The Ministry of Defence has confirmed that work is now under way to define the full requirement for a replacement to the Royal Air Force’s Hawk T2 advanced jet trainer, as part of a broader effort to modernise the UK Military Flying Training System (UKMFTS).

Around 650 aircrew trainees are currently progressing through the £3.8 billion, 25-year public-private partnership, which provides training for fast jet, multi-engine, rotary-wing and remotely piloted aircraft pilots, as well as mission aircrew across all three services. The system operates seven aircraft types across six UK sites and covers 20 aircrew specialisations.

In a letter to the Defence Committee dated 15 October, Defence Readiness and Industry Minister Luke Pollard described UKMFTS as “a 25-year, £3.8Bn Public Private Partnership, contracted to 2033.” He said the programme delivers aircrew training for the RAF, Royal Navy and Army, providing all training aircraft, simulators, instructors and infrastructure required for UK pilot development.

Pollard said the Fast Jet training pipeline is now “optimised,” with only six trainees waiting to begin flying training and all delays under three months. Thirty-two pilots are currently in post-elementary hold, down from 128 two years ago. However, delays persist in other areas: 34 pilots are waiting to begin Operational Conversion Unit training, including 12 rotary-wing pilots affected by Chinook OCU delays and the Puma’s phase-out, while 18 remotely piloted air system trainees face holdovers of up to four years due to delays in the Protector programme.

The minister said demand for multi-engine pilots is expected to increase from 2025–26 with new intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance platforms coming into service. A blended approach using both civilian and military training will be trialled in 2026 to meet this demand.

On the future of advanced jet training, Pollard confirmed that the MOD is maintaining close liaison with BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce “to ensure Hawk T2 engine availability meets our requirements,” but noted that availability “remains fragile.”

He wrote that the MOD is “standing up a Programme Team to assess future options and to define the full requirement,” with the goal of creating a system that is “technically adaptable and scalable,” integrates synthetic training devices, and delivers an immersive training environment.

Pollard concluded, “I want to assure the Defence Committee that the MOD remains committed to ensuring UKMFTS meets our current and future front-line requirements for world-class aircrew.”

Lisa West
Lisa West
Lisa has a degree in Media & Communication from Glasgow Caledonian University and works with industry news, sifting through press releases in addition to moderating website comments.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

80 COMMENTS

  2. Demand for multi engine pilots to increase due to new ISTAR platforms coming into service.
    E7? There are only 3, I’d dread to think the strain then if they replaced Hercules.

    • Hi M8 When it comes to multi engined platforms such as A330, A400, P8, E7 etc I just sometimes scratch my head, it’s almost as if the RAF is incapable of thinking outside their tight little “My Toys, my Children” mentality.
      Those Hercules crews haven’t vanished into thin air or forgotten everything they ever learned they have probably either migrated over to A400 or gone into the Civilian part of their flying careers.
      IMHO it’s time we took a leaf out of the USAF play book and actually thought about a well structured and rewarding RAuxAF à la their National guard.
      A lot of those ex RAF Pilots may be interested in it if the reward package incorporated a way of adding service years to their Forces Pensions and the promotions they would have had if MOD hadn’t curtailed their careers.
      And besides which if we end up in a shooting war, Civil Airlines will either be grounded or pressed into service anyway, so you may as well do the job properly. And the same goes for ground crews etc etc.
      Oh and Good Morning 😎

      • Good morning my friend. 😎
        And, it’s sunny here in Surrey, was expecting a deluge.
        There is actually a reserve Sqn for pilots in the RauxAF already, I forget its number, 600 something, for the ATF at Brize. That could be the embryo to expand.
        I think that is a great idea. I’ve also lamented before that our reserve, including the RauxAF, is a reserve of people but no kit. RNR, RauxAF, they have no assets themselves which is ridiculous given the wealth and economy of this country.

        • Sunny in Surrey? It’s about to tip it down in Greece, makes me wonder what the point of going on holiday is sometimes 😢.
          A RAuxAF makes sense, but I think it would need to have two components:
          The ‘regular reserves’ that train and are ORBAT-ed with normal RAF squadrons as ground crew, ATC and all the rest, who would exist to expand our existing fighting power and sortie rate in the event of conflict.
          The ‘auxiliary squadrons’ which train together and have their own aircraft (or use armed trainers), as you suggest. A good campaign in the commercial aviation industry, pilots aircrew and ground crew, would be able to produce a good nucleus as the UK produces an outsized proportion of the world’s commercial pilots IIRC. They’d just need some aeroplanes, that’s all.

          • Hi mate.
            You are aware, that the Royal Auxillary Air Force already exists?
            And a RAuxAF Regiment for the RAF Regiment side of things.
            That is the RAF reserve. I’m just checking as your wording made me uncertain.
            Those RAux AF Sqns already do as you described, support various parts of the regular RAF.
            I’d like to see them with aircraft, much as you describe.
            It’s fantasy though.

      • I’m sorry not T7 because of its delays, but maybe a powerpoint project as a potential option instead? At least the T7 has test articles handed over and testing by the USAF, which is a hell of a lot more than can be said for Aerialis, how many years have they been trying to flog that?

    • Whichever option is chosen, I wish that some thought was given to the possibility of using them as a quarterback to a group of UASs.

    • They have to look at the aircraft available, and see which best fits our requirements for fast jet training and a Red Arrows replacement. Trials have already been taking place at Boscombe Down with the M346. But they have to think what’s going to be a good platform for future Tempest pilots.

        • I think people will soon get over it once they are painted Red with a big Union Jack on the tail. At the end of the day the team is about the people. And most of joe public won’t give to cents where the aircraft comes from.

  6. There was a proposal from a British Company some time back-any news on that. It seemed a bit ambitious and may only have been a concept but once again, sad that one cannot be developed in the UK or in collaboration with another country. Capabilities constantly being shed or slowly chipped away..

      • Hello Daniele-that’s the one! Looking back at the history of the Hawk-I see they produced and sold over a 1000 units. From memory that is run not equalled for many years since the days of the Hunter? There are many reasons to keep a capability in the UK with a trusted ally including retaining a vital capability domestically.
        Is your D Day end of this month btw?

        • PS-The Hawker Hunter btw I see saw nearly 2000 units produced including some for the then Royal Rhodesian Air Force in the early 1960s. I remember when they arrived in Salisbury and at about the same time as the RAF were receiving their first batch of BAC Lightnings. I remember the photo on the front page of the Rhodesia Herald showing a squadron of silver Lightnings at a base in England. The caption read Display of Power! My young Rhodesian friend was jealous and wanted some for the RRAF 🙂
          (told you that story before…)

          • Hi Goeff -those were the days! Fyi- I believe several Rhodie Hunter pilots were seconded to 2 sqn SAAF in the 70’s. The rumour was these Mirages 111s were to be transferred to the Rhodies- but of course never eventuated.

            • Morning Klonkie-nice to hear from you! The 111 was the delta wing? Amazing aircraft ahead of their time. We saw one at the Virginia Airshow in Durban where the pilot performed a near vertical climb directly above the crowd in a classic trade of speed for height manoeuvre which never would have been allowed by the safety police these days! I must admit though we had a moment when he reached the near stall as he was literally immediately above me, wife and kids!! They also had an SAA 747 do a touch and go on that short runway-again the safety guys might have had second thoughts on that one!! Hope all good in NZ. Cheers for now

              • Cheers Geoff – all good here in Auckland thx! Spot on re the 111 being the delta wing. I believe RSA planned to secure a licence for local assembly of the Mirages F1 , presumably to supplement the existing F1 fleet . The ’77 arms embargo put an end to that however. So I guess the plan may have seen the transfer of the older Mir 111C to the Rhodesian Air force . Neither of theses two things came to pass however.

