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

Red Arrows Replacement............

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
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.

Red Arrows Replacement............

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 26th June 2025 | 21:21
  #121 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 94
Likes: 15
From: Behind You...
Originally Posted by chinook240
Surely the future of formation display flying 🤔

https://youtu.be/FKmlcaE47Yo?si=ed104PHP26YKYXwl
You could buy a real one for $305,000
https://www.platinumfighters.com/inv...ighter-n104rb/



Other A/C are available...
teej013 is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd July 2025 | 05:53
  #122 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 409
Likes: 49
From: The 24th & a Half Century
At least it will be through an open competition, hopefully with no political meddling. some interesting comments from MDP.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Common...rocurementSmes

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Common...3BDD/RedArrows

DuckDodgers is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd July 2025 | 06:11
  #123 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 1,532
From: Near the coast
Aeralis

As I have said many times, I will be delighted to be proven wrong but I still don’t see Aeralis being the logical choice.

Their USP is the common wing concept. I am struggling to see any customer, the RAF included, who needs that right now. In the RAF’s case they are solely after a straight Hawk T2 replacement. That means that the Aeralis comes across as a ‘Jack of all trades, Master of none’. There are much better options for a pure Phase IV trainer already on the market.

I really don’t want to see the RAF lumbered with a poor aircraft just to satisfy British industry. I mean, when has that ever happened?!

BV
Old 2nd July 2025 | 06:35
  #124 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 409
Likes: 49
From: The 24th & a Half Century
Originally Posted by Bob Viking
As I have said many times, I will be delighted to be proven wrong but I still don’t see Aeralis being the logical choice.

Their USP is the common wing concept. I am struggling to see any customer, the RAF included, who needs that right now. In the RAF’s case they are solely after a straight Hawk T2 replacement. That means that the Aeralis comes across as a ‘Jack of all trades, Master of none’. There are much better options for a pure Phase IV trainer already on the market.

I really don’t want to see the RAF lumbered with a poor aircraft just to satisfy British industry. I mean, when has that ever happened?!

BV
I suspect we will see this continued level of interference especially noting a) Dinenage’s husband is in the Lords and is appointed as a Defence Security Advocate established to help drive UK Defence exports and involves engagement with both UK Industry leaders and foreign Government Ministers, and b) Reid is in the Lords and on Aeralis’s board.

There are more COIs here than you can imagine. That’s before diving down the rabbit hole of Mr China being on their Advisory Board and the very non-British nature of the supply chain especially when looked at via ownership. Rumour has it there’s a capability investigation underway into their maturity…….

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/1984-10-17/debates/8682880b-879e-46a2-925a-91b914046600/RafNewBasicTrainerEvaluationOfTenders
DuckDodgers is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd July 2025 | 07:34
  #125 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,139
Likes: 331
From: Royal Berkshire
Originally Posted by Bob Viking
I really don’t want to see the RAF lumbered with a poor aircraft just to satisfy British industry.
What British Industry though, they don't even have a UK production facility to build any yet......(ignoring the fact that they haven't even built a flyable and testable prototype yet)

Its far too late in the day now to be even thinking that Aeralis is even an option for Hawk T.2 replacement....maybe if the timeline was 2050, but not 2030.
But, I'm sure wallets and ego's in the corridors of power can be suitably massaged to give the RAF another donkey.
GeeRam is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd July 2025 | 08:29
  #126 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Community Influencer
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,671
Likes: 7,352
From: Peripatetic
At least it will be through an open competition, hopefully with no political meddling.
I have a bridge to sell you….
ORAC is online now  
Reply
Old 2nd July 2025 | 13:12
  #127 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 760
Likes: 34
From: Rural England, thank God.
As I have said many times, I will be delighted to be proven wrong but I still don’t see Aeralis being the logical choice.

Their USP is the common wing concept. I am struggling to see any customer, the RAF included, who needs that right now. In the RAF’s case they are solely after a straight Hawk T2 replacement. That means that the Aeralis comes across as a ‘Jack of all trades, Master of none’. There are much better options for a pure Phase IV trainer already on the market.
Aeralis' concept is common fuselage (core), not common wing.
skua is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd July 2025 | 14:38
  #128 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 1,532
From: Near the coast
Skua

Originally Posted by skua
Aeralis' concept is common fuselage (core), not common wing.
Haha. Good spot. I won’t amend my post, but I think people knew what I meant.

BV
Bob Viking is online now  
Reply
Old 2nd July 2025 | 14:57
  #129 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,909
Likes: 129
From: Here
Originally Posted by DuckDodgers
At least it will be through an open competition, hopefully with no political meddling. some interesting comments from MDP.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Common...rocurementSmes

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Common...3BDD/RedArrows
This annoying habit of linking the M346 to Russia (I can understand why) should be shot down - MDP should be better briefed.

