Red Arrows Hawk replacements

Struggling to think of many countries that are in the market for Typhoon that have surplus Hawks available for disposal. As for the T.2 -I was always under the impression that one of the reasons for its introduction was a clear reqirement to train pilots on something that at least resembles a modern glass cockpit type. The T.2 systems offering the chance to introduce many more mission senarios to the mix.

The other reason the RAF got T2 was to keep Valley open, as there are some very sound business propositions to outsource all training up to type OCUs to Moose Jaw in Canada, but it would be politically ‘difficult’ to close the major employer in a very depressed area.

It is all about treasury driven contraction and cuts. In the mind of the beancounter there is no need for Tatty Ton to do fighter aggressor training with Hawks because Tiffies are aggressive and they are fighters and we have lots, so why not use them? (They are ten times more expensive to fly and are nowhere near as flexible or effective at providing a realistic threat as a Hawk). Same argument with the Naval Hawks – Tiffies or JSF will be used to attack enemy ships so why not practice on ours? Again not seeing the cost per hour differences of flying a Hawk v a big fast mover.

It is going to take a government with sphericals of ceramic coated titanium to try to do away with the Reds, so in the next 4 years or so, expect to see leaks in the press again saying that is what will happen. BAE will nip to No 10 with a ‘dead cheap’ refurbishment plan based at Warton and they will do the old birds up again. They may have XX serial numbers but like Grandpa’s axe that will be the only original thing left. Alternatively, BAE will do some dodgy deal to sell Typhoon/JSF/Gripen and will accept a load of Hawks as part ex which with a bit of TLC will be sold to the RAf as the replacement for the reds at knock down prices.

The RAF only has the Hawk T2 as an act of political largesse and patronage by ‘Two Jags’; Brough, in his ‘manor’ was due to close before the election – a juicy pork barrel Hawk order was duly processed. There are probably enough T2s to service the reduced throughput of Valley, but quite how they fit into MFTS is something of a mystery to me – potentially restricting competition. It might be feasible for the fleet to, just, re-equip 100 Sqn / RAFAT in 2020 if/when MFTS introduces a new type. It does leave some other issues though – RN FW Standards for one.

Replace T.1s with T.2s . There isn’t much out there that matches the Hawk, even though it was designed in the early 70s.

UK should have been thinking of something new to supercede Hawk, perhaps with the EJ200 engine and no afterburner. I think it is too late now.

ps…

Is there some way to reply to a thread without having to delete a quote ?

Back to the OP’s question, surely if the rest of the RAF will get the Hawk T.2 when the T.1 is retired, does it not follow that the Reds will follow suit? It would make the kind of airframe rotation described earlier much easier if both the Reds and the main RAF continued to operate the same type.

A point worth remembering: As mentioned earlier the Red’s aircraft amass fewer hours but what wasn’t mentioned is that they use up their Fatigue Index life faster. This is the reason they are periodically swapped with other units to even out their FI across the fleet.

I guess because they came into service in 1974, in car terms making them a classic, well for insurance purposes after 2020 :very_drunk:

Hate to be picky, but it didn’t come into service until ’76.
We had a great big party at Valley for “10 years of the Hawk in service”, all put on by BAe.

Depends which T1’s you are talking about !
Most of the RAF T1’s have the original cockpit but with mod 2010 fuselages (standard later hawk fuselage structure) + Mod 999 wings which are much stronger +mod 1830 tailplanes (also stronger).
There are still a couple of RAF T1’s with original fuselage !
However the QQ Hawks at BD are all original fuselage/wing (except the ripple one which has had a wing replaced but it is still a pre mod 999 wing) !

The back end of the T1’s is historic. Hasn’t the rest been changed ?

I could not remember if the borrowed (LH) jet (marked as ZF627) was a Mk 64 or 65…so I did some gentle googling ….

ZF627 Hawk Mk.64 – flight test markings G-9-538, first flight 12/02/1986, delivered (Kuwait) 03/06/1986, KAF serial 147

Looking again at the RH a/c – I had forgotten that we had also changed the wing dressing – ie removed the normal T1 stall toblerones and fitted the Mk60 series type multi wing fences with small toblerone on the inb side of the large fence (good ole PRC : ))

I wonder how many if any will make it into preservation. I have heard that they are due to go through a RTP programme like the Tornado F3s.

