They are just now receiving the "C-Update" and thus they must have time left in them.
Quoting N74JW (Thread starter): I think the KAI T-50 and the Hawk are the main contenders.
Given the number that the USAF requires and the relative simplicity of a training aircraft, it shouldn't be a problem to make a custom design a viable approach. It does not need to be off the shelf.
DEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4429 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 20 hours ago) and read 3294 times:
Considering that the UAE is about to select a winner for its advanced jet trainer competition and that EADS had halted the MAKO's development, KAI/LM's T-50 Golden Eagle and ATG/IAI's Javelin Mk 3 (military trainer version) have a headstart here.....
As said, EADS put the project in the fridge. Italy bailed out. Germany has it's training in the US now. Don't know what France is up to. Not that it's a bad design. Who knows, maybe in a few years European countries will place a demand for it.
Germany had its training in the US since the sixties and I think Germany and Italy both extended participation in ENJJPT until 2015 or so. But that does effectively mean that they depend on T-38s (38 T-38s are owned by Germany, but wear US markings). In case of the T-37 the German owned frames will be/are phased out with the American owned ones and training will continue on American owned T-6 Texan II, without that there is much talk about it ... looks like a cheap solution for us.
Scouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3255 posts, RR: 10 Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 1 hour ago) and read 3120 times:
Is the BAe Hawk (whatever version it's up to now) still considered State of the Art and could a new version of that be considered for this requirement?
Columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6800 posts, RR: 5 Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months ago) and read 3108 times:
Quoting PADSpot (Reply 8): In case of the T-37 the German owned frames will be/are phased out with the American owned ones and training will continue on American owned T-6 Texan II, without that there is much talk about it ... looks like a cheap solution for us.
Are there any plans to acquire own T-6 Texan IIs ?
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
PADSpot From Germany, joined Jan 2005, 1676 posts, RR: 5 Reply 11, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3099 times:
Quoting Columba (Reply 10): Are there any plans to acquire own T-6 Texan IIs ?
No, don't think so. According to a Luftwaffe pilot even before it was unrecognizable for the students whether they sit in an German or US T-37. They were maintained by Americans, wore the same American markings, received the same updates over time but were flown by student from all nations which participated in ENJJPT. Just from the books you could see which frame was bought by German money in the 60s and which by American money. Same for the T-38. There are no plans to get own T-6 Texan II because Germany pays the same money for each pilot training as the other nations do and which also don't contribute airplanes. Hence financially ENJJPT is a very reasonable institution, with the nice side-effect that future pilots learn proper English. That would be more difficult if we did training at home.
DeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3063 times:
I think the T-45 Goshawk is a good contender for a new AF advanded jet platform. It's a sturdy airframe, granted not supersonic, but still well suited for the training environment. You won't be doing carrier quals in it but it can haul a respectable load of 25-lbs blue practice bombs.
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3054 times:
Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 12): I think the T-45 Goshawk is a good contender for a new AF advanded jet platform. It's a sturdy airframe, granted not supersonic, but still well suited for the training environment. You won't be doing carrier quals in it but it can haul a respectable load of 25-lbs blue practice bombs.
DeltaGuy
I don't know that the Air Force even considers supersonic capability a necessity in their trainers any more. Most countries seem to be satisfied with an airplane that has high subsonic speed. What matters too is handling characteristics that're close to what the new pilot will encounter when he gets into a combat squadron. And versatility counts; good range for cross country nav' training, a respectable armament load for weapons delivery training. Low cost of operation and very good maintainability are musts. The Hawk seems to excell in all of these areas. And since we already use the airplane in Navy training squadrons, I don't see where there'd be a big "buy American" cry to get into the way. But then, you never know with politicians.
Quote: "The developer of the Javelin personal jet has laid off its staff after investment resources dried up.
'Everybody is on mandatory holiday for the rest of the week,' Aviation Technology Group says. 'The company is awaiting funding. It's not good news for ATG. Maybe they'll come up with something and we'll all go back to work, or maybe they won't'."
This suggests that future prospects for a military trainer are dim - unless a rich country's air force steps forward to finance the Mk 20 and Mk 30 development.
KevinSmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2986 times:
IMHO I do not believe that the USAF will select any aircraft that does not have two engines to replace the T-38. I would be different if the T-37 was still the main trainer. However since it is on it's way out and being replaced by the single engine T-6, it would make sense to me to expose the student pilots to multi-engine operations before getting to the operational aircraft. I've often wondered why the Navy ordered the T-45 for its carrier pilots when none of the follow on aircraft are single engine.
DeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2887 times:
Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 15): I've often wondered why the Navy ordered the T-45 for its carrier pilots when none of the follow on aircraft are single engine.
Well they operated the TA-4J for years right? Alot of these jets are centerline thrust, it's the Hoover guys that had the real beef I spose.
Back in the day, you had F-8's, A-4's, A-7's, etc, all single engine.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Jan 2005, 1676 posts, 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4429 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1113 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3255 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
