February 24, 2024 | International, Aerospace
May 8, 2019 | International, Aerospace
The Air Force’s new trainer jet is attracting the Navy’s and Marine Corps’ interests
By: Valerie Insinna
NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. — The U.S. Navy and Marine Corps are monitoring the development of the Air Force's T-X training jet, but it may be years before they can launch their own competitions to replace the T-45, officials said Monday.
“We're watching the T-X. Obviously the Air Force is going through that process,” Lt. Gen. Steven Rudder, the Marine Corps' deputy commandant for aviation, said during a panel at the Navy League's Sea-Air-Space conference.
“At some point, we're going to have to replace the T-45. We're going to have to replace the F-5,” he said, referring to the T-45 Goshawk (used by the Navy and Marine Corps to train fighter pilots) and the F-5 (used to simulate adversaries during exercises).
“Our adversary requirement is not going away. It only increases. That's another one that with our Air Force counterparts we're watching closely on many different fronts,” he added.
Last year, the Air Force chose a Boeing-Saab team to build a new, clean-sheet trainer, awarding the firms a contract worth up to $9.2 billion. Although the service's program of record is 351 T-X jets and 46 simulators, the agreement gives it the flexibility to buy up to 475 aircraft and 120 simulators. A Navy and Marine Corps buy would add several hundred aircraft to the Air Force's eventual order — a massive financial win for Boeing, which bid extremely low on the T-X solicitation with the expectation of raking in big profits during the production stage.
Boeing is set to deliver the first simulators to Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph, Texas, in 2023. In fiscal 2024, the Air Force will have enough simulators and trainers to declare its first squadron as operational.
Angie Knappenberger, the Navy's deputy director of air warfare, said the timing of a T-X buy could be “problematic” because of the current schedule of the TH-57 replacement, which is taking priority over a new jet trainer.
“Once we're able to accomplish that — the helicopter trainer replacement — then we're going to look more forward to something like the T-45 replacement. T-X would certainly be in the running as a candidate for something like that,” she said.https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/navy-league/2019/05/07/the-air-forces-new-trainer-jet-is-attracting-the-navys-and-marine-corps-interests
The Navy in January released a request for proposals for the TH-57 replacement, kick-starting a competition with Airbus, Bell and Leonardo that could potentially lead to a contract awarded this year. The service wants to buy 130 helicopter trainers from FY20 to FY23.
Knappenberger did not elaborate on why the timing of the T-X program could be challenging for the Navy, but the service plans to finish purchasing new helicopter trainers just as Boeing starts producing and delivering T-Xs to the Air Force. Another key factor may be whether the T-X can be outfitted with the gear necessary for taking off from and landing on aircraft carriers, and how quickly Boeing could complete the engineering work involved.
Like Rudder, Knappenberger noted the appeal of buying enough T-X trainers to fill the service's adversary air requirements, saying she's “curious to see” the jet's red air capabilities.
The Air Force is also assessing the T-X's ability to conduct other mission sets.
“You could imagine a version of the airframe that could be equipped as a light fighter. You can imagine a version that is equipped as an adversary air-training platform,” Air Combat Command head Gen. Mike Holmes told reporters in March.
