Red Arrows : Remaining Fatigue Life

[Bluerigger1]

Very interesting article on the Daily Mail website about the remaining life on the existing airframes and possible replacement aircraft type.

Mailhttps://www.dailymail.co.uk › newsIs this finally the end of the road for the Red Arrows? Iconic jets ...

[Ghastly Whisper]

A link to the actual so called story would be nice, but then again its just click bait and not worth reading anyway.

[Bluerigger1]

Thanks for taking the time to post a reply to this topic although I'm surprised at your conclusion that the article isn't worth reading. Apologies for my not knowing how to post a link. However I thought it would be of interest to those concerned about the future of the Reds.
The decision to withdraw an airframe from service is more neuaced than simply it's flying hours. But the article illustrates the fact that a decision is needed now on the future of RAFAT and is not simply "click bait". If that were the case I wouldn't have bothered wasting your valuable time.

[robw210]

https://youtu.be/mdmdfGYVm8o?si=r-f8b5vFU3ut-7F8

Take a look at this you tube video , from former Sqn Ldr Tim Davies , for some story background

[Bluerigger1]

Cheers for the link, very enjoyable show in Tim's inimitable style, certainly got to the crux of the problem.
We have been given various out of service dates for T.1, 2027, 2030 and 2035. (nothing official). 2027 is a bit soon unless the defence review knows something we don't. Unlikely to be 2035 given the hours / FI left on the aircraft so 2030 seems more likely.

[Ghastly Whisper]

Thanks for taking the time to post a reply to this topic although I'm surprised at your conclusion that the article isn't worth reading. Apologies for my not knowing how to post a link. However I thought it would be of interest to those concerned about the future of the Reds.
The decision to withdraw an airframe from service is more neuaced than simply it's flying hours. But the article illustrates the fact that a decision is needed now on the future of RAFAT and is not simply "click bait". If that were the case I wouldn't have bothered wasting your valuable time.

Whatever

[Nighthawke]

What a rude response! @ Bluerigger1 - thanks for your info which I take from you user name is either current of past in-service involvement. Always good to have fact from you rather than guesswork from some others.

[teeonefixer]

I couldn't find the Daily Fail article but watched the video. I think the graphic showed flying hours, but the killer here is the remaining Fatigue Life of the original front fuselage. All fatigue testing has been finished and it would take a very intensive effort to even tweak that upwards. Given that, as Bluerigger says, there's enough life in the fleet to go to 2035, maybe beyond. However, it costs! Unavailable odd components, the general difficulty keeping old airframes serviceable (I remember 100 Sqn had 15 airframes on strength but only 7 on the line), then the effort to keep converting replacement airframes to be smoke-equipped.
Given the MoD's procurement history, they had better make a decision about a replacement soon, if they can justify it.
Whether this gets included in the CAS's T.Mk.2 "replacement" wishes, let's see !

[Bluerigger1]

What a rude response! @ Bluerigger1 - thanks for your info which I take from you user name is either current of past in-service involvement. Always good to have fact from you rather than guesswork from some others.

Cheers Nighthawk, yes Hawk T.1 was my first aircraft as a wet behind the ears JT and will see me through to retirement. As I'm still in the game I try and keep factual without breaking confidentiality. t
teeonefixer, you are correct, it's the front fuselage that's original, everything else is the proverbial "trigger's broom". If I were a betting man, my money would be on 2030