Showing posts with label AJT. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AJT. Show all posts
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
2010 production start 18 to 24 a year UAE 48/20 FCR SG 10/12 Italy 15 begin end 2010
Alenia Aermacchi is positively addressing the world trainer market arena in a period of economical downturn, providing a reassuring signal for Italy's aeronautical industry, according to the company's chief executive Carmelo Cosentino
The 48th edition of the Le Bourget air show comes in a period of world economical downturn, which is affecting the aerospace sector. How is Alenia Aermacchi approaching this situation?
The Le Bourget air show represents an important international showcase for the aerospace sector. Although the economical downturn is hampering this world, Alenia Aermacchi is providing a positive signal against the current trend, thanks to the company's latest product in its core business, the M-346 Master advanced/lead-in-fighter trainer.
Considered the most advanced aircraft in its class on the market, the M-346 has been selected by the Italy and United Arab Emirates air forces for a total of over 60 aircraft, to be built in the forthcoming years.
© Alenia Aermacchi
This is a reassuring signal for all national aeronautical industries at a time of strong difficulty.
Which are current and future M-346 programme milestones? The M-346 has also been selected in an operational armed version. Which are its main items and what are its market prospects?
We have two M-346 prototypes and one series representative aircraft on the line, in the final stage of flight envelope verification testing. The fourth aircraft is completing full-scale aircraft static tests at Alenia Aermacchi facilities in Venegono, while the fifth aircraft is ready to begin fatigue tests.
The M-346 production and assembly line will be ready by year-end, characterised by advanced technical solutions and high-level automation. It will deliver the first aircraft for the Italian air force from the end of 2010, with a full initial production regime of 18-24 aircraft a year, according to market request. We are also ready to conclude industrial agreements for aircraft final assembly, components production and maintenance abroad.
The United Arab Emirates has requested 48 aircraft, including 20 in an operational armed version. These aircraft will be equipped according to the specific customer requirements, including a radar system, for which contacts are already ongoing with Selex Galileo's Finmeccanica company.
The global market prospects for the latest-generation trainer aircraft indicate a requirement for around 2,000 aircraft, with Alenia Aermacchi believing it can capture a share of around 600-700 units. No precise estimates are available for the armed operational version, although we believe it will add more aircraft to the already mentioned market share. This version is attracting interest from the Middle and Far East, as well as South America.
In which current world advanced trainer competitions is Aermacchi participating with the M-346 and what are its short- and medium-term prospects?
We are awaiting Italian air force contract signature and we are in the final stage of negotiations with the United Arab Emirates for an integrated training solution deal, which is expected to be reached before this summer. Alenia Aermacchi is also in competition for the Singapore Fighter Wing Course programme, including 10-12 aircraft and a comprehensive training and support package, for which we are tendering together with Boeing and ST (Singapore Technologies) Aerospace.
Other countries including Austria, Greece and Poland are showing strong interest in our aircraft, in addition to Eurotraining group members. A request for information for that programme is expected very soon.
At which markets is Alenia Aermacchi looking for additional MB-339 sales?
We are working to complete a Malaysia order for eight aircraft and an option for an additional four, of which two MB-339CMs have already been delivered and the third was flown for the first time recently.
The Italian air force has received the first two of 14 CD version upgraded aircraft. We are continuing to pay attention to the MB-339 opportunities on the markets and to satisfy the needs of our aircraft clients.
The 48th edition of the Le Bourget air show comes in a period of world economical downturn, which is affecting the aerospace sector. How is Alenia Aermacchi approaching this situation?
The Le Bourget air show represents an important international showcase for the aerospace sector. Although the economical downturn is hampering this world, Alenia Aermacchi is providing a positive signal against the current trend, thanks to the company's latest product in its core business, the M-346 Master advanced/lead-in-fighter trainer.
Considered the most advanced aircraft in its class on the market, the M-346 has been selected by the Italy and United Arab Emirates air forces for a total of over 60 aircraft, to be built in the forthcoming years.
© Alenia Aermacchi
This is a reassuring signal for all national aeronautical industries at a time of strong difficulty.
Which are current and future M-346 programme milestones? The M-346 has also been selected in an operational armed version. Which are its main items and what are its market prospects?
We have two M-346 prototypes and one series representative aircraft on the line, in the final stage of flight envelope verification testing. The fourth aircraft is completing full-scale aircraft static tests at Alenia Aermacchi facilities in Venegono, while the fifth aircraft is ready to begin fatigue tests.
The M-346 production and assembly line will be ready by year-end, characterised by advanced technical solutions and high-level automation. It will deliver the first aircraft for the Italian air force from the end of 2010, with a full initial production regime of 18-24 aircraft a year, according to market request. We are also ready to conclude industrial agreements for aircraft final assembly, components production and maintenance abroad.
The United Arab Emirates has requested 48 aircraft, including 20 in an operational armed version. These aircraft will be equipped according to the specific customer requirements, including a radar system, for which contacts are already ongoing with Selex Galileo's Finmeccanica company.
The global market prospects for the latest-generation trainer aircraft indicate a requirement for around 2,000 aircraft, with Alenia Aermacchi believing it can capture a share of around 600-700 units. No precise estimates are available for the armed operational version, although we believe it will add more aircraft to the already mentioned market share. This version is attracting interest from the Middle and Far East, as well as South America.
In which current world advanced trainer competitions is Aermacchi participating with the M-346 and what are its short- and medium-term prospects?
We are awaiting Italian air force contract signature and we are in the final stage of negotiations with the United Arab Emirates for an integrated training solution deal, which is expected to be reached before this summer. Alenia Aermacchi is also in competition for the Singapore Fighter Wing Course programme, including 10-12 aircraft and a comprehensive training and support package, for which we are tendering together with Boeing and ST (Singapore Technologies) Aerospace.
Other countries including Austria, Greece and Poland are showing strong interest in our aircraft, in addition to Eurotraining group members. A request for information for that programme is expected very soon.
At which markets is Alenia Aermacchi looking for additional MB-339 sales?
We are working to complete a Malaysia order for eight aircraft and an option for an additional four, of which two MB-339CMs have already been delivered and the third was flown for the first time recently.
The Italian air force has received the first two of 14 CD version upgraded aircraft. We are continuing to pay attention to the MB-339 opportunities on the markets and to satisfy the needs of our aircraft clients.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Beyond Limits - Jet Training in France
Beyond Limits - Jet Training in France
Story by Sandra Toh
Pictures by Chua Soon Lye
When they stepped out of their nest, they fluttered their wings to stay in flight. Now, after three years, they are riding on winds and soaring to places higher than before. PIONEER visits the Falcons (150 Squadron) at the Republic of Singapore Air Force's (RSAF) Advanced Jet Training (AJT) detachment in France, and finds out how far they have arrived.
Stepping out, setting up
Following the signing of the Defence Cooperation and Status of Forces Agreement by Singapore and France in Oct 98, the RSAF deployed its full AJT unit, comprising 18 A4-SU Super Skyhawks and almost 200 servicemen from 150 Squadron, to Cazaux Air Base in south-west France.
Setting up a new detachment in a foreign country poses its own set of challenges. The movement of the A4-SUs from Tengah Air Base to Cazaux Air Base, for instance, was an operation that involved one of the largest mobilisation of manpower and equipment ever in the history of the RSAF.
The aircraft were first prepared and wrapped in Tengah Air Base. Under the supervision of a team of safety officers and specialists, they were then towed down the streets of Singapore to Jurong Port. From there, the aircraft were moved onto a ship, and together with a maintenance crew, they embarked on an arduous 23-day sea journey to France.
CPT Regina Kim, an Air Traffic Liaison Officer, ensures the safe take-off and landing of the A4-SUs from the tower.
Upon arriving at Cazaux Air Base, the aircraft were unwrapped, and they took to the skies of France without a hitch. Just when you thought everyone in the squadron could heave a sigh of relief and celebrate, more challenging tasks lay ahead.
As the detachment was a long-term one, most servicemen were accompanied by their spouses and children. This meant that getting accommodation and making arrangements for their children's education came in tops on the squadron's priority checklist.
The refuelling tanker is one of the ground support services that the FAF provides to facilitate the squadron's operations.
Commanding Officer, LTC Lim Chye Poh, said: "We wanted to have a conducive environment where the personnel of 150 Squadron could be left to concentrate on their work as soon as they arrived. So a lot of administrative effort was put in to ensure that their families could settle down very quickly in terms of housing and education."
And that was not all. For operations to take off, the infrastructure for flight support had to be put in place. Unlike back in Singapore, basic requirements like fuel, oxygen and ground control equipment were not readily available. The squadron had to seek the support of the French to procure these items that are often taken for granted at home.
So while working overseas sounds appealing, the less glamorous truth is that it usually means starting from scratch.
Flying unlimited
The limited airspace and monotonous terrain in Singapore are constraints to effective flying training. As the mission of the AJT is to produce quality fighter pilots in combat roles, it is for good reason that the unit has spread its wings afield.
France, with its vast airspace, allows pilots to conduct a variety of flying operations, including air-to-ground and air-to-air missions. This naturally makes Cazaux Air Base an ideal training ground for our young pilots.
CPT Tan Chin Yeong, a trainee pilot who was in Cazaux for nine months, said: " The airspace is definitely much bigger. Here, we do not have to compete for airspace with other squadrons like we do in Singapore."
Training value can be further derived from flying in a foreign country that has different terrain, land features and weather conditions.
Flight Commander, MAJ Benny Chan, explained: "In Singapore, flying over the sea is what we do most of the time. But when training overseas, we get to pick up various ground features and targets."
"The exposure that the guys get here is precious because they will learn that there are more elements to look out for other than just flying their aircraft," he added.
MAJ Benny Chan (right) reviewing a trainee pilot's flight manoeuvres after a sortie.
For the flight instructors, being deployed to France gives them the opportunity to interact with pilots from the more experienced French Air Force (FAF). In fact, there is an ongoing affiliation programme where the pilots from the two air forces meet to exchange teaching methods and flying expertise.
Said MAJ Chan: "We talk about the common pitfalls that our trainees make and discuss what we can do to help them. We learn from one another."
Level up!
Aircraft maintenance is exceptionally demanding in the AJT detachment, considering that manpower and resources are minimal. First of all, to ensure that there are enough aircraft to meet daily operational requirements, servicing schedules have to be planned meticulously.
"Although our purpose is to support flying operations, we also have to look into sustainability," said MAJ Yao Shih En, Senior Maintenance Officer.
"We plan our schedules way ahead because if we have all the aircraft down at the same time, we cannot simply fly in more technicians."
The stress is further compounded by the fact that there are no reserves of maintenance spares and engine components in the detachment.
According to MAJ Yao, failed components are sent back to Singapore, as the unit does not have capabilities similar to the component repair facilities back home.
Daily launch and recovery servicing are carried out to maintain the aircraft in tip-top condition.
Since costs are incurred whenever components are freighted to and from Singapore, the specialists have to be very accurate in identifying the cause whenever an aircraft has a problem.
"Back home, if I suspect that a particular spare part is faulty, I can bring it to the base workshop to confirm. If it's not faulty, I can just go back and take another one to check," said SSG Ang Tiong, a Fire Control Specialist.
"But here, when it comes to troubleshooting, I have to work with the constraints and be able to pinpoint exactly what's wrong."
Besides being a specialist in electronic weapons, SSG Ang holds other appointments concurrently � a situation not unique to him, by the way. As a Shift IC, SSG Ang has to learn other systems so that when an aircraft has multiple defects, he can decide on the steps to rectify the problem within the shortest time possible.
Although stretched to unimaginable limits at times, SSG Ang relishes the opportunities given to him. Making a point that others in the squadron would agree with, he said: "Back home, you just belong to a small section in a huge organisation. You don't get to see how things are run. Here, the AJT detachment is like a mini airbase. It's all self-managed. You get to see the whole picture."
It's raining, men!
In summer, it can be blazing hot without a cloud in the sky. In winter, it can be freezing cold. Coming from Singapore, which is warm all-year round, the servicemen took a while to adjust to the extreme weather conditions.
"Whenever there's a new batch of guys, we 'brainwash' them a little to make sure that they follow the work practices here," said MAJ Yao.
"During winter, they have to wear gloves and extra clothes. So even if they are more clumsy and lose the actual feel when doing aircraft work, they have to adapt and manage."
And indeed, the squadron does not allow the forces of nature to hamper operations, if they can help it. For example, during one winter, when ice kept forming on the wings and windshields of the aircraft, they started racking their brains.
2WO Tan Kheng Hock, an Expeditor, led a group of men in coming up with a WITS project. He said: "We studied and arrived at the idea of using an air-starter unit to blow hot air on the surface of the wings and canopy areas of the aircraft."
"The process takes up a lot of time, but it works," he assured.
Excuse my French
Unable to speak beyond a few simple French phrases, another major problem that the servicemen faced initially was communication. Fortunately, the thoughtfulness and hospitality of the French helped them to overcome this problem at work.
Under the arrangement of the FAF, a French liaison officer is attached to the AJT detachment as an interpreter. Through the liaison officer, the unit is able to communicate its operational requirements to the air base personnel.
Shopping was nonetheless quite unnerving. MAJ Chan recalled: "My wife and I avoided the markets at first because we didn't know how to ask for things. We didn't know whether things were sold by weight or quantity."
To help the wives of the servicemen to integrate better into the new environment, French language classes are specially organised for them by a group of retired FAF personnel.
Playtime!
But the ones most proficient in French are � yes, the children. This is no surprise since they learn the language as part of their syllabus in Bremontier Group School. In fact, some parents noted that these precocious young ones would speak in French among themselves if they did not want the adults to understand their conversations!
Concerned that the children will lose grasp of their mother tongue? Mdm Chua Hwee Lee, seconded from the MInistry of Education, is around to conduct Chinese classes for them.
"My son can buy his own food at McDonald's, and he speaks to the restaurant crew in French," said MAJ Yao, who has two pre-school children.
"Don't know what they talk about!"
The French experience
Cazaux has a quaint, laid-back charm that makes it a relaxing place to live in. However, ironical as it may sound, the relaxing pace was a tad stressful initially for the harried urbanites in our servicemen.
But the servicemen have soon come to enjoy the simple pleasures that living in France offers. After work, most of them spend quiet evenings with their families. During the warmer months, they occupy their weekends by skating, gardening and playing beach volleyball. In winter, it is usually skiing at the Pyrenees. Occasionally, they participate in local community activities, like beach cleaning and charity runs.
1SG Williams using the ground test unit to check the integrity of the Identification Friend or Foe System of the aircraft.
Notwithstanding the cultural and linguistic differences, some of the servicemen have forged friendships with their local hosts. "I play in a rock band with the French. We jam and do a lot of heavy stuff," said 1SG Andrew Williams, a Radar Communications Specialist, with a grin.
"When I return to Singapore, I will definitely miss these people, and I believe I will be back here to visit them."
And surely, those who eventually head home after their stint in France will miss the country for many things � the friends, the fun and most of all, the experience in overcoming the odds and discovering that there are no limits they cannot go beyond.
Story by Sandra Toh
Pictures by Chua Soon Lye
When they stepped out of their nest, they fluttered their wings to stay in flight. Now, after three years, they are riding on winds and soaring to places higher than before. PIONEER visits the Falcons (150 Squadron) at the Republic of Singapore Air Force's (RSAF) Advanced Jet Training (AJT) detachment in France, and finds out how far they have arrived.
Stepping out, setting up
Following the signing of the Defence Cooperation and Status of Forces Agreement by Singapore and France in Oct 98, the RSAF deployed its full AJT unit, comprising 18 A4-SU Super Skyhawks and almost 200 servicemen from 150 Squadron, to Cazaux Air Base in south-west France.
Setting up a new detachment in a foreign country poses its own set of challenges. The movement of the A4-SUs from Tengah Air Base to Cazaux Air Base, for instance, was an operation that involved one of the largest mobilisation of manpower and equipment ever in the history of the RSAF.
The aircraft were first prepared and wrapped in Tengah Air Base. Under the supervision of a team of safety officers and specialists, they were then towed down the streets of Singapore to Jurong Port. From there, the aircraft were moved onto a ship, and together with a maintenance crew, they embarked on an arduous 23-day sea journey to France.
CPT Regina Kim, an Air Traffic Liaison Officer, ensures the safe take-off and landing of the A4-SUs from the tower.
Upon arriving at Cazaux Air Base, the aircraft were unwrapped, and they took to the skies of France without a hitch. Just when you thought everyone in the squadron could heave a sigh of relief and celebrate, more challenging tasks lay ahead.
As the detachment was a long-term one, most servicemen were accompanied by their spouses and children. This meant that getting accommodation and making arrangements for their children's education came in tops on the squadron's priority checklist.
The refuelling tanker is one of the ground support services that the FAF provides to facilitate the squadron's operations.
Commanding Officer, LTC Lim Chye Poh, said: "We wanted to have a conducive environment where the personnel of 150 Squadron could be left to concentrate on their work as soon as they arrived. So a lot of administrative effort was put in to ensure that their families could settle down very quickly in terms of housing and education."
And that was not all. For operations to take off, the infrastructure for flight support had to be put in place. Unlike back in Singapore, basic requirements like fuel, oxygen and ground control equipment were not readily available. The squadron had to seek the support of the French to procure these items that are often taken for granted at home.
So while working overseas sounds appealing, the less glamorous truth is that it usually means starting from scratch.
Flying unlimited
The limited airspace and monotonous terrain in Singapore are constraints to effective flying training. As the mission of the AJT is to produce quality fighter pilots in combat roles, it is for good reason that the unit has spread its wings afield.
France, with its vast airspace, allows pilots to conduct a variety of flying operations, including air-to-ground and air-to-air missions. This naturally makes Cazaux Air Base an ideal training ground for our young pilots.
CPT Tan Chin Yeong, a trainee pilot who was in Cazaux for nine months, said: " The airspace is definitely much bigger. Here, we do not have to compete for airspace with other squadrons like we do in Singapore."
Training value can be further derived from flying in a foreign country that has different terrain, land features and weather conditions.
Flight Commander, MAJ Benny Chan, explained: "In Singapore, flying over the sea is what we do most of the time. But when training overseas, we get to pick up various ground features and targets."
"The exposure that the guys get here is precious because they will learn that there are more elements to look out for other than just flying their aircraft," he added.
MAJ Benny Chan (right) reviewing a trainee pilot's flight manoeuvres after a sortie.
For the flight instructors, being deployed to France gives them the opportunity to interact with pilots from the more experienced French Air Force (FAF). In fact, there is an ongoing affiliation programme where the pilots from the two air forces meet to exchange teaching methods and flying expertise.
Said MAJ Chan: "We talk about the common pitfalls that our trainees make and discuss what we can do to help them. We learn from one another."
Level up!
Aircraft maintenance is exceptionally demanding in the AJT detachment, considering that manpower and resources are minimal. First of all, to ensure that there are enough aircraft to meet daily operational requirements, servicing schedules have to be planned meticulously.
"Although our purpose is to support flying operations, we also have to look into sustainability," said MAJ Yao Shih En, Senior Maintenance Officer.
"We plan our schedules way ahead because if we have all the aircraft down at the same time, we cannot simply fly in more technicians."
The stress is further compounded by the fact that there are no reserves of maintenance spares and engine components in the detachment.
According to MAJ Yao, failed components are sent back to Singapore, as the unit does not have capabilities similar to the component repair facilities back home.
Daily launch and recovery servicing are carried out to maintain the aircraft in tip-top condition.
Since costs are incurred whenever components are freighted to and from Singapore, the specialists have to be very accurate in identifying the cause whenever an aircraft has a problem.
"Back home, if I suspect that a particular spare part is faulty, I can bring it to the base workshop to confirm. If it's not faulty, I can just go back and take another one to check," said SSG Ang Tiong, a Fire Control Specialist.
"But here, when it comes to troubleshooting, I have to work with the constraints and be able to pinpoint exactly what's wrong."
Besides being a specialist in electronic weapons, SSG Ang holds other appointments concurrently � a situation not unique to him, by the way. As a Shift IC, SSG Ang has to learn other systems so that when an aircraft has multiple defects, he can decide on the steps to rectify the problem within the shortest time possible.
Although stretched to unimaginable limits at times, SSG Ang relishes the opportunities given to him. Making a point that others in the squadron would agree with, he said: "Back home, you just belong to a small section in a huge organisation. You don't get to see how things are run. Here, the AJT detachment is like a mini airbase. It's all self-managed. You get to see the whole picture."
It's raining, men!
In summer, it can be blazing hot without a cloud in the sky. In winter, it can be freezing cold. Coming from Singapore, which is warm all-year round, the servicemen took a while to adjust to the extreme weather conditions.
"Whenever there's a new batch of guys, we 'brainwash' them a little to make sure that they follow the work practices here," said MAJ Yao.
"During winter, they have to wear gloves and extra clothes. So even if they are more clumsy and lose the actual feel when doing aircraft work, they have to adapt and manage."
And indeed, the squadron does not allow the forces of nature to hamper operations, if they can help it. For example, during one winter, when ice kept forming on the wings and windshields of the aircraft, they started racking their brains.
2WO Tan Kheng Hock, an Expeditor, led a group of men in coming up with a WITS project. He said: "We studied and arrived at the idea of using an air-starter unit to blow hot air on the surface of the wings and canopy areas of the aircraft."
"The process takes up a lot of time, but it works," he assured.
