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

[WatcherZero]

Dassault CEO strikes dark tone on Europe’s sixth-gen fighter progress

Trappier's view contrasts with that of Airbus, which cited "strong progress" in a statement.

www.defensenews.com

Dassault continuing to not want to work with allies and grab as much of the pie for itself as possible, continually reopening already settled workshare agreements and wanting technology to flow solely from Airbus to Dassault and not the other way round.

 

[FighterJock]

Sad if true.

 

[Archibald]

Nope. Responsability for the present quagmire is probably 50 - 50 Dassault - Germany. You can bet the latter is in no hurry, having bought F-35s. Why bash Dassault when Germany drags its feet ? Why bash Dassault when past experience all the way from AFVG, Jaguar, Typhoon show that european cooperation is a red herring ? It's the lose-lose situation for France I mentionned upthread.

 

[WatcherZero]

Nope. Responsability for the present quagmire is probably 50 - 50 Dassault - Germany. You can bet the latter is in no hurry, having bought F-35s. Why bash Dassault when Germany drags its feet ? Why bash Dassault when past experience all the way from AFVG, Jaguar, Typhoon show that european cooperation is a red herring ? It's the lose-lose situation for France I mentionned upthread.

Dassault CEO said they are specifically trying to push FCAS introduction as far into future as possible, continually putting back planned introduction date, so they can still keeping making Rafales.

 

[TomcatViP]

quote?

 

[Big_Zukini]

Problem is that nobody has enough budget to develop a new military vehicle on their own anymore, not when their national buy is under 200.

Crud, even the US is struggling to afford F-47s on a 200-unit buy.

Then split into components. Share expenses in developing common propulsion, armament, and avionics.
Then everyone can at their own expense use these to make something in a form factor of their choosing.
I really don't see why it can't be done.

Production of composites and therefore stealth enabling materials is now common and no longer a hard block.

 

[dark sidius]

Sad if true.

It will never see the light , China Air Force and USAF win the 6th gen battle

 

[Scott Kenny]

Then split into components. Share expenses in developing common propulsion, armament, and avionics.
Then everyone can at their own expense use these to make something in a form factor of their choosing.
I really don't see why it can't be done.

Production of composites and therefore stealth enabling materials is now common and no longer a hard block.

Common Propulsion is already going to happen in Europe. They're down to one engine maker in the continent.

Armament is more likely to be national, it's easier to build a decent missile than bigger things.

Avionics is not something individual countries want to give up.

 

[EmoBirb]

Its obvious that more complex Industrial partnerships like Tornado/Eurofighter

These two had one major difference compared to FCAS though, what that difference is and why it's detrimental for FCAS is once again on display, imo.

The French may be the most difficult "partner" one could ever find in the defense world.

 

[EmoBirb]

2-Dassault can certainly do it alone (like Rafale) more efficiently and much faster, but the cost ain't split anymore, the whole burden falls on France.

I honestly doubt Dassault could develop something comparable to J-36 or F-47 in a time frame that's shorter than the FCAS timeline currently. It would end up probably akin to a Rafale Plus with UCAVs.

 

[Ainen]

Last time the US tried that, the rest of the world pulled us into two separate world wars.

Then even more reasons to go for affordable force structure.
Unaffordable masterpieces have another name - white elephants.

I honestly doubt Dassault could develop something comparable to J-36 or F-47 in a time frame that's shorter than the FCAS timeline currently. It would end up probably akin to a Rafale Plus with UCAVs.

Why?
Neither US nor China are magical.

 

[WatcherZero]

quote?

His testimony to the Defence Committee

Trappier was asked whether Dassault could go it alone should the FCAS program fail, and be able to provide France with a stealth-capable aircraft within a reasonable time frame.

“I don’t want to sound arrogant at all, but whose capabilities do I need other than my own to make a combat aircraft?” Trappier said. “So I’m willing to cooperate and share. I’m not against it, but I’m the one with the skills.”

Trappier said the future fighter doesn’t compete with the Rafale, which will operate alongside the new air combat system at some point. FCAS will be for beyond the 2040s, “more like 2045,” the CEO said.

Dassault is working on the future F5 standard for Rafale for 2030-2035, with a focus on connectivity and networking, and plans for a stealthy combat drone based on nEUROn as a loyal wingman.

“What we are trying to look at next is how we could make a future combat aircraft. Who with, that’s the question.”

The French state is committed to cooperation on FCAS to free up more resources and to contribute to “a slightly more united Europe,” Trappier said. “The problem is that when it comes down to the nitty gritty of the contracts, it’s more complicated.”

“We will do the NGF, as for with who, that’s not for me to answer,” Trappier said. “That’s up to the state, up to the politicians to say whether we should work with our traditional allies or not.”

