All Hawk T1s will be gone by 31 March 2022
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…
Leeming gets the RAF/Qatari Hawk Sqn, T2 equivalent.
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
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
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,891
Received 2,829 Likes
on
1,207 Posts
It’s not true, well not if you read the RAF website…
https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/hawk-t1/
hopefully it will be updated soon 
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.
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.
Last edited by NutLoose; 11th Jul 2021 at 04:17.
Thread Starter
FB
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The 24th & a Half Century
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
6 Posts
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.
Thread Starter
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.
FB
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The 24th & a Half Century
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
6 Posts
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!
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
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
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
Thread Starter
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!
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
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
BV
Thread Starter
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
FB
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..
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..
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.
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.
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.
Thread Starter
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
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
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