Excuse my French
Unable to speak beyond a few simple French phrases, another major problem that the servicemen faced initially was communication. Fortunately, the thoughtfulness and hospitality of the French helped them to overcome this problem at work.
Under the arrangement of the FAF, a French liaison officer is attached to the AJT detachment as an interpreter. Through the liaison officer, the unit is able to communicate its operational requirements to the air base personnel.
Shopping was nonetheless quite unnerving. MAJ Chan recalled: "My wife and I avoided the markets at first because we didn't know how to ask for things. We didn't know whether things were sold by weight or quantity."
To help the wives of the servicemen to integrate better into the new environment, French language classes are specially organised for them by a group of retired FAF personnel.
Playtime!
But the ones most proficient in French are � yes, the children. This is no surprise since they learn the language as part of their syllabus in Bremontier Group School. In fact, some parents noted that these precocious young ones would speak in French among themselves if they did not want the adults to understand their conversations!
Concerned that the children will lose grasp of their mother tongue? Mdm Chua Hwee Lee, seconded from the MInistry of Education, is around to conduct Chinese classes for them.
"My son can buy his own food at McDonald's, and he speaks to the restaurant crew in French," said MAJ Yao, who has two pre-school children.
"Don't know what they talk about!"
The French experience
Cazaux has a quaint, laid-back charm that makes it a relaxing place to live in. However, ironical as it may sound, the relaxing pace was a tad stressful initially for the harried urbanites in our servicemen.
But the servicemen have soon come to enjoy the simple pleasures that living in France offers. After work, most of them spend quiet evenings with their families. During the warmer months, they occupy their weekends by skating, gardening and playing beach volleyball. In winter, it is usually skiing at the Pyrenees. Occasionally, they participate in local community activities, like beach cleaning and charity runs.
1SG Williams using the ground test unit to check the integrity of the Identification Friend or Foe System of the aircraft.
Notwithstanding the cultural and linguistic differences, some of the servicemen have forged friendships with their local hosts. "I play in a rock band with the French. We jam and do a lot of heavy stuff," said 1SG Andrew Williams, a Radar Communications Specialist, with a grin.
"When I return to Singapore, I will definitely miss these people, and I believe I will be back here to visit them."
And surely, those who eventually head home after their stint in France will miss the country for many things � the friends, the fun and most of all, the experience in overcoming the odds and discovering that there are no limits they cannot go beyond.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
‘Grifo-S’ fire-control radar
Alenia Aeronautica’s CEO Giovanni Bertolone said that “the UAE selection for the Aermacchi marks a huge success for one of the Italian aeronautical technology’s flagship designs and the decision came as a surprise for most defence experts as well as for Lockheed.” An Aermacchi-official underlined to ACIG, that the M346 would – he mentioned the slow-progressing AEJPT ‘Eurotraining’ as well as Singapore or Austria – now be based on a much broader economical and industrial basis. The plane was evaluated in Al Ain in 2007 and half of the order would be fitted with the small ‘Grifo-S’ fire-control radar. The contract could be worth nearly € 1 billion and as – another – joint-venture, Alenia signed a composite-production for civil aircrafts with ‘Mubadala’.
Italy’s role in the UAE may be lesser known than of more ‘high-profile’ military forces like US and France “but that is by design”, one UAE-officer said. “It’s under the radar, but very effective.” In fact, Abu Dhabi’s Bateen Air Base has evolved as a key staging-post for the Italian government’s missions in the region. A team of 100 Italians stationed there support a fleet of AMI C-130s, ferrying troops and materials to Afghanistan. An AMI general-staff officer present at the Finmeccanica-chalet confirmed: “Without the Emirates, we couldn’t perform our ISAF-operations.”
For US$ 291 millions, the Navy of the UAE will further get two maritime-patrol aircrafts on the basis of the Bombardier DHC-8/Q300, equipped by Canadian contractor ‚Provincial Aerospace’. The integrator from St. Johns will led a team by Honeywell-UK, Saab-South Africa and US ‘FLIR-Systems Inc’. Given the much smaller plattform and ~US$ 145 millions per aircraft, the on-board equipment should be rather ‘opulent’, compared to ‘only’ US$ 183 millions/plane for Boeing’s recently fixed P-8I (on basis of the 737-800) for India. And that plattform also covers ASW-duties.
Already well established in police-service in Abu Dhabi as well as in Group 18 of the UAE-AFs Special Forces Command, the 15-seat Augusta-Westland AW139 got another confirmation worth ~US$ 60 millions. 7 SAR-versions for ‘Abu Dhabi Aviation’ and 2 further VIP-ships for the forces were announced. Last summer, the armed forces of Qatar ordered 18 of the type.
South Korea Blames T-50 Contract Failure on Cost of Aircraft
South Korea Blames T-50 Contract Failure on Cost of Aircraft
Published March 13, 2009 South Korea 0 Comments
Tags: Offsets, Procurement, South Korea, United States, Exports
Source: Korea Times
Date: 13 March 2009
There are more reasons than meet the eye for last month’s bidding failure of the T-50 Golden Eagle, Korea’s advanced trainer jet, chief of which is its price policy shortcoming, experts say.
Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI), Korea’s only aerospace firm, lost in a competition to supply next-generation military jet trainers to the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The Middle Eastern country selected the M-346, by Italy’s Alenia Aermacchi, as the preferred aircraft in the $1.3 billion deal, which included the building of 48 jets.
“Although the UAE acknowledged the T-50 has remarkably high quality, the country apparently put more value on cooperative projects in the aerospace industry that the Italian side pledged,” the Ministry of Knowledge Economy said in a statement, which also pointed out a disadvantage in price.
A T-50 jet’s flyaway cost is set at 20 billion won to 25 billion won ($13.5 - $16.9 million), while the M-346 costs 18 billion won to 20 billion won.
KAI said superiority in quality led to the higher price. The T-50’s engine generates 1.4 times more power than the M-346, and the jet trainer’s Mach 1.5 speed is superior to the Mach 0.9 of its Italian rival, according to the company.
A military expert claimed, however, that overly high quality led to failure in the end in a false effort to cram too much into a product that didn’t need to be equipped with state-of-the-art features.
“It’s just like trying to sell a Lamborghini to a driving school,” military expert Kim Seong-jeon said. “The market for trainer jets can’t be a luxury market. Even its supersonic speed doesn’t give it a critical edge because it’s not pivotal for advanced trainer jets.”
Supersonic flights are not necessary in an advanced flight-training program, he added. The core elements of the course consist of in-air operation, take-off and landing, and blind flying.
Manufacturing of supersonic trainer jets ends in a steep surge of its prime cost due to the superfluous features, according to the former wing commander, and this makes it non-price competitive.
“The price gap between the two jets per unit makes a huge difference,” Kim said. “Some might say the government didn’t give KAI enough support, but it makes no sense to blame it on a lack of marketing and other support as long as the product has a basic price problem.”
All of its problems trace back to its origins. The T-50’s development originally started as a domestic supply scheme for the Korean Air Force, which strongly opposed the plan first because of small demand.
The Korean Air Force needs 50 trainer jets at most, and the interval between each procurement could be long, as they can be in use for over 40 years. Consequently, export emerged as the solution to keep the project going.
Advocates of the T-50 say once it blazes the selling trail, in spite of the price, there will be more opportunities in the global market.
An industry source, however, said on condition of anonymity that kind of logic “could apply to the auto industry, where mass production is possible, but it’s highly unlikely for trainer jets.”
“The overall size of the defense industry is shrinking across the world and trainer jets take up a very small and limited share of it. At the end of the day, Korea can’t expect to export the T-50 in large quantities,” he said.
Comment: The high price of the platform could have been compensated by an offset package aimed at delivering quality support to UAE’s defence and aerospace industries. As South Korea attempts to ramp up exports this offset side to negotiations will have to be improved.
Published March 13, 2009 South Korea 0 Comments
Tags: Offsets, Procurement, South Korea, United States, Exports
Source: Korea Times
Date: 13 March 2009
There are more reasons than meet the eye for last month’s bidding failure of the T-50 Golden Eagle, Korea’s advanced trainer jet, chief of which is its price policy shortcoming, experts say.
Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI), Korea’s only aerospace firm, lost in a competition to supply next-generation military jet trainers to the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The Middle Eastern country selected the M-346, by Italy’s Alenia Aermacchi, as the preferred aircraft in the $1.3 billion deal, which included the building of 48 jets.
“Although the UAE acknowledged the T-50 has remarkably high quality, the country apparently put more value on cooperative projects in the aerospace industry that the Italian side pledged,” the Ministry of Knowledge Economy said in a statement, which also pointed out a disadvantage in price.
A T-50 jet’s flyaway cost is set at 20 billion won to 25 billion won ($13.5 - $16.9 million), while the M-346 costs 18 billion won to 20 billion won.
KAI said superiority in quality led to the higher price. The T-50’s engine generates 1.4 times more power than the M-346, and the jet trainer’s Mach 1.5 speed is superior to the Mach 0.9 of its Italian rival, according to the company.
A military expert claimed, however, that overly high quality led to failure in the end in a false effort to cram too much into a product that didn’t need to be equipped with state-of-the-art features.
“It’s just like trying to sell a Lamborghini to a driving school,” military expert Kim Seong-jeon said. “The market for trainer jets can’t be a luxury market. Even its supersonic speed doesn’t give it a critical edge because it’s not pivotal for advanced trainer jets.”
Supersonic flights are not necessary in an advanced flight-training program, he added. The core elements of the course consist of in-air operation, take-off and landing, and blind flying.
Manufacturing of supersonic trainer jets ends in a steep surge of its prime cost due to the superfluous features, according to the former wing commander, and this makes it non-price competitive.
“The price gap between the two jets per unit makes a huge difference,” Kim said. “Some might say the government didn’t give KAI enough support, but it makes no sense to blame it on a lack of marketing and other support as long as the product has a basic price problem.”
All of its problems trace back to its origins. The T-50’s development originally started as a domestic supply scheme for the Korean Air Force, which strongly opposed the plan first because of small demand.
The Korean Air Force needs 50 trainer jets at most, and the interval between each procurement could be long, as they can be in use for over 40 years. Consequently, export emerged as the solution to keep the project going.
Advocates of the T-50 say once it blazes the selling trail, in spite of the price, there will be more opportunities in the global market.
An industry source, however, said on condition of anonymity that kind of logic “could apply to the auto industry, where mass production is possible, but it’s highly unlikely for trainer jets.”
“The overall size of the defense industry is shrinking across the world and trainer jets take up a very small and limited share of it. At the end of the day, Korea can’t expect to export the T-50 in large quantities,” he said.
Comment: The high price of the platform could have been compensated by an offset package aimed at delivering quality support to UAE’s defence and aerospace industries. As South Korea attempts to ramp up exports this offset side to negotiations will have to be improved.
Singapore’s ST Engineering
Ready for competition
Italian M-346 takes on Lockheed T-50 in Singapore
By Tom Kington
February 01, 2009
Italy’s Alenia Aermacchi has teamed with Boeing and Singapore’s ST Engineering to jointly pitch its M-346 trainer to Singapore. “The three companies have been working together for months,” Aermacchi CEO Carmelo Cosentino said.
After much discussion and anticipation, the Asian island state released a formal request for proposals late last year.
After excluding BAE Systems’ Hawk from the running, Singapore short-listed the Aermacchi M-346 and Korea Aerospace Industries’ T-50 in late 2008 in preparation to buy up to a dozen new jet trainers, most likely early this year. South Korea’s KAI has teamed with Lockheed Martin to build and market the T-50.
Cosentino said it has not been decided which partner behind the M-346 bid would act as prime contractor. “We could create a new company to fulfill that role,” he said. In the meantime, plans are in the works for more Italian funds to further develop the aircraft’s fly-by-wire systems.
Although the Singapore competition involves few aircraft, it is being closely monitored as other jet trainer fleets around the world near retirement age. Boeing teamed with Aermacchi in May to promote the M-346 in markets outside the U.S., and Cosentino said the U.S. firm was now involved “in a limited fashion” with Aermacchi in its bid to supply the M-346 to the United Arab Emirates, where the Italian-built trainer is also facing off with the T-50.
Aermacchi’s parent company, Finmeccanica, meanwhile announced a partnership in October with Mubadala Development, a UAE investment agency, to build composite components for civilian aircraft.
A source at Aermacchi said the deal was not directly related to the M-346 pitch in the United Arab Emirates, but added that “having good relations can have a weight.”
Aermacchi also is talking to firms, including Boeing, about forging a partnership to market the M-346 in the U.S. as a T-38 replacement.
“We are doing a study,” Cosentino said. “A partner would need to have a good capacity for lobbying and investment, and we are talking to Boeing and others.”
“The choice between the supersonic T-50 and the subsonic M-346 comes down to syllabus philosophy. Do you want supersonic or not?” said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group, Fairfax, Va.
With no two-seater Joint Strike Fighter being built, JSF customers may be reluctant to send pilots from subsonic trainers to flying the supersonic JSF solo, he noted.
“As a JSF customer, Singapore may opt for the T-50, also because Lockheed Martin is already prime contractor on its basic trainer. For the UAE, the M-346 will be a good replacement for its Hawks and Aermacchis,” he said.
While the M-346, recently dubbed the “Master,” is being marketed as a sub- or trans-sonic aircraft, it has demonstrated limited supersonic capabilities. In a December flight, a prototype aircraft reached Mach 1.15 at an altitude of 45,000 feet.
“The M-346 is lower cost and will be a good way to replace Hawks and Aermacchis at a similar operating and acquisition cost,” Aboulafia added. “In the U.S., however, the T-50 will have an advantage as it is the equivalent to the supersonic T-38.”
While the T-50 is in service with its launch customer, the Korean Air Force, Aermacchi is awaiting the final sign-off on funding for the acquisition of 15 M-346s by its first customer, the Italian Air Force.
“The signing for the first batch within the order should happen within a few weeks, at most by year end,” Cosentino said.
That first batch order would likely amount to six aircraft plus simulators and logistics, he added, as well as some work on improvements to the Lecce Air Force base in southern Italy, where the aircraft will be hosted, and where Aermacchi also has suggested Singapore could send pilots for training if it buys the M-346.
Planning for the initial six-plane order, Aermacchi has placed a $52 million engine contract with Honeywell’s International Turbine Engine Co. for 20 F124-GA-200 engines to power 10 of the twin-engine trainers.
The contract, which also pays for support for the engines, was the “minimum buy practical,” Cosentino said, “but could partly cover a successive contract with another customer.”
With an eye on a future light fighter version of the M-346, Cosentino also said talks were under way with Finmeccanica stablemate Selex Galileo about mounting radar on the aircraft, starting with the mechanically scanned Grifo, but not excluding the electronically scanned Vixen.
Italian M-346 takes on Lockheed T-50 in Singapore
By Tom Kington
February 01, 2009
Italy’s Alenia Aermacchi has teamed with Boeing and Singapore’s ST Engineering to jointly pitch its M-346 trainer to Singapore. “The three companies have been working together for months,” Aermacchi CEO Carmelo Cosentino said.
After much discussion and anticipation, the Asian island state released a formal request for proposals late last year.
After excluding BAE Systems’ Hawk from the running, Singapore short-listed the Aermacchi M-346 and Korea Aerospace Industries’ T-50 in late 2008 in preparation to buy up to a dozen new jet trainers, most likely early this year. South Korea’s KAI has teamed with Lockheed Martin to build and market the T-50.
Cosentino said it has not been decided which partner behind the M-346 bid would act as prime contractor. “We could create a new company to fulfill that role,” he said. In the meantime, plans are in the works for more Italian funds to further develop the aircraft’s fly-by-wire systems.
Although the Singapore competition involves few aircraft, it is being closely monitored as other jet trainer fleets around the world near retirement age. Boeing teamed with Aermacchi in May to promote the M-346 in markets outside the U.S., and Cosentino said the U.S. firm was now involved “in a limited fashion” with Aermacchi in its bid to supply the M-346 to the United Arab Emirates, where the Italian-built trainer is also facing off with the T-50.
Aermacchi’s parent company, Finmeccanica, meanwhile announced a partnership in October with Mubadala Development, a UAE investment agency, to build composite components for civilian aircraft.
A source at Aermacchi said the deal was not directly related to the M-346 pitch in the United Arab Emirates, but added that “having good relations can have a weight.”
Aermacchi also is talking to firms, including Boeing, about forging a partnership to market the M-346 in the U.S. as a T-38 replacement.
“We are doing a study,” Cosentino said. “A partner would need to have a good capacity for lobbying and investment, and we are talking to Boeing and others.”
“The choice between the supersonic T-50 and the subsonic M-346 comes down to syllabus philosophy. Do you want supersonic or not?” said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group, Fairfax, Va.
With no two-seater Joint Strike Fighter being built, JSF customers may be reluctant to send pilots from subsonic trainers to flying the supersonic JSF solo, he noted.
“As a JSF customer, Singapore may opt for the T-50, also because Lockheed Martin is already prime contractor on its basic trainer. For the UAE, the M-346 will be a good replacement for its Hawks and Aermacchis,” he said.
While the M-346, recently dubbed the “Master,” is being marketed as a sub- or trans-sonic aircraft, it has demonstrated limited supersonic capabilities. In a December flight, a prototype aircraft reached Mach 1.15 at an altitude of 45,000 feet.
“The M-346 is lower cost and will be a good way to replace Hawks and Aermacchis at a similar operating and acquisition cost,” Aboulafia added. “In the U.S., however, the T-50 will have an advantage as it is the equivalent to the supersonic T-38.”
While the T-50 is in service with its launch customer, the Korean Air Force, Aermacchi is awaiting the final sign-off on funding for the acquisition of 15 M-346s by its first customer, the Italian Air Force.
“The signing for the first batch within the order should happen within a few weeks, at most by year end,” Cosentino said.
That first batch order would likely amount to six aircraft plus simulators and logistics, he added, as well as some work on improvements to the Lecce Air Force base in southern Italy, where the aircraft will be hosted, and where Aermacchi also has suggested Singapore could send pilots for training if it buys the M-346.
Planning for the initial six-plane order, Aermacchi has placed a $52 million engine contract with Honeywell’s International Turbine Engine Co. for 20 F124-GA-200 engines to power 10 of the twin-engine trainers.
The contract, which also pays for support for the engines, was the “minimum buy practical,” Cosentino said, “but could partly cover a successive contract with another customer.”
With an eye on a future light fighter version of the M-346, Cosentino also said talks were under way with Finmeccanica stablemate Selex Galileo about mounting radar on the aircraft, starting with the mechanically scanned Grifo, but not excluding the electronically scanned Vixen.
Monday, March 30, 2009
M-346’s
Fourth-generation fighters are now a reality, providing new levels of energy and agility as well as sensor and weapon networking, but posing the problem of how to train pilots to make safe and effective use of the carefree handling and mission capability of these costly combat assets.
A cheaper alternative to using the fighter itself could be a “fourth-generation trainer”, and associated integrated training system, that could take a student pilot from basic to advanced training, then through the tactical weapons and operational conversion units (OCU), and on to the frontline alongside the fighter.
“I admire Alenia Aermacchi’s decision to put cockpit customisation at the heart of the M-346’s digital architecture”
Alenia Aermacchi has designed the M-346 for this role, and the aircraft is the only all-new European advanced/lead-in fighter trainer in development. Its main rivals are the Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) T-50 Golden Eagle, and the BAE Systems Hawk 128.
Although still in development, w ith Italian military certification not due until mid-2007, Flight International was invited to assess the M-346’s potential to span the “basic to OCU” gap and be a one-stop solution to the training, capability and budgetary problems faced by air forces fielding fourth-generation fighters.
Alenia Aermacchi is the result of the merging of Alenia and Aermacchi in July 2003, and is part of Italian aerospace and defence giant Finmeccanica. Based at Venegono in Varese, near Milan, the company has delivered more than 2,000 trainers to date. Its products include the SF-260 piston primary, M-311 turbofan basic, and MB-339CD turbojet advanced trainers.
The M-346 has its origins in European studies of a new advanced trainer in the late 1980s, in which Aermacchi participated. These led to the AT-2000 proposal for an aircraft with an empty weight around 6.2t and a single afterburning engine. Aermacchi believed the better option was a lighter aircraft, around 4.5t, with two non-afterburning engines and advanced aerodynamics to give high agility, but docile low-speed handling. In 1992, the company left the European study to pursue its own design based around two engines.
Inlet location improves efficiency
At the end of 1992, Aermacchi joined with the Yakovlev design bueau, which was struggling with development of the Yak-130 jet trainer for the Russian air force to replace the Aero Vodochody L-39 trainer. Aermacchi suggested the requirement be changed from basic to advanced lead-in fighter trainer and it took the basic Yak-130 shape and developed it. According to Emanuele Merlo, head of flight technology, the M-346 is a totally new aircraft, internally and externally.
The wing was moved up the fuselage, having been too low on the Yak-130 and causing horizontal stabiliser blanking at mid to high angle of attack (AoA). The leading-edge extensions (LEX) were reduced and redesigned to give controllable vortex lift. Two small vertical fins were added at the wing roots to “trap” and control the LEX vortices at AoAs from 25-30° upwards. These LEX vortex controllers ensure the “vortex burst” over the wing at high AoA is symmetrical and controllable.
Blended wing
The wing was remodelled to blend into the fuselage for improved span loading. A saw- tooth was added to the full-span leading-edge flaps. Thickness was optimised from root to tip, and planform, profile and camber were optimised for best lift/drag over the widest possible envelope from short field and subsonic manoeuvre, through transonic penetration to supersonic cruise.
