FLUG REVUE August 2004: New jettrainers needed

HIGH-PERFORMACE JET TRAINERS UNDER DEVELOPMENT

By Karl Schwarz

After all the delays, one can scarcely believe it, but entry into service of fighter aircraft like the F-22, Rafale and Eurofighter is finally under way. Air forces around the world are expecting fourth generation fighters to provide enormously improved performance in both air-to-air combat and the deployment of precision guided munition. The multi-role/swing-role capability brings with it fresh challenges for the pilots.

Compared with the high-tech jets, the trainers used in most countries seem to be a long way behind the times. Most of them have only limited manoeuvrability, along with ageing systems and antiquated cockpit equipment, reflecting the fact that in many cases they date back to the 1950s and 1960s. The result is that the gap between the level of performance of pilots at the end of their training and what is required of them in combat is widening. This gap has to be closed through conversion training on the operational type and on-the-job training in the unit – an expensive undertaking, as fighter flying hours easily cost four times more than those of a jet trainer.

What is required is therefore a new trainer that will prepare the jet pilots of the future much more effectively and at lower cost for the fighter aircraft of the future, which may be very easy to fly but are very complex when it comes to use the weapon system. Extreme agility thanks to fly-by-wire control systems, high thrust-weight ratio, network centric warfare and swing role capability (the ability to switch operational roles in flight) are capabilities which cannot be trained anything like realistically on present types, such as the BAE Hawk and the MB-339.

Such capabilities require that trainers have a digital flight control system and an aerodynamic design which permits high angles of attack and superior turn performance. In addition they must have sufficient engine power for a thrust-weight ratio of 0.7:1 or even 1.1:1 with afterburner. It goes without saying that sophisticated avionics suites and a cockpit equipped with large screens and head-up display are also required.

The first aircraft to have followed this approach is the T-50 Golden Eagle, which has been under development by Korea Aerospace (formerly Samsung), with the energetic support of Lockheed Martin, since 1993. The “mini F-16” took off for the first time in August 2002, and at present four aircraft are involved in the test programme, which should be largely complete by the end of 2005, when the first aircraft will be delivered to the South Korean Air Force, which has a requirement for 94 aircraft. An initial contract for 25 Golden Eagles was signed in December 2003.

By contrast, EADS is still struggling to get its Mako programme off the ground. Since the mid-1990s, EADS (and its predecessor Dasa) has invested Euro 80 million of its own funds and 1,200 hours of wind tunnel tests without the vital success in the global search for customers that would have made a programme launch possible.

EADS Mako

At present EADS is concentrating on establishing the Mako as the aircraft for the Eurotraining programme, in which 12 air forces are interested. But here it faces competition from Aermacchi, which is offering the M-346 currently under development with generous financial support from the Italian government. This twin-jet should have had its maiden flight by now. Like the T-50 and the Mako, it offers high agility and a state-of-the-art cockpit, but no supersonic capability. Moreover, the M-346 is based on the Russian Yak-130, the first pre-production example of which took off for the first time in Nishni-Novgorod on 30 April.

All these types are distinctly different from the “conventional” jet trainers of the last few decades, the most successful of which continues to be the BAE Systems Hawk. After a lean period, BAE Systems recently clinched the long-awaited sale of 66 aircraft to India. The Royal Air Force is also purchasing 20 new Hawks for its training programme. Also in production is the T-45A Hawk derivative for the US Navy.

As the example of the T-50 shows, the development of jet trainers is no longer confined to the traditional aerospace nations. Many countries have tried their hand at such a project, but few of the types have had any export successes, so that the unit numbers have mostly been only modest.

Nor is this situation likely to change in the future, for although an urgent operational requirement has been predicted on the basis of the age of trainer fleets world-wide, the big boom has failed to materialise. This is due to the fact that since the end of the Cold War the number of fighter aircraft, for example, in Europe, has fallen significantly. In addition, with shrinking defence budgets and in some cases a severe squeeze on defence spending, training has never been a particular priority.

