South Korea abandons consideration of stealth fighter development

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NEXT

SlowMan 8/31/2009 5:17:47 PM

@ Rufus

> Ah yes, according to your "credible sources" that somehow have the inside story on what would be a massive undertaking for Boeing that has gone completely unreported in any respected intentional publication...

??? KFX has been covered at places like aviationweek. This is the problem with dealing with foreign fighter development projects in English speaking world, where 95% of material aren't translated.

Heck, J-13 already appeared on China's CCTV, but how many non-Chinese have seen that one..

> Once again your "credible sources" sound an awful lot like a recap of several confused fanboys

Who happens to write for military magazines.

> A few weeks ago you were here telling us how the program was already in development...

Preliminary development so that the decision maker can say a go or no go. Once the green light is given, the full development takes place starting the next day. This is how the R&D system works over there.

> a future fighter might take that can't even decide whether the plane in question will have one engine or two...

Well, both has been planned and simulated, for decision making process.

Quote Reply

Herald12345 Proportions are wrong, fanboy..... 8/31/2009 6:47:08 PM

on that PRC "fighter".

Not too clever, fanboy. Not too clever.

Herald

Quote Reply

Reactive 8/31/2009 8:56:53 PM

Even for a Chinese schematic (note perspective on radial elements) it's rubbish.

Slowman...

Dude.. you really are coming across very badly. C'mon, can't you see the weaknesses in what you are saying?

Quote Reply

Rufus 9/1/2009 2:21:40 AM

"??? KFX has been covered at places like aviationweek."

Covered yes, but none of the hilarious speculation you try to pass off as fact.

"Preliminary development so that the decision maker can say a go or no go. Once the green light is given, the full development takes place starting the next day. This is how the R&D system works over there."

lol

The F-18 is a Boeing plane. If anyone was going to do even a study on how to modify it it would be Boeing.

SKorea does not even have the blueprints and detailed technical data for the F-18 in order to attempt such a study.

You keep going on and on as if SKorea is going to produce a heavily modified SHornet complete with implausible major structural modifications but act like somehow nobody at Boeing would be aware that this was going on.

This is not about how things are done "over there." It is about how engineering projects work PERIOD.

You don't launch a major redesign of an aircraft you don't even have the plans for.

You are never going to get the blueprints to a state-of-the-art fighter jet packed with export controlled technology without first working out some serious contractual and tech transfer issues with Boeing and the United States.

Do you think you can just call Boeing on the phone and say "hey, we are thinking about making a knock-off of your top of the line product, would you mind faxing the secret plans over? K? thanx!"

There would have to be months of negotiations before even preliminary work could be undertaken and these talks would be widely reported in respected publications.

Try to use your head for once.

Quote Reply

SlowMan 9/1/2009 9:29:42 AM

@ Rufus

> Covered yes, but none of the hilarious speculation you try to pass off as fact.

English publications like aviationweek are pretty weak at covering non-US and non-Russian projects due to language barriers.

Just because 95% of information on certain projects aren't in English doesn't mean they are not available. CIA specifically has thousands of intelligence agents whose job is to watch foreign TV and read foreign newspapers and internet sites to gather information in non-English languages.

> The F-18 is a Boeing plane.

That doesn't mean Super Hornet's layout is only in Boeing's computer database; others have rough estimation of it.

> If anyone was going to do even a study on how to modify it it would be Boeing.

Yes, and it was Boeing that has been going after KFX project since 2006 and is said to be the most aggressive bidder(Actually Saab is even more aggressive than Boeing but Saab has little chance of selling its Gripen-based solution due to size limitation).

> SKorea does not even have the blueprints

You don't need an exact design drawings; just a rough construction of it on CATIA for computer simulation purpose.

> You keep going on and on as if SKorea is going to produce a heavily modified SHornet complete with implausible major structural modifications but act like somehow nobody at Boeing would be aware that this was going on.

I don't get why you keep saying this, since Boeing has been making the bid to do just that since 2006. Actually Boeing was making both F-15E based options and F/A-18E based options and left the choice to Korean DoD.

> This is not about how things are done "over there." It is about how engineering projects work PERIOD.

How they run projects like this is that they first build a rough version on CATIA and run simulations on it to gather data and cost estimates. Then they seek out specific technical partners for what they do not have. How else would you know what you need external engineering help on unless you build it first and run simulations on it, at least virtually on CATIA?

This is a great engineering practice for engineers too, since engineers work faster once they go for the real thing because they have done it before. This is why Korean engineers could roll out prototypes in just 3~4 years after the full development begins.

> export controlled technology without first working out some serious contractual and tech transfer issues with Boeing and the United States.

Actually that's the uncertainty about Boeing's bid. Boeing's tech transfer list in the bid is said to be extensive and "satisfactory", but there is uncertainly about getting the US government clearance.

> Try to use your head for once.

This is just a case of you not understanding different weapons development cultures of foreign countries.

AviationWeek has an article on how this kinds of engineering subcontracting work is done, namely Korean Army's new troop carrier helicopter in this case. < link >

Quote Reply

Herald12345 9/1/2009 9:46:00 AM

How they run projects like this is that they first build a rough version on CATIA and run simulations on it to gather data and cost estimates. Then they seek out specific technical partners for what they do not have. How else would you know what you need external engineering help on unless you build it first and run simulations on it, at least virtually on CATIA?