The single fin was repositioned for high AoA and the engine nozzle positions changed to reduce zero-lift drag. The air intakes were completely redesigned and are now 98-99% efficient over virtually the entire operating envelope, says Alenia Aermacchi. The shielded intake position under the LEX also improves engine efficiency at high AoA and when supersonic. The engines were changed to Honeywell F124-200s, each producing 6,250lb thrust (28kN) and with full-authority digital engine control (FADEC). The inlets are sized to accommodate up to a 20% increase in thrust from the present engine or possible future versions.
The sharp “chine” nose of the Yak-130 was rounded and redesigned to reduce frontal area, prevent unwanted vortex development in sideslip and allow installation of radar. A top-mounted airbrake was placed on the fuselage spine; horizontal-tail control power was raised to improve short-field performance and post-stall manoeuvring pitch recovery; and a fixed (removable) in-flight refuelling probe was added on the right side of the nose. There are now nine hardpoints (three wet), including wingtip missile rails.
Digital control
A digital fly-by-wire flight control system (FCS) operates the ailerons (there are no spoilers), rudder, taileron and leading-edge flaps. Simple half-span flaps are pilot operated. The quadruplex FCS can lose two channels and still provide safe operational capability. Rear-cockpit instructor controls provide the ability to “degrade” the FCS into various “training” modes. Although configured with a centre stick, the cockpit has been designed to accept a sidestick if requested by the customer.
The first M-346 prototype flew in July 2004 and the second in May 2005. Initial operational clearance of the FCS is due at the end of this year, with full clearance and Italian military certification due in mid-2007. Production rate is envisaged at three a month with an initial run of 12 aircraft plus one static and one fatigue test airframe planned for 2007, after certification.
The prototype has been demonstrated to the Greek air force, which has a critical need to replace its ageing T-2 Buckeyes, and Alenia Aermacchi has a memorandum of understanding with Hellenic Aerospace Industry for Greek participation in development and production of the M-346. Other potential customers include Chile, Poland, Portugual, Singapore and the United Arab Emirates. There is also the Advanced European Joint Pilot Training (AEJPT), or Eurotrainer, requirement involving 11 countries.
As part of its AEJPT studies, Alenia Aermacchi modelled the training mission density and superimposed it on the M-346’s flight envelope. The four “hot spots” - low speed/low altitude (circuits and approaches), 420kt (775km/h)/500ft (150m) (low-level attack), M0.7-0.8/20,000ft (air combat manoeuvring) and M0.7-0.9/38,000ft (air interception) - fall within the M-346 operating envelope. In the air combat training mission, the M-346 at full dry power would use 50kg/min (110lb/min) of fuel and could remain in the training area for 18min - three times the endurance of the afterburning T-50, the company claims.
Embedded training simulation (ETS), a system already operational on Italian air force MB-339C/Ds, allows the M-346 pilot to train within a virtual scenario involving computer-generated forces displayed in the cockpit. ETS allows early introduction and enhanced proficiency with situational awareness, tactical operations, sensor management and weapon deployment. The ETS system can simulate offensive sensors such as radar, defensive aids such as radar warning, datalinked information and a wide variety of air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons. The full integrated training system includes ground classroom trainers, procedural tactics trainers and full mission simulators that can be linked together and to the aircraft.
Basic empty weight is about 4,600kg and, with two pilots an a full internal fuel load of 2,000kg, the M-346 weighs around 6,700kg clean at take-off. Given a combined thrust of the two F124 turbofans of 12,500lb, the aircraft has greater than 1:1 thrust-to-weight ratio from around half fuel when clean. This is important when comparing the M-346 with trainers with a single afterburning engine that can exceed 1:1 only in reheat and at the cost of fuel and training time. Maximum take-off weight fully loaded is 9,700kg. This is also the maximum landing weight.
Three 465kg-capacity external fuel tanks can be carried (limit M0.92), which gives the M-346 a range (with 10% reserves) of 2,850km (1,540nm) compared with 2,070km clean. The aircraft’s service ceiling is 45,000ft, time to 40,000ft is 3.5min at an initial climb rate of 21,000ft/min (107m/s). Maximum speed is M1.2 at altitude or 572kt equivalent (590kt true) at 5,000ft. Load factors are +8/-3g. Take-off run is around 400m and landing roll around 500m.
The FCS endows carefree handling throughout the flight envelope. The aircraft is spin resistant and can be held inverted for 30s. With about 500kg of internal fuel, final approach speed is around 100kt indicated.
The F124-200 turbofan has a dual- redundant FADEC. The throttles feature a spring detent at 90% NH (core speed) to represent full dry power, giving a time for take-off roll of around 20s, typical of current trainers. Full throttle travel gives 100% NH, representing afterburner and giving a roll of 11s, typical of current fighters. The engines are surge resistant with auto-relight, which can be achieved up to 30,000ft and M1.
Maximum sustained load factor at 15,000ft and M0.6-0.8 is +6g and turn rate 14.5°/s - performance that exceeds many fighters and all trainers in either dry power or reheat. Only above M0.8 at this altitude does the KAI T-50 in reheat start to better the turn rate of the M-346. Maximum angle of attack is 40°, which matches or exceeds the limits of most modern fighters and allows the M-346 to undertake post-stall manoeuvres. Maximum roll rate is 230°/s and can be sustained up to 6g.
Dual systems
An auxiliary power unit (APU) is fitted that can be used for air supply, engine starting and 28V DC power supply up to 25,000ft. The hydraulic system has one pump per engine, with dual 3,000lb/in2 supply to the primary and secondary flight controls and wheel brakes. Park brake, steering, speed brake and landing gear are driven from the right-hand system, allowing the left engine to be shut down during taxi back after landing. An emergency power system is linked to the left hand supply.
The electrical system has one 20kVA 115V AC generator per engine and left and right transformer rectifier units to give 28V DC power. There are also separate AC and DC external ground-power receptacles on the left-hand side of the nose close to the pressure refuelling panel.
Main wheel brakes and nosewheel steering are “control-by-wire”, with steering selectable from high (taxi) to low (take-off and landing). The main gear folds forward into the fuselage, but wheelbase is a generous 2.7m. Gear limiting speed is 250kt. Carbon brakes allied to the low approach speed negate the need for any reversers, brake chute or lift dump.
The canopy is hinged on the right, electrically operated and features a bird-proof blast-shield transparency between the cockpits. The canopy can be jettisoned manually from inside or outside the aircraft using an explosive severance system, so there is no transparency-shattering miniature detonating cord obscuring the view. In an ejection, striker arms on top of each seat shatter the canopy. The seats are auto-sequenced, auto-separated and a command eject function is available to the instructor in the rear cockpit.
The heart of the avionics are two main computers, linked by 1553B databuses, one for navigation, weapons, head-up (HUD) and multifunction displays (MFD) and one for comms/audio. Both cockpits have three 5 x 5in (125 x 125mm) MFDs, an upfront control panel for comm/nav/ident and data insertion and the wide-angle HUD. The cockpit is night-vision compatible and provisioned for a helmet-mounted display (HMD). The HUD will be able to display infrared imagery from a pod-mounted sensor. Alenia Aermacchi says it will be able to customise the HUD and MFD formats and stick and throttle controls to closely match any fourth-generation fighter.
Alenia Aermacchi is convinced a two-engined trainer offers higher levels of safety. Its figures show one loss per million flight hours, rising to 10 for a single-engine aircraft. The company has designed the M-346 for low life-cycle costs, high reliability and low maintenance.
The nose can house multi-mode radar
There is extensive built-in test and an on-board maintenance/fatigue data recorder. The aircraft is maintained by “on condition” for essentially all of its service life. After 100h, an 8h two-man inspection is carried out and after 500h a preventative inspection is conducted by a bigger team. The engine hot section is inspected, on-airframe, every 2,000h and the cold section every 4,000h. There is no engine time between overhauls. The direct ratio is 3.5 maintenance manhours/flight hour. Recently the prototype flew direct from Venegono to Greece and flew nine demonstration flights over two days without fault.
Short flight
Our short test flight took place from the company airfield at Venegono in mid-June using the second prototype, aircraft 002 registered X616, with roughly 100h on the airframe. The M-346 was still in the middle of its development and certification programme and had not been cleared over its full envelope.
The principal limitations on 002 were a maximum altitude of 40,000ft (45,000ft for the production aircraft), speed at altitude of Mach 0.85 (M1.2 production), speed at low level of 530kt indicated (572kt production), gear limiting speed 200kt (250kt production), maximum +20° AoA in all configurations (+40° production), load factor +7/-1.6g (+8/-3g production).
The fly-by-wire FCS had been cleared to software Phase 1 (direct link) and was undergoing Phase 2 (reversionary mode) testing at the time of my flight, which would be conducted in Phase 1 standard. Phase 3 (full carefree handling) had been tested in the full mission simulator, which I flew briefly later as a comparison, but had yet to be loaded and tested in the prototypes in the air.
My safety pilot was Olinto Cecconello, experimental chief test pilot and M-346 project test pilot. He also flies the Eurofighter Typhoon as a test pilot and is able to bring fourth-generation fighter “read across” to the M-346 design.
Because of air traffic control and aircraft limitations we elected to look at handling and performance in the air combat manoeuvring training role and finish with some high-speed low-level transit and visual work. We could not go supersonic and did not have the time for a weapons or ETS evaluation.
Cecconello would take the front cockpit, and I the rear in the role of an instructor, drawing on my 1,200-plus hours on Hawks, many in the back seat as an instructor. I was planned to fly the complete sortie, but had no time for simulator familiarisation before stepping into the rear cockpit. The ease with which I could fly the aircraft would be a mark of how good its design was.
Because Venegono’s runway 36 is short, just 1,420m, we elected to go with clean wing and 1,500kg internal fuel. Aircraft 002 carries 500kg of flight-test instrumentation and the landing gear, taken directly from an Aermacchi AMX, is nearly 100kg heavier than in the production aircraft. With crew, take-off weight was 7,700kg. Outside air temperature was +28°C (82°F), wind calm, QNH 1018mb and visibility 8km with haze, clear sky and no turbulence. The operating area was to the north east, above the mountains surrounding Lake Como and so our base level was 10,000-15,000ft.
Boarding was via a ground ladder, but production aircraft will have a drop-down ladder “post” for crew entry. Stepping in was simple with the enormous canopy side-hinged to the right. The Martin-Baker Mk16 ejection seat was comfortable, with electric adjustment and a five-piece harness, which I like for negative g. I immediately liked the fact that all cockpit switches are forward of the pilot’s body line so there would be no need to bury my head or operate switches “blind” - something I had not seen since the Folland Gnat.
The three large head-down MFDs were bright, with clear formats and sharply defined symbology and with bezel buttons for sub-menu selection. The layout closely resembles that of the Eurofighter and Rafale. The centre stick, again similar to the Eurofighter’s, is positioned so as not to obscure the centre MFD. Mounted on the left sidewall, the throttles are “twinned” to look like a single unit and move along rails rather than a quadrant - a nice design that frees up console space.
APU start assist was simple. I liked that the engine-start rotary selection knobs are press in to turn/select and not pull out, preventing damage to the switch. Post-start we had to wait about 12s for the OBOGS to start operating. The canopy was then closed electrically, but in a two-action sequence. The first activates a horn and brings the canopy over and down to about 25cm (10in) above the side rail. The second action fully closes the canopy after a delay of about 3s to ensure no fingers are trapped - another excellent design detail.
Field of view in the rear cockpit is outstanding (and even better in the front). The canopy is so large and clear that it gives the slightly weird impression of not being there at all. The rear seat is so high that you almost lose sight of the front seat and, with no detonation cord to disrupt the forward view, it gave the impression of being in a single-seat cockpit.
Accurate taxiing
The canopy is so large and clear that it gives the slightly weird impression of not being there at all. The rear seat is so high that you almost lose sight of the front seat
We were ready to taxi 2-3min after start. Power to move was small and throttles close to idle at taxi speed. Taxiing was accurate, and tight turns easy to achieve with nosewheel steering (NWS) set to low and the carbon brakes were progressive and effective. I did not like the small NWS engage button at the base of the stick’s forward face, or having to cycle between low and high settings on the cockpit coaming. I recommend a chunkier switch or paddle so that students can find it in a hurry and, as it is steer-by-wire, incorporating the low/high modes into a digital schedule and leaving it fully engaged.
Line-up checks consisted of setting the trailing-edge flaps to take-off (20°), which automatically scheduled the leading-edge flaps to 20°, checking both engines momentarily at 80% NH then setting 100% and releasing brakes (aircraft 002 was not yet fitted with the production “pseudo reheat” throttle detent at the 90% NH position). Acceleration was rapid and telemetry showed a 400m ground roll, 11s take-off run and lift off at 8° AoA and 130kt (I was a little late to pull at the target rotate speed of 115kt).
M-346 is designed to handle and manoeuvre like a modern fighter
The HUD can show various flightpath vector (FPV) symbols, but we selected climb/dive angle (CDA - a velocity vector in pitch, but locked laterally). To aid accurate pitch capture, the HUD take-off symbology features additional pitch target bars that were useful at rotation until the CDA stabilised. Gear and flap were selected up immediately to observe the 200kt indicated limit speed, and the aircraft throttled back just seconds later to observe an ATC speed limit of 300kt. I felt no pitch changes with gear or flap travel.
After the gear came up, the HUD automatically changed to navigation mode. In the ATC positioning turns that followed, the controls already felt powerful, light, harmonised and fighter-like. They reminded me of the Dassault Mirage 2000, which has the nicest fly-by-wire FCS of any fighter I have flown to date.
After stabilising at 3,000ft, we were re-cleared to climb to 29,000ft. Full power and 300kt best climb speed gave a climb angle exceeding 25° and a climb rate that was off any clock I could see. The cockpit environment remained quiet and smooth. The FCS with its Phase 1 software load still felt extremely good. The control mechanical characteristics were just about perfect, with low breakout forces, just 0.25kg, in all axes. Roll rate was well over 200°/s and the roll could be stopped precisely at the 90° point.
The FCS uses a flightpath hold control law, so the pilot can place the FPV at any pitch angle, release the controls and the aircraft will maintain that flightpath angle during speed change. I tried this inverted, with the FPV on the horizon line, and released the controls. It was impressive to see the aircraft maintain -1g precisely with no stick input.
Longitudinally, the aircraft has auto-trim with gear up and above 190kt, so throughout the climb and accelerating to M0.85 at 29,000ft, the stick never moved and there was no a need to trim in any axis - a fighter-type feature. I could detect no pitch changes with power. I could not exceed M0.85, so cannot comment on transonic/supersonic performance and handling.
I descended rapidly to 20,000ft for some hard combat-type manoeuvring. I liked the airbrake, which can be selected to any angle up to 60°, with the position shown on the combined airbrake/flaps/gear display panel just above the gear handle.
In the 15,000-20,000ft height band, at 300kt and with 1,200kg of internal fuel, the lift boundary was buffet limited around +4g. Cecconello says the automatic scheduling of the leading-edge flaps still has to be perfected in FCS Phase 3, which should allow more g to be generated. I would recommend investigating scheduling the flaps automatically with increasing AoA versus airspeed, as in the KAI T-50, but this may require strengthening of the flaps.
Rapid roll reversals, highly loaded rapid rolls, low-speed loops and a high g wing-over all showed the aircraft to have no vices or control law discontinuities. Field of view was superb all the way around to the fin.
The aircraft was stabilised gear and flaps up at 20° AoA, the Phase 1 FCS limit, equating to 109kt. Later, flying the simulator with Phase 3 FCS indicated that at zero airspeed, with full aileron deflection held against full opposite rudder, the M-346 was completely spin-resistant.
Laterally and directionally, the aircraft could be rolled with rudder in the direction of the applied rudder pedal, and over 12° of sideslip could be generated to “kick off drift” for a crosswind landing in up to the demonstrated 30kt limit. The FCS damped any Dutch roll. Overall, I thought the FCS even at Phase 1 was excellent, and at Phase 3 it should be superb.
We then dived to 1,500ft for a high-speed, low-level transit home at 500kt-plus following the HUD navigation symbology. The low-level ride felt steady and comfortable and the aircraft/engine combination feels strong in this flight regime. There is a lot of excess thrust at low level, so I have no doubt the 572kt equivalent airspeed will be achievable when cleared.
We broke into the circuit at +5g, from 360kt indicated, slowing with full airbrake. With the gear down, below 190kt, the aircraft requires manual trim, but this is an enhancing feature to give students the necessary feedback from on the stick on speed change if they lose attention to the HUD. Downwind, I checked the gear down and the leading- and trailing-edge flaps were at 20°. The turn on to finals was flown at around 150kt until the AoA “bracket” came into view (the HUD having automatically reverted to landing mode), then 12º AoA held before slowing to 14º AoA (128kt) for the roll.
Soaking it up
From the instructor position I found the forward canopy arch blocked the view of the touchdown point, but Cecconello says the arch will be half the size in the production aircraft. The FPV was placed over the intended landing point, small bursts of power holding the AoA, and the trailing-link gear soaked up the touchdown with no hint of bounce.
Two rollers were completed then, due to a problem with his microphone, Cecconello decided on a full-stop landing. This was with full landing flap (leading-edge 25°/trailing-edge 40°), with telemetry showing a touchdown at 115kt and 13º AoA and stopping within 600m without the use of heavy braking. Flying and demonstrating an accurate circuit and touchdown to a student would be simple. The aircraft was as easy to fly as any jet I have flown and could be coped with by a basic student. We shut down with 600kg of fuel, having used 900kg over a flight time of 45min.
A teaching effectiveness graph developed by Alenia Aermacchi - with the Eurofighter and Rafale referenced at 112% - puts the M-346 at 92%, 10% ahead of the T-50. The company claims the M-346 could save an air force around €2 million ($2.5 million) per student pilot, as its training effectiveness equates to reduced OCU flying hours. Alenia Aermacchi argues these savings make the M-346 a cheaper solution than current Hawk 115-type advanced trainers.
My overriding impression after flying the M-346 is of an aircraft with great handling and performance, a true fourth-generation trainer in design and part of an integrated training system. I believe the M-346 has the potential to offer “one-type” training from basic through to fighter lead-in, and I admire Alenia Aermacchi’s decision to put cockpit and display customisation at the heart of the M-346’s digital architecture. ■
A cheaper alternative to using the fighter itself could be a “fourth-generation trainer”, and associated integrated training system, that could take a student pilot from basic to advanced training, then through the tactical weapons and operational conversion units (OCU), and on to the frontline alongside the fighter.
“I admire Alenia Aermacchi’s decision to put cockpit customisation at the heart of the M-346’s digital architecture”
Alenia Aermacchi has designed the M-346 for this role, and the aircraft is the only all-new European advanced/lead-in fighter trainer in development. Its main rivals are the Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) T-50 Golden Eagle, and the BAE Systems Hawk 128.
Although still in development, w ith Italian military certification not due until mid-2007, Flight International was invited to assess the M-346’s potential to span the “basic to OCU” gap and be a one-stop solution to the training, capability and budgetary problems faced by air forces fielding fourth-generation fighters.
Alenia Aermacchi is the result of the merging of Alenia and Aermacchi in July 2003, and is part of Italian aerospace and defence giant Finmeccanica. Based at Venegono in Varese, near Milan, the company has delivered more than 2,000 trainers to date. Its products include the SF-260 piston primary, M-311 turbofan basic, and MB-339CD turbojet advanced trainers.
The M-346 has its origins in European studies of a new advanced trainer in the late 1980s, in which Aermacchi participated. These led to the AT-2000 proposal for an aircraft with an empty weight around 6.2t and a single afterburning engine. Aermacchi believed the better option was a lighter aircraft, around 4.5t, with two non-afterburning engines and advanced aerodynamics to give high agility, but docile low-speed handling. In 1992, the company left the European study to pursue its own design based around two engines.
Inlet location improves efficiency
At the end of 1992, Aermacchi joined with the Yakovlev design bueau, which was struggling with development of the Yak-130 jet trainer for the Russian air force to replace the Aero Vodochody L-39 trainer. Aermacchi suggested the requirement be changed from basic to advanced lead-in fighter trainer and it took the basic Yak-130 shape and developed it. According to Emanuele Merlo, head of flight technology, the M-346 is a totally new aircraft, internally and externally.
The wing was moved up the fuselage, having been too low on the Yak-130 and causing horizontal stabiliser blanking at mid to high angle of attack (AoA). The leading-edge extensions (LEX) were reduced and redesigned to give controllable vortex lift. Two small vertical fins were added at the wing roots to “trap” and control the LEX vortices at AoAs from 25-30° upwards. These LEX vortex controllers ensure the “vortex burst” over the wing at high AoA is symmetrical and controllable.
Blended wing
The wing was remodelled to blend into the fuselage for improved span loading. A saw- tooth was added to the full-span leading-edge flaps. Thickness was optimised from root to tip, and planform, profile and camber were optimised for best lift/drag over the widest possible envelope from short field and subsonic manoeuvre, through transonic penetration to supersonic cruise.
The single fin was repositioned for high AoA and the engine nozzle positions changed to reduce zero-lift drag. The air intakes were completely redesigned and are now 98-99% efficient over virtually the entire operating envelope, says Alenia Aermacchi. The shielded intake position under the LEX also improves engine efficiency at high AoA and when supersonic. The engines were changed to Honeywell F124-200s, each producing 6,250lb thrust (28kN) and with full-authority digital engine control (FADEC). The inlets are sized to accommodate up to a 20% increase in thrust from the present engine or possible future versions.
