ... ot-streak/ has an interesting take:

The Air Force deserves tremendous credit. In a time of resurgent economic nationalism and trade barriers, the service went shopping around the world for the platform that offered best value for money. The service’s MH-139 helicopter selection earlier this week also clearly shows their commitment to global sourcing.

The three final T-X competitors were a Korean jet, a half-Swedish jet, and an Italian jet (with Russian DNA). Globalization isn’t appropriate for all military markets, but building a trainer is hardly core to national security or the health of the industrial base. Even though any winner needed to stand up a US production line, immigrant planes were welcome.

Interestingly enough, this pro-globalization hot take was written by the guy Airbus fans love to hate, Richard Aboulafia. I think it's a pretty good take. When you look beneath the covers, the US is spending a lot on imported military hardware and in many cases offering offsets in international contracts.

He also wrote:

Given Boeing’s recent string of victories (the MQ-25 drone, the MH-139 helicopter) it’s very clear that the company is being very aggressive, and is pricing to win. This is particularly true since their bid price needed to overcome the Air Force’s risk adjustment, in light of Boeing offering the only completely new design (and with the troubles of the KC-46 tanker still weighing on customer perception). There's a strong risk to Boeing of up-front losses here, as with the KC-46. But these wins do a lot to bolster Boeing’s military side, which had been under heavy pressure for the past few decades due to the Joint Strike Fighter and Long Range Strike-Bomber losses.

It is an interesting strategy. It seems to me there is something wrong with the purchasing rules if they allow a vendor to take up-front losses to gain long term business opportunities because then the competition becomes one of how much the vendors can afford to lose rather than who has the best product.

RJMAZ wrote:
As i said in the T-X thread 3 weeks ago.
RJMAZ wrote:
Boeing will win easily.

We consider fighter aircraft as 4th gen and 5th generation etc.

The design, development and testing can also be measured in similar generations. The Boeing trainer is the only one to use the latest generation of digital design. The Boeing 797 will probably be the first airliner to be designed using it. The main benefit is that the trainer was designed in a fraction of the time and no prototypes are required. It will have fewer parts and significantly less labour to assemble. This gives Boeing a massive advantage. The Boeing design would actually be much lower risk for this reason.

Heaps of people still don't understand it. Sort of like the F-35 10 years ago nearly everyone doubted it.

We live in interesting times.

So much for Lockheed's alleged advantage due to simulators and networks..
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:36 pm

Revelation wrote:
It is an interesting strategy. It seems to me there is something wrong with the purchasing rules if they allow a vendor to take up-front losses to gain long term business opportunities because then the competition becomes one of how much the vendors can afford to lose rather than who has the best product.


Taking up front loss can only get you so far. The contract is probably working on low margin and will only hit a loss if things go wrong. If things go wrong, Boeing has the ability to absorb the losses through their strong commercial sector. Thus they are in a position to take more risk than some.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Ozair
Posts: 2986
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:09 pm

Flighty wrote:
The F-35 was a lot more trouble than the manufacturer originally said. By any normal standard, the F-35 was a failure. The program has produced 320 jets at, by my reckoning, a cost of 800 million or so per jet. As of 2014, the program was 163 billion dollars over budget and seven years behind schedule. Not 163 million, which would be a serious problem and potentially a criminal matter. 163 billion. A thousand people should be in jail for that.

Flighty, those claims on F-35 cost are completely false. Make that post in the F-35 thread so we can address the false claims in the right place and, in the interest of educating yourself, read the thread...
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:25 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
As i said in the T-X thread 3 weeks ago.

RJMAZ wrote:
Boeing will win easily.

We consider fighter aircraft as 4th gen and 5th generation etc.

The design, development and testing can also be measured in similar generations. The Boeing trainer is the only one to use the latest generation of digital design. The Boeing 797 will probably be the first airliner to be designed using it. The main benefit is thatbthe trainer was designed in a fraction of the time and no prototypes are required. It will have fewer parts and significantly less labour to assemble. This gives Boeing a massive advantage. The Boeing design would actually be much lower risk for this reason.

