New RAAF Training Aircraft

[Chronic Snoozer]

Looking for credible intel on direction of Air 5428, the RAAF tender for a PC-9 replacement.

Any hot rumours? Anyone?

[Rosevidney1]

Can they really need changing?

[GreenKnight121]

Yes - strange as it may seem, after 20+ years (22 for youngest RAAF example, 27 for oldest RAAF example) the airframes are getting a bit fatigued - by the time their replacements arrive (in another 5+ years), they will be close to worn out.

Since the actual timeframe for replacement, even with the process starting now, is more like 10 years before the first deliveries, then we are looking at a fleet average of ~35 years at replacement.

Sure, you could spend over 25% of the cost of a new aircraft for a complete refurbishment of the airframe to get a significant extension of the useful life - for an aircraft that reflects pre-1984* design, maintenance, and operational considerations - unless you spend even more to install more modern avionics etc.


* first flight of first PC-9 built

[Buster Hyman]

Nov 24, 1987 was first delivery! Holy crap, I'd have never thought they were that old.

Anyway, never mind the training, what's a good platform for the Roulettes? :ok:

[Like This - Do That]

what's a good platform for the Roulettes?

Gnats? F-104s? Hunters? Vulcans? MiG-21s? Ex-RNZAF MB339s? :}

Anything but PC-9s :zzz:

I know .. I know ... (and I'm sure the CDF would sign off) Ex-RNZAF Ex-RAN A-4s.

[layman]

PC21 or T6 would seem to the most viable options

In our 'neighbourhood', NZ have recently acquired the T6. RSAF had SIAI-Marchetti S.211 and now have PC21 for basic training.

All jet was tried with the Macchi and found wanting.

I seem to remember reading (but can't relocate) that a decision is expected in early 2015


As for what the Roulettes will have - expect it will be whatever 2FTS use.

Agree 'noisy' would be more attractive to the uninitiated but having seen Roulettes and Hawk at ADFA a few weeks back, the Hawk would disappear for long enough to think it had finished. Meanwhile, solo PC9 managed loop (seemingly) directly over the parade ground.

[Buster Hyman]

Anything but PC-9s :zzz:
Can't argue the relative merit of the PC-9 as an aerobatic platform, but you can't knock the skills of the pilots! Always enjoy the Roulettes. :ok:

Hawks would be nice....[/wishful thinking]

[Hempy]

You'd think 'Team 21' (Lockheed-Martin/Hawker/Pilatus) and the PC-21 would be the best placed submission at this stage. BAE/Ratheon and the T-6 would be 'change for changes sake' imo.

[BBadanov]

You are right - it is between PC-21 and T-6.


Despite the PC-21 already being based at Pearce with the RSAF (that is the Sings), I think the T-6 will get it. But I do not have enough facts to lay down why it is "better".

[Chronic Snoozer]

Budget or capability? Choose one. Hopefully not the former.

[TBM-Legend]

T-6 has a secondary armed role making it ideal for the FAC replacement at 4 Sqn in addition to the other uses. PC21 does not do this unless the DMO spend five times the value modifying it!!!:rolleyes:

[Arm out the window]

Controversial point here, but is FAC ever really a viable role in this day and age? All good fun in training, but I couldn't see us ever deploying PC-9s or their replacement to be marking targets over any kind of battlefield these days.

[layman]

according to Wikipedia ...

Pilatus PC-21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilatus_PC-21)

Armament:
Hardpoints: Provisions provided for 4× under-wing and 1× centerline external store stations, capable of mounting up to 1,150 kg (2,540 lb) of payload of air-to-ground weapons to operate in the Counter-insurgency role.

[Thud105]

Air Forces Monthly ran a flight-test report on the PC-21 recently that mentioned it could carry weapons, but I think it was envisioned that these would be used in a COIN role, not a FAC one.

[Martin the Martian]

I still can't get my head around the thought that the PC-9 (and the Tucano for that matter) are now getting old enough to need replacing.

I feel old.:sad:

[Like This - Do That]

but is FAC ever really a viable role in this day and age

AOTW, probably not as FACs, but 4 SQN provides a very useful and cost effective input into JTAC training, doesn't it?