The sharp “chine” nose of the Yak-130 was rounded and redesigned to reduce frontal area, prevent unwanted vortex development in sideslip and allow installation of radar. A top-mounted airbrake was placed on the fuselage spine; horizontal-tail control power was raised to improve short-field performance and post-stall manoeuvring pitch recovery; and a fixed (removable) in-flight refuelling probe was added on the right side of the nose. There are now nine hardpoints (three wet), including wingtip missile rails.
Digital control
A digital fly-by-wire flight control system (FCS) operates the ailerons (there are no spoilers), rudder, taileron and leading-edge flaps. Simple half-span flaps are pilot operated. The quadruplex FCS can lose two channels and still provide safe operational capability. Rear-cockpit instructor controls provide the ability to “degrade” the FCS into various “training” modes. Although configured with a centre stick, the cockpit has been designed to accept a sidestick if requested by the customer.
The first M-346 prototype flew in July 2004 and the second in May 2005. Initial operational clearance of the FCS is due at the end of this year, with full clearance and Italian military certification due in mid-2007. Production rate is envisaged at three a month with an initial run of 12 aircraft plus one static and one fatigue test airframe planned for 2007, after certification.
The prototype has been demonstrated to the Greek air force, which has a critical need to replace its ageing T-2 Buckeyes, and Alenia Aermacchi has a memorandum of understanding with Hellenic Aerospace Industry for Greek participation in development and production of the M-346. Other potential customers include Chile, Poland, Portugual, Singapore and the United Arab Emirates. There is also the Advanced European Joint Pilot Training (AEJPT), or Eurotrainer, requirement involving 11 countries.
As part of its AEJPT studies, Alenia Aermacchi modelled the training mission density and superimposed it on the M-346’s flight envelope. The four “hot spots” - low speed/low altitude (circuits and approaches), 420kt (775km/h)/500ft (150m) (low-level attack), M0.7-0.8/20,000ft (air combat manoeuvring) and M0.7-0.9/38,000ft (air interception) - fall within the M-346 operating envelope. In the air combat training mission, the M-346 at full dry power would use 50kg/min (110lb/min) of fuel and could remain in the training area for 18min - three times the endurance of the afterburning T-50, the company claims.
Embedded training simulation (ETS), a system already operational on Italian air force MB-339C/Ds, allows the M-346 pilot to train within a virtual scenario involving computer-generated forces displayed in the cockpit. ETS allows early introduction and enhanced proficiency with situational awareness, tactical operations, sensor management and weapon deployment. The ETS system can simulate offensive sensors such as radar, defensive aids such as radar warning, datalinked information and a wide variety of air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons. The full integrated training system includes ground classroom trainers, procedural tactics trainers and full mission simulators that can be linked together and to the aircraft.
Basic empty weight is about 4,600kg and, with two pilots an a full internal fuel load of 2,000kg, the M-346 weighs around 6,700kg clean at take-off. Given a combined thrust of the two F124 turbofans of 12,500lb, the aircraft has greater than 1:1 thrust-to-weight ratio from around half fuel when clean. This is important when comparing the M-346 with trainers with a single afterburning engine that can exceed 1:1 only in reheat and at the cost of fuel and training time. Maximum take-off weight fully loaded is 9,700kg. This is also the maximum landing weight.
Three 465kg-capacity external fuel tanks can be carried (limit M0.92), which gives the M-346 a range (with 10% reserves) of 2,850km (1,540nm) compared with 2,070km clean. The aircraft’s service ceiling is 45,000ft, time to 40,000ft is 3.5min at an initial climb rate of 21,000ft/min (107m/s). Maximum speed is M1.2 at altitude or 572kt equivalent (590kt true) at 5,000ft. Load factors are +8/-3g. Take-off run is around 400m and landing roll around 500m.
The FCS endows carefree handling throughout the flight envelope. The aircraft is spin resistant and can be held inverted for 30s. With about 500kg of internal fuel, final approach speed is around 100kt indicated.
The F124-200 turbofan has a dual- redundant FADEC. The throttles feature a spring detent at 90% NH (core speed) to represent full dry power, giving a time for take-off roll of around 20s, typical of current trainers. Full throttle travel gives 100% NH, representing afterburner and giving a roll of 11s, typical of current fighters. The engines are surge resistant with auto-relight, which can be achieved up to 30,000ft and M1.
Maximum sustained load factor at 15,000ft and M0.6-0.8 is +6g and turn rate 14.5°/s - performance that exceeds many fighters and all trainers in either dry power or reheat. Only above M0.8 at this altitude does the KAI T-50 in reheat start to better the turn rate of the M-346. Maximum angle of attack is 40°, which matches or exceeds the limits of most modern fighters and allows the M-346 to undertake post-stall manoeuvres. Maximum roll rate is 230°/s and can be sustained up to 6g.
Dual systems
An auxiliary power unit (APU) is fitted that can be used for air supply, engine starting and 28V DC power supply up to 25,000ft. The hydraulic system has one pump per engine, with dual 3,000lb/in2 supply to the primary and secondary flight controls and wheel brakes. Park brake, steering, speed brake and landing gear are driven from the right-hand system, allowing the left engine to be shut down during taxi back after landing. An emergency power system is linked to the left hand supply.
The electrical system has one 20kVA 115V AC generator per engine and left and right transformer rectifier units to give 28V DC power. There are also separate AC and DC external ground-power receptacles on the left-hand side of the nose close to the pressure refuelling panel.
Main wheel brakes and nosewheel steering are “control-by-wire”, with steering selectable from high (taxi) to low (take-off and landing). The main gear folds forward into the fuselage, but wheelbase is a generous 2.7m. Gear limiting speed is 250kt. Carbon brakes allied to the low approach speed negate the need for any reversers, brake chute or lift dump.
The canopy is hinged on the right, electrically operated and features a bird-proof blast-shield transparency between the cockpits. The canopy can be jettisoned manually from inside or outside the aircraft using an explosive severance system, so there is no transparency-shattering miniature detonating cord obscuring the view. In an ejection, striker arms on top of each seat shatter the canopy. The seats are auto-sequenced, auto-separated and a command eject function is available to the instructor in the rear cockpit.
The heart of the avionics are two main computers, linked by 1553B databuses, one for navigation, weapons, head-up (HUD) and multifunction displays (MFD) and one for comms/audio. Both cockpits have three 5 x 5in (125 x 125mm) MFDs, an upfront control panel for comm/nav/ident and data insertion and the wide-angle HUD. The cockpit is night-vision compatible and provisioned for a helmet-mounted display (HMD). The HUD will be able to display infrared imagery from a pod-mounted sensor. Alenia Aermacchi says it will be able to customise the HUD and MFD formats and stick and throttle controls to closely match any fourth-generation fighter.
Alenia Aermacchi is convinced a two-engined trainer offers higher levels of safety. Its figures show one loss per million flight hours, rising to 10 for a single-engine aircraft. The company has designed the M-346 for low life-cycle costs, high reliability and low maintenance.
The nose can house multi-mode radar
There is extensive built-in test and an on-board maintenance/fatigue data recorder. The aircraft is maintained by “on condition” for essentially all of its service life. After 100h, an 8h two-man inspection is carried out and after 500h a preventative inspection is conducted by a bigger team. The engine hot section is inspected, on-airframe, every 2,000h and the cold section every 4,000h. There is no engine time between overhauls. The direct ratio is 3.5 maintenance manhours/flight hour. Recently the prototype flew direct from Venegono to Greece and flew nine demonstration flights over two days without fault.
Short flight
Our short test flight took place from the company airfield at Venegono in mid-June using the second prototype, aircraft 002 registered X616, with roughly 100h on the airframe. The M-346 was still in the middle of its development and certification programme and had not been cleared over its full envelope.
The principal limitations on 002 were a maximum altitude of 40,000ft (45,000ft for the production aircraft), speed at altitude of Mach 0.85 (M1.2 production), speed at low level of 530kt indicated (572kt production), gear limiting speed 200kt (250kt production), maximum +20° AoA in all configurations (+40° production), load factor +7/-1.6g (+8/-3g production).
The fly-by-wire FCS had been cleared to software Phase 1 (direct link) and was undergoing Phase 2 (reversionary mode) testing at the time of my flight, which would be conducted in Phase 1 standard. Phase 3 (full carefree handling) had been tested in the full mission simulator, which I flew briefly later as a comparison, but had yet to be loaded and tested in the prototypes in the air.
My safety pilot was Olinto Cecconello, experimental chief test pilot and M-346 project test pilot. He also flies the Eurofighter Typhoon as a test pilot and is able to bring fourth-generation fighter “read across” to the M-346 design.
Because of air traffic control and aircraft limitations we elected to look at handling and performance in the air combat manoeuvring training role and finish with some high-speed low-level transit and visual work. We could not go supersonic and did not have the time for a weapons or ETS evaluation.
Cecconello would take the front cockpit, and I the rear in the role of an instructor, drawing on my 1,200-plus hours on Hawks, many in the back seat as an instructor. I was planned to fly the complete sortie, but had no time for simulator familiarisation before stepping into the rear cockpit. The ease with which I could fly the aircraft would be a mark of how good its design was.
Because Venegono’s runway 36 is short, just 1,420m, we elected to go with clean wing and 1,500kg internal fuel. Aircraft 002 carries 500kg of flight-test instrumentation and the landing gear, taken directly from an Aermacchi AMX, is nearly 100kg heavier than in the production aircraft. With crew, take-off weight was 7,700kg. Outside air temperature was +28°C (82°F), wind calm, QNH 1018mb and visibility 8km with haze, clear sky and no turbulence. The operating area was to the north east, above the mountains surrounding Lake Como and so our base level was 10,000-15,000ft.
Boarding was via a ground ladder, but production aircraft will have a drop-down ladder “post” for crew entry. Stepping in was simple with the enormous canopy side-hinged to the right. The Martin-Baker Mk16 ejection seat was comfortable, with electric adjustment and a five-piece harness, which I like for negative g. I immediately liked the fact that all cockpit switches are forward of the pilot’s body line so there would be no need to bury my head or operate switches “blind” - something I had not seen since the Folland Gnat.
The three large head-down MFDs were bright, with clear formats and sharply defined symbology and with bezel buttons for sub-menu selection. The layout closely resembles that of the Eurofighter and Rafale. The centre stick, again similar to the Eurofighter’s, is positioned so as not to obscure the centre MFD. Mounted on the left sidewall, the throttles are “twinned” to look like a single unit and move along rails rather than a quadrant - a nice design that frees up console space.
APU start assist was simple. I liked that the engine-start rotary selection knobs are press in to turn/select and not pull out, preventing damage to the switch. Post-start we had to wait about 12s for the OBOGS to start operating. The canopy was then closed electrically, but in a two-action sequence. The first activates a horn and brings the canopy over and down to about 25cm (10in) above the side rail. The second action fully closes the canopy after a delay of about 3s to ensure no fingers are trapped - another excellent design detail.
Field of view in the rear cockpit is outstanding (and even better in the front). The canopy is so large and clear that it gives the slightly weird impression of not being there at all. The rear seat is so high that you almost lose sight of the front seat and, with no detonation cord to disrupt the forward view, it gave the impression of being in a single-seat cockpit.
Accurate taxiing
The canopy is so large and clear that it gives the slightly weird impression of not being there at all. The rear seat is so high that you almost lose sight of the front seat
We were ready to taxi 2-3min after start. Power to move was small and throttles close to idle at taxi speed. Taxiing was accurate, and tight turns easy to achieve with nosewheel steering (NWS) set to low and the carbon brakes were progressive and effective. I did not like the small NWS engage button at the base of the stick’s forward face, or having to cycle between low and high settings on the cockpit coaming. I recommend a chunkier switch or paddle so that students can find it in a hurry and, as it is steer-by-wire, incorporating the low/high modes into a digital schedule and leaving it fully engaged.
Line-up checks consisted of setting the trailing-edge flaps to take-off (20°), which automatically scheduled the leading-edge flaps to 20°, checking both engines momentarily at 80% NH then setting 100% and releasing brakes (aircraft 002 was not yet fitted with the production “pseudo reheat” throttle detent at the 90% NH position). Acceleration was rapid and telemetry showed a 400m ground roll, 11s take-off run and lift off at 8° AoA and 130kt (I was a little late to pull at the target rotate speed of 115kt).
M-346 is designed to handle and manoeuvre like a modern fighter
The HUD can show various flightpath vector (FPV) symbols, but we selected climb/dive angle (CDA - a velocity vector in pitch, but locked laterally). To aid accurate pitch capture, the HUD take-off symbology features additional pitch target bars that were useful at rotation until the CDA stabilised. Gear and flap were selected up immediately to observe the 200kt indicated limit speed, and the aircraft throttled back just seconds later to observe an ATC speed limit of 300kt. I felt no pitch changes with gear or flap travel.
After the gear came up, the HUD automatically changed to navigation mode. In the ATC positioning turns that followed, the controls already felt powerful, light, harmonised and fighter-like. They reminded me of the Dassault Mirage 2000, which has the nicest fly-by-wire FCS of any fighter I have flown to date.
After stabilising at 3,000ft, we were re-cleared to climb to 29,000ft. Full power and 300kt best climb speed gave a climb angle exceeding 25° and a climb rate that was off any clock I could see. The cockpit environment remained quiet and smooth. The FCS with its Phase 1 software load still felt extremely good. The control mechanical characteristics were just about perfect, with low breakout forces, just 0.25kg, in all axes. Roll rate was well over 200°/s and the roll could be stopped precisely at the 90° point.
The FCS uses a flightpath hold control law, so the pilot can place the FPV at any pitch angle, release the controls and the aircraft will maintain that flightpath angle during speed change. I tried this inverted, with the FPV on the horizon line, and released the controls. It was impressive to see the aircraft maintain -1g precisely with no stick input.
Longitudinally, the aircraft has auto-trim with gear up and above 190kt, so throughout the climb and accelerating to M0.85 at 29,000ft, the stick never moved and there was no a need to trim in any axis - a fighter-type feature. I could detect no pitch changes with power. I could not exceed M0.85, so cannot comment on transonic/supersonic performance and handling.
I descended rapidly to 20,000ft for some hard combat-type manoeuvring. I liked the airbrake, which can be selected to any angle up to 60°, with the position shown on the combined airbrake/flaps/gear display panel just above the gear handle.
In the 15,000-20,000ft height band, at 300kt and with 1,200kg of internal fuel, the lift boundary was buffet limited around +4g. Cecconello says the automatic scheduling of the leading-edge flaps still has to be perfected in FCS Phase 3, which should allow more g to be generated. I would recommend investigating scheduling the flaps automatically with increasing AoA versus airspeed, as in the KAI T-50, but this may require strengthening of the flaps.
Rapid roll reversals, highly loaded rapid rolls, low-speed loops and a high g wing-over all showed the aircraft to have no vices or control law discontinuities. Field of view was superb all the way around to the fin.
The aircraft was stabilised gear and flaps up at 20° AoA, the Phase 1 FCS limit, equating to 109kt. Later, flying the simulator with Phase 3 FCS indicated that at zero airspeed, with full aileron deflection held against full opposite rudder, the M-346 was completely spin-resistant.
Laterally and directionally, the aircraft could be rolled with rudder in the direction of the applied rudder pedal, and over 12° of sideslip could be generated to “kick off drift” for a crosswind landing in up to the demonstrated 30kt limit. The FCS damped any Dutch roll. Overall, I thought the FCS even at Phase 1 was excellent, and at Phase 3 it should be superb.
We then dived to 1,500ft for a high-speed, low-level transit home at 500kt-plus following the HUD navigation symbology. The low-level ride felt steady and comfortable and the aircraft/engine combination feels strong in this flight regime. There is a lot of excess thrust at low level, so I have no doubt the 572kt equivalent airspeed will be achievable when cleared.
We broke into the circuit at +5g, from 360kt indicated, slowing with full airbrake. With the gear down, below 190kt, the aircraft requires manual trim, but this is an enhancing feature to give students the necessary feedback from on the stick on speed change if they lose attention to the HUD. Downwind, I checked the gear down and the leading- and trailing-edge flaps were at 20°. The turn on to finals was flown at around 150kt until the AoA “bracket” came into view (the HUD having automatically reverted to landing mode), then 12º AoA held before slowing to 14º AoA (128kt) for the roll.
Soaking it up
From the instructor position I found the forward canopy arch blocked the view of the touchdown point, but Cecconello says the arch will be half the size in the production aircraft. The FPV was placed over the intended landing point, small bursts of power holding the AoA, and the trailing-link gear soaked up the touchdown with no hint of bounce.
Two rollers were completed then, due to a problem with his microphone, Cecconello decided on a full-stop landing. This was with full landing flap (leading-edge 25°/trailing-edge 40°), with telemetry showing a touchdown at 115kt and 13º AoA and stopping within 600m without the use of heavy braking. Flying and demonstrating an accurate circuit and touchdown to a student would be simple. The aircraft was as easy to fly as any jet I have flown and could be coped with by a basic student. We shut down with 600kg of fuel, having used 900kg over a flight time of 45min.
A teaching effectiveness graph developed by Alenia Aermacchi - with the Eurofighter and Rafale referenced at 112% - puts the M-346 at 92%, 10% ahead of the T-50. The company claims the M-346 could save an air force around €2 million ($2.5 million) per student pilot, as its training effectiveness equates to reduced OCU flying hours. Alenia Aermacchi argues these savings make the M-346 a cheaper solution than current Hawk 115-type advanced trainers.
My overriding impression after flying the M-346 is of an aircraft with great handling and performance, a true fourth-generation trainer in design and part of an integrated training system. I believe the M-346 has the potential to offer “one-type” training from basic through to fighter lead-in, and I admire Alenia Aermacchi’s decision to put cockpit and display customisation at the heart of the M-346’s digital architecture. ■
Alenia Aermacchi picks CAE for M-346 simulator
Aircraft
SUBSCRIBEYou are in: Home › Aircraft › News Article
DATE:02/05/08
SOURCE:Flight International
Alenia Aermacchi picks CAE for M-346 simulator
By Pino Modola
Canada's CAE has been selected as preferred full-mission simulator supplier for Alenia Aermacchi's M-346 advanced/lead-in fighter trainer, under the terms of a design, development and validation contract of undisclosed value.
The simulator will form part of the M-346 integrated training system, also to include onboard training systems and a complete range of ground-based products and services, ranging from paper and digital manuals to flight and mission simulation.
CAE will initially develop a prototype M-346 flight training device, including a cockpit replica with a Medallion-6000 image generator and dome display. The company will also provide a simulation-based development and validation environment to enable Aermacchi test pilots and engineers to carry out a series of tests intended to help in completing development of the M-346.
© Alenia Aermacchi
Selex Galileo will co-operate with CAE in developing the simulator, with the Italian company responsible for the cockpit and instructor operating station.
Alenia Aermacchi chief executive Carmelo Cosentino says: "After a competitive evaluation, we have selected CAE for its recognised simulation technology leadership and its willingness to actively participate in the Alenia Aermacchi team of industrial partners for the M-346 integrated training system."
The Finmeccanica company last month rolled out its first production-standard M-346 for the Italian air force, which is to acquire 15 under the launch order for the type.
Links posted in this story:
Aermacchi
SUBSCRIBEYou are in: Home › Aircraft › News Article
DATE:02/05/08
SOURCE:Flight International
Alenia Aermacchi picks CAE for M-346 simulator
By Pino Modola
Canada's CAE has been selected as preferred full-mission simulator supplier for Alenia Aermacchi's M-346 advanced/lead-in fighter trainer, under the terms of a design, development and validation contract of undisclosed value.
The simulator will form part of the M-346 integrated training system, also to include onboard training systems and a complete range of ground-based products and services, ranging from paper and digital manuals to flight and mission simulation.
CAE will initially develop a prototype M-346 flight training device, including a cockpit replica with a Medallion-6000 image generator and dome display. The company will also provide a simulation-based development and validation environment to enable Aermacchi test pilots and engineers to carry out a series of tests intended to help in completing development of the M-346.
© Alenia Aermacchi
Selex Galileo will co-operate with CAE in developing the simulator, with the Italian company responsible for the cockpit and instructor operating station.
Alenia Aermacchi chief executive Carmelo Cosentino says: "After a competitive evaluation, we have selected CAE for its recognised simulation technology leadership and its willingness to actively participate in the Alenia Aermacchi team of industrial partners for the M-346 integrated training system."
The Finmeccanica company last month rolled out its first production-standard M-346 for the Italian air force, which is to acquire 15 under the launch order for the type.
Links posted in this story:
Aermacchi
An aircraft per month, start end 2009
The engine will be Honeywell's F-124, digital flight control system is by Teleavio/Marconi Italiana in collaboration with BAE Systems of Santa Monica, and Dowty and Microtecnica for actuators. The avionics core system, including Head Up Displays, LCD Multi-Function Displays and the main Mission Processor, is provided by Alenia DSAE, and the Inertial Navigation System/Laser Gyro and integrated GPS by Honeywell. Ejection seats are Martin Baker/ SICAMB Mk 16. The electrical generator is provided by ASE (formerly Magneti Marelli Avio). Partnership agreements have been reached with Honeywell/FIAT Aviazione, Teleavio/Marconi Italiana/BAE Systems, Alenia DSAE and ASE. Further agreements are expected, also in the area of the Training System/ground based training media.
