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

All Hawk T1s will be gone by 31 March 2022

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.

All Hawk T1s will be gone by 31 March 2022

Old 10th Jul 2021, 17:39
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swindonshire
Posts: 1,971
Originally Posted by SLXOwft View Post
Under the Review the T1 Typhoons will only last until 2025. I presume this means 9(B) and 12(B) will follow Tatty Ton onto the retired list unless others are sacrificed instead.
The current public line is that all seven Typhoon squadrons (eight with 29 in the OCU role) will remain extant; the numbers in the sustainment fleet will reduce as a result. That, at least, was the position about three weeks ago, stated by a 3*. That could all change by 2025, of course…
Archimedes is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2021, 18:35
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by NutLoose View Post
Odd to think that the first of what were the Tornado replacements as such will be binned a scant couple of years after the Tornado.
Not really. Tornados were being disposed of in the 1990s and the last RAF Typhoons have only just rolled off the production line.
Easy Street is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2021, 23:11
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: north of england
Age: 57
Posts: 335
So with no Hawk T1's, what happens to Leeming?
mopardave is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2021, 23:43
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 376
Leeming gets the RAF/Qatari Hawk Sqn, T2 equivalent.
Jobza Guddun is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2021, 23:50
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,132
Originally Posted by mopardave View Post
So with no Hawk T1's, what happens to Leeming?
It will probably continue to house the following units:

90 SU
Future Joint RAF / Qatari Hawk Training Sqn
2 FP HQ RAF Regiment
34 Sqn RAF Regiment
607 Sqn RAuxAF
609 Sqn RAuxAF Regiment
Operational Training Centre
RAF Leeming MRT
YUAS
9 AEF
11 AEF
JFACTSU
RAFEngO74to09 is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 03:41
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 20,022
It’s not true, well not if you read the RAF website…

https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/hawk-t1/


The BAe Hawk T Mk1 is expected to remain in service until 2030 despite being replaced as the RAFs advanced fast jet pilot trainer by the new Hawk T Mk2. Like the Mk2, the Mk1 is a fully aerobatic, low-wing, transonic, two-seat training aircraft that is still used in a number of roles for the RAF. 100 Squadron, based at RAF Leeming, fly the Hawk T Mk1 in the ‘aggressor’ role, simulating enemy forces and providing essential training to the RAF front-line units. In addition to this, the Sqn carries out close air support training to British Army units, defence engagement tasks and participates in numerous overseas exercises throughout the year. The Mk1 is also in use with the Royal Air Force Aerobatic Team, the Red Arrows, based at RAF Scampton, in addition to the flight test and evaluation unit at MoD Boscombe Down.

The Hawk T1 is equipped to an operational standard and is capable of undertaking a war role. It has two underwing pylons cleared to carry AIM-9L Sidewinder air-to-air missiles or a telemetry pod for recording missions to enable post-flight debriefing.
hopefully it will be updated soon



Last edited by NutLoose; 11th Jul 2021 at 04:17.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 07:32
  #27 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 60
Posts: 1,493
Originally Posted by RAFEngO74to09 View Post
It will probably continue to house the following units:

90 SU
Future Joint RAF / Qatari Hawk Training Sqn
2 FP HQ RAF Regiment
34 Sqn RAF Regiment
607 Sqn RAuxAF
609 Sqn RAuxAF Regiment
Operational Training Centre
RAF Leeming MRT
YUAS
9 AEF
11 AEF
JFACTSU
Doesn't JFACTSU operate the Hawk T1?

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 07:50
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The 24th & a Half Century
Posts: 173
Originally Posted by Finningley Boy View Post
Doesn't JFACTSU operate the Hawk T1?

FB
Yes, but the jets and the crews come from the Ton. This service provision will have to be contracted out to meet the certification and accreditation minimums for the course delivered by JFACTSU in order to satisfy the JCAS MOA. There's probably iro 380hrs per year Hawk T1 provision to JFACTSU largely to cover off hot drop BDU-33, in addition I suspect there's another bucket load of hours (300-400?) to meet formation level currency and training as directed by JALO. All this is additional requirement to the non-representative training delivered by extant service provisions using DA-42s under a bespoke contract to Army Command through 1 Arty Bde along with Air's non-competed MSASS contract.
DuckDodgers is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 08:14
  #29 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 60
Posts: 1,493
Originally Posted by DuckDodgers View Post
Yes, but the jets and the crews come from the Ton. This service provision will have to be contracted out to meet the certification and accreditation minimums for the course delivered by JFACTSU in order to satisfy the JCAS MOA. There's probably iro 380hrs per year Hawk T1 provision to JFACTSU largely to cover off hot drop BDU-33, in addition I suspect there's another bucket load of hours (300-400?) to meet formation level currency and training as directed by JALO. All this is additional requirement to the non-representative training delivered by extant service provisions using DA-42s under a bespoke contract to Army Command through 1 Arty Bde along with Air's non-competed MSASS contract.
One imagines HHA will be the likely contenders? I wonder if they'll pick up few of the Hawks? They also need to find somewhere else to live of course.

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 11:24
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The 24th & a Half Century
Posts: 173
Originally Posted by Finningley Boy View Post
One imagines HHA will be the likely contenders? I wonder if they'll pick up few of the Hawks? They also need to find somewhere else to live of course.