[swh]

Controversial point here, but is FAC ever really a viable role in this day and age? All good fun in training, but I couldn't see us ever deploying PC-9s or their replacement to be marking targets over any kind of battlefield these days.

AT-802U prob be better. Pull the wings off and stuff it into a C130 or C-27J and send it anywhere around the world in a few hours.

2 seat, 15 hard points, lots of cameras, 10 hours endurance, .50 cal. GAU-19/A three-barrel Gatling guns, dual M260 7-tube rocket launchers, and 500 lb. Mk-82 bombs, hellfire etc.

http://www.802u.com/sites/default/files/AT-802U_Brochure_07_10.pdf

[Chronic Snoozer]

One would hope the training platform selected is on the basis of its suitability as a training platform rather than as a FAC platform, surely. Still stranger things have happened.

Back to the topic. I've heard the RFP ran to about 1000 pages and multiple proposals required. All sounds very hard for an arguably simple decision. (when compared with F-111 replacement say.)

[Lonewolf_50]

I think the Canadians fly the T-6, as do the USAF and now the USN.

I got to fly it over ten years ago.
It's a pretty good training aircraft.
I didn't get to fly the B version the Navy has gotten for its training wings.
I am not sure if that version might be more of what RAAF is looking for.

[dostum]

Certainly, the Pc21 seems to be the better aircraft, but the T6 is cheaper. There may be other factors in play also, like the 'on base' or 'off base' solution which might have a bearing on which type gets the nod. It seems the rich Middle Eastern countries (Qatar, UAE, Saudi) gave gone with the PC21 and the Western countries (US, Canada, Mexico, Nz) have gone with the Texan. I really have no idea which system will be adopted, but it has to be better than the antiquated system we have now. Our trainers have lagged well behind the operational types.

[josephfeatherweight]

My bet is on the T6, simply cause it's cheaper - which is a crying shame and hardly an improvement on the PC9 - in some areas, less capable.
The RSAF allegedly approached the RAAF during their lead up to the acquisition of their PC21s and said something along the lines of "Hey, RAAFies, how about we buy a shed-load of PC21s for a good price and have one maintenance base at Pearce and a couple of sims - makes sense, huh?" And the RAAFies said, "Um, we need to take the requisite 15 YEARS to come up with an answer - can you wait for us?" No kidding, the PC9 replacement project has been in the works for just on 15 years - numerous "project teams" have all had their go on the project, spent countless hours researching, handed over to their replacements (corporate knowledge lost along the way...) and the result has been a big fat zero. I'm surprised Raytheon or Pilatus can even be bothered with us anymore. Bananas...

[Heathrow Harry]

I'm sure they also made A LOT of trips to the USA and Europe to "collect data"

[FoxtrotAlpha18]

You laugh at the RFP being 1000 pages...the responses were more than 6000!

There had to be options for a second platform for BFTS, plus a non military location (e.g. Tamworth, West Sale etc) for ab initio training.

Team 21 - LockMart, Pilatus, Hawker Pacific - has offered the PC-21 and has modelled its offering on the Basic Wings Course scheme it conducts for Singapore at Pearce. General feeling is PC-21 has always been the RAAF's favoured platform, and there would be advantages in sharing sustainment and facilities with the Singas at Pearce. Questions about whether it is a bit too sporty for for screening/BFTS are valid, although its FCS and engine can be de-tuned if required.

The T-6C is offered by BAE, Beechcraft and CAE, and despite sharing a common airframe, its systems have long moved on from those in the PC-9. The T-6 has a bigger international build run and thus spares market to draw from, and is probably a more benign handler too.

The current 4SQN FAC platforms are training platforms ONLY to train JTACs or fast-FACs. They are not designed to be operationally deployed, and the new type will continue this role. They only need to be able to shoot smoke markers and carry drop tanks.

Down-select is expected before Xmas, with contract signature in 2Q 2015.

[junior.VH-LFA]

Singa's still do their equiv of FSP at Tamworth on the CT-4B with BAE, they call it "Air grading."

[rjtjrt]

Surely they are not toying with the idea of using PC21 or T6B for screening or BFTS.

[BBadanov]

No, I would not think so.