The first M-346 prototype is scheduled to fly by mid-2002, followed by a second prototype one year later. Full development funding is in place. The Italian Air Force will be in charge of certification. Deliveries are planned by 2005.-346 Gets Ready to Test the Market
Apr 22, 2007
By Andy Nativi
The moment of truth is near for AleniaAermacchi, as the company wraps up development work on the M-346 advanced jet trainer. There appears to be little doubt as to the aircraft's technical credentials, but offering a high-end trainer in a distinctly low-end budget environment will pose a formidable challenge.
The trainer aircraft business is a fickle one. Everyone needs them, though nobody wants to spend the money. Procurement decisions are delayed as scarce budgets are diverted to sexier projects. There's rarely a quick return on investment, taxing the patience of even the most steadfast chief financial officer.
And while margins in the high-end trainer business can be decent, the financial risks can be dire. It's that kind of an environment that caused EADS, for instance, to abandon its own plans to develop a product--the Mako--for this segment.
Clearly, it's not a business for the timid. Carmelo Cosentino, CEO of AleniaAermacchi, points out that "several companies are able to develop, from scratch, a new advanced trainer. But it is a long and costly exercise, requiring at least €1 billion ($1.35 billion) for a transonic aircraft and €1.5-2 billion if a supersonic design is pursued."
That the market isn't easy is evident. Even though the aircraft is maturing, AleniaAermacchi so far has failed to win a launch customer.
For the Italian company, seeing the M-346 through was a more natural decision than for others, because it is fundamentally a trainer house. It has produced as many as 2,000 trainers, selling the full range of such aircraft, from the basic SF-260s, offered as piston or turboprop-powered models, to the advanced jet-powered MB-339, now being reintroduced, to the still-in-development M-346.
So in a market where there are already plenty of offerings--the BAE Systems Hawk and the Korean Aerospace Industry T-50 to name two--what does the M-346 bring to the table?
Program officials say it is the first true fifth-generation trainer, but such nomenclature is often mere marketing spin. In this case, they mean it prepares students for the latest generation of front-line fighters and represents a modern-build standard. AleniaAermacchi representatives contend they've actually skipped a generation, since what is commonly referred to as fourth-generation trainers are nothing more than third-generation models with avionics upgrades.
The T-50 is generally seen as falling in the fifth-generation category, too, although it is conceived as an element of a "family" of aircraft that include the A-50 attack version and the potential F-50 light fighter. That has driven different design choices, emphasizing combat more than training, backers of the Italian aircraft argue. The market in the coming few years will indicate whether AleniaAermacchi's views are reflected by their customers.
The M-346 has had a long and sometimes rocky history. The project builds on work Aermacchi undertook in the 1980s to identify the requirements for a next-generation advanced trainer. These culminated in the early 1990s in the AT-2000/PTS-2000 study with what was then still part of Dornier. In parallel, Russia's Yakovlev performed similar studies.
That led in 1992 to Aermacchi and Yakovlev partnering, to share knowledge and develop the Yak/AEM-130D demonstrator. The latter started flying in April 1996. But differing project requirements, corporate priorities and Russia's financial crisis ended the cooperative effort in 1999.
As a result, despite a shared ancestry, the M-346 and Russia's latest trainer, the Yak-130, are fundamentally different.
The M-346 is much smaller and lighter, but with a wider flight envelope, more agility and a higher thrust-to-weight ratio. The Yak-130 was hurt by the cancellation of the Klimov RD-35 engine program, which forced Yakovlev to use the less-powerful, compact DV-2. With heavier electronics and systems, the aircraft lags compared with its sibling, although its price tag is much lower.
The Italian project moved into high gear in 2000. The first prototype was rolled out in June 2003 and started flying in July 2004, followed by a second aircraft in May 2005. The two prototypes have logged more than 300 flight hours, shared roughly equally. AleniaAermacchi plans to complete 700 flight hours before full operational capability is reached.
The test program has had its share of glitches. The flight control system didn't mature as quickly as hoped, so AleniaAermacchi shifted some work from its principal partner, BAE Systems, to sister company Alenia Aeronautica. The latter holds a licensing arrangement with BAE, but the shift cost time.
However, most aircraft changes have been relatively minor. The air brake initially was to extend 60 deg. but that resulted in tail buffeting, so the extension is now limited to 40 deg. The eventual fix is to move the brake 1-meter forward, while the intake for the environment control system, at the root of the tail, will be enlarged. It had been partially masked by the open speed-brake.
Control laws are still being refined and, so far, don't support the full airframe capability. In particular, it isn't easy to optimize use of the leading edge flaps to vary camber as a function of angle of attack, Mach and total pressure.
Other lessons could yet emerge as trials examine the most extreme points of the flight envelope, but developers are sanguine that they have no major worries.
The next M-346 to be delivered will be the first production representative model and is due to fly by year-end. It will be used to fully test, develop and then freeze the production configuration, and to certify the full structure.
The most immediate program milestone is a "development initial operational capability" standard. The Italian air force is set to certify the core systems and the fully expanded flight envelope. In 2008, a second certification for the production standard should take place, followed a year later by approval of the cleanly configured aircraft throughout the flight envelope. Finally, in 2010, the M-346 is scheduled to reach full operational capability, including seven basic armaments load-outs.
Production should take place in parallel. Output capacity will be for eight aircraft per year, but could grow to an aircraft per month should the market demand it. The low-rate build should be completed in 2010, with deliveries starting in late 2009.
Systems and aircraft performance are what truly define the M-346. Despite its bid for the high-end market, AleniaAermacchi steered clear of pushing to the extreme of the flight envelope, opting to forgo an afterburning engine, arguing that associated acquisition and operating costs rendered it nonviable. A high-transonic aircraft with two non-afterburning engines and greater agility will combine safety and low costs with performances equivalent, or even superior, to those offered by combat aircraft in a large part of the flight envelope (corner speed is at Mach 0.6/15,000 ft.), without sacrificing ease of control at takeoff, landing and approach, says PieroClaudio Iaia, M-346 program manager.
The M-346's aerodynamic configuration has been optimized for that performance. The aircraft's trapezoidal, mid-mounted, variable-camber-wing, with a leading edge sweep of 30.8 deg. and a moderate aspect ratio of 4, features a profile, with a 2% twist, and a thickness (6% at the tip, 8% at the root) specifically designed for transonic performance.
The flat, lower fuselage contributes lift (up to 30% of the total), and the wing is carefully blended with the fuselage, which includes generous leading edge extensions that are instrumental in aircraft controllability at high angles of attack (AOA), coupled with patented wing fences. The leading edge extension and fence combination allows the aircraft to exploit vortex lift, avoiding vortex bursting and the associated loss of lift.
Exploiting the vortex lift is particularly important for M-346 high-angle performance, since the aircraft doesn't have canards to help in that portion of the flight envelope. An added benefit is that the leading edge structural element shields the air intakes from ingesting unstable air that can lead to loss of thrust and further engine problems.
Thanks to a carefully calibrated ratio between the intake capture and throat areas, the high AOA/maneuvering intake pressure recovery is 0.97, maintaining good engine performance. With an optimal lift/drag curve over a wide part of the envelope and a lift coefficient maximum of 1.6, the aircraft is designed for short takeoff and landing runs, while both drag rise and trim drag are reduced and controlled over a large part of the envelope.
Designers placed particular attention on post-stall recovery and controllability at very high AOA. The M-346 is supposed to allow "carefree" handling and complete spin resistance well above 40-deg. AOA, a performance level that only some fighter aircraft can achieve. A raft of design factors contribute to the stability at those operating extremes, including the wing, wing fences, carefully rounded nose and a fuselage with a low-aspect-ratio forebody, a high tail positioned well forward on the fuselage spine to keep it effective at high AOA, and the generously sized horizontal tail to achieve the high-control authority.
The aerodynamic formula is bolstered by a four-channel reconfigurable digital flight control system, which manages a moderate subsonic relaxed longitudinal stability (5%) of the aircraft, that in turn allows maximum agility in the air combat arena. The level of redundancy allows the M-346 to continue its mission even if one channel fails. A dual-channel failure still allows degraded performance to return the aircraft to base. Instructors can deliberately degrade the flight controls in flight to teach students how to handle the aircraft in such situations.
The aircraft is powered by twin Honeywell F124-GA-200s, with dual-redundant full authority digital flight controls. The powerplants are designed to work with a sub-optimal airflow and be surge resistant, thanks to the high-pressure compressor design which features four axial stages and a centrifugal stage. Even though the bypass ratio is merely moderate, at 0.47, the specific fuel flow consumption is low. A production M-346 with 50% of fuel load, weighing about 5,900 kg. (13,007 lb.), will have a thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.9:1. By comparison, an advanced trainer with a single afterburning engine needs to use reheat to achieve maximum performance and a thrust-to-weight ratio nearing 1:1, and will therefore have merely one-third the endurance.
The engine also provides thrust growth possibilities. A near-term step would see improvements to the high-pressure turbine's material to a single crystal, which would deliver an extra 300 lb. of thrust. The long-term plans, says Mark Johnston, an engineer at Honeywell Aerospace, include shifting to an advanced, two-stage fan, which would increase both fan flow and efficiency and provide for an increase to 7,500 lb., about 1,000 lb. more thrust than now available.
On the avionics front, AleniaAermacchi has tried to find a low-cost way to replicate most of what would be found on a modern combat aircraft. The trainer is fitted with dual-redundant, 1553B digital data buses. It also carries two main computers, a navigation suite including a ring-laser gyro inertial navigation system with GPS radar altimeter, along with more traditional navigation beacon systems, a communication suite with friend-or-foe identification system, and two V/UHF radios (a third is on the prototypes). There are also dual head-up displays and the capability for helmet-mounted displays.
Like most trainer aircraft developers, AleniaAermacchi is keeping the option open for a combat aircraft derivative. The M-346 could carry up to 3.1 tons of external stores, distributed over nine wing and fuselage hardpoints. It could still achieve a 515-kt., 5.5g turning performance with a heavy load-out.
Although the trainer doesn't have a radar system, the nose section can be outfitted with a mechanical or electronically scanned array that would be provided by Galileo Avionica Grifo. Environmental control and power supply allow for the upgrade. Installing a navigation, laser-designation, or reconnaissance pod, with the ability to display imagery on the head-up displays or helmet-mounted sight should be possible. Provisions also exist for installation of electronic countermeasures.
While the aircraft is not intended to be stealthy, as AleniaAermacchi engineers will openly concede, steps have been taken to minimize the radar cross section. For instance, the engine's diverterless air intakes have slightly curved ducts in order to partially mask the engine compressor face in frontal aspect from an adversary's radar. The duct and lips can be covered with radar-absorbing material. Similar surface treatment would be applied to the wing's leading edge, in particular the obvious dogtooth, which otherwise would generate a significant radar return. Wing fences and pylons also would be covered.
The third prototype will sport a canopy with an advanced "gold" film, which will mask the double cockpit.
Provisions have also been made to boost survivability in the infrared arena. The relatively cool engines have a diffused jet plume thanks to the nozzle position, which has the dual benefit of reducing the infrared signature and drag.
Another derivation could be a single-seat version. The space now used by the back seat would allow for additional fuel or other equipment to be carried.
But the aircraft alone is only one element of any modern training system. Therefore, AleniaAermacchi is developing the broader training system concept, which would include the typical array of simulators, spanning from simple cockpit trainers to a full-motion arrangement. Partners, expected to be named soon, would be responsible for those efforts.
One of the system's features is an embedded simulation capability, used mainly for the most advanced phases of training. The system can replicate multimode fire-control and missile-warning radar receivers and countermeasures systems, including jammers, and the Link-16 Multifunction Information Distribution System that is becoming the backbone of coalition air-to-air combat tactics. Both air- and ground-threat scenarios can be played out.
The question now is whether these attributes will loosen tight wallets. AleniaAermacchi officials argue that use of the M-346 is more cost-effective than having the advanced phases of tactics and flight training done on actual combat fighters. They also note that many advanced fighters, notably the F-22 and F-35, will exist only as single-seaters. It's no surprise, then, that the company is courting the U.S. Air Force as a potential customer.
A slew of trainer aircraft decisions are expected in 5-10 years. But even before then, some important customers will indicate how the market is leaning. Greece, Poland, the United Arab Emirates and a few others are now in the market for an advanced training solution.
A handicap, however, is that the Italian air force has not yet bought the aircraft, although it has signaled an intent to do so. Company officials hope for confirmation soon. The Italian economic development ministry likely will finance part of the entire 12 low-rate aircraft, properly kicking off production.
AleniaAermacchi-parent Finmeccanica isn't just relying on the aircraft's attributes to do the sales job. Industrial workshares are being offered to companies in countries buying the aircraft. That card is already being played in Greece, where Hellenic Aerospace Industries has been made a partner.
Cosentino argues that "there is plenty of room to craft a cooperative program with involvement of partners in both the aircraft and the other elements of the complete training system."
M-346 SPECIFICATIONS
ENGINES
(2) Honeywell F-124-GA-200
THRUST, at sea level
28 kN (6,250 lb.)
INTERNAL FUEL
1,850 kg. (2,050 series)
MEASUREMENTS
Wingspan
9.7 meters
Length
11.52 meters
Height
4.98 meters
WEIGHTS
Empty
6,000 kg. (4,700 series)
Takeoff, clean
8,000 kg. (6,700 series)
Takeoff, maximum
8,000 kg. (9,800 series)
SPEED, max.
Mach 0.97 / 575 KCAS
(Mach 1.2 / 600 KCAS series)
LIMIT LOAD FACTORS
+7 / -2.5g (+8 / -3g series)
ANGLE OF ATTACK, max.
20 deg. (+40-deg. series)
The first M-346 prototype is scheduled to fly by mid-2002, followed by a second prototype one year later. Full development funding is in place. The Italian Air Force will be in charge of certification. Deliveries are planned by 2005.-346 Gets Ready to Test the Market
Apr 22, 2007
By Andy Nativi
The moment of truth is near for AleniaAermacchi, as the company wraps up development work on the M-346 advanced jet trainer. There appears to be little doubt as to the aircraft's technical credentials, but offering a high-end trainer in a distinctly low-end budget environment will pose a formidable challenge.
The trainer aircraft business is a fickle one. Everyone needs them, though nobody wants to spend the money. Procurement decisions are delayed as scarce budgets are diverted to sexier projects. There's rarely a quick return on investment, taxing the patience of even the most steadfast chief financial officer.
And while margins in the high-end trainer business can be decent, the financial risks can be dire. It's that kind of an environment that caused EADS, for instance, to abandon its own plans to develop a product--the Mako--for this segment.
Clearly, it's not a business for the timid. Carmelo Cosentino, CEO of AleniaAermacchi, points out that "several companies are able to develop, from scratch, a new advanced trainer. But it is a long and costly exercise, requiring at least €1 billion ($1.35 billion) for a transonic aircraft and €1.5-2 billion if a supersonic design is pursued."
That the market isn't easy is evident. Even though the aircraft is maturing, AleniaAermacchi so far has failed to win a launch customer.
For the Italian company, seeing the M-346 through was a more natural decision than for others, because it is fundamentally a trainer house. It has produced as many as 2,000 trainers, selling the full range of such aircraft, from the basic SF-260s, offered as piston or turboprop-powered models, to the advanced jet-powered MB-339, now being reintroduced, to the still-in-development M-346.
So in a market where there are already plenty of offerings--the BAE Systems Hawk and the Korean Aerospace Industry T-50 to name two--what does the M-346 bring to the table?
Program officials say it is the first true fifth-generation trainer, but such nomenclature is often mere marketing spin. In this case, they mean it prepares students for the latest generation of front-line fighters and represents a modern-build standard. AleniaAermacchi representatives contend they've actually skipped a generation, since what is commonly referred to as fourth-generation trainers are nothing more than third-generation models with avionics upgrades.
The T-50 is generally seen as falling in the fifth-generation category, too, although it is conceived as an element of a "family" of aircraft that include the A-50 attack version and the potential F-50 light fighter. That has driven different design choices, emphasizing combat more than training, backers of the Italian aircraft argue. The market in the coming few years will indicate whether AleniaAermacchi's views are reflected by their customers.
The M-346 has had a long and sometimes rocky history. The project builds on work Aermacchi undertook in the 1980s to identify the requirements for a next-generation advanced trainer. These culminated in the early 1990s in the AT-2000/PTS-2000 study with what was then still part of Dornier. In parallel, Russia's Yakovlev performed similar studies.
That led in 1992 to Aermacchi and Yakovlev partnering, to share knowledge and develop the Yak/AEM-130D demonstrator. The latter started flying in April 1996. But differing project requirements, corporate priorities and Russia's financial crisis ended the cooperative effort in 1999.
As a result, despite a shared ancestry, the M-346 and Russia's latest trainer, the Yak-130, are fundamentally different.
The M-346 is much smaller and lighter, but with a wider flight envelope, more agility and a higher thrust-to-weight ratio. The Yak-130 was hurt by the cancellation of the Klimov RD-35 engine program, which forced Yakovlev to use the less-powerful, compact DV-2. With heavier electronics and systems, the aircraft lags compared with its sibling, although its price tag is much lower.
The Italian project moved into high gear in 2000. The first prototype was rolled out in June 2003 and started flying in July 2004, followed by a second aircraft in May 2005. The two prototypes have logged more than 300 flight hours, shared roughly equally. AleniaAermacchi plans to complete 700 flight hours before full operational capability is reached.
The test program has had its share of glitches. The flight control system didn't mature as quickly as hoped, so AleniaAermacchi shifted some work from its principal partner, BAE Systems, to sister company Alenia Aeronautica. The latter holds a licensing arrangement with BAE, but the shift cost time.
However, most aircraft changes have been relatively minor. The air brake initially was to extend 60 deg. but that resulted in tail buffeting, so the extension is now limited to 40 deg. The eventual fix is to move the brake 1-meter forward, while the intake for the environment control system, at the root of the tail, will be enlarged. It had been partially masked by the open speed-brake.
Control laws are still being refined and, so far, don't support the full airframe capability. In particular, it isn't easy to optimize use of the leading edge flaps to vary camber as a function of angle of attack, Mach and total pressure.
Other lessons could yet emerge as trials examine the most extreme points of the flight envelope, but developers are sanguine that they have no major worries.
The next M-346 to be delivered will be the first production representative model and is due to fly by year-end. It will be used to fully test, develop and then freeze the production configuration, and to certify the full structure.
The most immediate program milestone is a "development initial operational capability" standard. The Italian air force is set to certify the core systems and the fully expanded flight envelope. In 2008, a second certification for the production standard should take place, followed a year later by approval of the cleanly configured aircraft throughout the flight envelope. Finally, in 2010, the M-346 is scheduled to reach full operational capability, including seven basic armaments load-outs.
Production should take place in parallel. Output capacity will be for eight aircraft per year, but could grow to an aircraft per month should the market demand it. The low-rate build should be completed in 2010, with deliveries starting in late 2009.
Systems and aircraft performance are what truly define the M-346. Despite its bid for the high-end market, AleniaAermacchi steered clear of pushing to the extreme of the flight envelope, opting to forgo an afterburning engine, arguing that associated acquisition and operating costs rendered it nonviable. A high-transonic aircraft with two non-afterburning engines and greater agility will combine safety and low costs with performances equivalent, or even superior, to those offered by combat aircraft in a large part of the flight envelope (corner speed is at Mach 0.6/15,000 ft.), without sacrificing ease of control at takeoff, landing and approach, says PieroClaudio Iaia, M-346 program manager.
The M-346's aerodynamic configuration has been optimized for that performance. The aircraft's trapezoidal, mid-mounted, variable-camber-wing, with a leading edge sweep of 30.8 deg. and a moderate aspect ratio of 4, features a profile, with a 2% twist, and a thickness (6% at the tip, 8% at the root) specifically designed for transonic performance.
The flat, lower fuselage contributes lift (up to 30% of the total), and the wing is carefully blended with the fuselage, which includes generous leading edge extensions that are instrumental in aircraft controllability at high angles of attack (AOA), coupled with patented wing fences. The leading edge extension and fence combination allows the aircraft to exploit vortex lift, avoiding vortex bursting and the associated loss of lift.
Exploiting the vortex lift is particularly important for M-346 high-angle performance, since the aircraft doesn't have canards to help in that portion of the flight envelope. An added benefit is that the leading edge structural element shields the air intakes from ingesting unstable air that can lead to loss of thrust and further engine problems.
Thanks to a carefully calibrated ratio between the intake capture and throat areas, the high AOA/maneuvering intake pressure recovery is 0.97, maintaining good engine performance. With an optimal lift/drag curve over a wide part of the envelope and a lift coefficient maximum of 1.6, the aircraft is designed for short takeoff and landing runs, while both drag rise and trim drag are reduced and controlled over a large part of the envelope.
Designers placed particular attention on post-stall recovery and controllability at very high AOA. The M-346 is supposed to allow "carefree" handling and complete spin resistance well above 40-deg. AOA, a performance level that only some fighter aircraft can achieve. A raft of design factors contribute to the stability at those operating extremes, including the wing, wing fences, carefully rounded nose and a fuselage with a low-aspect-ratio forebody, a high tail positioned well forward on the fuselage spine to keep it effective at high AOA, and the generously sized horizontal tail to achieve the high-control authority.
