France-Germany-Spain Future Combat Air System (FCAS / SCAF / FSAC)

I thought Plan B was two fingers at AirBerlinBus and go it alone?

As long as Paris is happy forking out the Euros there is no problem right? They have it sown up right?
Of course if Madrid is suddenly asked to contribute the other half they might go have a siesta while they mull Tempests or EF-50 NGADs.

I'm really curious what the name will end up being. I bet that will as much a political argument as everything else has been.
 
TomcatViP said:
Let's only hope that Plan B is not the Aerospace version of a middle age men crisis leaving wife and kids down the gutter to seek after some short term excitement.
Click to expand...
Does lead to some wonderful eye candy for viewers..Dassault has always had an eye for lookers.
 
Why is it there is always something in these opinion pieces which makes my teeth grind?
when Germany, with the agreement on the Special Fund, the MoD and Airbus will essentially focus their efforts in the development of a new version of the Eurofighter: the ECR version, which is, from an operational point of view, quite absurd for a fighter designed to be only a defensive interceptor.
Click to expand...
Since when was the Eurofighter designed to be a defensive interceptor? Eurofighter was always a multi-role aircraft - something even its "Cold War relic" detractors in the UK ignored. I see nothing fundamentally wrong with Typhoon to prevent it undertaking the SEAD role. It seems a rather odd sweeping statement for a defence industry reporter to make.

This should give DGA and Dassault Aviation enough time to think about a new revolutionary aircraft (a space fighter?), full of disruptive technologies and capabilities.
Click to expand...
Huh? Is this guy seriously dreaming of a Dassault exo-atmospheric space fighter?

This is why I always take these opinion pieces with large doses of salt, they tend to have the factual qualities of fanboy YouTube monologues made in darkened basements.
 
Hood said:
Why is it there is always something in these opinion pieces which makes my teeth grind?
Click to expand...
Because Defence-Aerospace basically just seems to be a mouthpiece for Dassault? There's zero balance

e.g. Dassault seem to have set Airbus a ridiculous workshare content ultimatum that Airbus can't sign up to but somehow Dassault are the victim in this rather than them trying to sink the project.
 
Between design, integration and tests, It will cost billions just to integrate a meaningful ECR capability into the Typhoon airframe. All that money could better be routed toward the FCAS and one or two squadron of Growler to act as an interim airframe for the next 2 decades. Just make room with Boeing to gradually integrate German Hardware and Software into new blocks of the Growler.
 
Regarding Dassault, the Thales scandal (French hardware content sold to Russia) will force them to temper their positions.
Note that, since as early as 2014, someone like me had already raised the issue, the resurfacing of those accusations today are certainly, at least, a political bargain.
French state being a major shareholder of Thales, aside of Dassault, doesn't help much (no more than the strange rapist rethoric regarding the necessity to please your aggressor (Ukraine should not discontent Mr Putin, infamously said French president Macron...)

In essence, facts are that, if there is a change in direction in this conflict regarding who's going to do what in FCAS, it will happen now... Or never.
 
Last edited:
@TomcatViP Not sure I follow… What does Thales have to do with the Dassault vs. Airbus fight over FCAS/NGF leadership?

(And who is going to use Russia to torpedo Thales? In France? No one IMHO)
 
Hood said:
This is why I always take these opinion pieces with large doses of salt, they tend to have the factual qualities of fanboy YouTube monologues made in darkened basements
Click to expand...
Or in general, anything defense related from those that are not a well established source are most of the times worthless.
 
H_K said:
@TomcatViP Not sure I follow… What does Thales have to do with the Dassault vs. Airbus fight over FCAS/NGF leadership?

(And who is going to use Russia to torpedo Thales? In France? No one IMHO)
Click to expand...

I think it would be awkward that no participating states makes any reference to an embargo infringement when Germany, for example, was very adament of introducing some rules into potential foreign sales of systems, sub-systems and airframe.
Thales is owned in majority by Dassault and the French state.
www.thalesgroup.com

Share and shareholding

www.thalesgroup.com www.thalesgroup.com
 
If I was BAE and Leonardo I wouldn't laugh just yet, we've seen more concrete action with UK-Japan link ups than we have Tempest. There is a fog of vagueness around Tempest - i.e. is the quietness from Leonardo and SAAB smooth relations or minimal commitment?

There is no doubting both Dassault and Airbus want the programme but the rutting season has to end sometime.

Not sure Trappier has much option for Plan B other than going it alone. I can't think of who else could fill Airbus's shoes in the programme.
 
Hood said:
If I was BAE and Leonardo I wouldn't laugh just yet, we've seen more concrete action with UK-Japan link ups than we have Tempest. There is a fog of vagueness around Tempest - i.e. is the quietness from Leonardo and SAAB smooth relations or minimal commitment?
Click to expand...
From the rumours around it seems to be smooth sailing so far. It probably won't be for ever. BAE undoubtedly have their faults but when it comes to working with other countries/ companies they seem to be very good at the diplomacy side of things (apart from with the French). It was BAE who managed to get everyone to co-operate on Meteor with a lot of hard yards and they seem to have managed their F-35 involvement very well..
 
