According to a contract notice, RAF instructors and pilots are due to fly on the Qatari owned Hawk MK 167 aircraft on the Joint Hawk Training Squadron currently being stood up at RAF Leeming.
You can read more about the joint squadron here.
Currently, the Hawk TMk2A variant aircraft does not have certification from the Military Aviation Authority to operate safely in UK airspace.
“The UK MOD and 11 Sqn Qatar Emiri Air Force (QEAF) have a critical dependency on the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) of the Hawk TMk2A BAE Systems, to certify the aircraft, when operated in accordance with the Release to Service Recommendation (RTSR), is airworthy and safe in all respects.
This procedure is considered justified for technical reasons under regulation 16 (1)(a)(ii) of the DSPCR 2011.
In order to award a UK RTS, there must be adequate evidence artefacts provided by the OEM and accepted by the MAA and Release to Service Authority (RTSA) to support the airworthiness statements.”
The notice adds:
“BAES are the OEM and single supplier with the required detailed technical understanding of the aircraft and possession of the technical documentation for the required evidence.”
It is understood that the award of this contract allows UK MOD personnel to operate the aircraft under a UK MOD governance framework.
Where’s our Hawk replacement coming from when our T2s need replacing?
A commercial franchise by the look of things.
its Red and its made in the USA and Sweden
I think it a shame that the RAF does not have T3 Hawk on order to replace T1 Hawk. T3 Hawk would be based on the 2017 prototype BAE showed India, that could use modern weapons such as Asraam, Brimstone & Paveway IV. It also had a cockpit designed to be a lead in trainer for F-35.
Agreed JH, would also provide additional surge capacity if the proverbial really hits the spinning thing
Probably an indication that BAE are not pressuring the RAF as they do not see there being sufficient demand to make it worthwhile for them. Likely little export opportunities. The old ‘we will make it if you force us to but its going to cost you’ sales strategy.
Well I don’t think BAE would sell it to Russia. There are plenty of countries that need a low operating cost trainer for the F-35.
That’s a very crowded market with a lot of established products. Why is anyone going to buy Hawk “T3” over T-7A, M-346 or T-50?
They wont dont forget the Goshawk is a large trainer in the USA and was overlooked.
its a old design and offers very l ittle
Where did you get all that from, JohninMK? Seems like unfounded (and inaccurate) speculation to me. I agree with John Hartley’s points. More than 1000 Hawks have been produced for home, export and licence-build. It is currently the Western world’s most successful trainer.
Warton is focussed on joint programmes. We need something indigenous too. And we could start by bringing forward a Red Arrows replacement (about 30 airframes?). And then the next-gen trainer.
Otherwise Brough will be shut down. HMG will say it’s a ‘commercial decision’ and BAE will (quite rightly) say that HMG can’t plan procurement and industrial strategy in the same breath.
I suspect and fear all this will come to ad hoc decisions as always. Can you imagine Red Arrows flying Italian or American? Because the RAF, with its legendary love of fast jets will probably want supersonic, claiming there is no UK offering there.
The Hawk has been very successful but it’s approaching the end of the development road.
There is an advanced trainer market but it will be smaller due to more use of simulators, drones & smaller fleets as costs to purchase & operate advanced trainers/fast jets climb. & there are a no. of established products there already (MB346, T-50 , Redhawk etc.). The cost of designing & building a whole new airframe for potentially orders of a few 10s does not make commercial sense nor does it make sense to operate one (availability/cost of spares etc. will be higher due to lower volumes).
High fuel prices will favour the Hawk with its 6500lb thrust engine over the newer 16000 lb thrust engines of T-50, Redtail etc. The Hawk is the same age as the F-16, but that is still selling well in its latest V spec. The 2017 prototype Hawk, would have been up to date & an economical lead in trainer for F-35.
Hawk T2 is already a good lead in trainer for Typhoon and F35 alongside sim traning.
T3 would have a more agile wing plus a cockpit laid out more like an F-35.
That’s a lot of money for a more agile wing. That doesn’t make any difference to pilot training. And new F35 pilots learn everything they need to know about the cockpit before getting in the real thing. Hawk T2 is perfectly good for many years to come.
But there are too few T2 in RAF service.
28 is what the RAF asked for.
I think the RAF was expecting follow up orders a few years later, that never happened. We started with 175 Hawk in the 1970s. Say the cut in RAF numbers means we only need half. Say we cut that in half again because of better simulators. We would still need 44 Hawk. Plus another 10-11 for Red Arrows.
Red Arrows cannot use the T2 or the T3 due to its anti collision system. so bang goes there number
44 Hawks for lets say 20 fast jet pilots. were its closer to 10.
wasting tax payers money on jets in storage. look at the training program and its basic flight training aircraft. and it gives you the actually numbers needed.
