AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer
What was put on the Turkey thread carried a very similar development and versions thinking as this project
- have you had a look? To compare
- have you had a look? To compare
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer
ArmChairCivvy wrote:What was put on the Turkey thread carried a very similar development and versions thinking as this project
- have you had a look? To compare
I haven’t but I will, I know a number of guys headed out to Turkey last year after COVID hit aerospace hard to work on there fighter jets there is parallels to this program.
If you historically look here in the past at things like variants of the adour engine being used in hawk, Jaguar and taranis. If your taking a top level overview and really getting a hold of thru life costs and sustainment for complete renewal across the board nows the time to do it across multiple systems and ways of working.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer
It was not just the similarities in the development/ the concept, but:
The choice of the engine (for a trainer) that caught my eye:
The choice of the engine (for a trainer) that caught my eye:
MammaLiTurchi wrote:CDR report consists of 1700 pages, and abstracts the detailed design of the aircraft. In Hürjet, General Electric's F404 engine is selected.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer
Yes and not a bad way to go. Leveraging the Boeing/saab red hawkArmChairCivvy wrote:It was not just the similarities in the development/ the concept, but:
The choice of the engine (for a trainer) that caught my eye:
MammaLiTurchi wrote:CDR report consists of 1700 pages, and abstracts the detailed design of the aircraft. In Hürjet, General Electric's F404 engine is selected.
A lot of research has into scalable engine architecture at RR at present and the way to go.
-
- Member
- Posts: 335
- Joined: 01 Jul 2020, 19:15
Re: AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer
(Aeralis) 13th May 2021
https://aeralis.com/SUSTAINABLE. CONFIGURABLE. GAME-CHANGING.
For generations, Air Forces have faced the challenge of operating an ever growing mix of single point aircraft designs.
Each brings its own logistic support, management and training burden. Each locks the military into a single point design for a generation. Operational flexibility is limited. Strategic change is expensive.
Until now.
-
- Member
- Posts: 86
- Joined: 26 May 2021, 11:45
Re: Red Arrows: UK firm to win deal to replace ageing jets
South Wales mentioned as a place of production. I assume it could be the former RAF St. Athan air station. Now home to Aston Martin and a lovely aircraft museum,.
Re: Red Arrows: UK firm to win deal to replace ageing jets
Doesn’t really make a huge amount of sense to be honest, a aircraft develop program would need considerately larger numbers than 14 to have a business case for a production contract.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3247
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Red Arrows: UK firm to win deal to replace ageing jets
It doesn't really stack up at all...their business model could make sense but they need substantial investment, which isn't going to come from a UK order alone.SW1 wrote:Doesn’t really make a huge amount of sense to be honest, a aircraft develop program would need considerately larger numbers than 14 to have a business case for a production contract.
Mind you BAE not developing a replacement for the Hawk made no sense either....there you are with a massive export hit on your hands and you never get around to replacing it as it ages...
Re: Red Arrows: UK firm to win deal to replace ageing jets
Well after the hawk t2 reaches the end of its service live how much lead in fighter training is going to be needed, I would suggest it will be getting less and less specially with unmanned systems and synthetics. Considering hawk has sold what about 1000 a/c total since the 70s it must be considerably smaller market now.Timmymagic wrote:It doesn't really stack up at all...their business model could make sense but they need substantial investment, which isn't going to come from a UK order alone.SW1 wrote:Doesn’t really make a huge amount of sense to be honest, a aircraft develop program would need considerately larger numbers than 14 to have a business case for a production contract.
Mind you BAE not developing a replacement for the Hawk made no sense either....there you are with a massive export hit on your hands and you never get around to replacing it as it ages...
Re: Red Arrows: UK firm to win deal to replace ageing jets
It gets worse when the USAF have just rolled out T-7A - if you're a Western nation looking to pick up a LIFT, especially if you're in the F-35 club, then this is a great option to buy a handful of decent jets off of a hot line.
Re: Red Arrows: UK firm to win deal to replace ageing jets
Are GDUK going to go into aircraft production after AJAX is cancelled?GarethDavies1 wrote:South Wales mentioned as a place of production.
Re: Red Arrows: UK firm to win deal to replace ageing jets
Even in a crowded market place it seemed an odd decision. What a waste of a large, existing customer base.Timmymagic wrote:Mind you BAE not developing a replacement for the Hawk made no sense either....there you are with a massive export hit on your hands and you never get around to replacing it as it ages...