He told lawmakers that if the future combat aircraft is produced as it is conceived today, with three partners, “Rafale will seem cheap to you.”

 

[H_K]

Dassault CEO said they are specifically trying to push FCAS introduction as far into future as possible, continually putting back planned introduction date, so they can still keeping making Rafales.

Nope. What he said was the current phased approach is deliberately designed (by Germany - but he didn’t say that) to slow progress down and is unlikely to deliver anything before 2045, and that the end product will be more expensive.

He then said that he would prefer to go faster (& cheaper), which would require a Neuron style partnership framework, but acknowledged this was a political decision and that Dassault had no choice in the matter even if the current approach put the program’s success at risk.

 

[kqcke for you]

I’m biased, because I hope the F-35 is just a stopgap solution and would like Germany to buy some GCAPs in the mid 30s. If not, you would be right.

How can it be a stopgap solution when its the most of the actual mission is the nuclear share weapons...

 

[kqcke for you]

Nope. Responsability for the present quagmire is probably 50 - 50 Dassault - Germany. You can bet the latter is in no hurry, having bought F-35s.

For a specific reason where there was no alternative on the market nor did anyone offer it.

Why bash Dassault when Germany drags its feet ?

If germany drags its feets then does the rest too.

Why bash Dassault when past experience all the way from AFVG, Jaguar, Typhoon show that european cooperation is a red herring ?

But somehow there are sutch projects which worked and even achieved there goals.

 

[TomcatViP]

@WatcherZero : as @H_K wrote, we can imply that's what Dassault CEO would want ideally but it is something that has remained unstated until today.

I was surprised by your take on this as it would have been contrary to the defense plan drafted by Dassault main customer and supporter, the French state.

What can be concluded from Trappier last charge against the FCAS multi-national windmill is only that it won't be an easy path. Every step on the way can be the last.
At least we could safely say that we will have a demonstrator. Something new to display at a full scale, with a human in it, around fair and airshow around the world, would certainly help both the French industry, but also those of Spain and Germany.

 

[galgot]

These two had one major difference compared to FCAS though, what that difference is and why it's detrimental for FCAS is once again on display, imo.

The French may be the most difficult "partner" one could ever find in the defense world.

... You've never met my ex.

 

[galgot]

His testimony to the Defence Committee

Where in this quote does he "... specifically trying to push FCAS introduction as far into future as possible, continually putting back planned introduction date, so they can still keeping making Rafales." ?

Trappier was asked whether Dassault could go it alone should the FCAS program fail, and be able to provide France with a stealth-capable aircraft within a reasonable time frame.

“I don’t want to sound arrogant at all, but whose capabilities do I need other than my own to make a combat aircraft?” Trappier said. “So I’m willing to cooperate and share. I’m not against it, but I’m the one with the skills.”

Trappier said the future fighter doesn’t compete with the Rafale, which will operate alongside the new air combat system at some point. FCAS will be for beyond the 2040s, “more like 2045,” the CEO said.

Dassault is working on the future F5 standard for Rafale for 2030-2035, with a focus on connectivity and networking, and plans for a stealthy combat dronebased on nEUROn as a loyal wingman.

“What we are trying to look at next is how we could make a future combat aircraft. Who with, that’s the question.”

The French state is committed to cooperation on FCAS to free up more resources and to contribute to “a slightly more united Europe,” Trappier said. “The problem is that when it comes down to the nitty gritty of the contracts, it’s more complicated.”

“We will do the NGF, as for with who, that’s not for me to answer,” Trappier said. “That’s up to the state, up to the politicians to say whether we should work with our traditional allies or not.”

He told lawmakers that if the future combat aircraft is produced as it is conceived today, with three partners, “Rafale will seem cheap to you.”

NGF is already scheduled to come in the 2040's, he just says the NGF won't compete with the rafale cause it will come later. Dassault is not pushing the schedules further away, he just says the thing will come in the 2040's, and with the problems encountered, most likely 2045 (or never).

And btw, I know it's always "French arrogance" and "Dassault's fault" for anything, all fun, no prob, we're use to it, but all this fuss about "Dassault is trashing FCAS" is a bit premature. No where in this interview is he saying Dassault is out of it, yet.

 

[Archibald]

And btw, I know it's always "French arrogance" and "Dassault's fault" for anything, all fun, no prob, we're use to it, but all this fuss about "Dassault is trashing FCAS" is a bit premature. No where in this interview is he saying Dassault is out of it, yet.

Very well said, chap.

 

[FighterJock]

Would it be Germany's fault for the failure of FCAS Archibald? Since Germany opted for the F-35 to keep it's nuclear role.

 

[H_K]

Would it be Germany's fault for the failure of FCAS Archibald? Since Germany opted for the F-35 to keep it's nuclear role.

