In article , Paul Saccani
writes
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 05:07:35 GMT, "JB" wrote:

The Hawk 127 is primarily a trainer, with a secondary ground attack
role.

Its a "Lead In Fighter" ****tard. The PC9 is a "trainer".

Sorry, but a 'Lead in Fighter' is still a trainer. Perhaps a more advanced
one, and it may have some secondary capabilities, but it's still a
trainer....

Funny that a number of air forces, including the RAF, have seen fit to use them
in the fighter and strike roles. Not the same model, of course, because ours
are set up to mimic the F-18 cockpit, but near enough. Besides the FAC role,
the PC-9 really is a trainer.

The Hawk was not developed as trainer, but does have a secondary capability in
that role....

The people at Hawker Siddeley Aviation developed the Hawk as a trainer
with a secondary strike role, not the other way round. It was envisaged
as a replacement for the Gnat and Hunter trainers. The P1182 project won
the competition for the RAF's new advanced jet trainer.

Of course, that is the role that we assign them, but it is
analogous to the Folland Gnat in that regard. They seem to have seen a lot
more combat than their supposed "trainer" status would suggest.
cheers,

Paul Saccani
Perth West Australia

--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!