                • Hi Klonkie. I thought we had some swept wing F1’s procured with the help of Israel? The Cheetah-was that a development of the Mirage 111 or from the F1? I speak from memory-like to avoid Google as far as possible 🙂 I have a friend who runs our local Country Club. He was ex BSAP, was badly injured in a mine encounter even though they were in an armoured vehicle-spent several months in hospital but recovered. He was for a while Ian Smith’s bodyguard. Some interesting people in our neighbourhood! Cheers from Durbs

                  • Hello Geoff, yes the FIs were acquired from France in 1975, with a planned intent to assemble more locally under licence in RSA (unsure how many were planned). The Cheetah was in 2 tranches. The first tranche in the mid 80s, an upgrade to the delta Mir 111D/E jets. The plan was to develop an indigenous new fighter for service entry in the late 90s, known as project CAVA.

                    I bevelling they were partnering with Israel to licence produce the new Lavi jet , then in prototype in the mid 80s. A major issues was sourcing a power plant. Israel was developing an upgraded licensed American PW power-plant , which of courses could never be exported to RSA with the UN Arms embargo. No doubt the default option wold have been the less powerful Mirage FI Snecma 9K engine.

                    The Lavi project was killed through USA pressure, Israel bought more F16’s. RSA then went it alone, to develop their own jet fighter. The design scope expanded to a bigger twin engine design (similar to the F18/ Mig 29). Israeli engineers joined on the project (ex Lavi engineers, I imagine). With the end of the cold war, Namibian independence ,and spiralling costs, the projects was cancelled. A wind test model was completed, which looked very much like the Mirage 4000 prototype. I have wondered if the sneaky French sold the design blueprints to SA.

                    After transition to a democratic nation, in 1994 the SAAF acquired a second tranche of Cheetahs – the C model (about 40 ish). These were new builds from Israel (essentially a Kfir air-frame), assembled in RSA and a French Snecma 9K 50 engine. Sadly, they were retired from 2007 when the SAAF onboarded the new Grippen jet. Some Cheetahs were sold to Ecuador and I seem to think Draken international bought some for fighter training programmes ?

                    Oddly enough the 90’s were kind of a golden age for South Africa aircraft production. Apart from the Cheetah, they were building several indigenous designs – the Oryx transport Helo, the Roovalk AH, re-purposed DC3 to turbo daks, and the ACE trainer prototype. The ACE was cancelled in favour of local production of a PC7/9 hybrid though.

                    Anyway, a rather long winded answer to your question!

                    • Wow Klonkie. That comprehensive reply says as much about you and your career as it does about South Africa’s amazing arms industry of that time!! The old saying-necessity is the mother of invention applies but this country produced some amazing talent in every department. We all know the obnoxious Elon Musk and beautiful Charlize Theron but there are thousands of other talented and gifted South Africans scattered around the planet-our loss, the worlds gain! To think that we were able to produce world class front line aircraft and were developing a trainer, helicopters and a turbocharged Dakota(!) and meantime back in our beloved Mother Country with all its resources and talent they cannot get a trainer replacement off the ground even in a time of the proverbial clear and present danger! SA could have been a place where people would be queuing up to come and live in-we had a great start with Madiba followed by the educated and intelligent Mbeki and then came the Great Destroyer-the truly evil Jacob Zuma. This is not the forum for politics and thank you George for indulging me, but the stories of Southern Africa are the modern equivalent of the Greek Tragedies

      • My preference would be to go with Aeralis, simply because it’s British and all that’s associated with that (sovereign capability, supporting British jobs and developing British technology etc) but then that comes with huge risk. Lots of conceptual ideas but not even a flying prototype yet. It’s a chicken and egg situation, I guess Aeralis need confidence someone is likely to buy there product(s) but then buyers need confidence this isn’t going to be a product investors sink Billions into without any return. All the other options have well developed, flying prototypes or are in-production and its just a case of opening a new production line. Difficult, especially when I dare say there is no further budget in the MoD for helping Aeralis build its prototypes.