23 Prefects under UK MFTS
10 Beechcraft T-6 Texan II
So based on the above 33 trainer airframes for all fixed wing training, so now you know why 28 T2s was the number required.
johan, who are you & why do you seem so angry? Your numbers ignore the other training i.e. not pilots. Simulating air attack for ships & ground units. Also now the RN FAA Hawk T1s have gone, there is a need there too.
Ok National Audit office states the RAF trains around 100 pilots a years across all its platforms.
so if 15 go to fast jet, how many trainers would be required.
again its not the 1980s anymore and BAEs closed all its sites. and sold of the land to build houses
ok so what do you train in for a Typhoon, and a Hawk dont do VTOL.
its was a great design, but its had its day,
the Adour is a much older engine though so less efficient pro rata & there are at least 50% more F404s in service than Adours. The extra power is required for the higher (supersonic) performance demanded of a modern advanced trainer (hence why Hawk wasn’t considered for the USAF trainer requirement), it’s 11000lb dry, 17,000 in reheat (which Hawk doesn’t have). Hawk’s maximum level speed is ~Mach 0.9 with never exceed ~1.2.
& how much training is supersonic? You are burning a lot of expensive fuel in a bigger engine, that you only need for a tiny part of the training module.
Probably not a lot & is part of the reason that fewer advanced trainers will be required. But, if it is required then it is required & you can’t do it with a non-capable aircraft. Dry & at part throttle fuel consumption probably isn’t that different & there may also be savings in maintenance from a more modern, more numerous engine. You can’t get away from the fact that Hawk is a 50 year old design.
As are F-16, Chinook & C-130. Even older in fact for the last two.
Yes but the 3 above are still a leading element in there Class, F16 Best value on a budget, Chinook best value in its class, C130 is tight on its girth and the A400s will take its crown USA Has no replacement in its system, as it was never required sounds like the Hawk,
The US TX requirement was/is for a trans/subsonic aircraft and excluded any supersonic requirements.
F-16 is a frontline budget fighter and if you check its operators it tends to be now those looking to replace Soviet era aircraft, But is being updated and replaced by current operators to F35s.
Fuel cost is not a issue for a Government as there is no duty on fuel for the Government.
while as Great as the Hawk WAS lack of development from BAEs cost it in its Golden years. and it lost its edge
based on the fact that the Goshawk got superseded by the Red Hawk, 1000 airframes in a 50 year program. and based on previous requirements.
most modern European Air forces could do with as little as 10 trainers each. due to simulator training.
BAEs have no desire or reason to develop at there cost, as there is no current market.
Still waiting for the condemnation of Russia JohninMk, you must be giving it some serious thought for it to take this long…..
Fortunately you know feck all aside from what your master tells you to say! Collar chafing still I take it? Putins sad lap dog!
Aeralis?
Supposedly Aeralis is quietly being lined up as the Hawk sucessor.
Yes, but until it gets serious money behind it, it remains a paper airplane.
I believe the company has bought/ leasing a large factory site, so it’s getting there..
Personally, I would put money into next gen Aerial, that could potentially be an export winner with its reconfigurable airframe…
The Hawk is getting rather tired.
Rolls Royce has just signed on as the engine partner as well.
Excellent, it seems to be really gathering pace, it’s all rather good news for the UK defence industry.
If I was BAE Systems, I would be buying in and supporting it!
Is the F-16, Chinook or C-130 tired? No, they just keep getting updated to keep them relevant.
It’s done John, look at the orders dropping off a cliff. BAE Systems should have designed a new generation trainer back in 2000, they didn’t, they simply kept warming over the Hawk and resting on their laurels. They have been overtaken (left in the rear view mirror) by a raft of modern competition.
they are not owned by BAEs and from the way your talking i say your on there pension,
but like me they shut my facility down and made me redundant to save money. and when they screwed the UK Taxpayer and held the government to ransom, they lost the rights to get given money for nothing
It’s company of a few people so far and this modular ability makes me nervous.
No other plane had tried to have different wing options, engines etc etc switch in and out as you please.
Run the hawk T2 until the red arrow airframes are spent then give the T2 to the arrows. Get some L159, red hawk, M346 for advanced training. 12 will probably do.
I should add if the transformer jet does work out then great but it will have to be more appealing than the other options
T2 has anti collision systems and cannot be used by the Reds
It has serious money, from Qatari investors ironically, as well as from Rolls Royce and the RAF.
Agree but its the same as fitting a electric motor in you MGB, time to move on BAEs should of developed a new trainer, but there are 7 other jet trainers currently on the market. and another 4 proposed. its now a very small market unless you are the USA
The RAF would go for the T3 ,if a photo shot of Maverick in the cockpit went online
Haha
👍👍
I am a bit puzzled over this announcement as Hawks Mk 167 have been flying over my home for at least three months now.
Haha. Take cover, I think it’s more a technical box ticking.
It’s a release to service certificate so I’m guessing it’s ok to fly but needs some official document for the U.K. personnel to have MOD approval.
Maybe someone fluent in government speak can tell us
👍 I guess so too!