RCAF Retires Hawk & Pilot Trng in Canada

[ORAC]

https://theaviationist.com/2024/03/11/farewell-ct-155/

Farewell CT-155: RCAF Retires Hawks, Halting Pilot Training Within Canada

On March 8, 2024, the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) announced that it will officially be retiring its fleet of CT-155 Hawk advanced trainer aircraft. 419 Tactical Fighter Training Squadron (419e Escadron d’entraînement à l’appui tactique), in charge of training the RCAF’s fixed wing fighter pilots, have held a cessation of operation ceremony last Friday in Cold Lake, Alberta.

The occasion also marked the beginning of a period of hiatus for the RCAF’s fixed wing training ops. This decision stems from the air force’s decision to transition its current CF-18 (https://theaviationist.com/2022/06/09/rcaf-cf18-bird-strike/) fleet to the F-35A (https://theaviationist.com/2023/01/09/canada-finalizes-acquisition-of-88-f-35s/). As of now it is yet unknown how long the RCAF will cease its flight training ops for.

The decision to phase out the aging CT-155 fleet has been long forthcoming. With the RCAF’s contract with CAE for training its pilots on the CT-155 ending this year and the decision to acquire F-35s approved, the time to overhaul the Hawks have finally come.

The CT-155 Hawks, originally built to the Hawk 115 standard, is based on a 30 plus year old design at heart, despite its upgrades. A total of 22 aircraft were initially delivered to the RCAF, mainly flying with 419 squadron and a handful with 2 Canadian Forces Flying Training School (CFFTS / 2e École de pilotage des Forces canadiennes)…..

However, with the RCAF’s decision to replace the aging CF-18 fleet with the F-35A, the need for a new training jet to prepare for the 5th generation fighter has become apparent. Especially with the Canadian government’s deal to buy 88 F-35As being announced on Jan. 9, 2023, the Hawk fleet have started to become outdated.

While the RCAF is in search for a suitable training aircraft, the national fast jet training program has been put on hold.

During its period of hiatus, the RCAF will partner with its allies to train their future fighter pilots. One of the first steps of this interim solution is mainly through the Euro-NATO Joint Jet Pilot Training (ENJJPT) program based at Sheppard Air Base, Texas.

Future RCAF pilots will also be diverted to other NATO countries with similar programs such as the Fighter Lead-in Training (FLT) in Finland and the International Flight Training School (https://theaviationist.com/2023/05/15/ifts-presentation/) in Italy…..

[Bob Viking]

As an ex member of 419 I can’t allow this to pass without comment. Here’s hoping the glacial Canadian procurement process can find a replacement and bring back the Might Moose.

BV

[PPRuNeUser0211]

As an ex member of 419 I can’t allow this to pass without comment. Here’s hoping the glacial Canadian procurement process can find a replacement and bring back the Might Moose.

BV
Same same. I always said the best job I had in the RAF was in the RCAF!

[WB627]

Why do the USAF still use T-38's? What can the T-38 do that a Hawk can not?

[Ascend Charlie]

What can the T-38 do that a Hawk can not?

​​​​​​​Exceed Mach 1?

[T28B]

As neither Mod nor Admin
I saw this in wikipedia:
The original T-45A, which became operational in 1991, contained an analog cockpit design, while the newer T-45C, which was first delivered in December 1997, features a new digital "glass cockpit" design. All T-45A aircraft currently in operational use are upgraded to T-45C standard. The T-45 is to remain in service until 2035 or later.
​​​​​​​The American Navy still uses the T-45C Goshawk to train its jet pilots.
Some of those pilots go on to fly F-35 C or F-35B.
Will Canada perhaps send their pilots south to keep their fast jet training program going?

[PPRuNeUser0211]

As neither Mod nor Admin
I saw this in wikipedia:

The American Navy still uses the T-45C Goshawk to train its jet pilots.
Some of those pilots go on to fly F-35 C or F-35B.
Will Canada perhaps send their pilots south to keep their fast jet training program going?
​​​​​​​Yes, but to the T-38 at ENJJPT in Texas, not to the Navy.