FB
I'm not entirely convinced that Air Command would view replacing the Hawk with the aircraft that the Hawk replaced as being reputationally viable despite it being on the MAR. It's going to be interesting watching this debacle, of their (Air Command's) own making, unfold over the coming months!
DuckDodgers is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 12:12
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,528
In a sane world, ground forces would professionalise the JTAC role to reduce the initial training burden and focus an expensive resource on recurrent training. Indeed, maybe the RAF Regiment could have filled this role in the same way USAF Air Support Operations Groups do for the US Army, instead of basing its existence solely on the argument that ingrained "air awareness" is needed to defend airbases.

In an even saner world, JTAC training would be carried out exclusively using simulators, with non-representative types such as DA42 used if real-world confirmation is felt necessary. [How is a BDU-33 drop "representative" training, anyway?] Contracting civilian-operated FJs on such tasking in today's cost-, safety- and environmentally-conscious world isn't justifiable IMHO.

I recognise that the worlds of inter-service politics and NATO standards are not always sane ones
Easy Street is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 12:34
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 201
Originally Posted by Easy Street View Post
In a sane world, ground forces would professionalise the JTAC role to reduce the initial training burden and focus an expensive resource on recurrent training. Indeed, maybe the RAF Regiment could have filled this role in the same way USAF Air Support Operations Groups do for the US Army, instead of basing its existence solely on the argument that ingrained "air awareness" is needed to defend airbases.

In an even saner world, JTAC training would be carried out exclusively using simulators, with non-representative types such as DA42 used if real-world confirmation is felt necessary. [How is a BDU-33 drop "representative" training, anyway?] Contracting civilian-operated FJs on such tasking in today's cost-, safety- and environmentally-conscious world isn't justifiable IMHO.

I recognise that the worlds of inter-service politics and NATO standards are not always sane ones
I don’t believe there’s any intent to contract civilian-operated fast air to conduct JFACTSU training….yet. Though as Duck Dodgers says, it’s going to be an interesting few months looking how they replace the roles conducted by 736 and the Ton. Perhaps they won’t be replaced.
Foghorn Leghorn is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 14:16
  #33 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 60
Posts: 1,493
Originally Posted by DuckDodgers View Post
I'm not entirely convinced that Air Command would view replacing the Hawk with the aircraft that the Hawk replaced as being reputationally viable despite it being on the MAR. It's going to be interesting watching this debacle, of their (Air Command's) own making, unfold over the coming months!
Indeed,

didn't someone post earlier that CAS was not convinced of the need the Tranche 1 Typhoons to be given any such kind of role?

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 14:49
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 75
Originally Posted by BEagle View Post
I'm not sure when HS.1182 became 'Hawk', but I heard later that someone in the mad MoD box wanted it to be named 'Tercel'.
I was under the impression that the Hawk name resulted from a "name our new aircraft" suggestion scheme open to company employees. I recall that Tercel was one of the other "leading" suggestions.
papabravowhiskey is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 14:57
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,950
A Hawk by any other name…

Thank God the internet wasn’t a thing then or we may have been flying around in ‘Planey McPlane Face’ for the last 40 odd years.

BV
Bob Viking is online now  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 15:23
  #36 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 60
Posts: 1,493
And now Ladies and Gentlemen, Boys and Girls, it gives me great pleasure to introduce the Royal Air Force Aerobatics Team for 1980, newly equipped with the Hawker Siddley Planey McPlane Face T1!

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 17:43
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: South East of Penge
Age: 71
Posts: 1,561
Bit of thread drift , but I was in industry at the Paris Air Show in the early 80's when the Alpha Jet was in market competition with the Hawk.
The A Jet was on first.. From brakes off until roll out the commentary was a continuous frenzied eulogy.
Minutes later the U.K. Competitiion got airborne
One sentence on take off ......
"British Aerospace " Awk" "
Then silence for the rest of the presentation..
Haraka is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2021, 19:40
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 332
I dug out the RAeS Journal of Aeronautical History 2013 Paper 'The HAWK story' to see if it has anything to say about the origin of the name, it doesn't. In case anyone is interested in reading it, I checked that it is still available online; it is at: https://www.aerosociety.com/media/48...hawk-story.pdf

It concludes with a copy of a letter from the late Duncan Simpson in which he relates the first flight (XX154) and the first delivery to Valley with CinC Training Command onboard.
Hawk XX163 was delivered to RAF Valley on 4th November 1976. The Commander-in-Chief [ACM Sir Rex Roe GCB, AFC] had requested to participate in this flight – which he duly did.
We arrived at Valley, in heavy rain, to be welcomed by Group Captain Thornton and his instructors.
So began the illustrious career in the Royal Air Force and overseas services, not forgetting the Red Arrows, of this splendid aeroplane.
In T2 form we shall see more of it in the future.
SLXOwft is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2021, 06:03
  #39 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 60
Posts: 1,493
SLXOwft,

Reading that snippet its remarkable to think that in my adult life there was a time when the RAF had at least four four stars active who weren't either CAS, VCDS or CDS.

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2021, 07:48
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 75
Originally Posted by SLXOwft View Post
I dug out the RAeS Journal of Aeronautical History 2013 Paper 'The HAWK story' to see if it has anything to say about the origin of the name, it doesn't. In case anyone is interested in reading it, I checked that it is still available online; it is at: https://www.aerosociety.com/media/48...hawk-story.pdf
If anyone has access to an archive of the in-house newspaper "Hawker Siddeley News", I am sure that there is to be found the article that I believe I can remember reading about the name choice, which also mentions Tercel. I have no idea why it stuck in my memory. I believe that although employees could suggest names, the choice was to be made by a select group ...
papabravowhiskey is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.