Heaps of people still don't understand it. Sort of like the F-35 10 years ago nearly everyone doubted it.

What exactly does digital design mean?

How is the design process used for the tx different for that used on recent designs such as the 350, f35 or 787?
 
EBJ68
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:20 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:31 pm

I wonder what the export potential for this airplane is.
 
Ozair
Posts: 2986
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:47 pm

Revelation wrote:
It is an interesting strategy. It seems to me there is something wrong with the purchasing rules if they allow a vendor to take up-front losses to gain long term business opportunities because then the competition becomes one of how much the vendors can afford to lose rather than who has the best product.



I think swings and roundabouts. Boeing will have moved a long way to win these contracts but once they have gained the business it may prevent them from bidding on other contracts. Some vendors are also being a bit more circumspect with their business, such as NG which has declined to bid or withdrawn themselves on a number of recent contracts, including T-X.

The question is how much does this impact their share price?
Revelation wrote:
So much for Lockheed's alleged advantage due to simulators and networks..

I think the advantage is still there but Boeing's offer was so low the USAF couldn't pass it up. One of the articles I read said the USAF was expecting bids around 16 billion while the Boeing bid was clearly a long way below that.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:03 pm

Ozair wrote:
The question is how much does this impact their share price?


The share prices won't be impacted until we get bad news. Boeing share price would more likely get a hit when they announce the 797. That is when Boeing have to commit their own money for the R&D.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6091
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:18 pm

himself wrote:
What they are going to call the plane.

"Lil Bug" :?: Reminds me of the WASP types of old. Can't wait for the carrier variant. :goodvibes:
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 18970
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:39 pm

EBJ68 wrote:
I wonder what the export potential for this airplane is.

The Forbes article linked above has some interesting commentary on that:

But given the limited size of the market, winning T-X matters. As I wrote earlier this week, the basic T-X program of record (350 aircraft) is equal to the total size of the advanced jet trainer market over the last 20 years. That US Air Force stamp of approval is important. There’s also a good chance that Boeing will market its plane as a light fighter, an interesting new product on the market and a way of expanding beyond the relatively small advanced trainer market.

However, winning that Air Force endorsement doesn’t guarantee market dominance. Even when the Air Force’s current elderly trainer, the T-38 (and its light fighter cousin, the F-5) was on the market, competing European contractors sold hundreds of Alpha Jets, Hawks, and Jaguar trainer variants.

So winning the contract is good because potential buyers know USAF will be flying these for decades, but no guarantee of success since the trainer market has a lot of competition with a relatively low barrier to entry and a pathway to the light fighter market too.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
User avatar
SAS A340
Posts: 813
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 5:59 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:39 pm

EBJ68 wrote:
I wonder what the export potential for this airplane is.


The Swedish defense Minister was pleased about the announcement today and pointed out that Sweden will soon have to replace its SAAB SK 60 trainer,s
It's not what u do,it's how u do it!
 
texl1649
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:46 pm

Unfortunately for Boeing, as I look at it it seems unlikely to evolve into a drone variant easily, with that comparatively huge cockpit. That could have been interesting in a non stealth drone requirement world, but perhaps that’s too much of an oxymoron moving forward anyway.

What drove the high wing layout?
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 886
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:37 pm

I think Boeing was quite aggressive on all 3 of these, the 'we really need this contract' mindset. Well, the mindset landed 3 contracts, when they were hoping for at least 1.

Fixed price is the way Boeing does the commercial work, yes it bit them hard on the KC-46 but soon they look redeemed provided they sell at least 100. DOD has become unhappy with taking all of the overruns like they have on the F-35. The Navy frigate competition they have funded 5 firms to the tune of $15M each to integrate the RFP into the parent design ship. Then they will select on capability and locked in costs.

On ship trainers they have gotten with the glass control panels that it can closely replicate several different models. I suspect that the Boeing - Saab can 'become' a F-35, a F-16, a Typhoon, or a Piper Cub on steroids. Probably also has the ability to control from the ground as a safety.
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 9:29 pm

bikerthai wrote:
Ozair wrote:
The question is how much does this impact their share price?