Not to bash them specifically but it’s “with Dassault” rather then “with the French” that appears to be the common denominator for more issues in these type of discussions.

I agree there is currently an opaque nature to the Swedish and Italian level and nature of involvement/ commitment to “Tempest”.
While the UK has been very keen for the very obvious political reasons to trumpet this program it’s not clear yet if the non-UK partners see it as technology demonstrator/ industrial development project or have actually definitively decided to buy it and put it into service (appears that those decisions have been kicked down the road though there may well be an element of an undeclared/ not formally acknowledged intention/ plan to do so).

As such “Tempest” appears to be like an engagement where one side is really into it and loves showing everyone the ring and is eager to get down the isle but the other party is less into it, happy to stay engaged indefinitely and may still have a bit of a wandering eye.
While the NGF is a more tempestuous engagement with one party being a bit of a bridezilla with very high demands but you still see them getting married.
Which is a better recipe for a long happy marriage is in the eye of the beholder….
 
Hood said:
Not sure Trappier has much option for Plan B other than going it alone. I can't think of who else could fill Airbus's shoes in the programme.
Click to expand...
Funny I can’t think of a single thing that Airbus adds to the program that Dassault can’t get elsewhere! (with Thales, Sagem, MBDA and in-house leveraging the Neuron R&D work)

1st pillar: NGF fighter (Dassault prime contractor and Airbus DS main partner),

2nd pillar: Engine (SAFRAN, MTU and ITP Aero Spain),

3rd pillar: Remote carriers (Airbus, MBDA, Spanish consortium of GMV, Tecnobit and Sener),

4th pillar: Tactical or combat cloud (Airbus, Thales, Indra),

5th pillar: "Simlab", overall coherence (Airbus, Dassault, Safran and MTU as well as MBDA and Thales as subcontractors),

6th pillar: Sensors (Indra, Thales, FCMS German consortium)

7th pillar: Stealth (Airbus Spain and Dassault)

There problem solved… now someone just has to pay for it! ;-)​
 
Last edited:
Also MTU's compressor and manufacturing tech. Disregarding the fiscal angle, purely on technical grounds I suspect the airframe side could indeed do without Airbus in a pinch. But I would not kick MTU out of the engine consortium for anything, if I were Dassault/SAFRAN/France.

I would also roundly dispute that the centre of gravity in stealth competence within Airbus resides with the Spanish arm.
 
red admiral said:
H_K said:
Funny I can’t think of a single thing that Airbus adds to the program that Dassault can’t get elsewhere! (with Thales, Sagem and in-house leveraging the Neuron R&D work)
Click to expand...

Funding from Germany and Spain
Click to expand...
Bingo. Going alone on Rafale already cost France an arm and a testicle. Trying to fund a 5th gen successor alone ? would cost much more than the remaining limbs and ball together.
 
It also paint a sour image for the European defense with everyone but France past 2035 having stealth assets.

osha-construction-sign-ode-5050_1000.gif


Regarding Sweden, their gov just launched officially Saab's future aircraft study for 25M€. It's a modest beginning but, at least, it is one decisive step forward.
 
Last edited:
H_K said:
Hood said:
Not sure Trappier has much option for Plan B other than going it alone. I can't think of who else could fill Airbus's shoes in the programme.
Click to expand...
Funny I can’t think of a single thing that Airbus adds to the program that Dassault can’t get elsewhere! (with Thales, Sagem, MBDA and in-house leveraging the Neuron R&D work)

,,,

There problem solved… now someone just has to pay for it! ;-)​
Click to expand...

And that‘s probably the only reason where we are good at - paying - and as such the only reason to let Germany in this consortium if it ever will be
 
Mustang Mk.X said:
It has been announced today, during a defence commision meeting, that Belgium will invest in the development of the FCAS/SCAF among other projects.
Click to expand...

Can you provide a link to such announcement?

Edit:
I ask because last info I have is from the end of last month, about Belgian (governmental) investment in SCAF(-development) still under consideration but no firm decision made. And I have yet to be invited to take part in Belgian defense commission meetings.
 
Last edited:
flateric said:
flateric said:
Funny to see as 'cooperation partners' continue to post totally different renderings of 'common' project.
Click to expand...
...
Click to expand...
That model would have been an excellent design for a European fifth-generation aircraft that could have entered service in 2025 and would have replaced the Spanish Hornet, the German Tornado and the French Mirage 2000, but it does not seem like something designed to enter service in 2050.
 
"excellent"?! Based on what?
Anyways, it seems at least better than could any Rafale in 2050.
 

Attachments

  • ztPSbEW.jpg
    ztPSbEW.jpg
    158.3 KB · Views: 89
  • LBGz7EY.jpg
    LBGz7EY.jpg
    183.4 KB · Views: 76
Last edited by a moderator:
Double posting from here where sits the document illustrating that short reflection, with the link kindly updated by @quellish in post #107 :

That document shows perfectly an often forgotten aspect of the predominance of UCAV among the forces: Air lift power and large volume, heavy load capacity with short field landing aircraft (or a Short field landing rocket ;)) .