And someone needs to brief John Cooper on the facts relating to TSR2.
Davef68 is online now  
Reply
Old 4th July 2025 | 09:15
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,481
Likes: 489
From: A place in the sun
Sorry about this, but I couldn't resist it!!!

Bergerie1 is online now  
Reply
Old 4th July 2025 | 22:05
  #131 (permalink)  
50 Countries Visited
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes: 210
From: Location: Location!
Originally Posted by GeeRam
What British Industry though, they don't even have a UK production facility to build any yet......(ignoring the fact that they haven't even built a flyable and testable prototype yet)

Its far too late in the day now to be even thinking that Aeralis is even an option for Hawk T.2 replacement....maybe if the timeline was 2050, but not 2030.
But, I'm sure wallets and ego's in the corridors of power can be suitably massaged to give the RAF another donkey.
Someone seems to think otherwise according to this BBC report.

Jack
Union Jack is offline  
Reply
Old 5th July 2025 | 06:37
  #132 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 290
Likes: 152
From: Too far South
Originally Posted by BEagle
The financial gain to the UK from the last RAFAT tour to North America more than covered both the tour cost and the annual cost of the whole team!

Those claiming that the cost of continuing the team is disproportionate are simply wrong.
But they only do that once in about every 20 years - to really be beneficial they either need to do it more often, or make sure that the financial gain is 20x the cost of the tour to pay for the years in between
Lomon is offline  
Reply
Old 5th July 2025 | 09:21
  #133 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,139
Likes: 331
From: Royal Berkshire
Originally Posted by Union Jack
Someone seems to think otherwise according to this BBC report.

Jack
The only thing more clueless than a BBC report is usually a politician.

GeeRam is offline  
Reply
Old 5th July 2025 | 15:04
  #134 (permalink)  
Community Builder
Community Influencer
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,458
Likes: 368
From: Wildest Surrey
Originally Posted by skua
Aeralis' concept is common fuselage (core), not common wing.
They also need a factory to build it in. Apart from Warton, all the factories have been shut down and disposed of.
chevvron is offline  
Reply
Old 5th July 2025 | 17:33
  #135 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,444
Likes: 55
From: Under a recently defunct flight path.
According to The Times today. From the article:-
The next generation of Red Arrows will be “Scottish as well as British” after it emerged they will be assembled at an SNP government-owned airport.The defence aviation firm Aeralis said that it had agreed a deal with Prestwick airport to build a facility for the final assembly of its UK aircraft. The company is developing a modular light jet aircraft which will replace the Hawk T1, currently used by the Red Arrows, which are due to be retired by the end of the decade. The site will also be used to assemble training aircraft and fighter jets for the RAF and Nato. The facility in Ayrshire is to go ahead despite an SNP ban on using taxpayer support for “munitions” projects. The airport was nationalised by the Scottish government in 2013 to save it from closure. It has since returned to profitability and the airport said the deal would create jobs, apprenticeships and investment.


Lyneham Lad is offline  
Reply
Old 5th July 2025 | 17:42
  #136 (permalink)  
Community Builder
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 2,374
Likes: 195
From: Richard Burtonville, South Wales.
Originally Posted by chevvron
They also need a factory to build it in. Apart from Warton, all the factories have been shut down and disposed of.
Is Hawarden gone too?

CG
charliegolf is offline  
Reply
Old 5th July 2025 | 18:03
  #137 (permalink)  
5 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,983
Likes: 381
From: Hampshire
Originally Posted by charliegolf
Is Hawarden gone too?

CG
Broughton is an Airbus plant; however I understand Spirit Aerosystems still have manufacturing facilities in Belfast and Prestwick; I belive they are looking to unload both.
SLXOwft is offline  
Reply
Old 5th July 2025 | 19:33
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 10,588
Likes: 805
From: Northumberland

Glasgow Prestwick Airport has been selected by leading British aircraft manufacturer AERALIS as the final assembly site for its revolutionary new aircraft programme – successfully beating off competition from 67 other UK locations.


https://www.glasgowprestwick.com/new...ew-red-arrows/
SWBKCB is online now  
Reply
Old 5th July 2025 | 20:05
  #139 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,139
Likes: 331
From: Royal Berkshire
Aeralis must have paid for some nice lunches to these press people, which just goes to prove how clueless the press are.

Leading British aircraft manufacturer.....
GeeRam is offline  
Reply
Old 6th July 2025 | 02:36
  #140 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,083
Likes: 253
From: London/Oxford/New York
Originally Posted by chevvron
They also need a factory to build it in. Apart from Warton, all the factories have been shut down and disposed of.
Nonsense!

Samlesbury is huge and all of the Airbus UK plants are pretty large and impressive too. There are numerous component and sub assembly manufacturers who could also get involved. The plan to manufacture the Aeralis includes airframe manufacture at Hamble and an assembly line at Prestwick.

You do seem to be really ill informed.
pr00ne is offline  
Reply


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

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.