The aerodynamic formula is bolstered by a four-channel reconfigurable digital flight control system, which manages a moderate subsonic relaxed longitudinal stability (5%) of the aircraft, that in turn allows maximum agility in the air combat arena. The level of redundancy allows the M-346 to continue its mission even if one channel fails. A dual-channel failure still allows degraded performance to return the aircraft to base. Instructors can deliberately degrade the flight controls in flight to teach students how to handle the aircraft in such situations.
The aircraft is powered by twin Honeywell F124-GA-200s, with dual-redundant full authority digital flight controls. The powerplants are designed to work with a sub-optimal airflow and be surge resistant, thanks to the high-pressure compressor design which features four axial stages and a centrifugal stage. Even though the bypass ratio is merely moderate, at 0.47, the specific fuel flow consumption is low. A production M-346 with 50% of fuel load, weighing about 5,900 kg. (13,007 lb.), will have a thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.9:1. By comparison, an advanced trainer with a single afterburning engine needs to use reheat to achieve maximum performance and a thrust-to-weight ratio nearing 1:1, and will therefore have merely one-third the endurance.
The engine also provides thrust growth possibilities. A near-term step would see improvements to the high-pressure turbine's material to a single crystal, which would deliver an extra 300 lb. of thrust. The long-term plans, says Mark Johnston, an engineer at Honeywell Aerospace, include shifting to an advanced, two-stage fan, which would increase both fan flow and efficiency and provide for an increase to 7,500 lb., about 1,000 lb. more thrust than now available.
On the avionics front, AleniaAermacchi has tried to find a low-cost way to replicate most of what would be found on a modern combat aircraft. The trainer is fitted with dual-redundant, 1553B digital data buses. It also carries two main computers, a navigation suite including a ring-laser gyro inertial navigation system with GPS radar altimeter, along with more traditional navigation beacon systems, a communication suite with friend-or-foe identification system, and two V/UHF radios (a third is on the prototypes). There are also dual head-up displays and the capability for helmet-mounted displays.
Like most trainer aircraft developers, AleniaAermacchi is keeping the option open for a combat aircraft derivative. The M-346 could carry up to 3.1 tons of external stores, distributed over nine wing and fuselage hardpoints. It could still achieve a 515-kt., 5.5g turning performance with a heavy load-out.
Although the trainer doesn't have a radar system, the nose section can be outfitted with a mechanical or electronically scanned array that would be provided by Galileo Avionica Grifo. Environmental control and power supply allow for the upgrade. Installing a navigation, laser-designation, or reconnaissance pod, with the ability to display imagery on the head-up displays or helmet-mounted sight should be possible. Provisions also exist for installation of electronic countermeasures.
While the aircraft is not intended to be stealthy, as AleniaAermacchi engineers will openly concede, steps have been taken to minimize the radar cross section. For instance, the engine's diverterless air intakes have slightly curved ducts in order to partially mask the engine compressor face in frontal aspect from an adversary's radar. The duct and lips can be covered with radar-absorbing material. Similar surface treatment would be applied to the wing's leading edge, in particular the obvious dogtooth, which otherwise would generate a significant radar return. Wing fences and pylons also would be covered.
The third prototype will sport a canopy with an advanced "gold" film, which will mask the double cockpit.
Provisions have also been made to boost survivability in the infrared arena. The relatively cool engines have a diffused jet plume thanks to the nozzle position, which has the dual benefit of reducing the infrared signature and drag.
Another derivation could be a single-seat version. The space now used by the back seat would allow for additional fuel or other equipment to be carried.
But the aircraft alone is only one element of any modern training system. Therefore, AleniaAermacchi is developing the broader training system concept, which would include the typical array of simulators, spanning from simple cockpit trainers to a full-motion arrangement. Partners, expected to be named soon, would be responsible for those efforts.
One of the system's features is an embedded simulation capability, used mainly for the most advanced phases of training. The system can replicate multimode fire-control and missile-warning radar receivers and countermeasures systems, including jammers, and the Link-16 Multifunction Information Distribution System that is becoming the backbone of coalition air-to-air combat tactics. Both air- and ground-threat scenarios can be played out.
The question now is whether these attributes will loosen tight wallets. AleniaAermacchi officials argue that use of the M-346 is more cost-effective than having the advanced phases of tactics and flight training done on actual combat fighters. They also note that many advanced fighters, notably the F-22 and F-35, will exist only as single-seaters. It's no surprise, then, that the company is courting the U.S. Air Force as a potential customer.
A slew of trainer aircraft decisions are expected in 5-10 years. But even before then, some important customers will indicate how the market is leaning. Greece, Poland, the United Arab Emirates and a few others are now in the market for an advanced training solution.
A handicap, however, is that the Italian air force has not yet bought the aircraft, although it has signaled an intent to do so. Company officials hope for confirmation soon. The Italian economic development ministry likely will finance part of the entire 12 low-rate aircraft, properly kicking off production.
AleniaAermacchi-parent Finmeccanica isn't just relying on the aircraft's attributes to do the sales job. Industrial workshares are being offered to companies in countries buying the aircraft. That card is already being played in Greece, where Hellenic Aerospace Industries has been made a partner.
Cosentino argues that "there is plenty of room to craft a cooperative program with involvement of partners in both the aircraft and the other elements of the complete training system."
M-346 SPECIFICATIONS
ENGINES
(2) Honeywell F-124-GA-200
THRUST, at sea level
28 kN (6,250 lb.)
INTERNAL FUEL
1,850 kg. (2,050 series)
MEASUREMENTS
Wingspan
9.7 meters
Length
11.52 meters
Height
4.98 meters
WEIGHTS
Empty
6,000 kg. (4,700 series)
Takeoff, clean
8,000 kg. (6,700 series)
Takeoff, maximum
8,000 kg. (9,800 series)
SPEED, max.
Mach 0.97 / 575 KCAS
(Mach 1.2 / 600 KCAS series)
LIMIT LOAD FACTORS
+7 / -2.5g (+8 / -3g series)
ANGLE OF ATTACK, max.
20 deg. (+40-deg. series)
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Master
The Examination Committee of the competition to name the M-346 trainer selected the name “MASTER” for the new M-346 advanced trainer/Lead-In Fighter Trainer, entirely designed and built by Alenia Aermacchi, a Finmeccanica Company.
The announcement will be made today by Ing. Carmelo Cosentino, Chief Executive Officer of Alenia Aermacchi, in the occasion of the annual meeting of the Members of the AERMACCHI PILOT CLUB, at the Circolo Ufficiali based in Centocelle Airport (Rome).
The competition to name the M-346 was launched on 20 October 2008 and ended on 23 November, recording a large success. Over 4,000 entries were received from every corner of the world.
The Committee, comprising the top management of Finmeccanica, Alenia Aeronautica and Alenia Aermacchi, examined the many proposals received and unanimously selected the name “MASTER”. This international name is the succinct embodiment of what the M-346 represents: the ideal tool to train the future jet pilots of the latest generation and at the same time the maximum level of training that a student can attain.
The winners of the prizes have been chosen from the three most interesting motivations.
The first prize goes to Mauro Petrolati, from Fiumicino (Rome), who will experience the thrill of a flight in the new M-346 advanced trainer, followed by visits to the Alenia Aermacchi factory in Venegono Superiore and to the Italian Air Force Museum at Vigna di Valle Air Force Base, near Rome.
The second prize was awarded to James Szabadics. He wins a very long journey to Italy to visits the Alenia Aermacchi factory in Venegono Superiore and to the Italian Air Force Museum at Vigna di Valle Air Force Base, near Rome.
The third prize was awarded to Giovanni Covella, from Chiari (Brescia) who wins a visit to the Alenia Aermacchi factory in Venegono Superiore.
Alenia Aermacchi congratulates the winners and will be pleased to welcome them on-site at the company. We also hope that the chosen name “MASTER” will take the M-346 to new heights of success and recognition in international market.
M346
In 1993, Aermacchi signed an agreement to partner with Yakovlev on the new trainer the firm was developing for the Russian Air Force. The resulting aircraft first flew in 1996 and was brought to Italy the following year to substitute the aging MB-339.
At the time, the aircraft was marketed as the Yak/AEM-130, however, by 2000, differences in priorities between the two firms brought about an end to the partnership, with each developing the aircraft independently, with Aermacchi retaining worldwide marketing rights except for Russia and the other CIS nations. A Russian version is also being pursued by Yakovlev and Sokol, under a different time schedule.
The M-346 is a highly modified version of the aircraft the joint venture was producing, and uses equipment exclusively from Western manufacturers. The first prototype rolled out on 7 June 2003 and flew for the first time on 15 July 2004.
In January 2005, the Greek Ministry of Defence signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to become a partner in the programme and, in 2006, Aermacchi signed an industrial cooperation agreement with Hellenic Aerospace Industry.
In July 2007, the M-346 flew to the United Arab Emirates for hot weather tests and operational evaluation by the UAE Air Force.
In March 2008 the Chilean ENAER signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Alenia Aermacchi at the FIDAE air show.
On 10 April 2008 one further prototype in the final configuration (new landing gear and air brake, more composite parts) was rolled out: first flight of this "Industrial Baseline Configuration" is expected in June.
In May 2008 Boeing signed a Memorandum of Understanding to cooperate on the marketing, sales, training and support of two Aermacchi trainers, the M-346 and the M-311.
The Italian air force intend to acquire a first batch of 14 low rate production M-346 advanced fighter trainer aircraft.
Design
The M-346 provides combat pilot training for front line fighters with high angle of attack capability. It is designed primarily to reduce acquisition and operating costs (no afterburner, aircraft specially designed for transonic training) and improve reliability (two engines, triple-quadruple redundant systems).
The aerodynamic design of the M-346 uses vortex lift to provide manoeuvrability and controllability at very high angle of attack (up to 40° degrees) using a Fly-By-Wire control system.
The engines are the Honeywell F124, digital flight control system is by Teleavio/Marconi in collaboration with BAE Systems, Dowty and Microtecnica for actuators.
The new IBC (Industrial Baseline Configuration) prototype present also a new air brake just behind the cockpit, similar to the Sukhoi Su-30, a new landing gear and some structural changes, with the use of more titanium and composite parts, in order to reduce weight and production costs. As a result the pre-series M-346 weight 780 kg less than the prototypes involving more specific excess power, faster acceleration and climbing, increased maneuverability and max speed, as well as improved fuel capacity (200 kg) and cockpit visibility.
The development of a full-mission simulator for the M-346 has been awarded to CAE and is currently under development.
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Aermacchi_M-346
At the time, the aircraft was marketed as the Yak/AEM-130, however, by 2000, differences in priorities between the two firms brought about an end to the partnership, with each developing the aircraft independently, with Aermacchi retaining worldwide marketing rights except for Russia and the other CIS nations. A Russian version is also being pursued by Yakovlev and Sokol, under a different time schedule.
The M-346 is a highly modified version of the aircraft the joint venture was producing, and uses equipment exclusively from Western manufacturers. The first prototype rolled out on 7 June 2003 and flew for the first time on 15 July 2004.
In January 2005, the Greek Ministry of Defence signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to become a partner in the programme and, in 2006, Aermacchi signed an industrial cooperation agreement with Hellenic Aerospace Industry.
In July 2007, the M-346 flew to the United Arab Emirates for hot weather tests and operational evaluation by the UAE Air Force.
In March 2008 the Chilean ENAER signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Alenia Aermacchi at the FIDAE air show.
On 10 April 2008 one further prototype in the final configuration (new landing gear and air brake, more composite parts) was rolled out: first flight of this "Industrial Baseline Configuration" is expected in June.
In May 2008 Boeing signed a Memorandum of Understanding to cooperate on the marketing, sales, training and support of two Aermacchi trainers, the M-346 and the M-311.
The Italian air force intend to acquire a first batch of 14 low rate production M-346 advanced fighter trainer aircraft.
Design
The M-346 provides combat pilot training for front line fighters with high angle of attack capability. It is designed primarily to reduce acquisition and operating costs (no afterburner, aircraft specially designed for transonic training) and improve reliability (two engines, triple-quadruple redundant systems).
The aerodynamic design of the M-346 uses vortex lift to provide manoeuvrability and controllability at very high angle of attack (up to 40° degrees) using a Fly-By-Wire control system.
The engines are the Honeywell F124, digital flight control system is by Teleavio/Marconi in collaboration with BAE Systems, Dowty and Microtecnica for actuators.
The new IBC (Industrial Baseline Configuration) prototype present also a new air brake just behind the cockpit, similar to the Sukhoi Su-30, a new landing gear and some structural changes, with the use of more titanium and composite parts, in order to reduce weight and production costs. As a result the pre-series M-346 weight 780 kg less than the prototypes involving more specific excess power, faster acceleration and climbing, increased maneuverability and max speed, as well as improved fuel capacity (200 kg) and cockpit visibility.
The development of a full-mission simulator for the M-346 has been awarded to CAE and is currently under development.
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Aermacchi_M-346
Monday, March 9, 2009
Aermacchi, Boeing Get Set For Singapore Trainer RFP
Ready for Competition
Aermacchi, Boeing Get Set For Singapore Trainer RFP
By TOM KINGTON
Published: 1 December 2008 PRINT | EMAIL
ROME - Italy's Aermacchi last week confirmed it has teamed with Boeing and Singapore's ST Engineering to jointly pitch its M-346 trainer to Singapore and expects the release of a request for proposals for a new trainer by the Asian island state this month.
"The three companies have been working together for months, and I expect an RfP to be issued around mid-December," Aermacchi CEO Carmelo Cosentino said.
After excluding BAE Systems' Hawk from the running, Singapore this year short-listed the Aermacchi M-346 and the KAI T-50 as it prepares to buy up to a dozen new jet trainers, with a decision possible next year. Korea's KAI has teamed with Lockheed Martin to build and market the T-50.
Cosentino said it has not been decided which partner behind the M-346 bid would act as prime contractor. "We could create a new company to fulfill that role," he said.
Although the Singapore competition involves few aircraft, it is being closely monitored as other jet trainer fleets around the world near retirement age. Boeing teamed with Aermacchi in May to promote the M-346 in markets outside the United States, and Cosentino said the U.S. firm was now involved "in a limited fashion" with Aermacchi in its bid to supply the M-346 to the United Arab Emirates, where the Italian-built trainer is also facing off with the T-50.
Aermacchi's parent company, Finmeccanica, meanwhile announced a partnership in October with Mubadala Development, a UAE investment agency, to build composite components for civilian aircraft.
A source at Aermacchi said the deal was not directly related to the M-346 pitch in the United Arab Emirates, but added, "Having good relations can have a weight."
Aermacchi is also now talking to firms, including Boeing, to forge a partnership for the marketing of the M-346 in the United States to replace the T-38.
"We are doing a study," Cosentino said. "A partner would need to have a good capacity for lobbying and investment, and we are talking to Boeing and others."
"The choice between the supersonic T-50 and the subsonic M-346 comes down to syllabus philosophy. Do you want supersonic or not?" said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group, Fairfax, Va.
He noted that with no two-seater Joint Strike Fighter being built, JSF customers may be reluctant to send pilots from subsonic trainers to flying the supersonic JSF solo.
"As a JSF customer, Singapore may opt for the T-50, also because Lockheed Martin is already prime contractor on its basic trainer. For the UAE, the M-346 will be a good replacement for its Hawks and Aermacchis," he said.
"The M-346 is lower cost and will be a good way to replace Hawks and Aermacchis at a similar operating and acquisition cost," he added. "In the U.S., however, the T-50 will have an advantage as it the equivalent to the supersonic T-38."
While the T-50 is already in service with its launch customer, the Korean Air Force, Aermacchi is awaiting the final sign-off on funding for the acquisition of 15 M-346s by its first customer, the Italian Air Force.
"The signing for the first batch within the order should happen within a few weeks, at most by year end," Cosentino said.
That first batch order would likely amount to six aircraft plus simulators and logistics, he added, as well as some work on improvements to the Lecce Air Force base in southern Italy, where the aircraft will be hosted, and where Aermacchi has also suggested Singapore could send pilots for training if it buys the M-346.
Planning for the initial six-plane order, Aermacchi has placed a $52 million engine contract with Honeywell's International Turbine Engine Co. for 20 F124-GA-200 engines to power 10 of the twin-engine trainers.
The contract, which also pays for support for the engines, was the "minimum buy practical," Cosentino said, "but could partly cover a successive contract with another customer."
With an eye on a future light fighter version of the M-346, Cosentino also said talks were under way with Finmeccanica stablemate Selex Galileo about mounting radar on the aircraft, starting with the mechanically scanned Grifo, but not excluding the electronically scanned Vixen.
Aermacchi rolled out in July its first preseries-version M-346, which joined two prototypes already flying. The preseries version boasts improved performance and a reduction in empty weight of about 700 kilograms. ■
Aermacchi, Boeing Get Set For Singapore Trainer RFP
By TOM KINGTON
Published: 1 December 2008 PRINT | EMAIL
ROME - Italy's Aermacchi last week confirmed it has teamed with Boeing and Singapore's ST Engineering to jointly pitch its M-346 trainer to Singapore and expects the release of a request for proposals for a new trainer by the Asian island state this month.
"The three companies have been working together for months, and I expect an RfP to be issued around mid-December," Aermacchi CEO Carmelo Cosentino said.
After excluding BAE Systems' Hawk from the running, Singapore this year short-listed the Aermacchi M-346 and the KAI T-50 as it prepares to buy up to a dozen new jet trainers, with a decision possible next year. Korea's KAI has teamed with Lockheed Martin to build and market the T-50.
Cosentino said it has not been decided which partner behind the M-346 bid would act as prime contractor. "We could create a new company to fulfill that role," he said.
Although the Singapore competition involves few aircraft, it is being closely monitored as other jet trainer fleets around the world near retirement age. Boeing teamed with Aermacchi in May to promote the M-346 in markets outside the United States, and Cosentino said the U.S. firm was now involved "in a limited fashion" with Aermacchi in its bid to supply the M-346 to the United Arab Emirates, where the Italian-built trainer is also facing off with the T-50.
Aermacchi's parent company, Finmeccanica, meanwhile announced a partnership in October with Mubadala Development, a UAE investment agency, to build composite components for civilian aircraft.
A source at Aermacchi said the deal was not directly related to the M-346 pitch in the United Arab Emirates, but added, "Having good relations can have a weight."
Aermacchi is also now talking to firms, including Boeing, to forge a partnership for the marketing of the M-346 in the United States to replace the T-38.
"We are doing a study," Cosentino said. "A partner would need to have a good capacity for lobbying and investment, and we are talking to Boeing and others."
"The choice between the supersonic T-50 and the subsonic M-346 comes down to syllabus philosophy. Do you want supersonic or not?" said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group, Fairfax, Va.
He noted that with no two-seater Joint Strike Fighter being built, JSF customers may be reluctant to send pilots from subsonic trainers to flying the supersonic JSF solo.
"As a JSF customer, Singapore may opt for the T-50, also because Lockheed Martin is already prime contractor on its basic trainer. For the UAE, the M-346 will be a good replacement for its Hawks and Aermacchis," he said.
"The M-346 is lower cost and will be a good way to replace Hawks and Aermacchis at a similar operating and acquisition cost," he added. "In the U.S., however, the T-50 will have an advantage as it the equivalent to the supersonic T-38."
While the T-50 is already in service with its launch customer, the Korean Air Force, Aermacchi is awaiting the final sign-off on funding for the acquisition of 15 M-346s by its first customer, the Italian Air Force.
"The signing for the first batch within the order should happen within a few weeks, at most by year end," Cosentino said.
That first batch order would likely amount to six aircraft plus simulators and logistics, he added, as well as some work on improvements to the Lecce Air Force base in southern Italy, where the aircraft will be hosted, and where Aermacchi has also suggested Singapore could send pilots for training if it buys the M-346.
Planning for the initial six-plane order, Aermacchi has placed a $52 million engine contract with Honeywell's International Turbine Engine Co. for 20 F124-GA-200 engines to power 10 of the twin-engine trainers.
The contract, which also pays for support for the engines, was the "minimum buy practical," Cosentino said, "but could partly cover a successive contract with another customer."
With an eye on a future light fighter version of the M-346, Cosentino also said talks were under way with Finmeccanica stablemate Selex Galileo about mounting radar on the aircraft, starting with the mechanically scanned Grifo, but not excluding the electronically scanned Vixen.
Aermacchi rolled out in July its first preseries-version M-346, which joined two prototypes already flying. The preseries version boasts improved performance and a reduction in empty weight of about 700 kilograms. ■
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
United Arab Emirates to buy Italian trainer planes
Milano -It took four years of work, and almost a two years' wait, but in the end results were achieved, and they are worth an over one billion-euro contract for 48 M-346 trainer planes. Giving the final OK to the order of these latest generation fighter planes, built by Alenia Aermacchi (of the Finmeccanica group), was the government of the United Arab Emirates, the first to have chosen these aircraft produced by the Italian defence group. Having outbid such competitors as the KAI [Korean Aerospace Industry] Group, and the British BAE Systems, providers of the training planes currently in use in the United Arab Emirates, now Alenia Aermacchi is to enter the contract negotiation phase.
The agreement announced within the INDEX [International Defence and Exhibition Conference] 2009 ambit, currently under way in Abu Dhabi, also includes an industrial component, with the setting up of a joint venture between Alenia Aermacchi and the Mubadala Development Company geared to the building of industrial facilities to assemble parts of the aircraft produced in Venegono (Varese province). This will be the first aeronautical facility located in the United Arab Emirates, which have long been investing in the civilian and military sector. With Alenia Aeronautica, Mabadala has already worked out an accord on composite materials geared to the civilian sector.