[Bob Viking]

Why do the USAF still use T-38's? What can the T-38 do that a Hawk can not?
To answer your question in one word - fly.

The RCAF Hawks were all out of fatigue hours. The owners did not do any sort of airframe life extension programmes and they simply got too old to carry on. They were very well used and abused over the years.

BV

[walbut]

How quickly time flies. It does not seem like just over 20 years ago that I and a couple of other BAE Systems engineers were in Moose Jaw carrying out a trial installation of a mod to correct a centreline tank contents indication problem. I know the aircraft does not have a tank fitted in the picture but this was an initial flight test with a clean aircraft to provide a datum set of parameters.
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1342/n088_23a_90b2b32ca014b2deb8f02d44a60015c75a5da99b.jpg

[ASRAAMTOO]

Just out of interest what does the cockpit of the ENJJPTS T 38s at Shepherd look like. Have they all been been upgraded to T38c with a fully digital fit?

[PPRuNeUser0211]

Just out of interest what does the cockpit of the ENJJPTS T 38s at Shepherd look like. Have they all been been upgraded to T38c with a fully digital fit?
They're definitely T-38C. Not sure if you'd call it 'fully digital' but it's pretty much on a par with the CT-155 - an early 00's glass cockpit with standby analogue.
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1676x1360/070507_f_1511t_049_4c7e435515a5c0f224b78fced5129990b0375a4d. jpg
2007 photo of T-38C cockpit

[Wetstart Dryrun]

Exceed Mach 1?



​​​​​​​In the Hawker Siddely shallow dive, an easy M1.01

[Bob Viking]

There was a photo behind the Ops Desk at 419 Sqn showing a Hawk CT155 HUD screenshot with Mach 1.2. Not such a shallow dive. And not such a gentle pull out either.

BV

[teeonefixer]

They were certainly well operated; up to 500 fhrs per year per airframe, compared to, typically, 200-250 for RAF Hawks. But I am surprised at the news as the fleet were undergoing continuous fatigue mod updates (in my day).

[longer ron]

In the Hawker Siddely shallow dive, an easy M1.01

The BBC series 'Bang goes the theory' filmed an episode at ETPS Boscombe Down in 2010/2011 with Dallas Campbell flying with Rhys W in Hawk XX341,the reason they used 341 is that it was normally flown solo from the rear cockpit (the a/c was heavily modified to have a VSS system for the front seat [student] occupant,the rear seat controls were still directly mechanically connected to the control system) so that Dallas could sit in the front seat for filming.
The mach dive was done over the Brizzle Channel,the inside shots were filmed in the (specially cleared out) ETPS Helicopter Hangar.
The Hawk footage starts at approx 7.00 and as an added bonus you even see my best side - wiggling hands very briefly :)
Hawk experts will also notice that the rear cockpit pin stowages are still in their original position on the canopy sill,there was insufficient room on the Glare Shields for the later flip up stowages.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyOqfwur8mg

[DuckDodgers]

They were certainly well operated; up to 500 fhrs per year per airframe, compared to, typically, 200-250 for RAF Hawks. But I am surprised at the news as the fleet were undergoing continuous fatigue mod updates (in my day).

That’s an interesting number which would put them well over 10,000hrs on the frame. Out of interest how much did the DND pay in terms of support contracts to enable such an unheard of availability rate.

[CAEBr]

That’s an interesting number which would put them well over 10,000hrs on the frame. Out of interest how much did the DND pay in terms of support contracts to enable such an unheard of availability rate.

It wasn't just a case of paying via a support contract to get the high availability rates. The Mk115 fleet were civil owned and were only making money when flying. NFTC, buying the recommended spares package and flying the aircraft regularly, were rewarded with an airframe that was very reliable. A number of Hawk operators also demonstrated that, albeit not to the same extent. Several also demonstrated the result of the opposite approach.