The share prices won't be impacted until we get bad news. Boeing share price would more likely get a hit when they announce the 797. That is when Boeing have to commit their own money for the R&D.

bt


I don’t the win in itself means much but if the digital design process that allowed BA to go from a clean sheet to a contract award pans out that could be a big tail wind
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Sep 28, 2018 11:13 pm

Congrats to the Boeing and Saab's team, excellent job.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 956
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Sat Sep 29, 2018 12:38 am

Planeflyer wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
As i said in the T-X thread 3 weeks ago.

RJMAZ wrote:
Boeing will win easily.

We consider fighter aircraft as 4th gen and 5th generation etc.

The design, development and testing can also be measured in similar generations. The Boeing trainer is the only one to use the latest generation of digital design. The Boeing 797 will probably be the first airliner to be designed using it. The main benefit is thatbthe trainer was designed in a fraction of the time and no prototypes are required. It will have fewer parts and significantly less labour to assemble. This gives Boeing a massive advantage. The Boeing design would actually be much lower risk for this reason.

Heaps of people still don't understand it. Sort of like the F-35 10 years ago nearly everyone doubted it.

What exactly does digital design mean?

How is the design process used for the tx different for that used on recent designs such as the 350, f35 or 787?


The new design software allows you to design in parallel. 100 parts can be open on 100 different computers at once with 100 engineers working on it simultaneously. The complex design gets updated in real time. You can optimised for reduced parts count, ease of assembly etc. You can have a maintenance team giving tips to where access doors are located.

Previously computer design you could open up a single part, build it, shape it and save it. Effectively designing in series. You would have to break the big design up into sections to get different teams working in parallel on it, but each big section would still get built in series. But then you get the A380 where the two sections didnt fit together. High risk. Lots of problems get found on initial assembly and much rework needs to be done including design changes. All of these problems get found and fixed in the initial design now.

Also this new design software with the design coming together in real time can be digitally tested for load. Fatigue testing in the digital world. Previously you could only optimising the individual parts for weight but now you could optimise the full combined structure. Real world result, lower weight, longer life, less repair work and design fixes to restore fatigue life.

Fluid dynamic guys can also be digital wind tunnel testing the outter flow line of the design. You want 9G and high alpha? You got it. No real flight testing, no prototyping, you'll turn like an F-35 with the very first production ready aircraft off the line.

Then you have stealth. Planform alignment the design with a click of a button. So all doors and panel join lines you can simply have a snap to function at a certain angle. Test the radar cross section in the digital world.

The software has been steadily evolving over the last 10 years. The 787 and A350 missed most of this, so most steps would be done in series. The A350 being a couple years newer probably went together smoother and cheaper.
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Sat Sep 29, 2018 1:21 am

RJMAZ wrote:
Planeflyer wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
As i said in the T-X thread 3 weeks ago.


Heaps of people still don't understand it. Sort of like the F-35 10 years ago nearly everyone doubted it.

What exactly does digital design mean?

How is the design process used for the tx different for that used on recent designs such as the 350, f35 or 787?


The new design software allows you to design in parallel. 100 parts can be open on 100 different computers at once with 100 engineers working on it simultaneously. The complex design gets updated in real time. You can optimised for reduced parts count, ease of assembly etc. You can have a maintenance team giving tips to where access doors are located.

Previously computer design you could open up a single part, build it, shape it and save it. Effectively designing in series. You would have to break the big design up into sections to get different teams working in parallel on it, but each big section would still get built in series. But then you get the A380 where the two sections didnt fit together. High risk. Lots of problems get found on initial assembly and much rework needs to be done including design changes. All of these problems get found and fixed in the initial design now.

Also this new design software with the design coming together in real time can be digitally tested for load. Fatigue testing in the digital world. Previously you could only optimising the individual parts for weight but now you could optimise the full combined structure. Real world result, lower weight, longer life, less repair work and design fixes to restore fatigue life.