General Dynamics, building aircraft? What is this, 1992?tomuk wrote:Are GDUK going to go into aircraft production after AJAX is cancelled?GarethDavies1 wrote:South Wales mentioned as a place of production.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
I would take the articles "sources" only marginally less seriously if this were printed in The Beano:
Don't get me wrong. I'm a fan of Aeralis and their concept but there's a good many billion quid and a decade plus between them and a production aircraft.Aureoles is producing five variants, the first of which has completed phase one and phase two development and is due to fly in 2024.
Edit: Their website has been updated: https://aeralis.com/
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" - Dr. Strangelove (1964)
Re: Red Arrows: UK firm to win deal to replace ageing jets
I believe this is the modular Jet Trainer that was talked about a few months back. The operator can swap out wings, rear fuselage, have either one engine for one level of training or two for greater performance for the LIFT role and so on, obviously done during deep maintenance. It would get the plane actually built and having the Arrows use it may help sales, but the Arrows are planning to keep their Hawks for at least another decade to it will be a while until they are replaced, and this is only a developmental project. I suppose the RAF think they can get the money if they choose a UK designed and built aircraft, supporting industry and all that, but imagine if they end up operating the only twelve sold!
I still think we would do better and try to show off and support sales of an aircraft in use now such as Typhoon and then replace it with say Tempest later on. The Arrows used to have a wartime role in the 1980s as a point defence squadron which was why they flew what was basically a Hawk T1A able to carry AIM-9L Sidewinders, and an Aden Gun Pod. Hopefully they would also have been resprayed grey as well. So give then a wartime role such as UK QRA in wartime. It would keep the pilots current as well as using the maintenance structure in place for the RAFs other squadrons using the type. Only use six jet for a display to save a few pennies if necessary.
I still think we would do better and try to show off and support sales of an aircraft in use now such as Typhoon and then replace it with say Tempest later on. The Arrows used to have a wartime role in the 1980s as a point defence squadron which was why they flew what was basically a Hawk T1A able to carry AIM-9L Sidewinders, and an Aden Gun Pod. Hopefully they would also have been resprayed grey as well. So give then a wartime role such as UK QRA in wartime. It would keep the pilots current as well as using the maintenance structure in place for the RAFs other squadrons using the type. Only use six jet for a display to save a few pennies if necessary.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: Red Arrows: UK firm to win deal to replace ageing jets
As odd as selling off your share in Airbus for peanuts?Jensy wrote:Even in a crowded market place it seemed an odd decision....Timmymagic wrote:Mind you BAE not developing a replacement for the Hawk made no sense either....there you are with a massive export hit on your hands and you never get around to replacing it as it ages...
- The Armchair Soldier
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1755
- Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
- Contact:
Re: Red Arrows: UK firm to win deal to replace ageing jets
Merging the topic into AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer.TheLoneRanger wrote:https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/14899 ... is-hawk-t1
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer
Only one of the largest BizJet manufacturers in the worldJensy wrote: General Dynamics, building aircraft? What is this, 1992?![]()
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif)
Re: AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer
- Exiting regional jet industry just as it 'took off'dmereifield wrote: As odd as selling off your share in Airbus for peanuts
- Selling the bizjet line to Raytheon
- Divesting aerostructures
- Selling Gripen share (Sweden may have left no choice)
There's competition...
Curse of late night posting! Should have said "pointy, fast-ish jets".RunningStrong wrote:Only one of the largest BizJet manufacturers in the worldJensy wrote: General Dynamics, building aircraft? What is this, 1992?![]()
Still better than describing them as "fighter aircraft", like the express.
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif)
I see the story has spread futher too: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... placement/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rrows.html
Not exactly pulling out the stops for DSEI though:
![Image](https://www.aero-mag.com/uploads/amm/articles/2021/08/23/38197/16297299729991.jpg)
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" - Dr. Strangelove (1964)
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1352
- Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Re: AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer
Could at least put a full scale fibre glass model outside...Jensy wrote:Curse of late night posting! Should have said "pointy, fast-ish jets".RunningStrong wrote:Only one of the largest BizJet manufacturers in the worldJensy wrote: General Dynamics, building aircraft? What is this, 1992?![]()
Still better than describing them as "fighter aircraft", like the express.
I see the story has spread futher too: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british ... placement/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rrows.html
Not exactly pulling out the stops for DSEI though:
Re: AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer
Sounds a bit too good to be true. You do have to wonder how much rigour is behind their design if they can make these sorts of claims this early in the lifecycle.
Re: AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer
Defiance wrote:Sounds a bit too good to be true. You do have to wonder how much rigour is behind their design if they can make these sorts of claims this early in the lifecycle.
There’s certainly a bit of feeling if it where this “easy” why has no one done that before about it, but then someone probably told spacex and eoin musk that too.