You wind tunnel a physical model, kumquat, because no supercomputer known can solve all the gas fluid equations involved.

Strictly amateur.

Herald

Quote Reply

SlowMan 9/1/2009 10:03:50 AM

@ Herald12345

> You wind tunnel a physical model, kumquat, because no supercomputer known can solve all the gas fluid equations involved.

But we are not talking about a full-scale development, but a rough estimation and simulation for engineering practice and cost estimations only.

Quote Reply

Herald12345 Sure we are................ 9/1/2009 10:51:21 AM

@ Herald12345

> You wind tunnel a physical model, kumquat, because no supercomputer known can solve all the gas fluid equations involved.

But we are not talking about a full-scale development, but a rough estimation and simulation for engineering practice and cost estimations only.

How do toy determine planform again (So you get the 4 influences right?)

That is what I meant by proportions.

Quote Reply

Rufus 9/1/2009 1:17:00 PM

"English publications like aviationweek are pretty weak at covering non-US and non-Russian projects due to language barriers."

This if of course neither true nor applicable. Any Boeing project is going to be done primarily in English.

"That doesn't mean Super Hornet's layout is only in Boeing's computer database; others have rough estimation of it."

LOL If by "rough estimate" you mean a few pictures, brochures and plastic hobby-shop models then yes.

The fact that you think someone would launch a serious design study on modifying a jet fighter based on that is hilarious.

"You don't need an exact design drawings; just a rough construction of it on CATIA for computer simulation purpose."

Kid, when you start talking about moving around the landing gear, "shrinking" the airframe, adding internal bays... etc etc you are not talking about a couple minor tweaks. Nothing short of a complete and detailed set of plans would be sufficient. You need to know the plane's center of gravity in all fuel and load states, the minute details of its aerodynamic properties, EVERYTHING. Even once you know that what you are describing would be a major project that would require a lot of work.

You clearly don't know the difference between fanboys creating CGI next generation fighters and engineers creating the real thing.

"I don't get why you keep saying this, since Boeing has been making the bid to do just that since 2006. Actually Boeing was making both F-15E based options and F/A-18E based options and left the choice to Korean DoD. "

If Boeing were offering a modified version of one of its planes Boeing would be doing the work, all of it. They would not turn over anything more than the most general information on the aircraft until after a formal agreement was in place and approved by all relevant authorities. That is how this business works. If such an agreement had been reached Boeing would have announced it....

"How they run projects like this is that they first build a rough version on CATIA and run simulations on it to gather data and cost estimates. Then they seek out specific technical partners for what they do not have. How else would you know what you need external engineering help on unless you build it first and run simulations on it, at least virtually on CATIA?"

How "they" run projects like this huh? LOL

"They" don't run projects like this AT ALL. Korea has never even attempted a project like what you are describing yet you act like they have some kind of standard procedure for it... and even more laughably... that that procedure calls for them to try to design radically modified versions of foreign aircraft they don't even have the plans for... LOL

"This is a great engineering practice for engineers too, since engineers work faster once they go for the real thing because they have done it before. This is why Korean engineers could roll out prototypes in just 3~4 years after the full development begins."

Yeah, all of those Korean designed fighter jets are coming to mind right now.

"This is just a case of you not understanding different weapons development cultures of foreign countries."

Foreign cultures? You are talking about trying to buy a US design. This isn't a question of culture. This is a simple case of a kid who doesn't understand how the arms trade works and doesn't understand how weapons development programs work.

You are really making a joke of yourself.

Quote Reply

SlowMan 9/1/2009 2:04:19 PM

@ Rufus

> Any Boeing project is going to be done primarily in English.

But the political decision process behind the project wouldn't be.

> LOL If by "rough estimate" you mean a few pictures

No, a CATIA model.

> The fact that you think someone would launch a serious design study on modifying a jet fighter based on that is hilarious.

But that's exactly how they are doing it. Based on computer modeling and simulation. This is what they call "preeliminary development".

> you are not talking about a couple minor tweaks.

Of course not. What is being discussed is basically a total redesign.

> If Boeing were offering a modified version of one of its planes Boeing would be doing the work, all of it.

Not even Lockheed Martin, which tends to guard its technology much more jealously than Boeing does, did that over the course of T-50 project.

> They would not turn over anything more than the most general information on the aircraft

You can create a rough CATIA models of target aircraft without input from the original manufacturer. Remember that this is strictly for evaluation purpose.

> Korea has never even attempted a project like what you are describing yet you act like they have some kind of standard procedure for it...

This aviationweek article explains that standard procedure very clear. < link >

M1A1 goes in -> standard procedure -> K1A1 comes out.
F-16 goes in -> standard procedure -> T-50 comes out.
Cougar goes in -> standard procedure -> Surion comes out.
S-400 goes in -> standard procedure -> KM-SAM comes out.
Super Hornet goes in -> standard procedure -> KFX comes out.

They have done this so many times it has indeed become a standard procedure.

> that that procedure calls for them to try to design radically modified versions of foreign aircraft they don't even have the plans for... LOL

Boeing will of course hand over the Super Hornet plans once contract is signed. This is what Boeing is bidding for, the right to sell Super Hornet plans and engineering subcontracting services in exchange for royalty, work share and the right to market resulting product in the US. The exactly the same kind of deal that Lockheed Martin signed 10 years ago that produced T-50.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NEXT