    • Aeralis are still going as a company, I think they are hoping for a flying prototype some time next year (check up on that).
      They got quite a lot of money from Qatar which will keep their design office going, but they have no links with anyone who can actually assemble planes so there’s a while to go before they are competitive to win any contracts.

      • Good Morning Torpedo. I know nothing about how aircraft are built but I presume the Hawk manufacturing setup is long gone. The basic design looks very similar to several of the new proposals so one wonders why that shell could not be re-manufactured with all the new electronic gizmos they produce these days? If they can keep B52s and DC3s in the air for decades, why not extend the life of the Hawk in a similar fashion? I know airframes as with hulls eventually just become unfit for purpose, but how do the Yanks do it? The F 16 for example-do they continue to manufacture or do they do complete rebuild jobs on these aircraft?

  7. So again not doing any thing just thinking about it. Same old crap day after day from the MOD, lots of long words and bugger all else. Never a single order worth while. more dead lines, coffee mornings and lack of any thing.

    • They have to evaluate the different aircraft types available for fast jet training and a Red Arrows replacement. Which meets our requirements Cost, operating cost. Do we get final assembly in the UK ect ect. Its not a quick or simple solution.

      • they have knowen for a while the Hawk out of service date, as alway leave til lste, then decide on cost any way. Most likely cheapest up front most expensive down the line like always.

  9. Let me guess, the most complicated and expensive one that relies on the most foreign agencies, but has British equipment jammed into it to really ramp up the costs

      • I don’t understand why BAE aren’t simply positioning themselves as the obvious choice with a ‘Hawk T3’ using an entirely updated design.
        From their perspective it would allow them to fill time in Warton without export orders and also give them ‘control’ of the whole fighter training process up to GCAP.
        Maybe they are afraid of the development costs associated with competitive procurement? If so, they aren’t really playing fairly.

        • This is exactly what “Some” of us think too. Hawk was a really successful British Aircraft, sold in good numbers all over the world with various upgrades along the way, It’s like a Flying Porsche 911 in many ways, just needs a government with the will and decent numbers to make a T3 Viable, trouble is, many other options have come along whilst we were Hibernating (as with so many other British stuff).
          Apparently the engines don’t work anymore (allthough Flight Radar still shows them, daily !).

        • How much do you think it would cost to update? Replacing systems that are obsolete or redundant or parts can’t be sourced. Upgrades for systems like the engine, flight control systems etc. Then recertify it for operations, all into a market where there are already a range of proven aircraft in service or least much more advanced development in their cycle than what they have right now. Maybe it might have made sense if they had started 10 plus years ago for a product now, but now it’s kind of like France suggesting an Airbus MPA, when the P8 has already taken the market.

      • Hawk has been a massive success, the last British aircraft built and sold in numbers. The logical thing would have been to keep the ability to build and design a successer but alas, the will and the numbers are no longer there.
        “Hawk engine doesnt work”, actually yes it does and has done pretty well for decades. Using a new version of more modern design would be the obvious thing to do in a new version of any Hawk.

        We should be all rather disapointed at this situation, or don’t you agree ?

          • Well If you must continue with this tiresome game,
            I know, It’s now an old aircraft with old engines and tech so overdue a complete redesign or we lose it completely to a probable forein built design.

            Sorry to make you feel the need to have some sort of ongoing Issue with my original Sarcastic comment.

            • there was money being chucked about left, right and centre a few years ago to resolve the issue. I am guessing none of the solutions worked

  11. Talked about it for years…
    Why have they only just started to look at “options”🤔😒😤
    Our armed forces have a terrible procurement process

    • Hawks were also “Day Fighters”, a well flown Hawk in a dog fight would be like a Terrier after a Rat. What they lack is Super Wizz Bangs and Whistles.

