The Ministry of Defence has confirmed that no decision has yet been made on whether a future replacement for the Hawk fast jet trainer will be built in the UK.
Responding to a parliamentary question from Luke Akehurst, Defence Minister Luke Pollard said the Strategic Defence Review had set an intention to pursue “cost effective replacements for the Hawk aircraft.” Pollard added that decisions on “production, sustainment, and replacement” will only follow completion of the Defence Investment Plan. He also pointed to broader government policy, noting that “the Hon. Gentleman will be aware of this Government’s strong support for making more defence equipment in the UK.”
While domestic manufacture remains a stated political priority, it is not yet a formal commitment for the Hawk replacement programme. Further detail is expected once the Defence Investment Plan is published.
The United Kingdom is developing a programme to replace the BAE Systems Hawk T1 and T2 aircraft, which provide advanced fast jet training for the Royal Air Force. Work is focused on defining requirements for a future training system that combines live flying and synthetic elements, with the Ministry of Defence still shaping the scope before issuing a formal tender. The effort has gained momentum because of increasing sustainment pressures on the Hawk fleet and a desire to modernise training ahead of next generation combat aircraft entering service.
Contenders currently positioning themselves include the Boeing, Saab and BAE Systems team offering the T7A Red Hawk, which they have proposed to assemble in the United Kingdom. Leonardo is promoting the M346 as another option and has highlighted its existing training systems with other European air forces. One of the more notable contenders is Aerialis, with its UK-built modular jet concept.
The programme remains in the preliminary phase, with industry lobbying under way but no official competition launched.
No mention of the UK Aeralis solution? Unless the UK selelcts Aeralis, the French won’t either and that will kill the whole project.
What makes you think the French would go for it? Not too mention it’s hard to kill something that doesn’t even exist outside PowerPoint.
They have opened a French subsidiary. France also needs a training solution. No doubt any French interest would require in-country build etc. The old ‘PowerPoint’ chestnut is boring. Every project exists on ‘paper’ at some point of the interest/uptake cycle. There is no hard and fast rule that says it should be flying and certified before MoD takes an interest regardless of your personal views.
It’s not boring, its fact. They have been touting this as a solution for how long? The site’s search engine doesn’t work to go to later pages, but the earliest this site covered them on the first results page is 2018, and the Prototype is always just “around the corner”, yet never actually getting in the air. They have done deals with RR, Babcock, Thales over the years and yet still nothing even test flying or production, so signing up a French office doesn’t convince me of anything either.
As for what the MOD should be doing, given the disasters they’ve made over and over you’d wish they would learn, but maybe they haven’t and this paper plane will get selected. If so, I wonder how much is going to disappear into “just around the corner” production.
Fair enough!
If Aerelis was chosen how long would it take to go from design, to prototype, to manufacture? Years – assuming all went well. We have a capability gap NOW. We need planes NOW. At some point reality needs to take priority. If I am a betting man I would say this is, as per usual down to finances. The annual cost of the current fudge is less on the current books than if they had to upfront for some planes. More expensive in the long term but less in the here and right now.
France is desperate to promote it’s arms industry and use whatever means it can to disrupt ours. Why do you think they wanted us to pay 60 times more than Canada to join SAFE? And still be limited to 50%.
No way they’re buying Aeralis
I wish we were so fiercely protective of our sovereign capabilities. There’s a good reason why France is second only to the US on the export market (how did France become the home of Airbus after really only having success with a single model airliner – The Caravelle?)
After AJAX, just buy the friggin’ thing off the shelf !
No chance. No money to the MIC and we won’t be able to build our own.
I agree, we buy 14 Chinook OTS happily enough.
Sick of the constant need to “Buy British” and alter everything to meet some perfect requirement, costing billions of £s and years to acquire and fix. We need aircraft that are good enough in significant numbers to do the job. Either buy the M346 or the T-7 and get the companies that already make them to produce them. Along with more T-6.
Heck, sound out Boeing on what deal we would get for 20 T-6, 40-50 T-7 and five or six more P-8s. I guarantee it would be cheaper than Aeralis and we’d get them a decade sooner.
Jobs are nice, but defence needs should take priority. Aeralis should be a non-starter. It doesn’t exist and we need aircraft yesterday.
No no…remember, we need to feed the MIC! That means home built, and bespoke everything to an inch of its life so it is “world leading”
Really this has to be a MOTS purchase.
If you were going to keep UK capacity running it would be better spending on a fixed price MOTS on this and buy some more Typhoon or E7’s that are desperately needed.
Agreed.
There has to be a balance between OTS and home built based on military immediate necessity and cost, not just always home for sovereign reasons.
We had this debate often enough on the Tides, they’d probably not exist yet if we’d waited for them to be built here, just like the FSS ships don’t exist that were needed years ago.
Thing is Typhoon has enough high tech in it to be worth preserving knowledge skills.
I can’t really see us exporting a licence built trainer TBH.
Typhoon and Tempest are worthwhile as they provide a budge to the future. Anything else I’m dubious about except E7 which is also worthwhile for other reasons.
