BAE Systems Hawk Replacement?

[LateArmLive]

Originally Posted by Tarnished

Doesn't this reasoning actually fit nicely with the Aeralis business model? I am pretty sure they have been courting the Red Air providers and gaining an understanding of their requirements. Start off with the urgently required Red Arrow's T1 replacement which certainly does not need any of the clever bells and whitles of Emberred Training Systems and threat/sensor emulators - all the Reds need is a jet with nice Red paint, good handling qualities, good thrust response (might need a tweaked engine) and a smoke system. Cockpit needs simple avionics and a Martin Baker ejection seat (which the T-7 does not have). Whilst you are getting these first jets flying you are working on your training system probably followed in close order by your Aggressor solution - which does not need to carry or deploy actual weapons. Hey presto, next step is your UCAV fitted out for the roles you most need at that time.



T

The trouble with the entire Aeralis entity is it's entirely smoke and mirrors built on a fantasy solution that is entirely unproven and undesired. The company has how much experience building modern tactical aircraft?

[BEagle]

Originally Posted by LateArmLive

The trouble with the entire Aeralis entity is it's entirely smoke and mirrors built on a fantasy solution that is entirely unproven and undesired. The company has how much experience building modern tactical aircraft?

Do they have any experience in building anything except AI imagery?

T-7A Red Hawk would mean collaboration with Boeing, which could be risky under the present US administration. But could BAeS secure an agreement with Turkey to build the Hürjet under licence? Currently T-7A sticker price seems to be substantially less than Hürjet though.

However did a small company like Folland secure an order for a private venture aircraft for a lightweight fighter which became the Gnat T Mk1? Unlike Aeralis, at least Folland had an aeroplane which actually flew before being considered.

[GeeRam]

Originally Posted by BEagle

However did a small company like Folland secure an order for a private venture aircraft for a lightweight fighter which became the Gnat T Mk1? Unlike Aeralis, at least Folland had an aeroplane which actually flew before being considered.

At least Folland had a factory and had been assembling major components and sub assemblies of Spitfires, Beauforts, Blenheim's and Mosquito's during the war as well as designing and flying some of its own designs to meet Ministry research specifications, Folland himself having set up his own company in the late 30's having been Gloster's chief designer. So, while Folland may have been a small company at the time the Gnat was developed from the Midge, it was an established company which also had an established chief designer in Teddy Petter, so much further up the food chain than Aeralis are (and likely ever will be)

[Tarnished]

I don't get the approach or attitude that says - unless you have a proven track record and vast previous experience you cannot possibly succeed in a new endeavour.

I have some faith in the Great British underdog, small teams, well managed with sound governance - think Kelly Johnson's Skunk Works. Trick is in these days of scrutiny and (over) regulation its very easy to quickly be forced to grow beyond efficient size.

[SimonPaddo]

Not a fan of either owner but SpaceX and Blue Origin seem to be doing OK, but they had BIG backing.

[Bob Viking]

Tarnished

I think we’re all on the same side and want the same things. We’d all love a British success story here but I, for one, am a realist.

I can think strategically and I understand the need for British industry and jobs to be protected. However, as someone intimately involved at the coal face I still cannot see a way forward for Aeralis in the next generation trainer process. They just haven’t progressed their idea far enough to be taken seriously, especially when current timeframes and likely customers are considered.

Please, please prove me wrong.

BV

[t43562]

Originally Posted by Tarnished

I don't get the approach or attitude that says - unless you have a proven track record and vast previous experience you cannot possibly succeed in a new endeavour.

I have some faith in the Great British underdog, small teams, well managed with sound governance - think Kelly Johnson's Skunk Works. Trick is in these days of scrutiny and (over) regulation its very easy to quickly be forced to grow beyond efficient size.

There has to be money for prototypes then. Smaller companies, made up of people with new ideas and skills who see a chance to do something better need a chance to try their stuff out without it having to be everything all at once. That may be impossible given the way governments of the past forced the aircraft industry to consolidate so much that it doesn't actually make aircraft anymore. Now the area of innovation is drones (e.g. windracers) because they aren't so impossibly difficult to get started with. Malloy got R&D money for example (at least I think it did) and then when its drones were picked up in the US it was bought by BAE.

[Asturias56]

"I have some faith in the Great British underdog, small teams, well managed with sound governance "

yes but aerospace requires billlions to bring a new aircraft to completion. IIRC 30 years ago it cost Gulfstream US$ 800 million just to upgrade the GIV to the GV - and that was a well established company with years of experience. These days it would cost well over a Billion. And that's not a new aircraft.

It's not just the prototypes - the cost of certification is enormous. You're looking at hundreds if not thousands of hours of flying ..........

[Lima Juliet]

For me it has to be M-346 built and assembled at Yeovil by Leonardo. Allow them to build their 4,000ft runway to get it in and out. Then you have some resilience for UK-based aerospace manufacture. Warton has GCAP, Typhoon and the 15% share of all F35 to keep it afloat. But if New Medium Helo (NMH) doesn’t happen then Yeovil will fall for sure. Other than that it is Hawarden and its plant/runway now that Filton has gone.

M-346 can provide another NFTE base too with Deci and now Greece operating the type, then there will be resilience built in the NATO fast jet aircrew training system too.

I can’t think of any other way to keep the UK aerospace industry ticking over, without putting all the eggs in the Warton basket.