      • Indeed-some were equipped with air to air missiles to act as ‘Guard ships ‘ at RAF bases prompting one Newspaper at the time to remark that the Russians must be scared knowing they might have to face Trainers as adversaries in a conflict!! 🙂

    • That was tried in the 1970’s with 2 sidewinders slumg under the wings.I think a Sqn worth of Hawks were identifed for the role from the OCUs. That in the days when we had Lightnings a Phantom Sqns in the UK and in Germany. Not sure if they were a reality or just a concept. As I recall the idea was to augment air defences and they would operate behind the fighter CAP manned by the big boys. They role to take out hostiles which had evaded the fighter CAP in the North Sea. I don’t recall seeing them in any of the big AD exercises I took part in.

      • Indeed yes they were. When you consider the newer threats of very basic and slow drones they would have an even greater relevance. Essentially in Europe.

      • They definitely took part in some, I saw an interview with an ex Tornado pilot, he described an exercise fighting the US Navy, how a mix of Tornados and Hawks caught the crews of the mighty F14 off guard, they were not expecting small nimble ankle biters throwing themselves into the mix.

        • I have often thought the A10C would be a good anti drone platform – long loiter time , great mix of weapons, great HUD and pilot FOV can be integrated into the network. I am surprised the USAF has not considered it , although one ac has emerged from the Iran strike with two drone/missile kills. Its a shame that it appears to be coming to the end of life for the USAF – something they have been trying to do for some years as it diverts funding from their other priority programmes.

          • The USAF has been trying to kill the A10 since the day it started flying. They have zero interest in seeing anything happen to it but being cut up in a scrapyard.

  14. Time to establish a study group of interested stakeholders to discuss options for reviewing options. Then we can move on to the discussion phase with industrial partners to discuss options. A deadline of 2035 for option discussions should be set. Then we can discuss parameters for any recommendations of options from the original study. With slippage this may lead to a decision of one option by 2040.

  15. On subject-remember the Folland Gnat!? Me and an old friend of my vintage ( ex-RAF maintenance crew) used to remember as many old British Aircraft makers as we could over a beer and we got to over twenty! In a similar vein, cars and motor bikes. The question, partly rhetorical-what the hell happened-where and why did they all disappear??

    • Yes, I used to make lots of models as a Yooof, Each kit came with a great description of each aircraft, it sort of taught me stuff about planes and sowed a life long interest. The Gnat was tiny but actually good enough for a trainer and the Red Arrows, It also did pretty well in War too.
      They are small like a Spitfire, there’s a Red Arrow Gnat at Cosford sat under the wing of a Comet. Cosford is Brilliant, if you haven’t been.

      • Haven’t been there halfwit-so many brilliant places to visit in the UK but tied up here for various reasons at present. I did Airfix models-had a model of the racing comet prop driven-same name as the Airliner, both De Havilland but this one was a pre-war racer! As to sowing life-long interests-true, our early years mould our character and interests. I was a “Nipper ” in the 1950s and we had the Dambusters and Reach for the Sky among others that moulded us!
        Cheers

        • I must go again, last time it was on my bike during a week of exploring and meeting up with a load of Bikers, didn’t spend enough time there but I’ll be taking the Motorhome next time and make a proper trip of it.
          Lot’s of Great Aircraft Museums here in the UK. Wish we had as many Old Ships.

  16. Can’t help thinking a fleet of Gripen for this role would be optimal, given high uk content and actual utility as a combat fighter, we could also have used typhoon T1’s as well really.

  17. The only request is for it to have combat capability, even if it’s just acts as extra missiles (Meteors) for Typhoons to guide/target and can carry brimstone / asraam to provide extra CAS

  18. Define the requirement? Seriously? The requirement is bloody obvious! Just get on with filling the fooking requirement!