On the same subject
-
-
November 10, 2024 | International, C4ISR, Security
Sweden selects Embraer cargo plane, Brazil plans to buy more Saab fighters
-
May 11, 2020 | International, C4ISR
DoD Pushes To Reverse FCC OK Of Ligado 5G Network
"The impact is significant, and it's unacceptable," Gen. Jay Raymond told the Senate Armed Services Committee. By THERESA HITCHENSon May 06, 2020 at 8:14 PM WASHINGTON: DoD is pressing for the FCC to reverse its controversial decision to approve Ligado's plan to create a mobile 5G communications network, one the Pentagon asserts will jam GPS receivers. “It is clear to DoD that the risk to GPS far outweighs the benefits of this FCC decision. And the FCC needs to reverse their decision,” DoD CIO Dana Deasy told the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) hearing during a marathon hearing this afternoon. A formal “re-petition” action has to be taken by National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) by the end of May. NTIA, which falls under the Commerce Department, coordinates federal agency use of the radio frequency spectrum. DoD, Deasy told the SASC, is working to provide NTIA with the necessary technical information to do so. SASC members were divided on the wisdom of the FCC's April 20 decision to approve Ligado's latest plan to repurpose its current L-band spectrum for use in a US-wide terrestrial 5G network. The SASC hearing did not fall along partisan lines. Instead, the division came between the SASC leadership and the committee's members who also sit on the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. It has jurisdiction over the FCC. For example, while Republican SASC Chairman James Inhofe and Democratic Ranking Member Sen. Jack Reed excoriated the FCC decision, Republican Sen. Roger Wicker, who chairs the Commerce committee, expressed support for the FCC. Indeed, a number of senators with a foot in the Commerce Committee raised the fact that the FCC's decision not only was approved unanimously by the five FCC commissioners, but also has been praised by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Attorney General William Barr. (Barr was tapped by President Donald Trump on April 4 to head a new Telecom Team designed to ensure that China cannot dominate the 5G marketplace and undercut the security of emerging US networks.) DoD and many other agencies, including the Transportation Department, have opposed the planned Ligado (formerly LightSquared) network for nearly a decade, arguing that it will drown out GPS signals in most current receivers. Their protests have been echoed by a wide swathe of the defense and commercial transport industry, including the Aerospace Industries Association and the National Defense Industrial Association. Indeed, according to a press release put out today by Inhofe's office: “This opposition extends to the private sector as well. Numerous industries across the gamut – commercial air, satellite communications, weather, construction, and more – have also registered their objections to the FCC's Order.” Mike Griffin, head of DoD Research and Engineering, explained that the issue is the “noise” that will be created by Ligado because it will use spectrum designed for satellite use to rebroadcast via terrestrial cell towers. He said that the situation for the vast number of GPS receivers today would be analogous to trying to hear the “rustling of leaves” through the noise of “100 jets taking off all at once.” Perhaps most significantly, Griffin pushed back hard against Ligado's assertions in FCC filings (and most recently in a letter today to the SASC obtained by Breaking D) that most receivers would not be affected. He said testing done by the Transportation Department showed that high-end GPS receivers used in civil aviation, which costs some $10,000 each, are impacted by Ligado's planned signal strength. Even those “hardened” receivers are “barely capable” of discerning GPS signals through the “noise” caused by Ligado's 9.8 dBW — an energy level about equal to that put out by a 10 watt light bulb). More worryingly, Griffin asserted that most commercial GPS receivers — including those that would be used to guide self-driving cars in the future — “lose lock” on the signal at a power level some 100 times lower than Ligado plans to use. Gen. Jay Raymond, double hatted as the head of Space Force and Space Command, told the SASC that Ligado's network would have a “significant impact” on Dod's homeland defense mission, as well as on military and commercial space launch capabilities. “In my opinion, the impact is significant, and it's unacceptable,” he said. While Deasy said one avenue for reversing the decision could be legislative action, it remains unclear what the SASC can actually do, however — should the committee even be able to agree on a course of action. Inhofe said it is legally unclear to him right now whether the Congressional Review Act, that allows Congress to overturn a decision by a federal agency, actually applies to the FCC decision for technical reasons. (The FCC officially is independent of the Executive Branch.) Retired Adm. Thad Allen, former Coast Guard Commandant and chair of the Space-Based Positioning and Timing National Advisory Board, suggested that the Senate Commerce Committee should hold a hearing and force the FCC to reconsider. Those members of that committee participating today, including Wicker, seemed reluctant to consider the idea of even having an exploratory hearing. For example, Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal suggested that the matter perhaps might be better adjudicated in the courts, given the questions raised about the legalities of the FCC's administrative process that have been raised by members of Congress as well as several industry groups. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/dod-pushes-to-reverse-fcc-ok-of-ligado-5g-network/