Trainer aircraft progression: What is ideal?

Profile picture for user Y-20 Bacon

Member for

6 years 5 months

Posts: 2,040

Swiss Simulator -> pc-7/9 -> pc-21 -> FA-18D or F-5B? Israel Simulator -> Grob-> Texan -> M-346 -> F16B or F-15B? Singapore Simulator -> Pc-21 -> M-346 -> F-5T? Saudi Simulator -> Pc-21 for all until 2 seat converter there's a lot of options.. sometimes used differently. Singapore PC-21 is considered basic while in Swiss it seems more advanced (correct me if this is wrong)
Original post

Member for

4 years

Posts: 815

there's a lot of options.. sometimes used differently. Singapore PC-21 is considered basic while in Swiss it seems more advanced (correct me if this is wrong)
RAAF in aircraft form is below. CT-4 -> PC-9 -> Hawk 127 -> Hornet In more detail is CT-4 (25 weeks basic @ BFTS Tamworth) -> PC-9 (37 weeks awarded wings @ RAAF Pearce)-> Hawk 127 (lead in jet, 14 weeks @ RAAF Pearce) -> Hawk 127 (A2A/A2G training 20 weeks @ RAAF Williamtown) -> Hornet conversion ( 6 months @ RAAF Williamtown). Total process usually takes about four years from start to finish. RAAF are changing slightly with PC-21 coming soon to replace both CT-4 and PC-9.

Member for

7 years 7 months

Posts: 619

Finland: Vinka/Grob -> Hawk -> Hornet.

Member for

7 years 8 months

Posts: 4,165

Swiss Simulator -> pc-7/9 -> pc-21 -> FA-18D or F-5B? Israel Simulator -> Grob-> Texan -> M-346 -> F16B or F-15B? Singapore Simulator -> Pc-21 -> M-346 -> F-5T? Saudi Simulator -> Pc-21 for all until 2 seat converter there's a lot of options.. sometimes used differently. Singapore PC-21 is considered basic while in Swiss it seems more advanced (correct me if this is wrong)
Swiss PC-21 are very sophisticated combat simulators (up to 4 vs 4 fights eg. )
Profile picture for user Y-20 Bacon

Member for

6 years 5 months

Posts: 2,040

Swiss PC-21 are very sophisticated combat simulators (up to 4 vs 4 fights eg. )
would a PC-21 be sufficient for all phases of training? (less types, easier logistics) or still a 3-4 type progression is better?

Member for

11 years 4 months

Posts: 178

Turkey: Now: Cessna T41D >SF-260 > KT-1T > T-38M 2019-2020: Super Mushak > KT-1T and TAI Hurkus-B > T-38M 2025+ Super Mushak > TAI Hurkus-B > TAI T-X
Profile picture for user Z1pp0

Member for

13 years 11 months

Posts: 203

Sweden: Sk 60 (SAAB 105) -> JAS 39 Gripen. For some time now Swedish Air Force use only jet training. The reasoning is that it would be just a waste of time and money to re-educate prospective pilots in jet operations since the screening and selection process was so rigorous that they could cherry pick the best and there was/would be very seldom any drop outs. It's only a handful of new pilots each year. Maybe a dussin max. IMHO this seems to be the ideal way for a smaller sized air force. Hardly suitable for large numbers of new recruits. Like USAF, or countries like Germany, UK, France etc.

Member for

4 years

Posts: 815

would a PC-21 be sufficient for all phases of training? (less types, easier logistics) or still a 3-4 type progression is better?
The move appears to be PC-21 as the start with some form of lead in, hawk m346 etc, to fast jets.
Profile picture for user Marcellogo

Member for

5 years 4 months

Posts: 1,758

Italy: SF-260T, M-345 (actually Mb-339D), M-346. Rationale is using a more advanced primary trainer to eat hours to basic training, while using the M-345 for the rest of basic to first half of advanced one instead of MD339 so to spare money and the second half of advanced and a consistent part of operational conversion actually made with two seat versions of service aircrafts using the M-346 lead-in trainer instead.

Member for

7 years 8 months

Posts: 4,165

would a PC-21 be sufficient for all phases of training? (less types, easier logistics) or still a 3-4 type progression is better?
Pilatus claims so. See here an interview we did of a PC21 pilot at PAS 2013 https://www.portail-aviation.com/2013/08/en-retard-du-bourget-interview-dun.html However, if one stay on the classical progression line (learn fly basics, than fighter flights systems than fast speed), Pilatus is perfect for 2nd part, but too expensive for part 1 and too slow for parrt 3 (despite PC21 able to "emulate" fighter speed for simulated missions) well... That's my view. I remember Pete Collins telling me during an interview that, considering the importance of weapon systems etc. nowadays it might be more sensible now to teach taht part first to every pilots (not only fighters), than to dispatch them according to basic flight results. He also said that transsition from PC21 to Rafale should be easy, but we are talking of a pilot that was qualified on over 170 tupes of planes.

Member for

11 years 7 months

Posts: 353

I agree with Z1ppo and Halloween that the classic multiple type (3+) progression is preferred. Fewer steps for small air forces might work. There are some aircraft that would be perfectly well suited for novice students stick and rudder wise, but would be too expensive to purchase and operate in large numbers. I have seen several instructors claim the Cessna Caravan would make a great trainer, but is a bit more pricy that a clapped out C-150.

Member for

7 years 10 months

Posts: 5,831

Piston trainer are great to teach early student flight coordination. Their inherent low kinetic flight characteristic unmask any error and are more forgiving at this early stage than a faster evolving turboprop. Grob makes an excellent range of early/advanced trainer that in some case can step on the feet of more classical turboprops like the PC7/9. The problem of the all jet training is that it doesn't lead to a natural joke/rudder culture that a fighter pilot will find useful again in the high alpha birds of tomorrow.

Member for

7 years 8 months

Posts: 4,165

TP 120 is an excellent trainer, and instructors love the side by side and the 4 dividable and programmable screens. About jet feelings, there is one french pilot that followed swiss cursus and he found the transition from PC21 to Rafale "hot".
Profile picture for user Y-20 Bacon

Member for

6 years 5 months

Posts: 2,040

TP 120 is an excellent trainer, and instructors love the side by side and the 4 dividable and programmable screens. About jet feelings, there is one french pilot that followed swiss cursus and he found the transition from PC21 to Rafale "hot".
hot in what way

Member for

7 years 7 months

Posts: 619

FAF fighter pilot training transitioned to 3-plane model in the '70s, Saab Safir->Fouga Magister-> MiG-21/Draken. Since Fouga was basically a sailplane powered by two hairdryers, last transition was pretty 'hot'. "Fouga airspeed indicator scale ended before MiG-21's began".