T-45C Replacement

[Llarry]

I know this is heresy, but if you delete the ball flying requirement, I suspect it would be cheaper to piggyback off the Air Force's T-7A with a Navy/Marine T-7B. Same F404 engine and relatively inexpensive development costs.

 

[MIDREGS]

I know this is heresy, but if you delete the ball flying requirement, I suspect it would be cheaper to piggyback off the Air Force's T-7A with a Navy/Marine T-7B. Same F404 engine and relatively inexpensive development costs.

I don’t think the Navy wants another trainer program tied to the Air Force

 

[ChuckMK23]

I don’t think the Navy wants another trainer program tied to the Air Force

In this budgetary climate I doubt it can a avoided.

 

[Skywalker]

Curious how well it flies at high alpha with those little horizontal stabs? But perhaps, like other things in life, it's not the size, but rather how they're used......so to speak.

If their marketing sim is anything to go by, below ~170 knots George starts to fight you. Hard to picture flying the ball like that in my limited experience.

 

[SynixMan]

In this budgetary climate I doubt it can a avoided.

The T-7 is a dumpster fire of a program.

If they Navy ordered T-50Ns today they'd probably get them before the Air Force got their T-7s.