According to the US market research company, Forecast International, with only 205 trainer (jet, turboprop and propeller-powered) deliveries, 2004 will mark a low point, and the prospects for 2005 are no better. Analyst Bill Dane does not expect a significant upswing until 2010, when he predicts there will be deliveries of 260 aircraft. All in all, in the period covered by its predictions up to 2013, Forecast International expects 2,314 aircraft, worth $21 billion, to be built.

Thanks to the huge US domestic market, the Raytheon T-6A Texan II is expected to top the league table with 693 aircraft, surprisingly followed by the Mako (260), assuming that the latter is selected for the Eurotraining contract. According to Dane, the Hawk will continue to hold its own with 250 sales, while the HJT-36 from India, currently undergoing flight testing, and the Super Tucano (ALX) will sell 182 and 165 units, respectively.

It goes without saying that such forecasts should be treated with caution, as it is not yet clear whether, for example, new designs like the high-performance Pilatus PC-21 turboprop trainer will prove a success or not. With its ultra-modern cockpit (large displays, flexible display formats) and good flight characteristics, this trainer could achieve significant penetration in markets over which jets have hitherto had a virtual monopoly.

Just how flexible the structure of a training programme can be is illustrated by the example of NATO Flying Training in Canada (NFTC), under which students carry out overland navigation flights on the Harvard II (T-6A) rather than on the Hawk. This may entail more flying hours (+18 for the Harvard, but -6.4 for the Hawk), but when every factor is taken into account (including airframe service life), this works out cheaper.

In fact, cost is likely to be an even more important factor in the future, especially for establishments like the NFTC, which are operated by industry, with air forces purchasing pilot training for a fixed price. Only financially strong consortia are in a position to build up commercial training programmes of this kind. In a complete package that includes computer-aided theoretical training, procedural trainers, simulators and the associated management tasks, training aircraft are just one element among many.

Eurotraining study to be evaluated by the countries

The specialists responsible for pilot training in Belgium, Germany, Finland, France, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland are in an unenviable position. They have the task of working their way through the stack of documents which the G5 industry consortium submitted to them on 30 March on the subject of “Eurotraining”. These submission documents describe “several” solutions for the future training of jet pilots, including four possible levels of outsourcing of tasks to private companies.

The feasibility study prepared jointly by Aermacchi, Dassault, EADS (Germany and Spain) and Saab in collaboration with numerous other interested companies examines every aspect of an integrated training system, from syllabus to aircraft, simulators, logistics and bases. The key elements are the “production” of 300 pilots and 60,000 flying hours per year, concentrated in two to three airfields in Europe. This will require between 20 and 30 simulators and around 150 new trainers. It is assumed that the programme will run for 30 years.

Bringing so many countries and companies with different interests together under a single hat is not a simple matter. Even with harmonised performance and cost models, there were obviously different results for the “best” solution, depending on whether one considered only training through to Phase IV (lead-in fighter training) or also included conversion to operational type and the role of the “companion trainer” which forms a part of the operational unit. It could prove significantly less costly to maintain flying proficiency on a companion trainer than on a fighter.

As far as the training aircraft is concerned, several approaches have been considered. But in reality, the two competing frontrunners are likely to be the Mako from EADS and Aermacchi's M-346. There are ten candidates airfields in northern and southern Europe under consideration as bases for an Advanced European Jet Pilot Training (AEJPT) programme.

By November, industry is hoping that the participating nations will have agreed on how to proceed and drawn up a European Staff Requirement. It is said that “decisive steps” need to be taken by the start of 2005, if a Eurotraining programme is to be in place by 2012.

The Luftwaffe is somewhat sceptical. Therefore it intends to continue training with the US Air Force in Shephard for the time being, even if it is clear that the T-38 Talon cannot bring a pilot up to the standard required to fly the Eurofighter. But at the end of the day, it is possible that they might consider additional training modules.

In view of the tight budgetary constraints, there appears to be no great pressure to invest, especially as the requirement for pilots will halve over the next few years. The problem is not the recruitment and training of new pilots (in fact, some candidates have already been turned down), but one of reducing the existing surplus as fast as the law allows.

From page 46 of FLUG REVUE 8/2004

Last updated 8 July 2004

FLUG REVUE, Ubierstr. 83, 53173 Bonn, Germany