UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

ASDOT

Contains threads on Joint Service equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 482
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

ASDOT

Postby RichardIC » 20 Feb 2017, 20:03

OK, difficult to know where to put this, but lets start a thread on everyone's favourite acronym - ASDOT - no idea what it stands for.

Anyway there was a brief flurry of interest at Fanrbourough last year when QinetiQ, Thales and Textron announced they were submitting a bid utilising the funny little Scorpion as their solution to the puzzle no-one had previously heard of:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/farnborough-mod-outlines-scope-of-asdot-aggressor-p-427454/

"The UK Ministry of Defence is developing a complex set of aggressor-type training requirements for all three of its armed services, with the ambition of developing a "Red Air" capability via its Air Support to Defence Operational Training (ASDOT) programme."

Today we find out that Inzpire and Discovery Air Defence have joined the fray.

https://www.inzpire.com/2017/02/inzpire-discovery-air-defence-join-forces/

Image

From the press release you could be forgiven that they'll be offering clapped-out Vietnam-vet A-4s as part of their "solution". But the actual words don't mention anything about A-4s so that would just be jumping to conclusions.

Who knows? How exciting.

downsizer
Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 02 May 2015, 08:03

Re: ASDOT

Postby downsizer » 20 Feb 2017, 20:17

Air Support to Defence Operational Training.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 20 Feb 2017, 20:33

Israel is now taking delivery of their new trainers and the so far used Skyhawks were snatched up by the US aggressor sqdrn (I think that one is private as well, no info whether the planes there are flown by Services pilots or are offered as a complete package (with pilots... a nice job for retirees!)

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 1840
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby dmereifield » 20 Feb 2017, 21:09

Would the Indo-UK advanced Hawks be suitable for this?

User avatar
RichardIC
Member
Posts: 482
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby RichardIC » 20 Feb 2017, 22:27

downsizer wrote:Air Support to Defence Operational Training.

Thanks, I should maybe read my own posts.

dmereifield wrote:Would the Indo-UK advanced Hawks be suitable for this?

It's pretty clear these are going to be contractor owned aircraft. Would anyone be prepared to invest the capital required for new-build Hawks? HMG surely won't.

My hunch (and it's no more) is that Textron are desperate for a launch customer for the Scorpion, and that capital and operating costs would be much less than for Hawks.

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 576
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby Spinflight » 21 Feb 2017, 00:32

There won't be new build Hawks, too expensive. Most likely 3rd gen.

Think ex Swiss Hunters, ex Belgian Alpha Jets etc. There is a bidder promising F-16s but it's bollocks.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 21 Feb 2017, 07:04

Spinflight wrote:a bidder promising F-16s but it's bollocks.


Why? Most of them have been upgraded once, twice... some hangar, somewhere must have a few of the original vintage stored away.

In this context they just need to fly like the real thing.

Per hour costs come down if capital cost is zero. Mig-35 order, just placed somewhere else, in order to get the flight hours to a decent standard, can also be seen in the light of per flight hr cost index:
PAK-FA 100
Current front line a/c 80
Mig-35(*) 40
near-sonic trainer ? (fly the same one in a more advanced config for advanced weapons training: ?+)
highly manoeuvreable (old crap) fighters for aggressor use (v small numbers required) ??

---
(*) Post script: build up qualified pilot numbers, and order more of "real" planes when the oil price will have gone up again (and the niggles in the new types sorted out)
- where would the RAF been in the Battle of Britain without the University Flying Clubs to draw on?

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4599
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby marktigger » 18 Mar 2017, 14:34

how many legacy hawks could appear on the market?

Jake_Grafton
Junior Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 19 Apr 2017, 12:03
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby Jake_Grafton » 19 Apr 2017, 12:12

"There is a bidder promising F-16s but it's bollocks."

Totally concur with the above, If the USAF or USN wanted F-16s as a contractorised service it would have offered those in the 309th AMARG at DM AFB. The maintenance and availability record is not the best either nor is the cost per flight hour! They will probably struggle with Third Party Transfer too if trying to acquire from a foreign nation.

"Why? Most of them have been upgraded once, twice... some hangar, somewhere must have a few of the original vintage stored away."

Have you seen the state of the Block 10 Netz aircraft in Israel? Even Poland will not buy them due to the cost of modernising them.

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 576
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby Spinflight » 04 Aug 2017, 04:15

The oem doesn't even offer support.

Will be a mix of biz jets and something third gen. No idea why people think A4s would be bad.. Lovely little dart.

Currently the contractor operated falcons just simulate red air up to the merge. So anything would be a big improvement, and hopefully much cheaper even though it is a pfi.

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2382
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby RetroSicotte » 12 Sep 2017, 10:13

A new challenger appears.

http://www.janes.com/article/73789/grip ... r-dsei17d1

I do wonder whats been stripped from it to get to an aggressor level compared to a straight up "Gripen combat jet". An interesting proposal none-the-less...and one that has a lot of UK industry involvement and pre-operation in the Empire Test School.

Chances of something this high end? Low, but an intriguing surprise.

Dahedd
Member
Posts: 460
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18

Re: ASDOT

Postby Dahedd » 12 Sep 2017, 10:54

Always loved the Gripen, enjoyed seeing them over Forres last year when they visited Lossie. Would have loved to have seen it in RAF colours as a Jaguar replacement. Guess this would be one way.

Still love the concept of the Textron Scorpion though.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 12 Sep 2017, 11:42

RetroSicotte wrote:A new challenger appears.

http://www.janes.com/article/73789/grip ... r-dsei17d1

I do wonder whats been stripped from it to get to an aggressor level compared to a straight up "Gripen combat jet". An interesting proposal none-the-less...and one that has a lot of UK industry involvement and pre-operation in the Empire Test School.

