Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

New RAAF Training Aircraft

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

New RAAF Training Aircraft

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 26th Sep 2014, 12:12
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The wrong time zone...
Posts: 843
Received 58 Likes on 23 Posts
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...
josephfeatherweight is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2014, 16:54
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm sure they also made A LOT of trips to the USA and Europe to "collect data"
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2014, 03:56
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
FoxtrotAlpha18 is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2014, 05:06
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Aus
Posts: 568
Received 71 Likes on 25 Posts
Singa's still do their equiv of FSP at Tamworth on the CT-4B with BAE, they call it "Air grading."
junior.VH-LFA is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2014, 06:07
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 926
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Surely they are not toying with the idea of using PC21 or T6B for screening or BFTS.
rjtjrt is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2014, 07:54
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Land of Oz
Posts: 564
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
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.
BBadanov is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2014, 07:59
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria
Age: 62
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Captain Sand Dune is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2014, 14:34
  #28 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Coal Face
Posts: 1,296
Received 332 Likes on 126 Posts
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.
Chronic Snoozer is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2014, 23:20
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Screening, the plan is to conduct this in simulators. i.e. No airborne flight screening at all.
dostum is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2014, 00:58
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 370
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is an interesting article here 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...
flyinkiwi is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2014, 07:50
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria
Age: 62
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe you can send the RNZAF acquisition team over to Oz to show these incompetents at DMO how to buy aircraft.
Captain Sand Dune is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2014, 08:23
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Land of Oz
Posts: 564
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
...these incompetents at DMO how to buy aircraft.


Hey Captain, would that be "our DMO" you are talking about?
Somewhat akin to "our ABC".
BBadanov is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2014, 07:41
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sydney
Age: 69
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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?
kerilee is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2016, 21:40
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Canberra
Posts: 244
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Pilot training has started

Oldish news but ...

RAAF?s first PC-21 pilots begin conversion training | Australian Aviation

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

cheers
layman
layman is online now  
Old 26th Jan 2016, 23:19
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 3,152
Received 101 Likes on 54 Posts
DAS2015

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















chopper2004 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.