If the ground army can make it valid with C-130 type of aircraft operating lighter models with less range, an air force must have an heavy lifter able to land on short and dispersed runways where UCAV will have to operate.

In that sense, FCAS (central European one) is missing an essential component and that would, in effect, directly limits its performances.

Deploying and Sustaining a fleet of an advanced UCAV with C-17 is one thing. Relying on more modest solution like C-130 sized aircraft or even a disfunctionnal one like the A400 would be a risky wager.
 
Last edited:
Last interview of Mr Trappier, Dassault CEO, about FCAS and Plan B (Dassault could now somewhat claims Vauban's legacy) reveals that nothing has moved and FCAS is stuck in the mud:

5cded96063604.image.jpg


Sadly, the link to the interview was deleted. Consequently, this post was edited.
 
Last edited:
FighterJock said:
GTX said:
Opinion: Germany & France Waltzing Around the NGF
Click to expand...

Germany’s recent selection of the F-35 will not help matters into the future of the FCAS, I can see France pulling out and going their own way just like they did in the Eurofighter program that of course led to the development of the Rafael.
Click to expand...
I don't think France can afford to go it alone this time, the rafial was already stretching things to the braking point, going further would gust cause things to break. To be honest even if tempest and fcas were united im not convinced they would have enough money to do it, but I would find it a lot more likely then two European aircraft, let alone any of these country's going it alone.
 
Airbus hint a Plan B:
Guillaume Faury a souligné l'importance de s'en tenir aux propositions actuelles, lors d'une interview accordée à Reuters en marge du salon aéronautique de Farnborough, en Angleterre.

"Il y a le plan A, le SCAF. Il y a également d'autres options, nous y réfléchissons, mais nous travaillons au plan A", a-t-il déclaré.

"Nous voulons que cela se réalise. Je ne veux pas discuter du plan B. Cela compromettrait les chances de parvenir au plan A."
-----------/--------------------------

Guillaume Faury stressed the importance of sticking to the current proposals, during an interview with Reuters on the sidelines of the Farnborough Air Show in England.

"There is plan A, SCAF. There are also other options, we are thinking about it, but we are working on plan A," he said.

"We want this to happen. I don't want to discuss Plan B. It would jeopardize the chances of getting to Plan A."
Click to expand...

Perhaps the solution lies in the wording: let's rename SCAF, Plan B and each side will be functional again!

www.reuters.com

Airbus mulls fighter options but focuses on FCAS -CEO

Europe's Airbus, locked in a dispute with Dassault Aviation over the next stage of a Franco-German-Spanish fighter project, is thinking about other options but is focused on making the project work as planned, its chief executive said on Wednesday.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TomcatViP said:
Airbus hint a Plan B:
Guillaume Faury a souligné l'importance de s'en tenir aux propositions actuelles, lors d'une interview accordée à Reuters en marge du salon aéronautique de Farnborough, en Angleterre.

"Il y a le plan A, le SCAF. Il y a également d'autres options, nous y réfléchissons, mais nous travaillons au plan A", a-t-il déclaré.

"Nous voulons que cela se réalise. Je ne veux pas discuter du plan B. Cela compromettrait les chances de parvenir au plan A."
-----------/--------------------------

Guillaume Faury stressed the importance of sticking to the current proposals, during an interview with Reuters on the sidelines of the Farnborough Air Show in England.

"There is plan A, SCAF. There are also other options, we are thinking about it, but we are working on plan A," he said.

"We want this to happen. I don't want to discuss Plan B. It would jeopardize the chances of getting to Plan A."
Click to expand...

Perhaps the solution lies in the wording: let's rename SCAF, Plan B and each side will be functional again!

www.reuters.com

Airbus mulls fighter options but focuses on FCAS -CEO

Europe's Airbus, locked in a dispute with Dassault Aviation over the next stage of a Franco-German-Spanish fighter project, is thinking about other options but is focused on making the project work as planned, its chief executive said on Wednesday.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
Click to expand...
A classic case of the prisoner's dilemma!

Prisoner's dilemma - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Cjc said:
FighterJock said:
GTX said:
Opinion: Germany & France Waltzing Around the NGF
Click to expand...

Germany’s recent selection of the F-35 will not help matters into the future of the FCAS, I can see France pulling out and going their own way just like they did in the Eurofighter program that of course led to the development of the Rafael.
Click to expand...
I don't think France can afford to go it alone this time, the rafial was already stretching things to the braking point, going further would gust cause things to break.
Click to expand...
IIRC typhoon didn't really save that much money for major partners - i.e. multiple national aircraft were technically possible for that overall price - probably(!) somewhat less advanced, but much closer to individual customer neess.
It, however, stopped national governments from cancelling it.
Judging from historical experience, not sure France really needs such "will booster" as much as others.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom