UK Defence Forum

..........

Thanks. Not that i expected differently, but... one can at least hope.

...............

Generally flames coming out the engine is classed as a technical emergency!!!!!

Glad they all got out safely.

................

arfah wrote:

jimthelad wrote:Generally flames coming out the engine is classed as a technical emergency!!!!!

Cough* "Airwolf" Cough!"

arfah wrote:Helicopter from RAF Valley suffers technical emergency, lands, then catches fire.

That will buff out, right?

The RAF's new Embraer Phenom 100s:

What are they for?

BTW, very elegant.

Multi-Engine Training at RAF Cranwell

replacing the King airs?

Yep 5 out 5 in I believe

Thanks SB..

Scorpion Testing continues in USA full article here
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... lfire.html

In separate news limited production has begun mentioning the uk as a possible customer.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/tex ... ntract-yet

what was wrong with the King Air ?

Phenom is closer to most of the multi engine fleet, turbofans over turboprops and a much newer cockpit.

Let's see what happens with the already "off-loaded" 28 initial trainer a/c - the German manufacturer has declined to provide spares to the prospective buyer (their newer model partook in an evaluation where it - along with the others - were judged bad value for money).
- sour grapes?
- let's see if the EU exemptions for anti-competitive behaviour in military kit will reach this far

UK receives first of new Trainers for MFTS. http://www.defensenews.com/articles/uk- ... t-training

Textron Scorpion flies new production standard aircraft but no customer yet....
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ir-432726/

Well just listened to a programme on Radio 4 about the MFTS and it seems to be in an absolute shambles that make the Army's problems seem minor. It is taking up to NINE year to train a fast jet pilot to a level he or she can join a squadron. Trainees are leaving before completing the courses and it is costing the MoD ten of millions of pounds with nothing to show for it at the end. Courses are being paid for with nobody on them. Contracts are be subcontracted out because there isn't capacity. All current multi-engine training is one case where the Company contracted under MFTS cannot do it and so L3 in Bournemouth is picking up the slack. IF you want to here the programme I recommend you do so it will probably be available on BBC Sounds in the near future.

Lord Jim wrote:Well just listened to a programme on Radio 4 about the MFTS and it seems to be in an absolute shambles that make the Army's problems seem minor

It's hard to believe it's got this bad. A new low?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-47420 ... ssion=true

Poiuytrewq wrote:

Lord Jim wrote:Well just listened to a programme on Radio 4 about the MFTS and it seems to be in an absolute shambles that make the Army's problems seem minor

It's hard to believe it's got this bad. A new low?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-47420 ... ssion=true

It was looking all rosy in 2016:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-nor ... s-35475585

In the Red Air aggressor training context... I wonder where we are at with that contract? Namely, there was a recent statement that the two Typhoon Tr1 squadrons (no mention of them being mixed, between types) would be mainly tasked with QRA and Red Air.

Here's a USAF philosophy on the same matter, from 2017
"Air Combat Command boss Gen. Mike Holmes said “in a perfect world” the Air Force would “have the resources to maintain the aggressor squadrons it used to have” and “do it in-house with modernized threats.” But, in the world we’re living in now, we’re limited in personnel and end strength.

In the late 1970s, right after the Vietnam War, the Air Force had four aggressor squadrons, but dwindling budgets forced the service to shut down the 26th AGRS at Clark AB, Philippines, and the 527th AS at RAF Alconbury, UK, leaving one aggressor squadron at Nellis and, later, one in Alaska.

"I'd have to trade an operational fighter squadron for an aggressor squadron if I was going to do it in-house right now,” because of limited amounts of funding, time, and people, Holmes told reporters at AFA’s Air, Space & Cyber Conference in September. He added, “If we can bring on some contract Red Air, then not only do we get some dedicated people to train against, we also reduce the amount of time that our crews are spending … pretending to be somebody else instead of training for their primary skills,” all in the context of a “zero-sum budget for flight hours.”["]

It is often claimed that outsource contracts for the service are 'full of hot air' as the bidding companies do not have the aircraft. In that same, quoted article http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pag ... arket.aspx there is a nice overview of what has been bought lately, in the way of fast jets.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/20 ... n-against/

A defence contract to provide a “private airforce” for the RAF to train against has been ditched by the Ministry of Defence.

The deal worth up to £1.2bn and known as Air Support to Defence Operational Training (ASDOT) would see fighter pilots dogfighting against jets supplied by industry.