USA T-7A Trainer by BAE, Boeing & Saab.

[Yasar_TR]

After a long delay the T-7A trainer deliveries have started with the first units.

T-7

www.boeing.com

This is a state of the art trainer, specially designed to train 5th and next generation fighter pilots.
But the problem is that these fighters are so easy to fly as they are furnished with top end FBW (fly by wire) avionics that makes a pilot’s work too easy. So the trainer has been designed with this in mind.
The pilot will be a lazy passenger whereby the flying the plane will be done by FBW system and the pilot will be busy sorting out sensors and equipment related to the plane’s situational awareness, EW, system management etc. So the pilot's brain cycles will be focused on mission management rather than on manually flying the aircraft. It is a bit of a downer as the intricacies of standard flight training has been omitted.
This puts the plane in a position (as far as the designers are concerned) not needing supersonic flight. As supersonic flight is going to be used only for a short time during flight, it has been deemed not necessary to be included in this trainer.
This is a bit of a short sightedness, when the best new generation fighters are supercruise capable, it is important to have a trainer that can fly supersonic.
But supersonic flight means more expensive trainer. US airforce needs at least 350 of these trainers and cost is important. It is claimed that the empty shell plane cost is around 20 million dollars. But the price will spiral upwards as electronics and mission related avionics are added. So cost has played a certain part in going subsonic too.

Tusas Hurjet‘s approach is more realistic, and with the rift between US and Europe growing, it has all the makings of a success story.

 

[TR_123456]

View attachment 79010
After a long delay the T-7A trainer deliveries have started with the first units.

T-7

www.boeing.com

This is a state of the art trainer, specially designed to train 5th and next generation fighter pilots.
But the problem is that these fighters are so easy to fly as they are furnished with top end FBW (fly by wire) avionics that makes a pilot’s work too easy. So the trainer has been designed with this in mind.
The pilot will be a lazy passenger whereby the flying the plane will be done by FBW system and the pilot will be busy sorting out sensors and equipment related to the plane’s situational awareness, EW, system management etc. So the pilot's brain cycles will be focused on mission management rather than on manually flying the aircraft. It is a bit of a downer as the intricacies of standard flight training has been omitted.
This puts the plane in a position (as far as the designers are concerned) not needing supersonic flight. As supersonic flight is going to be used only for a short time during flight, it has been deemed not necessary to be included in this trainer.
This is a bit of a short sightedness, when the best new generation fighters are supercruise capable, it is important to have a trainer that can fly supersonic.
But supersonic flight means more expensive trainer. US airforce needs at least 350 of these trainers and cost is important. It is claimed that the empty shell plane cost is around 20 million dollars. But the price will spiral upwards as electronics and mission related avionics are added. So cost has played a certain part in going subsonic too.

Tusas Hurjet‘s approach is more realistic, and with the rift between US and Europe growing, it has all the makings of a success story.

So,this means the F-35 is worthless without BVR against EF,Rafale,KAAN etc?
What if you can Jam all the electronics of the F-35?

 

[Yasar_TR]

So,this means the F-35 is worthless without BVR against EF,Rafale,KAAN etc?
What if you can Jam all the electronics of the F-35?

I like that logic! Makes sense.
If you leave your pilots inexperienced about warfare in supersonic flight conditions, they would be at a disadvantage when they have to..

But this plane is there to train pilots for a fighter jet that is a flying computer in essence, that is also carrying munitions and a2a missiles.

Apart from f22, in a non BVR confrontation, none of the f35 versions have any chance against a 4.5 generation fighter anyway.
But we don’t know what the next Generation fighter equipment and flight envelope entails.
However, no matter what it entails, to not give training to your pilots in real life supersonic flight conditions is not clever.

F35 is a stealth fighter. You have to see it on your radar to jam it. Even if you have the capability to jam it you need to know where it is. (Also, F35 electronics are very advanced. It would be very difficult to jam.)

 

[TR_123456]

However, no matter what it entails, to not give training to your pilots in real life supersonic flight conditions is not clever.

I find it stupid,this means pilots wont be training for dogfight which also means what if the F-35 runs out of BVR missiles?
Just take a look at the training.
Anyway,i find the combat radius of the F-35A insufficient.
What do you think,Senior?

 

[Yasar_TR]

I find it stupid,this means pilots wont be training for dogfight which also means what if the F-35 runs out of BVR missiles?
Just take a look at the training.
Anyway,i find the combat radius of the F-35A insufficient.
What do you think,Senior?

I fully agree. Without extra fuel tanks and help of fuel tankers they are almost useless. You can’t beat a twin engined fighter in that respect.
But F16 isn’t that much better either. In fact, although f16 has a longer ferry range, when loaded, F35A has better operational radius than F16.

Regarding dogfight etc, no matter how much simulator time you spend and theory you are taught, until it becomes second nature to you through live exercise, you really are not ready for it. To discard supersonic flight training is a big mistake.

 

[Afif]

I fully agree. Without extra fuel tanks and help of fuel tankers they are almost useless. You can’t beat a twin engined fighter in that respect.

F-35A has larger combat radius than twin engined F-22 and carries more fuel internally.

 

[TR_123456]

F-35A has larger combat radius than twin engined F-22 and carries more fuel internally.

Compare it to none American.

 

[Yasar_TR]

F-35A has larger combat radius than twin engined F-22 and carries more fuel internally.

Correct. But F22 can carry drop tanks to improve its range (more than 1600 Nm. It is primarily an air superiority design with combat radius as a secondary point).

However it is a few decades older tech if compared to F35. Where as F35 is still being updated, hardly anything has been added to the F22.

Without external fuel tanks :

f35 combat radius : 590 Nm
f15ex combat radius : 790 Nm
SU35 combat radius : 860 Nm
SU57 combat radius : 800Nm
Rafale combat radius : 700 Nm

But these are only figures.

How much load do they carry?
How long can they loiter in battlefield?
How quickly they can arrive and leave battlefield?
These are important points.

Also;
How much external fuel can they carry with drop tanks and how does that affect their combat radius?
(Some fighters like F15EX and EF2000 have CFTs that do not detract from plane’s overall kinematics performance too much. And improve combat radius drastically.)

Most fighters have to carry external tanks in order to perform.
If it is Stealthy jets, then it has to be drop tanks.
With non stealthy jets CFTs are the norm. This is when the twin engines excel. (One must not forget the fact that CFTs will detract from manoeuvrability and overall kinematics performance. So if agility and long range is required from a jet, then drop tanks are used).

Russian jets are a different story altogether. With the exception of the new Mig and su34 jets that carry CFTs, all twin engined jets by design, prefer large internal tanks. If they have to carry extra fuel, then the drop tanks are their primary choice.


nb.
CFTs are designed to blend in to the fuselage so that the jet fighter’s kinematics and manoeuvrability are not too adversely effected.