Fluid dynamic guys can also be digital wind tunnel testing the outter flow line of the design. You want 9G and high alpha? You got it. No real flight testing, no prototyping, you'll turn like an F-35 with the very first production ready aircraft off the line.

Then you have stealth. Planform alignment the design with a click of a button. So all doors and panel join lines you can simply have a snap to function at a certain angle. Test the radar cross section in the digital world.

The software has been steadily evolving over the last 10 years. The 787 and A350 missed most of this, so most steps would be done in series. The A350 being a couple years newer probably went together smoother and cheaper.


Thanks for the explanation. Is this stadard Catia software, custom or a combination of programs?
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 956
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:37 am

Planeflyer wrote:
Thanks for the explanation. Is this stadard Catia software, custom or a combination of programs?

A bit of everything.

Most commercial software have plug ins. That is where the fancy stuff can be added.

Catia/solidworks software have added parallel network ability over the last decade. There would no doubt be US military funded specific plugins for stealth, planform alignment etc.

Custom plug ins also allow the import and export of data between software suites.

Boeing would have access to decades of NASA research, so there would be custom plug ins created for fluid flow software.

Lockheeds F-35 and T-50 both started development long before 3D printing was even a thing. You can now 3D print secondary but complex shaped parts and save a huge amount of time, weight and reduce the part count.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Sat Sep 29, 2018 6:31 am

RJMAZ wrote:
Planeflyer wrote:
Thanks for the explanation. Is this stadard Catia software, custom or a combination of programs?

A bit of everything.

Most commercial software have plug ins. That is where the fancy stuff can be added.

Catia/solidworks software have added parallel network ability over the last decade. There would no doubt be US military funded specific plugins for stealth, planform alignment etc.

Custom plug ins also allow the import and export of data between software suites.

Boeing would have access to decades of NASA research, so there would be custom plug ins created for fluid flow software.

Lockheeds F-35 and T-50 both started development long before 3D printing was even a thing. You can now 3D print secondary but complex shaped parts and save a huge amount of time, weight and reduce the part count.


I haven't followed the latest design software, thanks for this inside. Interesting though, it kind of works like google docs, with which multiple users can edit a document in real time. For me it seems quite logical, it should indeed make the design process, testing and production a lot cheaper in the future.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Sat Sep 29, 2018 11:55 am

Dutchy wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
Planeflyer wrote:
Thanks for the explanation. Is this stadard Catia software, custom or a combination of programs?

A bit of everything.

Most commercial software have plug ins. That is where the fancy stuff can be added.

Catia/solidworks software have added parallel network ability over the last decade. There would no doubt be US military funded specific plugins for stealth, planform alignment etc.

Custom plug ins also allow the import and export of data between software suites.

Boeing would have access to decades of NASA research, so there would be custom plug ins created for fluid flow software.

Lockheeds F-35 and T-50 both started development long before 3D printing was even a thing. You can now 3D print secondary but complex shaped parts and save a huge amount of time, weight and reduce the part count.


I haven't followed the latest design software, thanks for this inside. Interesting though, it kind of works like google docs, with which multiple users can edit a document in real time. For me it seems quite logical, it should indeed make the design process, testing and production a lot cheaper in the future.


Yes, good insight on the Google docs analogy. It seems the new design software is more of platform rather than a file system like Google dosc is to word, powerpoint and excel.

Rij, thanks again for the information very helpful .

Now maybe I can return the favor, ck out the chart of DASTY( The ADR of Dassault systems). You can buy shares directly in Paris if you prefer. What a chart! I just read the the transcript for the last earnings call. It is well coverd on seeking alpha. I'm going to open a position monday.
 
User avatar
USNFalconCraft
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2018 11:18 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Tue Oct 02, 2018 1:18 pm

Congratulations to Boeing and SAAB for winning the competition. At least for me, T-X was the coolest looking out of the competitors (and an original design too).
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Tue Oct 02, 2018 1:45 pm

texl1649 wrote:
What drove the high wing layout?


I'm surprised no-one here has attempted to answer this question.

