Civi wise the always struck me ( on the ones we had here ) as not being that robust, they struck me as built to a price rather than for longevity, but then again I initially thought that of the Puma.

‘Snap’ on the rumour. Apparently 2 poorly aircraft from the same sortie.

So am I to infer that L3 are taking multi-training off Ascent? I suppose losing “close” to 40% of the fleet in one sortie is going to limit their ability to deliver training.....

[QUOTEAs for 40% of the Phenom fleet now being unavailable, one also has to wonder what the heck happened if both aircraft became 'poorly' on the same sortie....][/QUOTE]

Rumour has it that adequate separation failed to be maintained during a formation sortie....

ME students have gone straight from EFT to Multis at least as long as I have been in the RAF (1999). They have not done BFT in that whole period.

EFT included formation flying. I can’t speak for the present day EFT.

I know your gripes but you don’t have to go as far back as the 70’s to find a system that worked well.

As much as there were benefits to the system where everyone flew the JP it was hardly cost effective, or certainly wouldn’t be nowadays.

Please, sometimes, instead of harking back to a bygone era just accept that your modern day counterparts are doing the best they can with what they have. It may be different but that doesn’t automatically make it wrong.

It just doesn’t help anyone to say “bring back the flying training system of 40 years ago”.

Anyone can find problems. It takes a really clever person to find solutions. Real ones. That work. In 2018.

On a separate note, I find it a little unsavoury the way people salivate at the thought of the flying training system failing or being proven right that the Phenom may or may not have been the right jet for the job (I know nothing of multi engine aircraft so won’t offer an opinion either way). It’s the only system we have.

As your Mum used to say, “if you haven’t got anything nice to say...”

BV

ME Students now do, I believe, an abbreviated EFT cse (Aeros & spinning no longer covered?) followed by an abbreviated MELIN (Multi-engine Lead-in) cse, (which itself was reduced by something like 15 hrs so that the sponsor could get promoted for saving money). Their ME cse is therefore essentially their BFT in old terms so things such as formation & low-level need to be covered then. Their OCU Cse, which they can start with a grand total of around 150 hrs, is now therefore effectively AFT.

After 2-3 years as a co-pilot & maybe 1000hrs TT they will be ready for captaincy. Allegedly.

Looking at the view from the cockpit of the Phenom it is hard to see how you would teach ab-initio formation but apparently Ascent cleared it as suitable. I don’t know if they are reviewing things in light of recent events.

I wouldn't be surprised if they are reassessing that.

At least they have spares if it's just the tip, take it off the good wing and fit it to the other aircraft ;)

I agree with what has been said re the HS125, built like the proverbial, and a proven type in RAF service.

BV

Normally, I agree with the majority of things you say, but...

...this I do not agree with. The whole MFTS thing has been a ‘train crash’ slowly evolving in front of our eyes. The NAO have been crawling all over this, EFT with Prefect has not exactly gone well - late by at least 3 months on the start date and the student output has been well below the planned numbers, with the aircraft too small to fit the the talker pilots who have to go to Tutor. There are numerous problems with the airframes - cracks as reported on Prune and engines being overtorqued by ham fisted students mean that availability from such a tiny fleet is low, which leads to slower output of studes. At Turweston there was a Juno that had reportedly cooked its avionics because we painted them black but didn’t pay for air con. The Juno is also too small for crewman training. The Hawk availability at Valley has been poor with around half on the line on a good day and then there was the widely discussed incident that stopped Hawk flying for a while. Now we have the Phenom, with only 5 bought and 2 allegedly bent, which means that again the small numbers with no planned resilience to quickly tap into, means that this is also not going well. With 10 Texans coming to replace a fleet of around 60 Tucanos, you can only imagine how that is going to go!

The outsource is a blessing actually as it means that there is some resilience. Don’t forget that MFTS was designed for SDSR10 with the low numbers required for that plan, but SDSR15 means that more ME pilots are needed for P8 and various assets being run on. So the outsource programme is there to service the extra requirement from SDSR15 with a suitable uplift of money to pay for it. Personally I think the DA42 with Garmin 1000 is a better aircraft for ME training than the Phenom. They would do well to use the Phenoms for 32 Sqn duties and buy double the number of DA42s to deliver ME pilot training.

The proof is in the pudding with some significant holding periods for the aircrew students waiting for this apparent debacle to start running smoothly.

But I don’t want to be accused of being negative talking down the new training system!

So of course it is all wonderful ;-)

Good post LJ.

It is rather tragic to think that only a short time ago the RAF could provide its own training in-House, using QFIs that had recent frontline experience (although there were a few that had skulked around Lincolnshire seemingly for ever!) A QFI tour was a ‘rest’ from the frontline & continuous deployments & afterwards you returned able to take on instructional duties on the OCUs.

Now the training system has ground to an almost total halt, the often unsuitable aircraft provided in tiny numbers unable to cope with any surge in aircrew numbers. Students in the system are facing years of holds, even prior to EFT, so are VWing as a result. Meanwhile outflow is accelerating as the airlines up their recruitment & the effects of restrictions on flying pay (sorry, retention pay), pensions & below inflation pay rises come home to roost.

Almost a ‘perfect storm’ in aircrew numbers is in prospect and the RAF has seemingly lost the ability to do anything training-wise to solve it.

If you're thinking Turboprop, the Twotter is a nice aircraft.


https://www.vikingair.com/twin-otter...SAAEgI0IfD_BwE

Firstly let me say that the part of MFTS that I have experience of is working fine. A decent sized fleet of new jets with a huge new building, decent sims and new engineering facilities is not a terrible place to work.

Secondly I should add that I am not qualified to comment on any of the other areas of MFTS so my optimism may well be misplaced.

My final point which I keep trying to make, poorly it seems, is that I personally will take no joy in seeing MFTS fail if it comes to that, I don’t think anyone should. It is the only training system we have right now and the hopes of hundreds of aspiring pilots and the future of the Air Force rests on it. Not to mention that a lot of my tax pounds have been spent on it and if it fails we won’t get them back.

BEagle it is not just you old farts who can see the problems. Us young(er) folk can see them too. It’s just that, for those of us that work in the system, I feel there is no point complaining or pointing out the faults when it won’t change anything. It just makes people go to work feeling miserable.

So, in summary, excluding the FJ aspects which I do know about you are almost certainly right about the other bits but I for one will not sit and rub my hands with glee at the prospect of its impending failure.

BV

665 dollar Canadian per hour

https://www.vikingair.com/twin-otter...costs#Per-Hour


and a lot more versatile.

This thread is in danger of getting a bit like a Volvo driver trying to convince a VW driver which car is best now!

Maybe Ascent/Affinity just got bored of all the opinions thrown at them and drew a name out of a hat.

Next up let’s all try to agree on the best fighter aircraft ever built.

BV

And in that, as it does as with the Tanker contract make one wonder why, if a company can build a new facility, and supply and operate a training regime while making a healthy profit on the length of that contract, why the RAF could not do the same where no profit is required both cheaper and with service personnel.

Jam today versus jam tomorrow.

We needed new training aircraft across the spectrum. I have no idea how much Phenoms, Prefects, Junos and Texans cost but I have a fair idea how much Hawks cost.

If we’d managed to afford new aircraft I would bet good money we would have been operating out of manky old buildings in perpetuity.

No government wants to stump up billions in one go. Spreading the cost (even if it turns out to be far more expensive in the long run) is how governments work.

You know all of this as well as I do.

BV

I agree Bob, but the company involved with the Phenom is probably leasing them, or if purchased has factored in those costs.

Thankfully, PFI is now largely discredited - and rightly so, as governments always could borrow far more cheaply than businesses. Unfortunately it was discredited slightly too late in the day to stop the AirTanker and MFTS contracts, the latter signed when IPS was at a historic low, and as you rightly say we are stuck with the consequences.

The only test of that is whether FJ OCU slots are being filled on time with suitable candidates...

BV

As ever a reasoned and balanced post. My concern on what I hear about Valley and what the spotters would seem to back up are the low numbers of actual jets that fly from the line on a day to day basis. On some spotter sites it states it is as low as 6 aircraft. Now seeing as we bought 28x Hawk T2s and less than half of that seems to be the ‘batting average’, are you really that confident on that rosie picture you are painting?

Here is the spotters log on 13 Jun which was described as an exceptionally good day recently:
Even 17 out of 28 isn’t exactly amazing I would offer?

Now with all of the Saudis, Qataris and other nations buying training courses, plus our own pilots, then QFI workups and everything else like STANEVAL going on, are we really convinced that 17x Hawks on a daily basis is going to crack it? Not forgetting that the RN are also needing FJ pilots in reasonable numbers also.

BTW - I agree that our training system is the future of the Service, so why have we allowed it to slowly decline into a training fleet The NAO grilled the MOD on this 3 years ago: https://www.nao.org.uk/report/military-flying-training/

The video is here: https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/...1-168735a1b10b

Not sure that the Phenom windows are much different to the Jetstream and that was used for formation on METS for years

As I recall on the Jetstream you could see your wingtips at least, I would imagine that would be less likely to be possible on a swept wing jet like the Phenom. Add in the throttle lag of a jet & I can’t see it as being an ideal ab-initio formation trainer.