Fast-Jet Pilot Training Modernisation Choices

This paper sets out the core structure of flight training for fast-jet pilots, explains the necessary airmanship and tactical skill sets that must be taught, the risks inherent in undervaluing airmanship, and how both live flying and synthetic training in simulators can and should be used in parallel. It then provides analysis of four of the main aircraft options currently available for Western air forces looking to modernise their advanced fast-jet trainer fleets, and explains what factors may make each one more or less attractive to any given air force as a replacement for ageing jet trainers like the Hawk, Alpha Jet and SK-60.

Key Recommendations

• Airmanship skills development remains at the core of military flight training, and this cannot be accomplished in simulators. It requires regular, realistic, live flying throughout training and a pilot’s frontline career. Factors such as spatial disorientation at night or in bad weather and G-induced loss-of-consciousness remain the main cause of fatal accidents in Western fighter fleets.
   
• The advanced turboprop-powered PC-21 can provide cost-effective Phase 4 training, but transitioning straight to frontline jets from a turboprop brings greater flight safety risks that must be managed by instructors at operational conversion units (OCUs). These risks will be far harder to manage safely if air forces operate only single-seat frontline jets at the OCU stage, such as F-35.
   
• The M-346A, T-7A and TA-50 are all manifestly capable like-for-like replacements for traditional lead-in fighter trainers in Phase 4 training. Each has different technical, financial and geopolitical factors that affect how any given nation will view them comparatively.
   
• Both the M-346A and T-7A are well suited to cover both Phase 3 and Phase 4, but the M-346A is likely to be slightly more cost efficient and easier for students at Phase 3, while offering slightly less ‘fighter-like’ performance in Phase 4 than the T-7A or TA-50.
   
• The M-346A, T-7A and TA-50 can all simulate more complex training during Phase 4 compared to legacy lead-in fighter trainer types. This means air forces can offset part of their acquisition costs over time by reducing the length of the subsequent OCU syllabus needed to convert pilots to their frontline type.
   
• Air forces should consider if they are likely to need light fighter, red air provision and/or companion trainer capacity in the coming years. If such requirements are assessed as likely, then suitability should be a secondary set of requirements against which to compare the different jet trainer modernisation options. The TA-50, in particular, is a compelling option for a Phase 4 lead-in fighter trainer if there are serious secondary light fighter and/or companion trainer requirements foreseen alongside planned fifth/next-generation frontline fighter force structures.