The issue here is less Germany's F-35 decision and more their pushing a partnership model that looks like Eurofighter on steroids, which will deliver a flawed plane that will be too late, too expensive, and subject to too many vetoes and too much political interference (Bundestag anyone...).

The UK would never have signed up for this, having been burnt once before. The French have, but are seriously worried about the lack of output.

 

[kqcke for you]

Common Propulsion is already going to happen in Europe. They're down to one engine maker in the continent.

Thats not the case both have there own engine manufacture. For FCAS its EUMAT based of Safran, MTU and ITP where GCAP has a team based of Rolls-Royce, Avio Aero and IHI but yeah a consolidation of manufactures is happening if everything stays as it is.

Armament is more likely to be national, it's easier to build a decent missile than bigger things.

It use is but we still have multi nationale developments like FC/ASW or 3SM.

Avionics is not something individual countries want to give up.

For sure but then again sometimes we don't have choices and need to sacrefice something. For hell if they need too make a consortium of the bespoke companys for the job and each of them do the workload in there motherland

 

[Archibald]

Wonder whether France would be better doing it with Spain alone ? Almost happened for Rafale, circa 1988...

 

[FighterJock]

And I can sympathise with France over Germany's behaviour with FCAS, they should definitely go it alone with Spain and throw Germany out for good.

 

[kqcke for you]

The issue here is less Germany's F-35 decision and more their pushing a partnership model that looks like Eurofighter on steroids, which will deliver a flawed plane that will be too late, too expensive, and subject to too many vetoes and too much political interference (Bundestag anyone...).

Do we know what and who is pushing for what? Okay we know something. The goverments want this more pillar sharing based programm where dassault likes a neutron like framework more focused around themself (which is inderstandable)

The UK would never have signed up for this, having been burnt once before. The French have, but are seriously worried about the lack of output.

Everything can be done peer contracts and strict rules but then again maybe thats why germany is in FCAS...

 

[red admiral]

The UK would never have signed up for this, having been burnt once before. The French have, but are seriously worried about the lack of output.

But GCAP is pursuing a similar partnered, multi phase approach?

partnership model that looks like Eurofighter on steroids, which will deliver a flawed plane that will be too late, too expensive, and subject to too many vetoes and too much political interference

But it will actually deliver a plane. Whereas France / Dassault alone is unlikely to do that due to scale and cost of "6th Gen".

Previous experience is that the "Eurofighter" model reduces time and cost relative to a national only programme.

 

[kqcke for you]

I don't think here is only 1 to blame but all. For sure germany was a problem in the 80s too late 2010s but with the change in political situation international and in germany many people are more adapt for sales too more extrem countries. But we also have france with dassault which clearly want an more leadership focused position (which makes sense and should have been oblivious). Now spain is ... Spain i can't really say mutch about them as im neither familiar with there political situation nor there problematic site in FCAS same with belgium. Now i do believe that FCAS a more F-35 like avionic system in an F-22 like airframe with maritime applications but maybe since the second war in ukraine there seems to be an wish from german (and spain?) for a larger airframe which seems to be not possible with the existing configuration of PANG which hardly can't be changed like that. Now there no real solution to get out of it except too compromise for both sides too some extent.

MAWS was a failure from the start (from my view) as they couldnt come when needed and now would be too early but time will Tell. MGCS on the otherhand seems to be rather good as both want a rather light tank system ( well systems) with the only big difference being which gun but with both being so similiar its unlikely that one is better so more a question of what becomes the new standard and if everyone will follow it

 

[Ainen]

But it will actually deliver a plane. Whereas France / Dassault alone is unlikely to do that due to scale and cost of "6th Gen".

Previous experience is that the "Eurofighter" model reduces time and cost relative to a national only programme.

Previous experience is that eurofighter exactly doesn't reduce cost even per nation - even compared to France, which produced 1.5 different planes(naval variant, as close as it is, is a different structural design, had its own set of trials) instead of 1. For all the expenses, 99% of Eurofighters still fly with mechanical radars (among long list of other long overdue updates).
I.e. they're basicaly subpar aircraft, barely above NATO average. If it's an example of actually delivering a plane(and not politics), IMHO it's outright better to drop Germany yesterday, at most limiting things to a joint derisking demonstrator.
There is no magic in scale and cost of 6th gen; this isn't some kind of Yamato project. It's expensive and requires a major industrial power to achieve. It's an unavoidable payment for country trying to retain its status as one, anyway.
Nothing less, nothing more.
And longer list of nations didn't help to transform Eurofighter into 5th gen aircraft back in 1990s. For all their combined resources.

 

[H_K]

But GCAP is pursuing a similar partnered, multi phase approach?

