The Ministry of Defence has confirmed that the Royal Air Force (RAF) is conducting a capability investigation into replacing its advanced jet trainer.

This assessment will inform the Strategic Defence Review (SDR) and support the training needs of current and future combat aircraft, including the Typhoon, F-35 Lightning, and the forthcoming Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP).

Conservative MP Ben Obese-Jecty raised the matter in a written question to the Ministry of Defence, asking for an update on the procurement process for the RAF’s next-generation fast-jet trainer.

Responding to the question, Defence Minister Maria Eagle stated: “The Royal Air Force is undertaking a capability investigation into the replacement of the current advanced jet trainer capability and combat aircrew training requirements for Typhoon, F-35 Lightning and the future Global Combat Air Programme, which is informing the Strategic Defence Review (SDR).”

The investigation considers the changing nature of combat aircraft operations and aims to identify a system that meets evolving training requirements. Eagle highlighted that the study includes options for combining live flying and networked virtual training.

“The nature of UK combat aircraft operation continues to transform, and future training requirements reflect this. Therefore, the capability investigation includes consideration of a training system that would combine live flying training, including with our air weapons range infrastructure, and networked virtual training through realistic simulation,” she explained.

The outcome of the SDR will ultimately determine the next steps, with no decisions to be made until its completion.

The RAF’s current fast-jet training capability, provided by the Hawk T2, has been central to preparing aircrew for frontline operations. The inclusion of virtual simulation in training has gained traction in recent years, offering cost-effective and scalable solutions while maintaining high levels of realism.

However, the integration of such systems alongside live flying remains a challenge, particularly in ensuring interoperability with existing and future platforms.

As the SDR progresses, decisions made will be critical to ensuring that RAF aircrew remain prepared for the demands of modern and future air combat.

 

George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison

21 COMMENTS

  1. There are many options, we are in partnership with Italy and Japan to produce GCAP and they will be facing the same issues as ourselves regarding new Fast trainers. Fact is we do not have a modern option in production but Italy does and they operate Typhoons and F35B so that may be an obvious option.
    I just hope that given the ridiculously low numbers we would want, we don’t try to go it alone, that market is pretty full so just for once a fast off the shelf option would be prudent.
    In fact I’d actually think about a joint training approach with like minded nations using a common, jointly owned pool of aircraft.

    • it’s an idea worth exploring ABC. In the 80’s there was a joint Tornado RAF/German/Italian training centre at RAF Cottesmore.

      • Yep and I spent many a happy hour watching from the Stamford end of the runway. If you think about we have most of different weather and terrain issues covered between just those 3.

    • Healey was being shown around that Turk jet last week. People started to speculate if we’d buy it as part of them going for Typhoon.

      • Perhaps so mate.
        Many of us considered the Hawk T2 as one of the worst politically motivated purchases.

        It was beyond bleeding obvious it would have a short shelf life, as a 30 year old design with a face lift is still old had.
        It was always going to be showing its age by 2030.

        What’s needed is a high end, thoroughly modern LIFT, a composite blend of sophisticated synthetic avionics, able to mimic F35/GCAP avionics, preferably at least transonic, highly agile with a reconfigurable fly by wire flight control system and excellent reliability.

    • I agree – we would be mad to do a bespoke.

      This is a MOTS requirement but UK has a nasty habit of taking sensible MOTS and then ‘optimising it’ such that we can only afford a tiny number of units.

      Unfortunately, then there is the issue of how it plays with defence industrial policy and keeping people busy if we don’t get another Typhoon order.

      That is where cost effective logic evaporates and something very expensive gets inserted into the capital plans that RAF probably don’t want on its budget lines.

  2. Since 1980 UK and Italy have got basically the same main combat aircrafts. And if GCAP survives to 2070 will be 90 years of that… So it makes sense to have some commonality.

  3. Did Aeralis ever happen? I thought they were developing a new modular aircraft with one of them being a trainer option and the RAF were quite interested?

    • I would like to see Aeralis brought under the GCAP umbrella, as part of a LIFT, UCAV, Light attack GCAP expansion.

      Unfortunately, the Italians might well blow a gasket over that one!!!

    • Aeralis are still going. According to their website they have made submissions to the Government’s “Invest 2035: The UK’s modern industrial strategy” on the 2nd December and the Strategic Defence Review on the 1 October. They have also had a visit from the RN’s Develop Directorate in October which is interesting. The modular aircraft has an uncrewed option with the pilot replaced with AI, although I think that version is still some way off as the focus appears to be on the Fast Jet Trainer.

      They were supposed to be flying a prototype test aircraft this year, but I could find no mention of that online so I guess they missed that target. My fear is that they get small contracts for various bit of niche tech they are developing, rather as happened to Reaction Engines, and get pulled away from their core business – designing and building an innovative aircraft.

      Cheers CR

    • The trouble is that unless they get a few descent size orders in or at least I lot of interest from potential big buyers then it might become a good idea that may never materials

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here