PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   New RAF Trainer (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/582983-new-raf-trainer.html)

TEEEJ 15th Aug 2016 00:22

New RAF Trainer
 
Gallery at following link showing Embraer Phenom, serial ZM333. The Phenom will replace the King Air at RAF Cranwell.

EMBRAER PHENOM 100 - THE PHENOM - Affinity Flying Training Services

NutLoose 15th Aug 2016 02:01

What's happening to the Tucano's then? It seems odd to add another type if they are staying.

We have a couple of Phenom based here and they look a bit "Tinny" so I will be interested to see how well they stand up to military use compared to the King Airs.

I note the Grobs are the Turbo Prop versions, bang seats and all.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...rocket-352414/


The training aircraft will be the Grob G 120TP ‘Prefect’ for elementary flying training, the Beechcraft ‘Texan’ T-6C for basic flying training and the Embraer ‘Phenom’ 100 for multi-engine pilot training.

Thirty-eight modern, glass cockpit aircraft will be delivered in a phased approach over the next three years comprising 23 Grob G 120TP ‘Prefects’, 10 Beechcraft ‘Texan’ T-6Cs s and 5 Embraer ‘Phenom’ 100 jets – all featuring digital cockpits, exposing students at an early stage to the technologies they will rely on at the operational level.


http://www.affinityfts.co.uk/affinit...istry-defence/

Danny42C 15th Aug 2016 07:36

If you have tears, prepare to shed them now....
 
END OF AN ERA

Nutloose,

... exposing students at an early stage to the technologies they will rely on at the operational level...
So, it's the end of the analogue clocks, then ? (that's me finished !)

Danny......:{

bingofuel 15th Aug 2016 08:15

I find it interesting they intend to use a jet for multi engine training. Are the majority of the RAF large multi engine aircraft not still turboprops, ie Atlas and C130. I would suggest it easier to transition a turboprop trained pilot to a jet than vice versa.

Torquelink 15th Aug 2016 09:23


I find it interesting they intend to use a jet for multi engine training. Are the majority of the RAF large multi engine aircraft not still turboprops, ie Atlas and C130. I would suggest it easier to transition a turboprop trained pilot to a jet than vice versa.
Not to mention engine out handling: wing mounted vs rear fuselage mounted engines?

Fareastdriver 15th Aug 2016 10:06

Makes it easier to get your licences at an early stage so you can build up your experience for the airlines.

NutLoose 15th Aug 2016 14:27

http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogs pot.co.uk/p/uk-military-flying-training-system.html

Remove the gap between blogs and pot

Davef68 15th Aug 2016 14:34


Originally Posted by bingofuel (Post 9474080)
I find it interesting they intend to use a jet for multi engine training. Are the majority of the RAF large multi engine aircraft not still turboprops, ie Atlas and C130. I would suggest it easier to transition a turboprop trained pilot to a jet than vice versa.

You could equally say all the MFTS helicopters are skid equipped, but all/most operational ones have wheels. It just means more training, airframe hours, and costs on the OCU. Keeps MFTS cheaper (he says cynically).

PS First Grob in build here:
http://www.affinityfts.co.uk/wp-cont...P-in-build.jpg

tartare 15th Aug 2016 23:16

That M.17 bang seat is an amazing looking piece of kit - so small compared to its ancestors!
Could do with one of those in the 152...
...actually the 152 could do with a tiny turboprop and one of those five bladed props as well...

PPRuNeUser0211 16th Aug 2016 06:52

Is the 'prefect' actually getting the bang seat? I heard a vicious rumour it was coming sans bang/oxygen, though it was only a rumour.

Wander00 16th Aug 2016 08:15

Should have kept a couple of Canberra T4s for asymetric training..............

NutLoose 16th Aug 2016 08:52

If you read the link I posted the helicopter one is also coming up with different types in the offing.

Davef68 16th Aug 2016 09:14

H135/H145 Juno/Jupiter - the first one flew last week

air pig 16th Aug 2016 10:12

Is its serviceability any better, from what I have heard 30% is not good enough.

chopper2004 16th Aug 2016 11:42


Originally Posted by NutLoose (Post 9475160)
If you read the link I posted the helicopter one is also coming up with different types in the offing.

I mentioned it here :)

http://www.pprune.org/military-aviat...elected-2.html

chopper2004 16th Aug 2016 11:45


Originally Posted by Davef68 (Post 9475187)
H135/H145 Juno/Jupiter - the first one flew last week

https://www.airbushelicopters.com/we...MFTS_1995.html

(photos courtesy of AH)

cheers

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g2...psiqzzbyth.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g2...ps3bpx5y0x.jpg

devonianflyer 16th Aug 2016 17:45


Originally Posted by pba_target (Post 9475043)
Is the 'prefect' actually getting the bang seat? I heard a vicious rumour it was coming sans bang/oxygen, though it was only a rumour.

Not rumour. The bang seat I'd agree the RAF can do without in EFT.

Oxygen and air conditioning in a glass cockpit TP capable of ops well above 10,000 would have been nice though.

But don't worry, I'm sure Grob gave the MOD/Ascent/Affinity a nice discount on the price by asking to remove the systems from the original configuration. Every penny helps...

dervish 16th Aug 2016 19:47


But don't worry, I'm sure Grob gave the MOD/Ascent/Affinity a nice discount on the price by asking to remove the systems from the original configuration. Every penny helps...
Tongue firmly in cheek? This is what went wrong on Chinook Mk3.

NutLoose 16th Aug 2016 20:49

As it would probably involve a certain amount of redesign work to accommodate the RAF, you might find the savings were / are pitiful, remember the fiasco over the Typhoons gun, where it was cheaper to simply fit it but not at the time use it, rather than design and build a ballast system to replace it.

..

Mil-26Man 17th Aug 2016 11:39


remember the fiasco over the Typhoons gun, where it was cheaper to simply fit it but not at the time use it, rather than design and build a ballast system to replace it.
...and then to eventually use it after all. Fiasco indeed.


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:21.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.