All Hawk T1s will be gone by 31 March 2022
With all due respect I don't think that Andy1999 has a point at all.
The RAF ordered 176 Hawk T1's, and they equipped an advanced flying training school of three squadrons, two tactical Weapons Units of two squadrons each, a CFS squadron, an aerobatic team the Red Arrows, the Institute of Aviation Medicine, ETPS, A&AEE and RAE. The RAF training aircraft were used to provide aircrew for a total of 32 RAF and RN front line fast jet squadrons.
The RAF ordered 28 Hawk T2's to equip one advanced flying training school of two squadrons that provide aircrew for 8 front line squadrons, soon to increase to 9 when 809 Sqn reforms in a few years, and maybe an additional RAF squadron by 2030 (the slowest re-equipment programme in RAF history?)
The current Hawk T1 fleet of 81 aircraft is used to equip one RAF adversary and aggressor squadron, one RN adversary and aggressor squadron, the Red Arrows with 16 a/c and the Centre for Aviation Medicine with 2, the remainder of the 81 being in store. All but the Red Arrows aircraft and a few in store are being retired this month, without replacement.
So, as they are not used for pilot training there is no equivalence between the 176 Hawk T1, nor indeed the current 81 Hawk T1, and the 28 Hawk T2.
If you REALLY want to look at a comparison, then look no further than the basic trainer situation. There 14 aircraft have taken over the roles of 130! The RAF had 130 Tucano T1 in three flying training schools, a CFS squadron, and later some used for refresher and navigator training. Currently the RAF has 14 Texan T1 in one squadron...
The RAF ordered 176 Hawk T1's, and they equipped an advanced flying training school of three squadrons, two tactical Weapons Units of two squadrons each, a CFS squadron, an aerobatic team the Red Arrows, the Institute of Aviation Medicine, ETPS, A&AEE and RAE. The RAF training aircraft were used to provide aircrew for a total of 32 RAF and RN front line fast jet squadrons.
The RAF ordered 28 Hawk T2's to equip one advanced flying training school of two squadrons that provide aircrew for 8 front line squadrons, soon to increase to 9 when 809 Sqn reforms in a few years, and maybe an additional RAF squadron by 2030 (the slowest re-equipment programme in RAF history?)
The current Hawk T1 fleet of 81 aircraft is used to equip one RAF adversary and aggressor squadron, one RN adversary and aggressor squadron, the Red Arrows with 16 a/c and the Centre for Aviation Medicine with 2, the remainder of the 81 being in store. All but the Red Arrows aircraft and a few in store are being retired this month, without replacement.
So, as they are not used for pilot training there is no equivalence between the 176 Hawk T1, nor indeed the current 81 Hawk T1, and the 28 Hawk T2.
If you REALLY want to look at a comparison, then look no further than the basic trainer situation. There 14 aircraft have taken over the roles of 130! The RAF had 130 Tucano T1 in three flying training schools, a CFS squadron, and later some used for refresher and navigator training. Currently the RAF has 14 Texan T1 in one squadron...
Thanks Pr00ne, spot on. and the argument extends far beyond just T1 fleet and old aircraft numbers.
How many time do we see " oh that Lightning is too expensive, for that money we could have had 10 x ?? (F16 / F18/F15 insert what is flavour of the day on the BBC). What folk fail to realise is you then need 10 x more pilots, 10 x more engineers, 10 x more spaces to hangar the aircraft etc. How that translates back through the pipeline to how many trainees you need to get to the 10 x frontline qualified pilots ( and WSOs as well) to occupy this vast number of airframes.
How many time do we see " oh that Lightning is too expensive, for that money we could have had 10 x ?? (F16 / F18/F15 insert what is flavour of the day on the BBC). What folk fail to realise is you then need 10 x more pilots, 10 x more engineers, 10 x more spaces to hangar the aircraft etc. How that translates back through the pipeline to how many trainees you need to get to the 10 x frontline qualified pilots ( and WSOs as well) to occupy this vast number of airframes.
NUMBERS GAME
Thanks Pr00ne, spot on. and the argument extends far beyond just T1 fleet and old aircraft numbers.
How many time do we see " oh that Lightning is too expensive, for that money we could have had 10 x ?? (F16 / F18/F15 insert what is flavour of the day on the BBC). What folk fail to realise is you then need 10 x more pilots, 10 x more engineers, 10 x more spaces to hangar the aircraft etc. How that translates back through the pipeline to how many trainees you need to get to the 10 x frontline qualified pilots ( and WSOs as well) to occupy this vast number of airframes.
How many time do we see " oh that Lightning is too expensive, for that money we could have had 10 x ?? (F16 / F18/F15 insert what is flavour of the day on the BBC). What folk fail to realise is you then need 10 x more pilots, 10 x more engineers, 10 x more spaces to hangar the aircraft etc. How that translates back through the pipeline to how many trainees you need to get to the 10 x frontline qualified pilots ( and WSOs as well) to occupy this vast number of airframes.
Hopefully I'm jumping to the wrong conclusion but if they've carried out the last aggressor sortie and they're scrapping the Hawks, the future doesn't sound that rosie does it.........sadly. It's gonna be quiet up here now.
[QUOTE=trim it out;11202060]100 Sqn only make up one of the 10 units based at Leeming. Granted they're the only (full time/jet) flying unit but there's plenty still going on at Leeming.[/QUO
Yes, I'd hate to see it close down. Nonetheless, I'll miss the Hawks.
Yes, I'd hate to see it close down. Nonetheless, I'll miss the Hawks.
It states 9 Aircraft to train 8 pilots a year - must be a misprint?
Now what were the relative numbers for RAF T-6 output?
[QUOTE=mopardave;11202063]
Not going to happen! And you will still see Hawks.