  19. If the UK had National Will (ha,ha), we would order 40 new build Hawk T3, based on the advanced Hawk offered to India in 2017. That could have had a high Alpha wing plus a cockpit similar to the F-35. The last Hawk was built in 2022. We could restart if we wanted to, but we would have to be quick.

    • If the last Hawk was built in 2022, it’s likely the supply chain started shutting down/retooling by 2020/1, making the idea of restarting even more problematic, but the main issue is for what? So the UK reinstates a production line, churns out some 40-50 airframes and then what? The Trainer market is already well served, where’s the demand that makes it an export viable aircraft? If it isn’t, has the UK just flushed a chunk of money down the loo?

  20. I think BAe have studied the competition and concluded they can’t build an aircraft that competes on price. BAe are more than capable of designing an advanced trainer aircraft that meets both the 5th and possible 6th Gen requirements for an advanced jet trainer. I really feel that BAe were overly relying on the Golden Goose lasting longer. Not really looking at a replacement, as the MoD had given them no indications, which is probably due to a lack of funds on the MOD’s part. But advances in technology have significantly overtaken the capabilities of the Hawk and what it can deliver. If the Hawk was just to be used as the bridge between a basic and an advanced trainer, it would have a use. But the days of being an advanced trainer are now gone.

    The question would be what does the advance trainer aircraft need to do to be capable of delivering 5th or 6th Gen training. Would it need to be a low observable design, that includes a weapons bay, or does it just need the avionics and networking capabilities? Does the aircraft need the aerodynamics and performance to match a 5th Gen jet, as its unlikely to match what a 6th jet will deliver?

    If you just concentrate on how a trainee pilot is taught how to use the avionics, networking and the methods to harness all the information. Then this would be cheaper option. But you still need an aircraft that has the “available volume” for all the avionics and electrical generating capability to power the systems. The Hawk doesn’t have the space or the power for this. It is too small to cram in the necessary avionics etc and the Adour isn’t powerful enough to supply these systems. For example if we took what the pilot uses in the F35, can these fit in the Hawk, even if the systems were dumbed down in performance? No, as the design of the Adour is over 40 years old and does not take into account the bypass air used for systems cooling. You could as per the current Hawk simulate these systems. But simulations doesn’t give the trainee pilot the options to play with the systems, as it will only have limited capability based on the programming.

    The other issue is weapons training. Are we expecting the training just to encompass the basics, i.e. dumb bomb releases and possible gun strafing, as per the Hawk currently? Or will they need to use more complex weapons, that encompass stand-off engagements along with the mission planning? All the “next gen” trainer jets use external hard points to mount weapons. For initial operations against a peer enemy, its very unlikely that F35 or GCAP will use externally mounted weapons. Having weapons mounted under the wings changes how the aircraft performs and in some configurations places limitations on the flight envelop. So does that mean to be more realistic, the trainer aircraft needs a weapons bay?

    As far as I know the Boeing T7, M346, Aeralis etc are all being marketed as meeting the requirements for 5th Gen advanced training. But are they really just expanding on what 4th Gen does, i.e. giving 4.5 capabilities. What really are the requirements that an advanced jet trainer needs, so that a trainee pilot can progress to an F35 or GCAP OCU?

    Just don’t me started on the Aeralis!

    • The trouble with ticking all the options boxes is that you end up with an unaffordable, gold plated, diamond encrusted trainer, that HM Treasury would never pay for.

    • Thank you for this DaveyB. Makes sense but still if we are to buy a trainer from elsewhere there are always some risks in this weird world in which we live with old loyalties and certainties out the window one day, back the next. As to setup costs and short runs surely the answer for the core of “good” players is joint ventures. Even the mighty USA with all its resources and alternatives had a big stake, much of it after the initial development, in the Hawk.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

By submitting this comment, you agree to the storage and handling of your data by this website in accordance with our Privacy Policy.