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

UK MFTS Fixed Wing Flying Training : The Future

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.

UK MFTS Fixed Wing Flying Training : The Future

Old 3rd Feb 2016, 19:02
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,637
Whilst I can only agree that 10 Texans seems a little on the conservative side, you are of course assuming the course will be the same as it always has been. That may not be a fair assumption.
BV
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2016, 19:12
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 787
A fair point BV & I believe the intention is to do much of what was traditionally done on the BFJT cse on the Tucano on the 'Prefect' syllabus given that types greater complexity.
Ken Scott is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2016, 19:26
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Hopefully Inverted
Posts: 55
Originally Posted by Ken Scott View Post
A fair point BV & I believe the intention is to do much of what was traditionally done on the BFJT cse on the Tucano on the 'Prefect' syllabus given that types greater complexity.
Then how can 23 'Prefects' replace the ~25 Tutors required on the line each day for the current EFT, let alone any down loaded BFJT work. The numbers really really don't add up for me.

Unless of course Grob/Ascent/Affinity have guaranteed the Prefect will never break or need routine maintenance...
devonianflyer is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2016, 20:03
  #64 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 62
Posts: 6,996
Also ... at the other end of the of the FJ training 'machine' ...

The T6C is to be the feed-in to the Hawk T2. But in this brave new MFTS World FJ Bloggs wont have got his or her hands on a jet as yet. So if the T6C is to replace the Hawk T1, will there be a need to start FJ Bloggs earlier on the Hawk T2 ergo more Hawk T2s will be needed ?

CoffmanStarter is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2016, 20:48
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 3,904
The Grob 120TP is to be called 'Prefect' - what a sh!te name....

Lima Juliet is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2016, 21:10
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 787
At the risk of sounding like a spokesperson for Ascent, which I'm not, I believe the intent is to use the Texan to bridge the gap between the Prefect & the T2 in performance terms with advanced simulation to ease the transition, not to replace the T1. The Prefect cse would cover more than the old Tutor/ Bulldog/ Chipmunk syllabi so they are not really equivalent, the Texan I guess doing higher speed LL Nav & higher energy manoeuvres.

Personally I think the RAF & the other services could've done it better themselves for the 3 billion the PFI will cost but the projected 'saving' of 1billion was obviously too good to resist coupled with the post-RAF career opportunities for a few VSOs.
Ken Scott is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2016, 21:21
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,637
Coffman

I'm afraid you and a few others betray your slight lack of knowledge on the subject. The T6C is not intended to replace the Hawk T1. Students currently move from Tucano straight to Hawk T2. IV Sqn is 208 and 19 Sqns in old money. There never has been a Hawk T1 transition to Hawk T2.

The T6C will replace the Tucano with a shorter course.

I hope I have now spelt it out in obvious enough terms.

Whether the numbers of airframes are sufficient is for the bean counters to work out. I'm just the pilot!

BV
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2016, 21:51
  #68 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 62
Posts: 6,996
Thanks Bob ... Understood
CoffmanStarter is offline  
Old 3rd Feb 2016, 23:41
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 1,277
No matter how the course is, that's surely not enough aircraft.

Unless they DO now bring in the Hawk T1 between Texan and T2 to bridge the gap
LlamaFarmer is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2016, 18:12
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Lincs
Posts: 19
Hawk T1 OSD still 2020, so that won't work.
Jerry Atrick is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2016, 18:22
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 3,666
Couple of Q's for someone:
Why is the T6 simulator now not going to Valley?

What about MFTS (RW)? Any update?

TC
Thomas coupling is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2016, 19:10
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,637
Regardless of the Hawk T1 OSD there would be absolutely no sense, now or ever, flying a bridging course on a T1 before flying a T2.

Try looking at it as a whole package (Prefect, Texan and T2) rather than trying to relate it to its predecessor. Times are moving on. We move with them or move aside.

BV
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2016, 19:11
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: at the behest of the Queen of Canada.
Posts: 797
So will the MoD retain the Tutor?
Hueymeister is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2016, 20:05
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,096
That was my next question what will be the UAS's mount now? Laughingly the Kiwis have more T-6 than us, by one airframe

Btw will 45(R) continue their display team after the introduction of the Phenom? I saw the Emirates Academy Phenom 100 perform at DAS2015 (my photos below)

















cheers
chopper2004 is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2016, 23:57
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 1,277
Originally Posted by Bob Viking View Post
Regardless of the Hawk T1 OSD there would be absolutely no sense, now or ever, flying a bridging course on a T1 before flying a T2
Not sure about the others, but mine was a comment of throwaway sarcasm about how few a/c they were getting and having to supplement them with a T1 bridge course
LlamaFarmer is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2016, 02:15
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,235
I had hoped (on a heritage basis) the T6C would be called Harvard.
Davef68 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2016, 07:17
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,175
From the aircraft numbers it would seem there is to be a large reliance on simulators.

Only time will tell if this is a good thing for crew training, but no doubt the bean counters have decided already it's worth a try.
A and C is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2016, 09:09
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 2,096
Davef68

The Canadians call theirs the Texan II

CT-156 Harvard II | Trainer | Aircraft | Royal Canadian Air Force

cheers
chopper2004 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2016, 10:43
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,235
Yes, I had hoped we would follow suit. And given the Phenom a suitable scholarly name.
Davef68 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2016, 11:45
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Somerset
Posts: 97
The T6 can't be called Harvard as there is still a Harvard active on the military register.
Lynxman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.