The answer is (not my own, but what I have learned from a-net) the high wing and downward dihedral provide better maneuverability due to cg position. It also allow for a shorter landing gears while providing room under the wing for pylons and other hard mounts.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
ELBOB
Posts: 72
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:56 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Wed Oct 03, 2018 9:05 am

RJMAZ wrote:
But then you get the A380 where the two sections didnt fit together.


The A380 didn't have section mismatches, that was the 787. And that was with three design teams working on a single digital model.

The A380 wiring looms were problematic because the two design teams used different modelling principles.
 
User avatar
brianK73
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 1:47 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Wed Oct 03, 2018 5:08 pm

ELBOB wrote:
The A380 didn't have section mismatches, that was the 787. And that was with three design teams working on a single digital model.

The A380 wiring looms were problematic because the two design teams used different modelling principles.


Actually, if I recall correctly, the mismatch was due to the fact the French and German design teams were using the incompatible versions of CATIA software, and the data had to be manually converted between the two teams. Thus opening the way for Murphy's Law...
 
estorilm
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:07 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Oct 04, 2018 12:41 pm

Flighty wrote:
...By any normal standard, the F-35 was a failure.

Except for that one tiny "standard" where you've got a deployed 5th generation fighter in front-line service, and the (first) 5th gen platform for countless NATO allies. It's absolutely a success, albeit an expensive one.

There's no aircraft (except MAYBE the F-22) in the world that I'd EVER want to be in, while facing an F-35.

That it's also STOVL, carrier-based, supersonic, and single-engined is remarkable.

In any event, on topic.. OP's bias shows a bit in the title lol. I do like this design though - this didnt really strike me as LM's "thing" anyways. Having said that, Boeing ABSOLUTELY MUST get this thing out on schedule - you can be absolutely positive that they're going to be under the microscope with this one.
 
aumaverick
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:40 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:03 pm

Can we address a more important factor in the decision please: what will Boeing's new T-X trainer be designated by the USAF? T-54?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... es#Trainer
It's an entirely different kind of flying, altogether.
 
bunumuring
Posts: 2427
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 2:56 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:03 pm

Hey guys,
Any word on the official designation and/or name of it yet?
Cheers,
Bunumuring

EDIT: I see that aumaverick just beat me to it, asking the same question!
I just wanna live while I'm alive!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:35 pm

aumaverick wrote:
Can we address a more important factor in the decision please: what will Boeing's new T-X trainer be designated by the USAF? T-54?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... es#Trainer


Why not the T-7? The last trainer to receive a official destination was the T-6 Texan II, right?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 18970
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Oct 04, 2018 2:27 pm

aumaverick wrote:
Can we address a more important factor in the decision please: what will Boeing's new T-X trainer be designated by the USAF? T-54?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... es#Trainer

Because, numerology?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
tjh8402
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:20 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:36 pm

Dutchy wrote:
aumaverick wrote:
Can we address a more important factor in the decision please: what will Boeing's new T-X trainer be designated by the USAF? T-54?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... es#Trainer


Why not the T-7? The last trainer to receive a official destination was the T-6 Texan II, right?


I think that was more of a tribute to the original than giving any consideration to consecutive numbering’s.
 
User avatar
himself
Topic Author
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:02 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:52 pm

estorilm wrote:
In any event, on topic.. OP's bias shows a bit in the title lol. I do like this design though - this didnt really strike me as LM's "thing" anyways. Having said that, Boeing ABSOLUTELY MUST get this thing out on schedule - you can be absolutely positive that they're going to be under the microscope with this one.

The title came from the article I linked, and I admitted my bias right away. Like, first line.
 
User avatar
himself
Topic Author
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:02 am

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:54 pm

I'm also wondering
1. Still itching to see what the name and nomenclature will be
2. What were the bids from Leonardo DRS & KAI/Lockheed
3. Boeing already has two examples flying, decades experience building planes, simulators and radios, so how can Boeing screw this up?