Chances of something this high end? Low, but an intriguing surprise.


They were once thinking of recycling the C airframes for E/F. So this has taken no planning, but perhaps the reuse of components from C's being withdrawn will be extensive, and that helps with getting the price right.

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2382
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby RetroSicotte » 12 Sep 2017, 12:24

One could dare to say the RAF could kill two birds with one stone here. There is going to be an enormous cut to combat jet numbers in 2019, down to around 160 jets (!) for the forseeable future.

Getting an ASDOT aggressor that can also be relied on as capable enough to function in a light strike role as the Gripen can would go a long way to helping the massive shortfall in jet numbers.

Good luck finding money...

indeid
Member
Posts: 270
Joined: 21 May 2015, 20:46

Re: ASDOT

Postby indeid » 12 Sep 2017, 12:28

Spinflight wrote:The oem doesn't even offer support.

Will be a mix of biz jets and something third gen. No idea why people think A4s would be bad.. Lovely little dart.

Currently the contractor operated falcons just simulate red air up to the merge. So anything would be a big improvement, and hopefully much cheaper even though it is a pfi.

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk
.

Doesn't the ASDOT contract replace the Cobham Falcons and the T1s of 736 NAS and 100 Sqn? The T1s go into the the merge and provide the DACT, Cobham the general targets and the EW training.

Be interesting to see what they can cut from an operational aircraft for a dedicated aggressor and how that compares on cost with ex operational platforms.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 12 Sep 2017, 12:53

indeid wrote:how that compares on cost with ex operational platforms.


I was in a sort of roundabout way speculating that these (Gripens) will be such platforms, probs with a new engine and some EW gizmos to suit the training, as the Swedish AF kit certainly won't be thrown into the deal.
- if the airframes were considered for the nextGen, then they must have loadsa life left in them
... would a derated engine do the job (if they step into the shoes of T1s)? May be, but why not step up, for once?

indeid
Member
Posts: 270
Joined: 21 May 2015, 20:46

Re: ASDOT

Postby indeid » 12 Sep 2017, 13:08

RetroSicotte wrote:One could dare to say the RAF could kill two birds with one stone here. There is going to be an enormous cut to combat jet numbers in 2019, down to around 160 jets (!) for the forseeable future.

Getting an ASDOT aggressor that can also be relied on as capable enough to function in a light strike role as the Gripen can would go a long way to helping the massive shortfall in jet numbers.

Good luck finding money...


Some of the T1s were fitted for sidewinders with the MFF concept for point defence, but not sure if you could do the same with contractor provided kit. Cobham jets are on the civvy, not mil register, while the FOST helos are fully contractor provided but are on the mil register. Pre 736, FRADU used mil aircraft but contractor pilots and support, so I suppose that they could have been handed back over to the military if needed. Lots of different ways this could be done. It might depend on what regulations they need the platforms to follow.

I would imagine that as you say, any contract provision for transfer to combat operations would prove very expense, and therefore unlikely.

james k
Member
Posts: 357
Joined: 31 Aug 2017, 16:51
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby james k » 12 Sep 2017, 14:47

I understood that the Textron Scorpion was under consideration for service with RN 736 Squadron FAA (no link it was an article in Warships & International Fleet Review a few issues back). Apparently it's being tested by QuinetQ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textron_AirLand_Scorpion

Spinflight
Member
Posts: 576
Joined: 01 Aug 2016, 03:32
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby Spinflight » 12 Sep 2017, 14:57

The Scorpion has been looked at several times. It's a heap of crap.

Explains why Saab weren't playing ball with any of the likely bidders, they wanted the contract for themselves!

The stripped down non combat capability is, unfortunately, inevitable given the hours needed and costs allocated. Almost certainly rules out new builds, though Leonardo were I think proposing 346s.

Gripen is already in service with the ETPS of course, I would have thought it was a right old squeeze but they're bidding.

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 1840
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby dmereifield » 12 Sep 2017, 14:59

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/201 ... /#comments

Leonardo confirmed to be making a bid, no info on the aircraft type though. So does it look like a new model Hawk is out of contention? Or is it just not appropriate?

Little J
Member
Posts: 549
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby Little J » 12 Sep 2017, 17:12

Dahedd wrote:Always loved the Gripen, enjoyed seeing them over Forres last year when they visited Lossie. Would have loved to have seen it in RAF colours as a Jaguar replacement. Guess this would be one way.


Love the Gripen too (only seen at airshows, but always impressive).
Shame it never had the EJ200, that could have helped it get the contract! :D

topman
Member
Posts: 269
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Location: Tokelau

Re: ASDOT

Postby topman » 12 Sep 2017, 17:56

Spinflight wrote:The Scorpion has been looked at several times. It's a heap of crap.



Interesting, what did you think was wrong with it?

MRCA
Member
Posts: 186
Joined: 29 Apr 2017, 22:47
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby MRCA » 12 Sep 2017, 21:54

The gripen in service with EPTS has visited the UK about twice it's based in linkoping

I assume this will be a contracted service and the uk will simply be buying an hours based service with the service provider owning and operating whatever a/c they put fwd.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3490
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: ASDOT

Postby Ron5 » 17 Sep 2017, 17:41

The SAAB announcement is for new build aircraft. Built with no weaponry but with unspecified sensor & EW kit. No price point mentioned. I'd be curious how low they could go.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 10163
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: ASDOT

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 17 Sep 2017, 20:13

Ron5 wrote:The SAAB announcement is for new build aircraft.


Janes is ambiguous in the choice of wording:
"Gripen Aggressor is based on the Gripen C airframe, with a Gripen D-based two-seater an option. "

If we were to flip a coin on that, I would say it is about recycling and rekitting airframes, not just being based on that (old) design.


Return to “Joint Service”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 5 guests