[typerated]

And presumably the 346 is quite a bit cheaper to buy/operate than the Red Hawk or T-50.
It's hard to see a need for supersonic and afterburners.
If you want a 2nd tier combat aircraft / red air buy Gripens

[BBadanov]

Originally Posted by Tarnished

I have some faith in the Great British underdog, small teams, well managed with sound governance - think Kelly Johnson's Skunk Works. Trick is in these days of scrutiny and (over) regulation its very easy to quickly be forced to grow beyond efficient size.

That smacks of the aircraft cottage industry that lasted in UK through the '60s and '70s. I remember taking a Bucc into such a location (Bitteswell ?) for servicing as late as the '80s, The place was small, run down, and not a lot going on. You need Warton as the centre, with a couple of outstations. That's all your market can support now.

[chevvron]

Originally Posted by BBadanov

That smacks of the aircraft cottage industry that lasted in UK through the '60s and '70s. I remember taking a Bucc into such a location (Bitteswell ?) for servicing as late as the '80s, The place was small, run down, and not a lot going on. You need Warton as the centre, with a couple of outstations. That's all your market can support now.

Bitteswell was closed by about '84; more likely it was HoSM.

[BBadanov]

Originally Posted by chevvron

Bitteswell was closed by about '84; more likely it was HoSM.

No it would have been Bitteswell when I returned from Germany in 1983.
On the A1 near Rugby, and an aerial farm to the south.

[chevvron]

Originally Posted by BBadanov

No it would have been Bitteswell when I returned from Germany in 1983.
On the A1 near Rugby, and an aerial farm to the south.

That's the place.
BAe had just built a new production facility there (built 10 Hawks there so I'm told) and closed it again soon after. Doug Arnold bought it when he sold Blackbushe in '84 and I competed there in '85 for drag racing.

[DuckDodgers]

Originally Posted by Lima Juliet

For me it has to be M-346 built and assembled at Yeovil by Leonardo. Allow them to build their 4,000ft runway to get it in and out. Then you have some resilience for UK-based aerospace manufacture. Warton has GCAP, Typhoon and the 15% share of all F35 to keep it afloat. But if New Medium Helo (NMH) doesn’t happen then Yeovil will fall for sure. Other than that it is Hawarden and its plant/runway now that Filton has gone.

M-346 can provide another NFTE base too with Deci and now Greece operating the type, then there will be resilience built in the NATO fast jet aircrew training system too.

I can’t think of any other way to keep the UK aerospace industry ticking over, without putting all the eggs in the Warton basket.

Sounds good in principle but please show me the USP of another M346 campus aligned to NFTE? I’m struggling to see why I wouldn’t go to Deci or Kalamatta, and if anyone says you get the CFS tick then jeez I have abridge to sell you.

However, I’d take it everyday of the week over any hyper-inflated and unsuitable T-7A built by Bungling Baron.

[DuckDodgers]

Originally Posted by typerated

And presumably the 346 is quite a bit cheaper to buy/operate than the Red Hawk or T-50.
It's hard to see a need for supersonic and afterburners.
If you want a 2nd tier combat aircraft / red air buy Gripens

I think you’d be very surprised on the op cost front, particularly factoring in WLC around obsolescence and assurity of supply chain.

[longer ron]

Originally Posted by chevvron

That's the place.
BAe had just built a new production facility there (built 10 Hawks there so I'm told) and closed it again soon after. Doug Arnold bought it when he sold Blackbushe in '84 and I went there in '85 for drag racing.

Bitteswell delivered the original batch of Red Arrows Hawk conversions (smoke system/paint etc).
I cannot remember if the aircraft were flown in from dunsfold or roaded in from Kingston/Brough.
I converted 2 x Hawks at Dunsfold in the 1980's as attrition replacements
Smoke trials had originally been carried out at Dunsfold though - the Adour exhaust was much cooler than the Orpheus and it took some time to get the correct dye to cope with that.

[GeeRam]

Originally Posted by Lima Juliet

For me it has to be M-346 built and assembled at Yeovil by Leonardo. Allow them to build their 4,000ft runway to get it in and out.

Or build them there, and road them to nearby RNAS Yeovilton for final assembly and test flying. Its been done plenty of times before, and with more difficult and bigger aircraft to move over longer journeys than Yeovil to Yeovilton...?

[chevvron]

Originally Posted by GeeRam

Or build them there, and road them to nearby RNAS Yeovilton for final assembly and test flying. Its been done plenty of times before, and with more difficult and bigger aircraft to move over longer journeys than Yeovil to Yeovilton...?

Or as I said, when the hard runway is ready, first flight from Yeovil to land at Yeovilton like they did with the VC10s Brooklands to Wisley and Brough to Warton for the last Hawks..

[Easy Street]

Originally Posted by chevvron

Or as I said, when the hard runway is ready, first flight from Yeovil to land at Yeovilton like they did with the VC10s Brooklands to Wisley and Brough to Warton for the last Hawks..

In a fast jet trainer there's only a very small amount of mass which can be left uninstalled at the first flight stage (a handful of avionics boxes at the very most), so the VC10 logic doesn't cross over. And BAES briefly resumed Hawk flights out of Brough only so that Warton final assembly capacity could be redeployed for Typhoon, with surface finishing and flight testing for both types being consolidated there. This made best use of the company's existing workforces at both sites.

Extending the runway at Yeovil could avoid the need to establish a final assembly facility at Yeovilton. But attaching wings to fuselage post-road move is a simple task that would only need a small facility, much cheaper to build and maintain than a jet-capable runway at Yeovil. And with the sites so close together, it would effectively be one workforce working across them. So, to me it would not make commercial sense to extend Yeovil's runway purely to allow a short hop to Yeovilton.