UK Defence Forum

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

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.

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.

ArmChairCivvy 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.

Yes and not a bad way to go. Leveraging the Boeing/saab red hawk

A lot of research has into scalable engine architecture at RR at present and the way to go.

Ha, ha, ha ... excellent!!

(Aeralis) 13th May 2021

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.

https://aeralis.com/

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,.

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.

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.

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.

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...

Timmymagic wrote:

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.

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.

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...

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.

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.

GarethDavies1 wrote:South Wales mentioned as a place of production.

Are GDUK going to go into aircraft production after AJAX is cancelled?

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...

Even in a crowded market place it seemed an odd decision. What a waste of a large, existing customer base.

tomuk wrote:

GarethDavies1 wrote:South Wales mentioned as a place of production.

Are GDUK going to go into aircraft production after AJAX is cancelled?

General Dynamics, building aircraft? What is this, 1992?

I would take the articles "sources" only marginally less seriously if this were printed in The Beano:

Aureoles is producing five variants, the first of which has completed phase one and phase two development and is due to fly in 2024.

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.

Edit: Their website has been updated: https://aeralis.com/

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.

Jensy wrote:

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...

Even in a crowded market place it seemed an odd decision....

As odd as selling off your share in Airbus for peanuts?

TheLoneRanger wrote:https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/14899 ... is-hawk-t1

Merging the topic into AERALIS - Modular Jet Trainer.

Jensy wrote: General Dynamics, building aircraft? What is this, 1992?

Only one of the largest BizJet manufacturers in the world

dmereifield wrote: As odd as selling off your share in Airbus for peanuts

- Exiting regional jet industry just as it 'took off'
- Selling the bizjet line to Raytheon
- Divesting aerostructures
- Selling Gripen share (Sweden may have left no choice)

There's competition...

RunningStrong wrote:

Jensy wrote: General Dynamics, building aircraft? What is this, 1992?

Only one of the largest BizJet manufacturers in the world

Curse of late night posting! Should have said "pointy, fast-ish jets".

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:

Jensy wrote:

RunningStrong wrote:

Jensy wrote: General Dynamics, building aircraft? What is this, 1992?

Only one of the largest BizJet manufacturers in the world

Curse of late night posting! Should have said "pointy, fast-ish jets".

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:

Could at least put a full scale fibre glass model outside...

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.

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.

SW1 wrote:eoin musk

He's Irish?! (Elon)