US Navy’s Undergraduate Jet Training System: Competition Narrows as Training Requirements Evolve

The US Navy’s Undergraduate Jet Training System (UJTS) competition has entered a decisive phase, with only two contenders remaining for a programme that will shape how future naval aviators are trained for decades to come.

Under the UJTS, the Navy is seeking a replacement for its T-45C Goshawk trainer, which has been in service since 1994. This is not simply about acquiring a new aircraft; it is procuring an integrated training capability comprising aircraft, simulators and digital training tools designed to prepare student aviators for fifth- and sixth-generation operational aircraft.

Although the Navy has been discussing the requirements since 2020, the competition only got under way formally in March of last year. The requirement covers ‘up to’ 216 airframes with a budget of more than $10 billion. Initially, four principal contenders emerged, three of which had previously featured in the T-X programme.

Boeing and Sweden’s Saab offered the T-7A Red Hawk, while Lockheed Martin and Korean Aerospace Industries (KAI) presented the TF-50N, a navalised version of the T-50 Golden Eagle, and Textron Aviation Defense, in partnership with Leonardo’s Aermacchi, put forward the Beechcraft M346N. The fourth contender is Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC), in partnership with Northrop-Grumman and General Atomics, with a ‘clean sheet’ design, the twin-engine Freedom Fighter.

What makes UJTS particularly interesting from a training perspective is that it is not a straightforward replacement for T-45C. The new aircraft will not be required to carry out deck landings on carriers and, indeed, the requirement for Field Carrier Landing Practice (FCLP) has been significantly relaxed. Rather than continuing approaches through  touchdown on a simulated carrier deck ashore, student pilots will only be required to fly the approach profile to the ‘wave-off’ point. This represents a major change in how the Navy intends to prepare aviators for carrier operations.

The new aircraft will be required to integrate the new Precision Landing Mode (PLM) system, the future standard internal approach aid for all US naval aircraft, which could influence the need for structural modifications to existing designs. Training systems will therefore need to familiarise students with operational landing technologies much earlier in the training pipeline, further reinforcing the importance of integrated live, virtual and constructive training architectures.

The original Request for Information (RFI) was initially issued on 4th June 2020, the final version being 31st March 2025. The Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued on March 26th this year, soliciting offers by 29th June, and looking for a contract award date of Q2/2027. Shortly thereafter, on April 23rd, Lockheed Martin/KAI, withdrew the TF-50N, stating that the companies had  “conducted a rigorous assessment of the UJTS solicitation and determined [their] offering would not be the best solution for this program due to the required level of U.S. content and other reasons.”

There is an adage within the US Defence world that the Air Force and the Navy would never willingly buy the same aircraft, the F-4 Phantom and – to a lesser extent the A-7 Corsair II – being aberrations.  For a while, it looked as though this maxim might be overturned; however, in early June, Boeing surprisingly announced the withdrawal of the T-7A, which had been considered a front-runner. The company stated that: “After careful evaluation, [they had] determined the T-7A does not meet the U.S. Navy’s Undergraduate Jet Training System requirements.”

Two explanations have been suggested. The first, which aligns with Boeing’s statement, is that the specific requirements of UJTS would require a significant modification to the T-7A’s GE404 engine. The second is that withdrawal will allow Boeing to concentrate on development of 6th-Generation programmes, such as F-47.

Beyond the FCLP constraints, there are no great surprises in the UJTS airframe and avionic requirements: subsonic/transonic, agile, embedded sensor systems and cockpit layout representative of front-line USN fighters, helmet-mounted display (HMD)-compatible, and with integrated Augmented Reality (AR) capability. The engines must be able to “survive the rigors of carrier operations—including salt-water spray, high humidity, and extreme operational tempos—without heavy corrosion or excessive degradation.” Quite why this should be, since the aircraft will not apparently be required to land on a carrier or even approach one, is something of a mystery; however, the development work entailed is ostensibly the reason for the T-7A withdrawal.

This leaves two remaining contenders, both of which are twin-engined. That is good for safety, but with through-life cost implications.

The Leonardo M-346 is now a well-established platform. In service with 7 air forces and on order for Austria, M-346 is a proven performer, not least in the Italian Air Force/Leonardo International Flight Training School at Decimomannu, Sardinia. The M-346N demonstrator, which first flew in September 2025 is apparently based on the light attack variant M-346FA, pending firming-up of the Navy’s precise requirements. The final version will doubtless incorporate updated technology.

The SNC Freedom Jet presents a very different proposition. It remains a clean-sheet design which has yet to fly, although it has been the subject of extensive digital modelling.  The powerplants are planned to be Williams FJ44-4M turbofans, which are widely used in bizjets, and confer significant life-cycle cost savings over the Goshawk.  It is unclear to what extent SNC will need to include prototyping and development data in their bid to NAVAIR, but the proposed timescale, with contract award in March 2027, seems very tight for a clean-sheet design. However, we have seen in the T-X programme a relaxation of deadlines to accommodate a viable contender, and the Freedom Jet is currently the only home-grown solution.

The picture should become clearer once the submissions have been evaluated following the June deadline. What remains particularly noteworthy is that UJTS appears to be evolving from a traditional aircraft replacement programme into a broader transformation of naval flight training. The eventual winner will need to deliver not only a capable jet trainer, but an integrated training system capable of preparing future naval aviators for increasingly complex operational environments.