Just reading various articles, I can see how Boeing underbid the others. They cut costs of construction. Instead of using too many precisely-milled components and panels, they used advanced software to make fewer parts, with fewer fasteners, 3D-printing parts, and simply gluing other parts together. They took out a lot of waste and labor. For example, the canopy is injection-molded, taking days instead of weeks to build. It's simply a more modern, more economical design.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:15 pm

himself wrote:
They cut costs of construction. Instead of using too many precisely-milled components and panels, they used advanced software to make fewer parts, with fewer fasteners, 3D-printing parts, and simply gluing other parts together.


From what I can surmise, they proposed to achieve the cost savings by using precisely drilled holes and assemble the components together with minimal drilling/touch work at final/major assemblies. This require highly controlled process from the detail level on up and require buy-in from sub-component suppliers. I believe they have tried this on the commercial line. That may be why they are confident in the pricing and convinced the Air Force that the risk is acceptable. This may also explain how they were able to outbid LM on the Navy's UAV tanker project as well.

Gluing aircraft parts together at the higher assembly level is not a good idea. You either glue it at the detail level or combine multiple parts in one co-cured part. Major components are still fastened together.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
bunumuring
Posts: 2427
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 2:56 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Oct 05, 2018 1:52 pm

Hey guys,
How about 'Dreamtrainer' for a name? It was suggested to me by my (non-avgeek) teenage son after we looked at photos of Boeing's successful T-X.
I laughed, told him 'No way' but agreed to at least post it here....
Cheers,
Bunumuring.
I just wanna live while I'm alive!
 
EBJ68
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:20 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:18 pm

Dreamtrainer would be in line with the "Dream..." theme but I don't believe the Air Force or even Boeing will go that route. I'm pretty sure it will be a name with a definite military tone, but for the life of me I can't imagine what it might be, given that names get used and reused over the decades.
 
cumulushumilis
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 8:49 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Sat Oct 06, 2018 2:43 am

To me it looks like a Hornet.. How about Baby Bug?
 
petertenthije
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:00 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Sat Oct 06, 2018 2:49 pm

The name could be Sabot: SAab BOeing Trainer.

From wiki: A sabot (UK: /sæˈboʊ, ˈsæboʊ/, US: /ˈseɪboʊ/) is a structural device used in firearm or cannon ammunition to keep a sub-caliber flight projectile, such as a relatively small bullet or arrow-type projectile, in the center of the barrel when fired,
Attamottamotta!
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Sat Oct 06, 2018 3:12 pm

Viking II? I know the Swedes are not Dane's, but close enough? But the Air Force probably won't want a name taken from the Navy.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Sat Oct 06, 2018 3:23 pm

Thor - God of Sky would be too much.
Loki - Trickster or sometimes known as Sky Traveler, may be more appropriate

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 18970
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing Beats Lockheed for $9.2 Billion Air Force Trainer Program

Sat Oct 06, 2018 3:29 pm

cumulushumilis wrote:
To me it looks like a Hornet.. How about Baby Bug?

Sounds like an appropriate nickname, but the Air Force might not like using Navy slang.

petertenthije wrote:
The name could be Sabot: SAab BOeing Trainer.

From wiki: A sabot (UK: /sæˈboʊ, ˈsæboʊ/, US: /ˈseɪboʊ/) is a structural device used in firearm or cannon ammunition to keep a sub-caliber flight projectile, such as a relatively small bullet or arrow-type projectile, in the center of the barrel when fired,

Clever, but:
  • Air Force plane being named after Army munition?
  • Name that highlights the non-US participant?

Clever as it is, I wouldn't put any money on this name getting any traction.

Boeing doesn't have much heritage in this space to leverage. The best I could find is:

The Stearman (Boeing) Model 75 is a biplane formerly used as a military trainer aircraft, of which at least 10,626 were built in the United States during the 1930s and 1940s.[1] Stearman Aircraft became a subsidiary of Boeing in 1934. Widely known as the Stearman, Boeing Stearman or Kaydet, it served as a primary trainer for the United States Army Air Forces, the United States Navy (as the NS & N2S), and with the Royal Canadian Air Force as the Kaydet throughout World War II.

Yet perhaps USAF would not want to evoke the mental image of an eighty year old biplane?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: flyingturtle, RJMAZ and 24 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos