Hawk at 30
 

Unless I'm mistaken, the Hawk is 30 years in service this year. Given that equates (in simple terms) to the RAF in 1977 using an aircraft from 1947! - is there a replacement on the horizon, if so, what?

The Chipmunk served from 1950 to 1996 all told, though for the last twenty or so years it was just on AEF duty.

Thats a very simplistic view to say the least.

Quality of build and the ability to 'futureproof' designs were completely different in 1947 to they were in 1977.

But to answer your question, I believe 24 new Hawks have been ordered and will be with the RAF some time in the future.

Indeed, the mighty Hawk 128 (or AJT or whatever you want to call it) should be arriving late 08/early 09 with the first students progressing through courses in '10 or '11. More power, more fuel, combat wing, advanced avionics and more toys than you can shake a stick at. (Ok so it might not be the ideal solution, but it ain't half bad!)

Plenty of aircraft have served beyond 30 years. It's not unusual. Age of a design alone is certainly not an indicator of usefulness: just look at the Dakotas that still earn money in various parts of the world. The Hunter was in squadron service for over 40 years and the Canberra, I believe, 50. Properly supported, funded and maintained, any aircraft can last practically forever. If it's a good design and does it's job well, that's no bad thing.

I heard somewhere that when they reach their forecast out of service dates, some lumps of B-52 and Nimrod, will have been serving for the best part of 100 years (although perhaps in the same manner as my grandfather's broom).

Incidentally, didn't the RAF recently have to lease back the Canberras that they had just auctioned off, because nothing else available in the inventory could do the job of the Canberra - a late 1940s design.:ok:

Thanks for your responses. I am aware I was being a little simplistic, but when you see those buggers being thrown around, it does make one think of airframe longevity.

Great aircraft from a standing on the ground perspective, looks good in flight, and carves throught the turns 'with the greatest of ease'

My goal in '78 was to be a FLEM (Might as well set those sights high!) and work on them at Valley with my mate, but I got siphoned off into a higher pay band. Oh well, never mind...

pba is right!

Just short of 30 Hawk 128 AJT a/c are under production. What does this mean? Well, a better airframe (Wing, Combat Flap, wingtip Mx), A Bigger Motor (Adour 951... 20% more 'Go'), Modern systems ie: TCAS, Auto Pilot, Glass Cockpit, Fully Integrated Nav / Ins / GPS system, HOTAS, HUD, Ground Attack training capabillity, A-A training capability. But, this is only the start...... This replaces the T1a in the Tac Wpns role, but future and further enhancements 'may' include: Synthetic (DataLinked) Radar, Synthetic Ground Environments (SAMS), Virtual Air Environments, and many other possible concepts.

The 'Basic' model, makes a T1 look like a museum piece. The 'End Game', should be worthy of the JSF generation.

'Hawk', was a winner in 1977, and as a training tool, it still is. A Good a/c remains a good a/c (OK the T1s are Knacked). Update, modernise and enhance.... you have a winner. Simple. Stick with the winning formula.

Advo

Chipmunkery?
 

http://www.bbmf.co.uk/othertypes.html
Scroll down.

If only 30 are on order to replace I'd guess 80? currently in service I guess the new stock will get knackered a lot more quickly. Obviously someone thinks we won't need the throughput of trainee pilots.

All this praise being levelled at T'bungling Barron's toy........ Beagle, where art thou?

We're getting Hawk 128 because the govt said so. And the govt said so because BAE said so. Questions?

Kitbag,

If these threads are read and taken as the 'Truth', we won't need any 128's.


(I won't need one!, neither will 'Beagle' I suspect?)

Fact is, That's What's Comming. And Actually, it's a really good a/c. Plane and simple.

Advo

Allright, here goes (says 4 most excellent pints of St Magnus!!!!) - so what's the longest lived cab still being used by Aunty Betty? BBMF et al not allowed. Me know nuthin but i'll open with the Andover. Takers?

Advo I was not having a go at the aircraft, rather the decision to replace the training fleet with less than half their number. The T1 is undoubtedly a fine aircraft, especially if it can be sold to the Americans in competition with their own indigenous designs, just concerned that the 128 fleet are going to rack up the hours rather faster than the T1 fleet have over the last 30 years. Mind you all the fancy av kit might help to keep it on the ground.

Isn't the Meteor used by Martin Baker still officially on loan to them and thus still on the military register?

Kitbag,

bear in mind that we now train approximately 2 fast jet pilots a year, vs the hundred or so in the 70s. So hours will build at a similar rate I should imagine....

They have two, WL419 and WA638.

Haven't QinetiQ still got a couple of Havards flying? (not the Raytheon variety)

MDLB

oldest
 

There is still a harvard flying at boscombe down. Been in Raf service since 1940 i think and still works today for photo chase and the like

oldest 2
 

Also isnt the mighty hercules 40 years in RAF service this year ?