100 Sqn is being replaced (not in role) by a joint Qatari/RAF Hawk T2 squadron. Leeming is also home to two University Air squadrons, one of which has only just moved in, and an AEF. It is also the home to 90 SU (TCW as was), possibly the largest single unit in the RAF. It is also one of only a small number of airfields with hardened facilities, and in the face of the increasing likelihood of Scottish indepence, would be the RAF's most northerly operational airfield.
100 Sqn is being replaced (not in role) by a joint Qatari/RAF Hawk T2 squadron. Leeming is also home to two University Air squadrons, one of which has only just moved in, and an AEF. It is also the home to 90 SU (TCW as was), possibly the largest single unit in the RAF. It is also one of only a small number of airfields with hardened facilities, and in the face of the increasing likelihood of Scottish indepence, would be the RAF's most northerly operational airfield.
NOTAM posted up for the 100 Squadron disbandment parade this Thursday , 24th ;
U1524/22: Leeming: Aerodrome limitation
Q) EGTT/QFALT/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5418N00132W005NOISE AND CIRCUIT EMBARGO FOR PARADEFROM: 24 Mar 2022 14:00 GMT TO: 24 Mar 2022 15:00 GMT .
U1524/22: Leeming: Aerodrome limitation
Q) EGTT/QFALT/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5418N00132W005NOISE AND CIRCUIT EMBARGO FOR PARADEFROM: 24 Mar 2022 14:00 GMT TO: 24 Mar 2022 15:00 GMT .
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Yeovil,Somerset
Age: 52
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NOTAM posted up for the 100 Squadron disbandment parade this Thursday , 24th ;
U1524/22: Leeming: Aerodrome limitation
Q) EGTT/QFALT/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5418N00132W005NOISE AND CIRCUIT EMBARGO FOR PARADEFROM: 24 Mar 2022 14:00 GMT TO: 24 Mar 2022 15:00 GMT .
U1524/22: Leeming: Aerodrome limitation
Q) EGTT/QFALT/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5418N00132W005NOISE AND CIRCUIT EMBARGO FOR PARADEFROM: 24 Mar 2022 14:00 GMT TO: 24 Mar 2022 15:00 GMT .
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Yeovil,Somerset
Age: 52
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having spoken to a friend who would know, apparently HHA & Draken International are/ will be bidding for any surplus Hawk aircraft & spares, with the idea to tender a bid for any MOD requirement.
Seems to me that this would be a more expensive way to provide aggressor aircraft....
Seems to me that this would be a more expensive way to provide aggressor aircraft....
Having spoken to a friend who would know, apparently HHA & Draken International are/ will be bidding for any surplus Hawk aircraft & spares, with the idea to tender a bid for any MOD requirement.
Seems to me that this would be a more expensive way to provide aggressor aircraft....
Seems to me that this would be a more expensive way to provide aggressor aircraft....
If you can share the service with someone else then, apart from operating costs for your service, you may be able to share the overhead costs with other users. If you want 100 % of the service you pay all the costs. The contractor will also want a premium to cover the risk that you walk away leaving him with kit and people he has no use for.
Of course, if the contractor can get your old kit cheap, his acquisition and depreciation costs are likely to be lower. Similarly, if he recruits staff at lower cost his operating costs are likely to be lower. His maintenance costs may well be higher though because he does not know the kit as well as you did.
Removing assets from your business affects the balance sheet and things like return on capital employed, though these are rather nonsense concepts for an armed force. Buying back a service that was formerly in house affects the P&L, negatively if you are the only user of the service contracted out. Again P&L is a nonsense concept for an armed force.
N
Not really. You do indeed contract the service and you pay for the delivery of the service. The payment you make includes elements for the contractors profit, the whole day-to-day costs of delivery of your service including repair and maintenance, fuel, salaries etc., the acquisition cost of the kit needed, the depreciation of the kit and the pensions of the staff. An accountant would find a few more things to add in.
If you can share the service with someone else then, apart from operating costs for your service, you may be able to share the overhead costs with other users. If you want 100 % of the service you pay all the costs. The contractor will also want a premium to cover the risk that you walk away leaving him with kit and people he has no use for.
Of course, if the contractor can get your old kit cheap, his acquisition and depreciation costs are likely to be lower. Similarly, if he recruits staff at lower cost his operating costs are likely to be lower. His maintenance costs may well be higher though because he does not know the kit as well as you did.
Removing assets from your business affects the balance sheet and things like return on capital employed, though these are rather nonsense concepts for an armed force. Buying back a service that was formerly in house affects the P&L, negatively if you are the only user of the service contracted out. Again P&L is a nonsense concept for an armed force.
N
If you can share the service with someone else then, apart from operating costs for your service, you may be able to share the overhead costs with other users. If you want 100 % of the service you pay all the costs. The contractor will also want a premium to cover the risk that you walk away leaving him with kit and people he has no use for.
Of course, if the contractor can get your old kit cheap, his acquisition and depreciation costs are likely to be lower. Similarly, if he recruits staff at lower cost his operating costs are likely to be lower. His maintenance costs may well be higher though because he does not know the kit as well as you did.
Removing assets from your business affects the balance sheet and things like return on capital employed, though these are rather nonsense concepts for an armed force. Buying back a service that was formerly in house affects the P&L, negatively if you are the only user of the service contracted out. Again P&L is a nonsense concept for an armed force.
N
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The 24th & a Half Century
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
7 Posts
Having spoken to a friend who would know, apparently HHA & Draken International are/ will be bidding for any surplus Hawk aircraft & spares, with the idea to tender a bid for any MOD requirement.
Seems to me that this would be a more expensive way to provide aggressor aircraft....
Seems to me that this would be a more expensive way to provide aggressor aircraft....