Proportion of synthetic flying in the future
The RAF has already announced its goal for 90% of flying to be synthetic by 2030. Cost and 'green' agenda are 2 cited justifications, but clearly there are other key considerations. Firstly, 'security', assuming that someone would always be watching, no air force would risk revealing tactics or operational capabilities where there was a credible alternative. Secondly, 'realism'. What benefit is derived if the training can't accurately recreate the range of adversaries and tactics our warfighters might face? My interest, as someone working in the support side of industry, is considering what new sustainment models would be required if assets are purchased but subsequently fly far fewer hours than current inventory?'
I'm obviously not asking anyone to discuss specifics and I fully appreciate from speaking to numerous pilots that a minimum amount of real flying will always be needed. But, given the huge range of knowledge and expertise on this forum, conceptually what is the end point with respect to a future manned combat system? 150 actual flying hours a year? 100? 50? None (with any necessary flight time obtained on other less capable platforms)? I would greatly appreciate your insights.