Pfi

[Roland Pulfrew]

JDW this week:
France abandons private funding

Defence minister Michele Alliot-Marie said the "government had concluded that financing the programme with bank loans under a public-private initiative would have proved too expensive and complicated".

So it was the Aussies who ditched it first, now the French. Just how long are we going to carry on with FSTA and MFTS PFIs? Discuss?;) ;)

[BEagle]

Quelle surprise? NON!

The concept of the Rental Air Farce having to use civvie plastic spastic aeroplanes with all their non-military restrictions was bad enough - incidentally, you do know that Ze Tchermans have now stated that all German a/c must have the captain in the 'designated seat' following a court ruling, don't you chum? The only exception is for flights where the FI is the captain and the student is in the captain's seat - so flying Das Teutor solo from the RHS would be contrary to the current German certification ruling......

But for force-enabling tanker aircraft to be rented on a 'power by the hour' basis is plain daft. Except, of coure, for the owners who will eventually laugh all the way to the bank! "Need another jet to support Bliar's adventurism, do you? Let's look at the fine print. Oh dear - that'll mean Clause VI section 17b. 28 days notice required - or penalty clause 234 section 12c. Shame..."

I can just imagine the delightful Hither's comment to the OzMoD boss when she got back. "This Brit PFI thing is a crock, mate. We should give it the flick!"

And so they have. Their contract is signed - but it's over a year now since the preferred bidder for A330 FSTA was selected.... Such things are beginning to affect ME pilots' decisions to stay in the mob. A chum you will recall (Freddie Mercury look-alike) is now with Sir Dicky B's finest, flying the A340-300 and also their sparkly new A340-600s! Plus anticipating the A380 in a few years....whereas had he stayed in he might still be flying ancient old things like VC10s and TriStars which are years past their sell-by dates with no clear replacement anywhere in sight. Other mates are doing the FIIQ thing just to get a chance of flying something younger than their fathers' ages!

[hyd3failure]

I understood that we were committed to MFTS PFIs. Is that not correct?

[Skylark4]

BEagle,
Which is the Captans seat?
In the Tutor (the 115 E), the right hand seat has all the bells and whistles and is therefore the Captains seat unless it is a training situation where the Instructor is in the 'secondary' left hand seat. I don't think there is a law that says that the captains seat MUST be on the left.

When are you going to stop ranting on about the Tutor being made of Plastic. It is actually made of Carbon Fibre, just as is a large part of any modern fighter or transport, including your current part time employers offerings.
Slingsbys equivalent, the Firefly would be made from a similar material if Slingsbys could only bring themselves to making a commitment to producing something in serious numbers. Their thinking seems to go along the lines of " We may not sell many, so we had better not invest in the moulds for Glass Fibre construction. The aircraft won't be as good but we won't lose too much money if it all goes wrong."

Mike W

[BEagle]

I'm sure Grob will be able to advise which seat is certificated as the P1 seat in Das Teutor.

Agree that at least the quality of construction of the Plastic Spastic is better than the offering from Slingsbys (cloth ailerons for the 21st century?). But a nice gucci airframe stuffed full of pretty eye-candy is cock all use if it has the roll response of a toy glider when it comes to teaching military pilots to fly.

Fun for taking space cadets on joy rides though, I imagine.

[Skylark4]

BEags,
You might find the roll rate inadequate but I suspect that the Studes aren't too worried about it. After all, the Tutor is only used for initial training after which they move on to the Tucano which, I assume, does meet your specification.
Anyway, stop blaming the aeroplane. It was "you" that chose it.

Mike W

[BEagle]

Not me, chum! That's like saying I voted Labour...

UAS/EFT students are assessed for future employment far more rigorously than the lads and lasses ;) were when I was teaching on the Bulldog - and they need something with more of a military character than a pretty little touring aeroplane in order to demonstrate prowess in flying demanding manoeuvres.

But the biggest crime is that they're stuck with civil operating restrictions... No flying below 500 ft MSD, no IFR in Class D (they don't have ADF...or military exemption).

PFI is a crock of $hite for the military. It might be cheap - it is, of consequence, also nasty.

[Skylark4]

BEags,
From what you say, most of your objections to the Tutor would not be there if you had only bought them yourselves and therefore made them Military Aircraft instead of renting from the Bank of Scotland via V T Aerospace. You would still have had what you consider to be a poor roll rate but is it that much worse than the Bulldog which had its own specific limitations. At least the Tutor can maintain height during aerobatics.

Do you honestly think PFI is cheap. I suppose it would be for the LAFT task if you don't renew the contract but over the normal life of a trainer I would expect it to cost more. Just not quite so much up front. You could still have cheap civilian labour with RAF aircraft. You seem to be doing it with everything else you own.

Mike W

[BEagle]

Not sure who you mean by 'you', Sky4 - I'm not in the mob any more.

Das Teutor should have been rejected for military use until its acknowledged deficiencies had been corrected - after which it should have been procured and operated under military CA release. Then we would be in total agreement.

[Skylark4]

BEags,
The "you" I refer to are the RAF QFIs and other interested parties who evaluated God knows what (I wasn't there) and eventually selected the Grob 115 E. Within reason, I imagine they could have had just about anything but the Tutor was the one they chose.

I don't think it has any "acknowledged deficiencies" ( don't shout at me, I'm only groundcrew) but the rest of that paragraph, I agree with. Mind you, that would mean that you would be flying IFR with all electric instruments and all off the same bus-bar. That is what you ordered.

Mike W