Quite probable !
Wastospace are possibly not keen on any black jets flying in private hands…either here or across the pond !!

The mention of the Mk66 reminded me of this occasion !…

Meanwhile…back in 1986 we took 2 Hawks to Emmen, Switzerland for a flyoff against the Awful Jet ; )
We shared the same Hangar as the French – separated by some Hessian LOL (only in switzerland LOL)
On the left is a brand new Hawk borrowed from an overseas customer and on the right is T1 XX345…modified with a brake chute + updated brakes and anti skid – she had about 1200 hrs on the clock at that date.the Test Pilots in orange flying suits probably (L) Heintz F and (R) the late Jim Hawkins !
Photo taken at Emmen and is courtesy of Gabriel Clerc who was one of the Swiss test pilot team !
HF had a great sense of humour and when the swiss asked him about our seeming lack of support vehicles/equipment for the Hawks – he said something like – ”you only need swiss army knives to service these babies”…the swiss team were very friendly and when we left for home they presented us all with ….a swiss army knife (still in my tool box and in use :))

I wonder how many if any will make it into preservation. I have heard that they are due to go through a RTP programme like the Tornado F3s.

Hampden -there are something like forty plus Hawk T.1 ‘s in storage at Shawbury. These aircraft would be the basis of a Major overhaul programme . So I guess all would be available for Red Arrows use but fatigue life remaining would determine prime candidates.

The first assumption is that they will be replaced with anything.

I suspect that we only got the Tucano when one of the Black Buck Vulcans lost the probe-tip on the way home from Stanley, AND had some dodgy hardware hung-up underneath. The Brazilians were prepared (as neutrals) to accept this offensive, armed, aircraft, in the interests of humanity. But I would give your back-teeth/right-arms to listen to the recordings of the panic calls from UK MoD to Brazil MoD whilst this problem was “agreed”, or “sorted out”. Fall about material!!

There was indeed much political input to the Tucano decision, but what you describe above has nothing to do with it. Of the 3 contenders, one was described as “dangerous”, there was the one the RAF wanted and another one. The preferred one was too expensive and the other one could be built in Belfast. There you have it.

exmpa

Maybe the question should be, “how many airframes are available to the Red Arrows?”. I’m talking Hawks with Red Arrows mods, or could be modded for use?

That’s a rather strange notion ! For example Chinook ‘Bravo November’ is clearly a ‘historic’ aircraft having served with distinction in numerous conflicts with her singular role in the Falklands being of particular note . She doesn’t need to wait until retirement to be deemed ‘historic’ -she is now.

Quite. I’d suggest that Guy Gibson’s Dams Lancaster ED932 was ‘historic’ the moment it touched down on May 17th 1943, even though it was less than 2 months old! What a shame none of the Dams Lancs survived into preservation.

Just had a load of these ‘vintage’ red hawk jets fly over the house here. Lovely 😀

That’s a rather strange notion ! For example Chinook ‘Bravo November’ is clearly a ‘historic’ aircraft having served with distinction in numerous conflicts with her singular role in the Falklands being of particular note . She doesn’t need to wait until retirement to be deemed ‘historic’ -she is now. Clearly there are numerous
other aircraft serving with the RAF that could be said to fit the same bill . The Hawk T.1 as a type is in her final years -I cannot see how people can perceive her as ‘Modern’ – a Hawk T.2 yes – but not a machine built in the 1970’s in many cases.

As to the ‘diary of events’ -if its pictures of modern aerobatic aircraft -massed fly in’s of RV’s and numerous other new aircraft that pop in there they are still in no way historic . Some might find it strange that an aircraft that has served the RAF with distinction isn’t seen as worthy of ‘historic’ but photographic threads on Duxford that have pictured tractors – car shows – quilt exhibitions -F1 cars are in some way more !

I suppose the only viable candidate is the Tucano, but even that could only be considered as a stop-gap..

IIRC the Tucano has an earlier, or similar OS date to the Hawk

Why not discuss this in ‘Modern’ ?

Feel free to.

You might get different views there.

Meanwhile I see no particular reason to move this thread.

Moggy
Moderator