Current satisfaction at Finmeccanica's general headquarters makes up for the more sombre mood of the past few days because of news from the US concerning the presidential helicopter. Finmeccanica Chairman and CEO Pier Francesco Guarguaglini seemed optimistic that the accord with the United Arab Emirates could "rapidly lead to new negotiations (...) This is only the first step. I am also convinced that this will be a successful aircraft." Guarguaglini also pointed out that the "M-346 is an advanced-concept product," and that, besides the national customer [the government], "which is always there, customers outside Italy are also needed. The Emirates are the first non-Italian customer, and they are launching the product on the world market."
With the M-346, Alenia Aermacchi is already on Singapore's short list for the Fighter Wings Course programme, which will replace the current air fleet, whereas in the United Arab Emirates the Italian group is in the running with another fighter plane, the M-311, and will be competing against the PC-21 of the Swiss group Pilatus. "With the choice of our trainer plane by the government of the United Arab Emirates, the M-346 has become a world-class reference point in terms of training pilots for new generation fighter planes," said Giorgio Zappa, Finmeccanica general manager, according to whom over the next 20 years the market could even call for 2,000 aircraft, and the Italian group hopes to be able to corner a 35 per cent share of that market.
Now it is a matter of waiting for a decision by the Italian air force, which has already announced that it wants to purchase 15 planes, using funds from the productive activities ministry. Today, this decision seems closer after the contract landed with the United Arab Emirates. It was Defence Minister Ignazio La Russa who stressed that the contract won by Alenia Aermacchi is an "Italian industry victory," which concretized also thanks to the "decisive role played by the defence ministry." The M-346 Aermacchi Master is an advanced, fourth generation trainer plane, whose first pre-series model was test flown on 8 July 2008. The plane was specially conceived to train pilots who will be flying the new Typhoon Eurofighters, purchased by the air force, and the F-35JFS, which is currently at the development stage, and on whose programme Italy too is participating.
Several companies of the Finmeccanica group (Selex Galileo, Alenia Sia, Sirio Panel, and Selex Communication) are involved in developing the trainer plane, whereas a marketing, training, and product support on international markets contract has been signed with Boeing.
The stock marked responded favourably to the Finmeccanica listing thanks to the new contract, posting a 1.77 per cent increase.
Source: Il Sole 24 Ore, Milan, in Italian 26 Feb 09
BBC Mon EU1 EuroPol ME1 MEPol 0am
BBC Monitoring. Copyright BBC.
The agreement announced within the INDEX [International Defence and Exhibition Conference] 2009 ambit, currently under way in Abu Dhabi, also includes an industrial component, with the setting up of a joint venture between Alenia Aermacchi and the Mubadala Development Company geared to the building of industrial facilities to assemble parts of the aircraft produced in Venegono (Varese province). This will be the first aeronautical facility located in the United Arab Emirates, which have long been investing in the civilian and military sector. With Alenia Aeronautica, Mabadala has already worked out an accord on composite materials geared to the civilian sector.
Current satisfaction at Finmeccanica's general headquarters makes up for the more sombre mood of the past few days because of news from the US concerning the presidential helicopter. Finmeccanica Chairman and CEO Pier Francesco Guarguaglini seemed optimistic that the accord with the United Arab Emirates could "rapidly lead to new negotiations (...) This is only the first step. I am also convinced that this will be a successful aircraft." Guarguaglini also pointed out that the "M-346 is an advanced-concept product," and that, besides the national customer [the government], "which is always there, customers outside Italy are also needed. The Emirates are the first non-Italian customer, and they are launching the product on the world market."
With the M-346, Alenia Aermacchi is already on Singapore's short list for the Fighter Wings Course programme, which will replace the current air fleet, whereas in the United Arab Emirates the Italian group is in the running with another fighter plane, the M-311, and will be competing against the PC-21 of the Swiss group Pilatus. "With the choice of our trainer plane by the government of the United Arab Emirates, the M-346 has become a world-class reference point in terms of training pilots for new generation fighter planes," said Giorgio Zappa, Finmeccanica general manager, according to whom over the next 20 years the market could even call for 2,000 aircraft, and the Italian group hopes to be able to corner a 35 per cent share of that market.
Now it is a matter of waiting for a decision by the Italian air force, which has already announced that it wants to purchase 15 planes, using funds from the productive activities ministry. Today, this decision seems closer after the contract landed with the United Arab Emirates. It was Defence Minister Ignazio La Russa who stressed that the contract won by Alenia Aermacchi is an "Italian industry victory," which concretized also thanks to the "decisive role played by the defence ministry." The M-346 Aermacchi Master is an advanced, fourth generation trainer plane, whose first pre-series model was test flown on 8 July 2008. The plane was specially conceived to train pilots who will be flying the new Typhoon Eurofighters, purchased by the air force, and the F-35JFS, which is currently at the development stage, and on whose programme Italy too is participating.
Several companies of the Finmeccanica group (Selex Galileo, Alenia Sia, Sirio Panel, and Selex Communication) are involved in developing the trainer plane, whereas a marketing, training, and product support on international markets contract has been signed with Boeing.
The stock marked responded favourably to the Finmeccanica listing thanks to the new contract, posting a 1.77 per cent increase.
Source: Il Sole 24 Ore, Milan, in Italian 26 Feb 09
BBC Mon EU1 EuroPol ME1 MEPol 0am
BBC Monitoring. Copyright BBC.
Italian M-346 takes on Lockheed T-50 in Singapore February 01, 2009
Ready for competition
Italian M-346 takes on Lockheed T-50 in Singapore
By Tom Kington
February 01, 2009
Italy’s Alenia Aermacchi has teamed with Boeing and Singapore’s ST Engineering to jointly pitch its M-346 trainer to Singapore. “The three companies have been working together for months,” Aermacchi CEO Carmelo Cosentino said.
After much discussion and anticipation, the Asian island state released a formal request for proposals late last year.
After excluding BAE Systems’ Hawk from the running, Singapore short-listed the Aermacchi M-346 and Korea Aerospace Industries’ T-50 in late 2008 in preparation to buy up to a dozen new jet trainers, most likely early this year. South Korea’s KAI has teamed with Lockheed Martin to build and market the T-50.
Cosentino said it has not been decided which partner behind the M-346 bid would act as prime contractor. “We could create a new company to fulfill that role,” he said. In the meantime, plans are in the works for more Italian funds to further develop the aircraft’s fly-by-wire systems.
Although the Singapore competition involves few aircraft, it is being closely monitored as other jet trainer fleets around the world near retirement age. Boeing teamed with Aermacchi in May to promote the M-346 in markets outside the U.S., and Cosentino said the U.S. firm was now involved “in a limited fashion” with Aermacchi in its bid to supply the M-346 to the United Arab Emirates, where the Italian-built trainer is also facing off with the T-50.
Aermacchi’s parent company, Finmeccanica, meanwhile announced a partnership in October with Mubadala Development, a UAE investment agency, to build composite components for civilian aircraft.
A source at Aermacchi said the deal was not directly related to the M-346 pitch in the United Arab Emirates, but added that “having good relations can have a weight.”
Aermacchi also is talking to firms, including Boeing, about forging a partnership to market the M-346 in the U.S. as a T-38 replacement.
“We are doing a study,” Cosentino said. “A partner would need to have a good capacity for lobbying and investment, and we are talking to Boeing and others.”
“The choice between the supersonic T-50 and the subsonic M-346 comes down to syllabus philosophy. Do you want supersonic or not?” said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group, Fairfax, Va.
With no two-seater Joint Strike Fighter being built, JSF customers may be reluctant to send pilots from subsonic trainers to flying the supersonic JSF solo, he noted.
“As a JSF customer, Singapore may opt for the T-50, also because Lockheed Martin is already prime contractor on its basic trainer. For the UAE, the M-346 will be a good replacement for its Hawks and Aermacchis,” he said.
While the M-346, recently dubbed the “Master,” is being marketed as a sub- or trans-sonic aircraft, it has demonstrated limited supersonic capabilities. In a December flight, a prototype aircraft reached Mach 1.15 at an altitude of 45,000 feet.
“The M-346 is lower cost and will be a good way to replace Hawks and Aermacchis at a similar operating and acquisition cost,” Aboulafia added. “In the U.S., however, the T-50 will have an advantage as it is the equivalent to the supersonic T-38.”
While the T-50 is in service with its launch customer, the Korean Air Force, Aermacchi is awaiting the final sign-off on funding for the acquisition of 15 M-346s by its first customer, the Italian Air Force.
“The signing for the first batch within the order should happen within a few weeks, at most by year end,” Cosentino said.
That first batch order would likely amount to six aircraft plus simulators and logistics, he added, as well as some work on improvements to the Lecce Air Force base in southern Italy, where the aircraft will be hosted, and where Aermacchi also has suggested Singapore could send pilots for training if it buys the M-346.
Planning for the initial six-plane order, Aermacchi has placed a $52 million engine contract with Honeywell’s International Turbine Engine Co. for 20 F124-GA-200 engines to power 10 of the twin-engine trainers.
The contract, which also pays for support for the engines, was the “minimum buy practical,” Cosentino said, “but could partly cover a successive contract with another customer.”
With an eye on a future light fighter version of the M-346, Cosentino also said talks were under way with Finmeccanica stablemate Selex Galileo about mounting radar on the aircraft, starting with the mechanically scanned Grifo, but not excluding the electronically scanned Vixen.
Italian M-346 takes on Lockheed T-50 in Singapore
By Tom Kington
February 01, 2009
Italy’s Alenia Aermacchi has teamed with Boeing and Singapore’s ST Engineering to jointly pitch its M-346 trainer to Singapore. “The three companies have been working together for months,” Aermacchi CEO Carmelo Cosentino said.
After much discussion and anticipation, the Asian island state released a formal request for proposals late last year.
After excluding BAE Systems’ Hawk from the running, Singapore short-listed the Aermacchi M-346 and Korea Aerospace Industries’ T-50 in late 2008 in preparation to buy up to a dozen new jet trainers, most likely early this year. South Korea’s KAI has teamed with Lockheed Martin to build and market the T-50.
Cosentino said it has not been decided which partner behind the M-346 bid would act as prime contractor. “We could create a new company to fulfill that role,” he said. In the meantime, plans are in the works for more Italian funds to further develop the aircraft’s fly-by-wire systems.
Although the Singapore competition involves few aircraft, it is being closely monitored as other jet trainer fleets around the world near retirement age. Boeing teamed with Aermacchi in May to promote the M-346 in markets outside the U.S., and Cosentino said the U.S. firm was now involved “in a limited fashion” with Aermacchi in its bid to supply the M-346 to the United Arab Emirates, where the Italian-built trainer is also facing off with the T-50.
Aermacchi’s parent company, Finmeccanica, meanwhile announced a partnership in October with Mubadala Development, a UAE investment agency, to build composite components for civilian aircraft.
A source at Aermacchi said the deal was not directly related to the M-346 pitch in the United Arab Emirates, but added that “having good relations can have a weight.”
Aermacchi also is talking to firms, including Boeing, about forging a partnership to market the M-346 in the U.S. as a T-38 replacement.
“We are doing a study,” Cosentino said. “A partner would need to have a good capacity for lobbying and investment, and we are talking to Boeing and others.”
“The choice between the supersonic T-50 and the subsonic M-346 comes down to syllabus philosophy. Do you want supersonic or not?” said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group, Fairfax, Va.
With no two-seater Joint Strike Fighter being built, JSF customers may be reluctant to send pilots from subsonic trainers to flying the supersonic JSF solo, he noted.
“As a JSF customer, Singapore may opt for the T-50, also because Lockheed Martin is already prime contractor on its basic trainer. For the UAE, the M-346 will be a good replacement for its Hawks and Aermacchis,” he said.
While the M-346, recently dubbed the “Master,” is being marketed as a sub- or trans-sonic aircraft, it has demonstrated limited supersonic capabilities. In a December flight, a prototype aircraft reached Mach 1.15 at an altitude of 45,000 feet.
“The M-346 is lower cost and will be a good way to replace Hawks and Aermacchis at a similar operating and acquisition cost,” Aboulafia added. “In the U.S., however, the T-50 will have an advantage as it is the equivalent to the supersonic T-38.”
While the T-50 is in service with its launch customer, the Korean Air Force, Aermacchi is awaiting the final sign-off on funding for the acquisition of 15 M-346s by its first customer, the Italian Air Force.
“The signing for the first batch within the order should happen within a few weeks, at most by year end,” Cosentino said.
That first batch order would likely amount to six aircraft plus simulators and logistics, he added, as well as some work on improvements to the Lecce Air Force base in southern Italy, where the aircraft will be hosted, and where Aermacchi also has suggested Singapore could send pilots for training if it buys the M-346.
Planning for the initial six-plane order, Aermacchi has placed a $52 million engine contract with Honeywell’s International Turbine Engine Co. for 20 F124-GA-200 engines to power 10 of the twin-engine trainers.
The contract, which also pays for support for the engines, was the “minimum buy practical,” Cosentino said, “but could partly cover a successive contract with another customer.”
With an eye on a future light fighter version of the M-346, Cosentino also said talks were under way with Finmeccanica stablemate Selex Galileo about mounting radar on the aircraft, starting with the mechanically scanned Grifo, but not excluding the electronically scanned Vixen.
UAE chooses M-346 as advanced lead-in fighter trainer 25/02/09
UAE chooses M-346 as advanced lead-in fighter trainer
By Luca Peruzzi
The United Arab Emirates air force and air defence has selected Alenia Aermacchi's M-346 Master as its future advanced lead-in fighter trainer. The UAE government on 25 February announced at the International Defence Exhibition & Conference (IDEX) in Abu Dhabi that negotiations have begun for the acquisition of 48 M-346s for an undisclosed sum. However, sources suggest the acquisition could be worth around €1 billion ($1.27 billion).
An undisclosed number of the aircraft are expected to be procured in a light attack configuration, with Finmeccanica company Alenia Aermacchi to also provide a full ground-based training system including flight simulators as part of the deal. Deliveries are planned from 2012.
© Alenia Aermacchi
The announcement also unveiled the creation of a joint venture in the UAE between Alenia Aermacchi and Mubadala Development to establish a final assembly line for the M-346. The agreement also foresees "the manufacturing of aerostructures in composite materials for the civil sector in Abu Dhabi," says Finmeccanica chief executive Pier Francesco Guarguaglini. The company says the pact is also the result of close collaboration between the Italian government and defence industry.
Alenia Aermacchi's M-346 was selected following a lengthy competition with the Korea Aerospace Industries/Lockheed Martin T-50. The UAE commitment represents the first export sale for the M-346, 15 of which will also be produced for the Italian air force.
By Luca Peruzzi
The United Arab Emirates air force and air defence has selected Alenia Aermacchi's M-346 Master as its future advanced lead-in fighter trainer. The UAE government on 25 February announced at the International Defence Exhibition & Conference (IDEX) in Abu Dhabi that negotiations have begun for the acquisition of 48 M-346s for an undisclosed sum. However, sources suggest the acquisition could be worth around €1 billion ($1.27 billion).
An undisclosed number of the aircraft are expected to be procured in a light attack configuration, with Finmeccanica company Alenia Aermacchi to also provide a full ground-based training system including flight simulators as part of the deal. Deliveries are planned from 2012.
© Alenia Aermacchi
The announcement also unveiled the creation of a joint venture in the UAE between Alenia Aermacchi and Mubadala Development to establish a final assembly line for the M-346. The agreement also foresees "the manufacturing of aerostructures in composite materials for the civil sector in Abu Dhabi," says Finmeccanica chief executive Pier Francesco Guarguaglini. The company says the pact is also the result of close collaboration between the Italian government and defence industry.
Alenia Aermacchi's M-346 was selected following a lengthy competition with the Korea Aerospace Industries/Lockheed Martin T-50. The UAE commitment represents the first export sale for the M-346, 15 of which will also be produced for the Italian air force.
Sunday, August 10, 2008
M346
M-346 Gets Ready to Test the Market
The moment of truth is near for AleniaAermacchi, as the company wraps up development work on the M-346 advanced jet trainer. There appears to be little doubt as to the aircraft's technical credentials, but offering a high-end trainer in a distinctly low-end budget environment will pose a formidable challenge.
The trainer aircraft business is a fickle one. Everyone needs them, though nobody wants to spend the money. Procurement decisions are delayed as scarce budgets are diverted to sexier projects. There's rarely a quick return on investment, taxing the patience of even the most steadfast chief financial officer.
And while margins in the high-end trainer business can be decent, the financial risks can be dire. It's that kind of an environment that caused EADS, for instance, to abandon its own plans to develop a product--the Mako--for this segment.
Clearly, it's not a business for the timid. Carmelo Cosentino, CEO of AleniaAermacchi, points out that "several companies are able to develop, from scratch, a new advanced trainer. But it is a long and costly exercise, requiring at least €1 billion ($1.35 billion) for a transonic aircraft and €1.5-2 billion if a supersonic design is pursued."
That the market isn't easy is evident. Even though the aircraft is maturing, AleniaAermacchi so far has failed to win a launch customer.
For the Italian company, seeing the M-346 through was a more natural decision than for others, because it is fundamentally a trainer house. It has produced as many as 2,000 trainers, selling the full range of such aircraft, from the basic SF-260s, offered as piston or turboprop-powered models, to the advanced jet-powered MB-339, now being reintroduced, to the still-in-development M-346.
So in a market where there are already plenty of offerings--the BAE Systems Hawk and the Korean Aerospace Industry T-50 to name two--what does the M-346 bring to the table?
Program officials say it is the first true fifth-generation trainer, but such nomenclature is often mere marketing spin. In this case, they mean it prepares students for the latest generation of front-line fighters and represents a modern-build standard. AleniaAermacchi representatives contend they've actually skipped a generation, since what is commonly referred to as fourth-generation trainers are nothing more than third-generation models with avionics upgrades.
The T-50 is generally seen as falling in the fifth-generation category, too, although it is conceived as an element of a "family" of aircraft that include the A-50 attack version and the potential F-50 light fighter. That has driven different design choices, emphasizing combat more than training, backers of the Italian aircraft argue. The market in the coming few years will indicate whether AleniaAermacchi's views are reflected by their customers.
The M-346 has had a long and sometimes rocky history. The project builds on work Aermacchi undertook in the 1980s to identify the requirements for a next-generation advanced trainer. These culminated in the early 1990s in the AT-2000/PTS-2000 study with what was then still part of Dornier. In parallel, Russia's Yakovlev performed similar studies.
That led in 1992 to Aermacchi and Yakovlev partnering, to share knowledge and develop the Yak/AEM-130D demonstrator. The latter started flying in April 1996. But differing project requirements, corporate priorities and Russia's financial crisis ended the cooperative effort in 1999.
As a result, despite a shared ancestry, the M-346 and Russia's latest trainer, the Yak-130, are fundamentally different.
The M-346 is much smaller and lighter, but with a wider flight envelope, more agility and a higher thrust-to-weight ratio. The Yak-130 was hurt by the cancellation of the Klimov RD-35 engine program, which forced Yakovlev to use the less-powerful, compact DV-2. With heavier electronics and systems, the aircraft lags compared with its sibling, although its price tag is much lower.
The Italian project moved into high gear in 2000. The first prototype was rolled out in June 2003 and started flying in July 2004, followed by a second aircraft in May 2005. The two prototypes have logged more than 300 flight hours, shared roughly equally. AleniaAermacchi plans to complete 700 flight hours before full operational capability is reached.
The test program has had its share of glitches. The flight control system didn't mature as quickly as hoped, so AleniaAermacchi shifted some work from its principal partner, BAE Systems, to sister company Alenia Aeronautica. The latter holds a licensing arrangement with BAE, but the shift cost time.
However, most aircraft changes have been relatively minor. The air brake initially was to extend 60 deg. but that resulted in tail buffeting, so the extension is now limited to 40 deg. The eventual fix is to move the brake 1-meter forward, while the intake for the environment control system, at the root of the tail, will be enlarged. It had been partially masked by the open speed-brake.
Control laws are still being refined and, so far, don't support the full airframe capability. In particular, it isn't easy to optimize use of the leading edge flaps to vary camber as a function of angle of attack, Mach and total pressure.
Other lessons could yet emerge as trials examine the most extreme points of the flight envelope, but developers are sanguine that they have no major worries.
The next M-346 to be delivered will be the first production representative model and is due to fly by year-end. It will be used to fully test, develop and then freeze the production configuration, and to certify the full structure.
The most immediate program milestone is a "development initial operational capability" standard. The Italian air force is set to certify the core systems and the fully expanded flight envelope. In 2008, a second certification for the production standard should take place, followed a year later by approval of the cleanly configured aircraft throughout the flight envelope. Finally, in 2010, the M-346 is scheduled to reach full operational capability, including seven basic armaments load-outs.
Production should take place in parallel. Output capacity will be for eight aircraft per year, but could grow to an aircraft per month should the market demand it. The low-rate build should be completed in 2010, with deliveries starting in late 2009.