Probably a CT-4 - type follow-on. BFTS is flight grading and some basic intro lead-in to PC-9s at 2FTS.

[Captain Sand Dune]

Wouldn't hold your breath people. I'm going to stick my neck out and say this has to be the most poorly managed acquisition project currently running in the ADF. Unfortunately your average politician and senior officer cannot understand the importance of good training to capability.

[Chronic Snoozer]

Questions about whether it is a bit too sporty for for screening/BFTS are valid

Not suitable as a screening aircraft.

although its FCS and engine can be de-tuned if required.

No it can't be.

Unfortunately your average politician and senior officer cannot understand the importance of good training to capability.

Training - the whipping boy of Air Power. Such a shame.

[dostum]

Re: Screening, the plan is to conduct this in simulators. i.e. No airborne flight screening at all.:ooh:

[flyinkiwi]

There is an interesting article here (http://www.pacificwingsmagazine.com/2012/07/14/training-tomorrows-rnzaf-a-single-solution) which compares the T-6 and PC offerings from a NZ perspective written before the final decision was made.

The main reason for the decision I read elsewhere (an Australian Aviation publication whose name escapes me) was that the specified corrosion and fatigue life of the Texan II was backed by a proven track record operating in harsh environments.

Oh, and it's cheaper too... :ok:

[Captain Sand Dune]

Maybe you can send the RNZAF acquisition team over to Oz to show these incompetents at DMO how to buy aircraft.

[BBadanov]

...these incompetents at DMO how to buy aircraft.


Hey Captain, would that be "our DMO" you are talking about?
Somewhat akin to "our ABC".

[kerilee]

This is not a PC9 replacement program, it also has to cover the current basic phase. Both tenderers have offered a single, similar, high end type to cover from entry all the way through to graduation; neither offered a 2-aircraft solution (it was not a requirement). The simulators will be used for screening, not initial training. This is going to cost the taxpayers mucho grando to have Bloggs learn the absolute basics in a real airborne environment. I hate to think of the total cost over the next 25 years for each early scrubbed student as they walk out the gates, particularly since nearly half of the output are due to go to choppers. What ever happened to the Defence's mantra about downloading to more cost effective systems where possible and also our Government screaming about the budget deficit?

The Singaporeans at least use BAE's CT4s prior to their PC21s and the USAF/USN use Diamond D20s to get some air time prior to spending big bucks with their T6 systems. The Pommies have just, finally, chosen a 2 aircraft solution for their UKMFTS program.

The Kiwis have gone for all-through T6 training. I suspect that choice was more for morale purposes since their training aircraft will now be faster than most of their operational types.

But as others have commented, this program has been going on for eons, longer than the Caribou replacement..sorry LTAC...sorry Battlefield Airlift Aircraft program. And in saying that, one also has to remember that the ongoing 5428 team was also saddled with bulk external politics such as the need for all bidders to put forward a non-ADF airfield solution, not as an option but mandatory, for the basic training phase. And why just the Basic Phase?? I think many in Defence were hoping that requirement would go away when a certain Federal Independent Seat Member's vote was no longer needed approaching election time. I wonder how many $$ that folly cost the bidders to satisfy?

[layman]

Oldish news but ...

RAAF?s first PC-21 pilots begin conversion training | Australian Aviation (http://australianaviation.com.au/2016/01/raafs-first-pc-21-pilots-begin-conversion-training/)

I heard that this was 2(?) weeks of ground school with flying training for first 2 pilots to start 'soon' (March?)

cheers
layman

[chopper2004]

I attended Dubai Airshow back in November and saw the PC-21 perform, so here are my photos :) below

@Lonewolf also the Kiwi's latest customer to use the T-6C,

cheers

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/longranger006/PC_21_1_zpsgpmpcwuw.jpg



http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/longranger006/PC_21_6_zpshibtflo8.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/longranger006/PC_21_5_zps6vtysq0h.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/longranger006/PC_21_4_zpsw0ayfshg.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/longranger006/PC_21_7_zpsphcx9bpm.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/longranger006/PC_21_10_zpsxuthw20g.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/longranger006/PC_21_8_zps2vbdhhtt.jpg