Tempest is a pipe dream. Never ever going to happen.
Buy British when it’s viable, even if it costs a more by sticker price, viable is the important part.
BAE don’t want in the trainer business, Aeralis is British, in the sense that it’s really not, but let’s pretend, though as yet has nothing viable on offer.
Italy our GCAP parter has a trainer and would build in Britain with the bonus’ that they’ll upgrade it for Tempest, S. Korea has a trainer and would build in Britain, the US has a trainer that’s more British than anything on offer that could be built and assembled here.
Let’s swing back in a decade of study and programs to see if we even have a trainer fleet or we’ve ended up outsourcing it all to a foreign nation.
The inability to manage the Training Fleet (the fact that the existing one is becoming obsolete should not come as a surprise) is indicative of the mess that is UK defence. All, the Army, Navy and Airforce are desperately short of mass. But like much else it comes down to a lack of money. There is none, nah da…..
All should be very concerned, if nothing ‘happens’ in the next 10 years we may have got away with it. If it does I am sure we’ll help, but it will be limited.
I don’t think it is accurate to say that the training fleet is becoming obsolete. Nearly all of it is new-ish or current, including the Texan, Prefect, Phenom, Juno and Jupiter. The only older aircraft are the Hawks (other than the University air squadrons’ Tutors).
The reason why is that, faced with big.pressures on the budget, the training.function was contracted out to the UKMFTS and the aircraft bought on a PFI basis. The only trainers still owned by the RAF are the Hawks and Tutors.
The odds must be pretty high that the Hawk replacement is passed over to UKMFTS, to decide on and pay for the new fast jet trainer. Over the piece, a PFI is horribly expensive, as the contractor is generally just borrowing the money from financiers and paying commercial interest rates.
But when you’re stuck fo money, it’s an easy short-term solution for the MOD. As it was with the purchase of the A330 Voyagers, which are costing us an arm and a leg annually.
No point making a decision really. Far better to have some meetings about whether we should make a decision and then postpone the build. No rush!
“No decision has been made” sounds like an epitaph on the gravestone of UK Plc
I don’t think it is accurate to say that the training fleet is becoming obsolete. Nearly all of it is new-ish or current, including the Texan, Prefect, Phenom, Juno and Jupiter. The only older aircraft are the Hawks (other than the University air squadrons’ Tutors).
The reason why is that, faced with big.pressures on the budget, the training.function was contracted out to the UKMFTS and the aircraft bought on a PFI basis. The only trainers still owned by the RAF are the Hawks and Tutors.
The odds must be pretty high that the Hawk replacement is passed over to UKMFTS, to decide on and pay for the new fast jet trainer. Over the piece, a PFI is horribly expensive, as the contractor is generally just borrowing the money from financiers and paying commercial interest rates.
But when you’re stuck fo money, it’s an easy short-term solution for the MOD. As it was with the purchase of the A330 Voyagers, which are costing us an arm and a leg annually.
Courtesy of Gordon Brown….take them off the books, jobs a good un.
Just buy something, use it and get on with the job. Feeding the monster that is the MIC shows the amount of lobbying that goes on. We hear “British jobs” and yet the military go without decent and workable kit for decades. Prime examples F35B and of late Ajax. Yup, feed the monster with taxpayers money. Everybody gets a good deal.
ps Light Infantry sarcasm.#bringbackCVRT&SLR
You’re singing from my song sheet John.
Joking, I know we agree on much there regards the MIC.
As for CVRT and the SLR, I understand they both worked just fine, and the SLR has stopping power the Infantry missed?
Aye we do. Look at a certain “Lord” suspended for lobbying last week….cronyism, bordering on corruption. I started to question when Blair suspended the SFO investigation into Saudi/UK arms deals.
As for CVRT, it worked. Fast, agile and armed, in drone days do we need armoured recon now? A question for Rupert School to ponder that, then Head Shed is always pondering at the taxpayers expense.
7.62? Yes, whatever the platform it stops and has range 5.56 never will. Hence the US moving back up the calibre chain. I hated the SA80 and still do, hate the round. We had 9mm for the rear echelon and transport/loggie types.
Then of course some here will accuse others of being out of the loop….and I did not mention Ajax or QE carriers! 🙂
Ahhh the QECs, now there is a subject we do disagree on, but hey ho, on the wider political picture…
John, respect, mate.
Imagine the headline no decision on UK build of next frigate then the following uproar. It bizarre how some industry sectors get more support than others, go figure.
Must keep the Scots happy matey.
“Scots” and “Happy” in the same sentence?!? 😉
Fried Mars Bars, Fish Suppers, pints of heavy, bagpipes and the SNP….sure they are happy.
OT but Nicholas Drummond has posted on his Twiter that the AW149 has been confirmed as the UK”s MHR choice….as it was the only one remaining. No mention of quantity. Can ukdj confirm this too?
Still decades late. Another “ we will be considering it”. Meanwhile, the RAF is sending pilots outside of its own system for flight training. That capability, once gone, is hard-earned and expensive to get back.