Indeed, let’s see if they’re still going in the fall. It’s all getting very tiresome; there are COIs everywhere starting in the upper chamber, then there’s the China angle given KD on the Board of Advisors, Southwell is no angel with the SFO, complete hyperbole around the market they can win, and then there’s the duplicitous playoff between London and Paris.

Aeralis
 

If you’re going to make such bold statements please, for the love of God, come up with some artwork that illustrates an aircraft designed for this century, not the middle of last century.

BV

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....47ac719bf.jpeg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....1cefaaf8c.jpeg

I realise that looks aren’t always a measure of performance but, it looks odd, like they grafted the cockpit of a M346 onto a G91.

I can't believe that anyone is still taking Aeralis seriously - even a basic knowledge of aerodynamics and fighter design tell you that thing won't work. But hey, it's got a Union Flag on the tail....that's gotta be worth buying.

I still wonder if it's designed by the chap who does the Skytoons caricatures.

https://skytoons.co.uk/

Crumbs, what an ugly aeroplane. Bring back the Hunter :-)

Actually it looks more like a SAAB J29.

Aeralis Jet
 

The aeroplane is still the problem for me. Last year it went from a high wing design to a low wing design. At RIAT (where the images are from) they are showing a crayon drawing of a jet which could have been done by the YTS member of the team. Nobody can possibly believe that drawing represents the final draft of a 21st century training jet design.

They are basically still saying “you give us the cash and we’ll get serious about a design, until then just trust us that it’ll be a jet and we’ll paint ten of them red for you”.

Until I see a credible image of a jet that looks like it’ll rival the current market competitors (I know cockpit and avionics will be just as important but performance still matters) I just can’t get excited.

Allegedly they are 12 months from a flying prototype but they haven’t actually decided what it’ll look like. Unless that really is the final design, in which case I actually hope they don’t get any investment.

I will end with my usual caveat. I hope I’m wrong and I truly hope Aeralis develops and builds a market leading modern training jet that sells globally in huge numbers.

BV

Gonna need a bigger fin!

Mog

Tell me you're an aircraft manufacturer that's never designed an aircraft or even appreciates aircraft design without telling me...

It's not just ugly, it's a Frankenstein level hodge podge of curves and lines.

To think that these ridiculous cartoon images were approved, then printed & presented is mighty sad.

Looks like the APU chuffs the smoke..;maybe there`s a double crease in the `plans`..

DSEi
 

Had a gander at DSEI this week, and wandered past the Lockheed Martin booth and spotted the model of Tf-50 in red colors so my pics here

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....912dc14b41.jpg
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....2ff0ff530e.jpg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....fd6b88f3e0.jpg
cheers

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....1213e7dfc6.png
The Aeralis design reminds me of this aircraft…

I'm with the ugly vote. The only uglier aircraft in recent years was the Boeing X32. Maybe they are related?
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/i...1XsZc&usqp=CAU

Looks like a rehashed J29 with side intakes and a pointy nose.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....05fd22d0ae.jpg

Why would the RAF buy the T-50?

I already said that at #147

Orange peel variant for the RAF then?

Cross between an F16 and F18? Looks okay to me.