Systems and aircraft performance are what truly define the M-346. Despite its bid for the high-end market, AleniaAermacchi steered clear of pushing to the extreme of the flight envelope, opting to forgo an afterburning engine, arguing that associated acquisition and operating costs rendered it nonviable. A high-transonic aircraft with two non-afterburning engines and greater agility will combine safety and low costs with performances equivalent, or even superior, to those offered by combat aircraft in a large part of the flight envelope (corner speed is at Mach 0.6/15,000 ft.), without sacrificing ease of control at takeoff, landing and approach, says PieroClaudio Iaia, M-346 program manager.
The M-346's aerodynamic configuration has been optimized for that performance. The aircraft's trapezoidal, mid-mounted, variable-camber-wing, with a leading edge sweep of 30.8 deg. and a moderate aspect ratio of 4, features a profile, with a 2% twist, and a thickness (6% at the tip, 8% at the root) specifically designed for transonic performance.
The flat, lower fuselage contributes lift (up to 30% of the total), and the wing is carefully blended with the fuselage, which includes generous leading edge extensions that are instrumental in aircraft controllability at high angles of attack (AOA), coupled with patented wing fences. The leading edge extension and fence combination allows the aircraft to exploit vortex lift, avoiding vortex bursting and the associated loss of lift.
Exploiting the vortex lift is particularly important for M-346 high-angle performance, since the aircraft doesn't have canards to help in that portion of the flight envelope. An added benefit is that the leading edge structural element shields the air intakes from ingesting unstable air that can lead to loss of thrust and further engine problems.
Thanks to a carefully calibrated ratio between the intake capture and throat areas, the high AOA/maneuvering intake pressure recovery is 0.97, maintaining good engine performance. With an optimal lift/drag curve over a wide part of the envelope and a lift coefficient maximum of 1.6, the aircraft is designed for short takeoff and landing runs, while both drag rise and trim drag are reduced and controlled over a large part of the envelope.
Designers placed particular attention on post-stall recovery and controllability at very high AOA. The M-346 is supposed to allow "carefree" handling and complete spin resistance well above 40-deg. AOA, a performance level that only some fighter aircraft can achieve. A raft of design factors contribute to the stability at those operating extremes, including the wing, wing fences, carefully rounded nose and a fuselage with a low-aspect-ratio forebody, a high tail positioned well forward on the fuselage spine to keep it effective at high AOA, and the generously sized horizontal tail to achieve the high-control authority.
The aerodynamic formula is bolstered by a four-channel reconfigurable digital flight control system, which manages a moderate subsonic relaxed longitudinal stability (5%) of the aircraft, that in turn allows maximum agility in the air combat arena. The level of redundancy allows the M-346 to continue its mission even if one channel fails. A dual-channel failure still allows degraded performance to return the aircraft to base. Instructors can deliberately degrade the flight controls in flight to teach students how to handle the aircraft in such situations.
The aircraft is powered by twin Honeywell F124-GA-200s, with dual-redundant full authority digital flight controls. The powerplants are designed to work with a sub-optimal airflow and be surge resistant, thanks to the high-pressure compressor design which features four axial stages and a centrifugal stage. Even though the bypass ratio is merely moderate, at 0.47, the specific fuel flow consumption is low. A production M-346 with 50% of fuel load, weighing about 5,900 kg. (13,007 lb.), will have a thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.9:1. By comparison, an advanced trainer with a single afterburning engine needs to use reheat to achieve maximum performance and a thrust-to-weight ratio nearing 1:1, and will therefore have merely one-third the endurance.
The engine also provides thrust growth possibilities. A near-term step would see improvements to the high-pressure turbine's material to a single crystal, which would deliver an extra 300 lb. of thrust. The long-term plans, says Mark Johnston, an engineer at Honeywell Aerospace, include shifting to an advanced, two-stage fan, which would increase both fan flow and efficiency and provide for an increase to 7,500 lb., about 1,000 lb. more thrust than now available.
On the avionics front, AleniaAermacchi has tried to find a low-cost way to replicate most of what would be found on a modern combat aircraft. The trainer is fitted with dual-redundant, 1553B digital data buses. It also carries two main computers, a navigation suite including a ring-laser gyro inertial navigation system with GPS radar altimeter, along with more traditional navigation beacon systems, a communication suite with friend-or-foe identification system, and two V/UHF radios (a third is on the prototypes). There are also dual head-up displays and the capability for helmet-mounted displays.
Like most trainer aircraft developers, AleniaAermacchi is keeping the option open for a combat aircraft derivative. The M-346 could carry up to 3.1 tons of external stores, distributed over nine wing and fuselage hardpoints. It could still achieve a 515-kt., 5.5g turning performance with a heavy load-out.
Although the trainer doesn't have a radar system, the nose section can be outfitted with a mechanical or electronically scanned array that would be provided by Galileo Avionica Grifo. Environmental control and power supply allow for the upgrade. Installing a navigation, laser-designation, or reconnaissance pod, with the ability to display imagery on the head-up displays or helmet-mounted sight should be possible. Provisions also exist for installation of electronic countermeasures.
While the aircraft is not intended to be stealthy, as AleniaAermacchi engineers will openly concede, steps have been taken to minimize the radar cross section. For instance, the engine's diverterless air intakes have slightly curved ducts in order to partially mask the engine compressor face in frontal aspect from an adversary's radar. The duct and lips can be covered with radar-absorbing material. Similar surface treatment would be applied to the wing's leading edge, in particular the obvious dogtooth, which otherwise would generate a significant radar return. Wing fences and pylons also would be covered.
The third prototype will sport a canopy with an advanced "gold" film, which will mask the double cockpit.
Provisions have also been made to boost survivability in the infrared arena. The relatively cool engines have a diffused jet plume thanks to the nozzle position, which has the dual benefit of reducing the infrared signature and drag.
Another derivation could be a single-seat version. The space now used by the back seat would allow for additional fuel or other equipment to be carried.
But the aircraft alone is only one element of any modern training system. Therefore, AleniaAermacchi is developing the broader training system concept, which would include the typical array of simulators, spanning from simple cockpit trainers to a full-motion arrangement. Partners, expected to be named soon, would be responsible for those efforts.
One of the system's features is an embedded simulation capability, used mainly for the most advanced phases of training. The system can replicate multimode fire-control and missile-warning radar receivers and countermeasures systems, including jammers, and the Link-16 Multifunction Information Distribution System that is becoming the backbone of coalition air-to-air combat tactics. Both air- and ground-threat scenarios can be played out.
The question now is whether these attributes will loosen tight wallets. AleniaAermacchi officials argue that use of the M-346 is more cost-effective than having the advanced phases of tactics and flight training done on actual combat fighters. They also note that many advanced fighters, notably the F-22 and F-35, will exist only as single-seaters. It's no surprise, then, that the company is courting the U.S. Air Force as a potential customer.
A slew of trainer aircraft decisions are expected in 5-10 years. But even before then, some important customers will indicate how the market is leaning. Greece, Poland, the United Arab Emirates and a few others are now in the market for an advanced training solution.
A handicap, however, is that the Italian air force has not yet bought the aircraft, although it has signaled an intent to do so. Company officials hope for confirmation soon. The Italian economic development ministry likely will finance part of the entire 12 low-rate aircraft, properly kicking off production.
AleniaAermacchi-parent Finmeccanica isn't just relying on the aircraft's attributes to do the sales job. Industrial workshares are being offered to companies in countries buying the aircraft. That card is already being played in Greece, where Hellenic Aerospace Industries has been made a partner.
Cosentino argues that "there is plenty of room to craft a cooperative program with involvement of partners in both the aircraft and the other elements of the complete training system."
M-346 SPECIFICATIONS
ENGINES
(2) Honeywell F-124-GA-200
THRUST, at sea level
28 kN (6,250 lb.)
INTERNAL FUEL
1,850 kg. (2,050 series)
MEASUREMENTS
Wingspan
9.7 meters
Length
11.52 meters
Height
4.98 meters
WEIGHTS
Empty
6,000 kg. (4,700 series)
Takeoff, clean
8,000 kg. (6,700 series)
Takeoff, maximum
8,000 kg. (9,800 series)
SPEED, max.
Mach 0.97 / 575 KCAS
(Mach 1.2 / 600 KCAS series)
LIMIT LOAD FACTORS
+7 / -2.5g (+8 / -3g series)
ANGLE OF ATTACK, max.
20 deg. (+40-deg. series)
The moment of truth is near for AleniaAermacchi, as the company wraps up development work on the M-346 advanced jet trainer. There appears to be little doubt as to the aircraft's technical credentials, but offering a high-end trainer in a distinctly low-end budget environment will pose a formidable challenge.
The trainer aircraft business is a fickle one. Everyone needs them, though nobody wants to spend the money. Procurement decisions are delayed as scarce budgets are diverted to sexier projects. There's rarely a quick return on investment, taxing the patience of even the most steadfast chief financial officer.
And while margins in the high-end trainer business can be decent, the financial risks can be dire. It's that kind of an environment that caused EADS, for instance, to abandon its own plans to develop a product--the Mako--for this segment.
Clearly, it's not a business for the timid. Carmelo Cosentino, CEO of AleniaAermacchi, points out that "several companies are able to develop, from scratch, a new advanced trainer. But it is a long and costly exercise, requiring at least €1 billion ($1.35 billion) for a transonic aircraft and €1.5-2 billion if a supersonic design is pursued."
That the market isn't easy is evident. Even though the aircraft is maturing, AleniaAermacchi so far has failed to win a launch customer.
For the Italian company, seeing the M-346 through was a more natural decision than for others, because it is fundamentally a trainer house. It has produced as many as 2,000 trainers, selling the full range of such aircraft, from the basic SF-260s, offered as piston or turboprop-powered models, to the advanced jet-powered MB-339, now being reintroduced, to the still-in-development M-346.
So in a market where there are already plenty of offerings--the BAE Systems Hawk and the Korean Aerospace Industry T-50 to name two--what does the M-346 bring to the table?
Program officials say it is the first true fifth-generation trainer, but such nomenclature is often mere marketing spin. In this case, they mean it prepares students for the latest generation of front-line fighters and represents a modern-build standard. AleniaAermacchi representatives contend they've actually skipped a generation, since what is commonly referred to as fourth-generation trainers are nothing more than third-generation models with avionics upgrades.
The T-50 is generally seen as falling in the fifth-generation category, too, although it is conceived as an element of a "family" of aircraft that include the A-50 attack version and the potential F-50 light fighter. That has driven different design choices, emphasizing combat more than training, backers of the Italian aircraft argue. The market in the coming few years will indicate whether AleniaAermacchi's views are reflected by their customers.
The M-346 has had a long and sometimes rocky history. The project builds on work Aermacchi undertook in the 1980s to identify the requirements for a next-generation advanced trainer. These culminated in the early 1990s in the AT-2000/PTS-2000 study with what was then still part of Dornier. In parallel, Russia's Yakovlev performed similar studies.
That led in 1992 to Aermacchi and Yakovlev partnering, to share knowledge and develop the Yak/AEM-130D demonstrator. The latter started flying in April 1996. But differing project requirements, corporate priorities and Russia's financial crisis ended the cooperative effort in 1999.
As a result, despite a shared ancestry, the M-346 and Russia's latest trainer, the Yak-130, are fundamentally different.
The M-346 is much smaller and lighter, but with a wider flight envelope, more agility and a higher thrust-to-weight ratio. The Yak-130 was hurt by the cancellation of the Klimov RD-35 engine program, which forced Yakovlev to use the less-powerful, compact DV-2. With heavier electronics and systems, the aircraft lags compared with its sibling, although its price tag is much lower.
The Italian project moved into high gear in 2000. The first prototype was rolled out in June 2003 and started flying in July 2004, followed by a second aircraft in May 2005. The two prototypes have logged more than 300 flight hours, shared roughly equally. AleniaAermacchi plans to complete 700 flight hours before full operational capability is reached.
The test program has had its share of glitches. The flight control system didn't mature as quickly as hoped, so AleniaAermacchi shifted some work from its principal partner, BAE Systems, to sister company Alenia Aeronautica. The latter holds a licensing arrangement with BAE, but the shift cost time.
However, most aircraft changes have been relatively minor. The air brake initially was to extend 60 deg. but that resulted in tail buffeting, so the extension is now limited to 40 deg. The eventual fix is to move the brake 1-meter forward, while the intake for the environment control system, at the root of the tail, will be enlarged. It had been partially masked by the open speed-brake.
Control laws are still being refined and, so far, don't support the full airframe capability. In particular, it isn't easy to optimize use of the leading edge flaps to vary camber as a function of angle of attack, Mach and total pressure.
Other lessons could yet emerge as trials examine the most extreme points of the flight envelope, but developers are sanguine that they have no major worries.
The next M-346 to be delivered will be the first production representative model and is due to fly by year-end. It will be used to fully test, develop and then freeze the production configuration, and to certify the full structure.
The most immediate program milestone is a "development initial operational capability" standard. The Italian air force is set to certify the core systems and the fully expanded flight envelope. In 2008, a second certification for the production standard should take place, followed a year later by approval of the cleanly configured aircraft throughout the flight envelope. Finally, in 2010, the M-346 is scheduled to reach full operational capability, including seven basic armaments load-outs.
Production should take place in parallel. Output capacity will be for eight aircraft per year, but could grow to an aircraft per month should the market demand it. The low-rate build should be completed in 2010, with deliveries starting in late 2009.
Systems and aircraft performance are what truly define the M-346. Despite its bid for the high-end market, AleniaAermacchi steered clear of pushing to the extreme of the flight envelope, opting to forgo an afterburning engine, arguing that associated acquisition and operating costs rendered it nonviable. A high-transonic aircraft with two non-afterburning engines and greater agility will combine safety and low costs with performances equivalent, or even superior, to those offered by combat aircraft in a large part of the flight envelope (corner speed is at Mach 0.6/15,000 ft.), without sacrificing ease of control at takeoff, landing and approach, says PieroClaudio Iaia, M-346 program manager.
The M-346's aerodynamic configuration has been optimized for that performance. The aircraft's trapezoidal, mid-mounted, variable-camber-wing, with a leading edge sweep of 30.8 deg. and a moderate aspect ratio of 4, features a profile, with a 2% twist, and a thickness (6% at the tip, 8% at the root) specifically designed for transonic performance.
The flat, lower fuselage contributes lift (up to 30% of the total), and the wing is carefully blended with the fuselage, which includes generous leading edge extensions that are instrumental in aircraft controllability at high angles of attack (AOA), coupled with patented wing fences. The leading edge extension and fence combination allows the aircraft to exploit vortex lift, avoiding vortex bursting and the associated loss of lift.
Exploiting the vortex lift is particularly important for M-346 high-angle performance, since the aircraft doesn't have canards to help in that portion of the flight envelope. An added benefit is that the leading edge structural element shields the air intakes from ingesting unstable air that can lead to loss of thrust and further engine problems.
Thanks to a carefully calibrated ratio between the intake capture and throat areas, the high AOA/maneuvering intake pressure recovery is 0.97, maintaining good engine performance. With an optimal lift/drag curve over a wide part of the envelope and a lift coefficient maximum of 1.6, the aircraft is designed for short takeoff and landing runs, while both drag rise and trim drag are reduced and controlled over a large part of the envelope.
Designers placed particular attention on post-stall recovery and controllability at very high AOA. The M-346 is supposed to allow "carefree" handling and complete spin resistance well above 40-deg. AOA, a performance level that only some fighter aircraft can achieve. A raft of design factors contribute to the stability at those operating extremes, including the wing, wing fences, carefully rounded nose and a fuselage with a low-aspect-ratio forebody, a high tail positioned well forward on the fuselage spine to keep it effective at high AOA, and the generously sized horizontal tail to achieve the high-control authority.
The aerodynamic formula is bolstered by a four-channel reconfigurable digital flight control system, which manages a moderate subsonic relaxed longitudinal stability (5%) of the aircraft, that in turn allows maximum agility in the air combat arena. The level of redundancy allows the M-346 to continue its mission even if one channel fails. A dual-channel failure still allows degraded performance to return the aircraft to base. Instructors can deliberately degrade the flight controls in flight to teach students how to handle the aircraft in such situations.
The aircraft is powered by twin Honeywell F124-GA-200s, with dual-redundant full authority digital flight controls. The powerplants are designed to work with a sub-optimal airflow and be surge resistant, thanks to the high-pressure compressor design which features four axial stages and a centrifugal stage. Even though the bypass ratio is merely moderate, at 0.47, the specific fuel flow consumption is low. A production M-346 with 50% of fuel load, weighing about 5,900 kg. (13,007 lb.), will have a thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.9:1. By comparison, an advanced trainer with a single afterburning engine needs to use reheat to achieve maximum performance and a thrust-to-weight ratio nearing 1:1, and will therefore have merely one-third the endurance.
The engine also provides thrust growth possibilities. A near-term step would see improvements to the high-pressure turbine's material to a single crystal, which would deliver an extra 300 lb. of thrust. The long-term plans, says Mark Johnston, an engineer at Honeywell Aerospace, include shifting to an advanced, two-stage fan, which would increase both fan flow and efficiency and provide for an increase to 7,500 lb., about 1,000 lb. more thrust than now available.
On the avionics front, AleniaAermacchi has tried to find a low-cost way to replicate most of what would be found on a modern combat aircraft. The trainer is fitted with dual-redundant, 1553B digital data buses. It also carries two main computers, a navigation suite including a ring-laser gyro inertial navigation system with GPS radar altimeter, along with more traditional navigation beacon systems, a communication suite with friend-or-foe identification system, and two V/UHF radios (a third is on the prototypes). There are also dual head-up displays and the capability for helmet-mounted displays.
Like most trainer aircraft developers, AleniaAermacchi is keeping the option open for a combat aircraft derivative. The M-346 could carry up to 3.1 tons of external stores, distributed over nine wing and fuselage hardpoints. It could still achieve a 515-kt., 5.5g turning performance with a heavy load-out.
Although the trainer doesn't have a radar system, the nose section can be outfitted with a mechanical or electronically scanned array that would be provided by Galileo Avionica Grifo. Environmental control and power supply allow for the upgrade. Installing a navigation, laser-designation, or reconnaissance pod, with the ability to display imagery on the head-up displays or helmet-mounted sight should be possible. Provisions also exist for installation of electronic countermeasures.
While the aircraft is not intended to be stealthy, as AleniaAermacchi engineers will openly concede, steps have been taken to minimize the radar cross section. For instance, the engine's diverterless air intakes have slightly curved ducts in order to partially mask the engine compressor face in frontal aspect from an adversary's radar. The duct and lips can be covered with radar-absorbing material. Similar surface treatment would be applied to the wing's leading edge, in particular the obvious dogtooth, which otherwise would generate a significant radar return. Wing fences and pylons also would be covered.
The third prototype will sport a canopy with an advanced "gold" film, which will mask the double cockpit.
Provisions have also been made to boost survivability in the infrared arena. The relatively cool engines have a diffused jet plume thanks to the nozzle position, which has the dual benefit of reducing the infrared signature and drag.
Another derivation could be a single-seat version. The space now used by the back seat would allow for additional fuel or other equipment to be carried.
But the aircraft alone is only one element of any modern training system. Therefore, AleniaAermacchi is developing the broader training system concept, which would include the typical array of simulators, spanning from simple cockpit trainers to a full-motion arrangement. Partners, expected to be named soon, would be responsible for those efforts.
One of the system's features is an embedded simulation capability, used mainly for the most advanced phases of training. The system can replicate multimode fire-control and missile-warning radar receivers and countermeasures systems, including jammers, and the Link-16 Multifunction Information Distribution System that is becoming the backbone of coalition air-to-air combat tactics. Both air- and ground-threat scenarios can be played out.
The question now is whether these attributes will loosen tight wallets. AleniaAermacchi officials argue that use of the M-346 is more cost-effective than having the advanced phases of tactics and flight training done on actual combat fighters. They also note that many advanced fighters, notably the F-22 and F-35, will exist only as single-seaters. It's no surprise, then, that the company is courting the U.S. Air Force as a potential customer.
A slew of trainer aircraft decisions are expected in 5-10 years. But even before then, some important customers will indicate how the market is leaning. Greece, Poland, the United Arab Emirates and a few others are now in the market for an advanced training solution.
A handicap, however, is that the Italian air force has not yet bought the aircraft, although it has signaled an intent to do so. Company officials hope for confirmation soon. The Italian economic development ministry likely will finance part of the entire 12 low-rate aircraft, properly kicking off production.
AleniaAermacchi-parent Finmeccanica isn't just relying on the aircraft's attributes to do the sales job. Industrial workshares are being offered to companies in countries buying the aircraft. That card is already being played in Greece, where Hellenic Aerospace Industries has been made a partner.
Cosentino argues that "there is plenty of room to craft a cooperative program with involvement of partners in both the aircraft and the other elements of the complete training system."
M-346 SPECIFICATIONS
ENGINES
(2) Honeywell F-124-GA-200
THRUST, at sea level
28 kN (6,250 lb.)
INTERNAL FUEL
1,850 kg. (2,050 series)
MEASUREMENTS
Wingspan
9.7 meters
Length
11.52 meters
Height
4.98 meters
WEIGHTS
Empty
6,000 kg. (4,700 series)
Takeoff, clean
8,000 kg. (6,700 series)
Takeoff, maximum
8,000 kg. (9,800 series)
SPEED, max.
Mach 0.97 / 575 KCAS
(Mach 1.2 / 600 KCAS series)
LIMIT LOAD FACTORS
+7 / -2.5g (+8 / -3g series)
ANGLE OF ATTACK, max.
20 deg. (+40-deg. series)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