I think the approach has to be suited to the partners... i.e. what might work for GCAP doesn't necessarily work for FCAS.

To give Italy and the UK credit where due, they have a strong partnership track record and compatible requirements. Japan seems good at compromise and able to fit in easily. That puts GCAP on the right footing.

Whereas for FCAS, Germany has a terrible record both in terms of partnerships (see how it almost sunk Eurofighter in the 90s, and then underinvested in improving the product once in service), but also in setting realistic requirements (A400M, Eurofighter, Tiger UHT), with the added wildcard of Bundestag parliamentary veto rights which none of the other countries have to deal with. They've also stonewalled and slow walked the FCAS program at every step, which is not good for the future.

Arguably Dassault & Airbus D&S are probably both equally responsible for not taking a more productive partnership stance, but even if the 2 companies were on best of terms, the other obstacles to success would still remain.

Previous experience is that the "Eurofighter" model reduces time and cost relative to a national only programme.

I haven't seen any evidence that Eurofighter delivered faster and cheaper than Gripen or Rafale?

 

[red admiral]

Different countries have different world views and priorities. Not much point in discussing further or looking at actual evidence or facts.

Meh

 

[Maro.Kyo]

Common Propulsion is already going to happen in Europe. They're down to one engine maker in the continent.

Simply not true, both in terms of military and civil applications.

Armament is more likely to be national, it's easier to build a decent missile than bigger things.

a lot of their flagship air-launched ordnance programmes are multi-national, so also not true.

 

[kqcke for you]

France - and EU - didn't produce stealth aircraft for a simple reason their design cycle started too early, and peace prevented unnecessary spending afterwards (for what? Lybians shoot down all the Rafales, or Yemenis all the Eurofighters?). Now peace divident is gone, and new cycle of aircraft development was necessary in any case. They're of course not nearly as capable in aerospace department as Turkey and South Korea(no slightening intended), but i think they'll eventually manage, somehow.

Peace divident the evil of all military projects of this scale.

Spare me this uhnoes, return to reality. Maybe Germany will screw things up, maybe UK will cancel GCAP right before service entry(that's their trick). France will have FCAS, one way or another.

For sure they get FCAS/ SCAF in there way but guys i don't think now is the time for those picky mickys (even tought we can't change a thing). For FCAS/SCAF to work as a multinationale project we need to accept trade offs. One solution to the (FCAS/SCAF) too small would be munition carrier. Just a flying wing with minimal avionics and a lot of munition and fuel in the case of germany (and spain?). This would allow FCAS too stay in the empty weight limit of 16t.

 

[H_K]

i honestly would have been mutch happier with being part of GCAP simply because of the faster timeline (thanks to japan i guess)

The GCAP vs NGF timeline is worth its own discussion IMHO.

I wouldn't put too much weight on the target service entries. 2035 for GCAP is very aspirational and likely unachievable, whereas 2040-45 for NGF appears to be more conservative and probably more realistic.

What matters more is the timelines for individual components (airframe development, engine development etc):

1) Demonstrators: 2027 is for the UK-only tech demonstrator, similar to EAP in the 1980s. Whereas in 2029 we may see an actual joint French/German/Spanish NGF demonstrator which I expect will be closer to the end product (similar to YF-22/X-35/Rafale A). The actual GCAP prototype won't fly until 2030... which is a very aggressive timeline IMHO since development only started last year and won't be complete until 2027. I expect this 2030 GCAP first flight to still look more like a test bed than a full prototype (e.g. it probably still won't have the right engines).

2) Engine development appears to be running roughly even. While it's true that Rolls Royce is (way?) ahead in terms of core technology development, the GCAP engine partnership between RR - IHI - Avio has only been up and running for a short amount of time relative to the NGF NEFE partnership between Safran - MTU - ITP.

Bottom line is the 2035 timeline for GCAP smells more like when the first pre-production aircraft will be delivered (similar to the first Eurofighter IPA aircraft which was delivered 8 years after DA1 prototype first flight)... with extensive testing remaining and a slow ramp-up to operational service. Whereas 2040-2045 for NGF smells like an in-service date for the first operational squadron. Apples and oranges...

 

[WatcherZero]

Nope. What he said was the current phased approach is deliberately designed (by Germany - but he didn’t say that) to slow progress down and is unlikely to deliver anything before 2045, and that the end product will be more expensive.

Germany wants FCAS accelerated not slowed down as they are facing a gap from 2030-2040 with little if any Typhoon production and potential loss of skills. Dassault on the other hand has Rafale deliveries scheduled through 2035 and potentially as late as 2038.
The target date is 2040 but here you have the Dassault CEO saying he would like it to be 2045 or even later.

Yes Dassault loved the Neuron program, they were lead contractor and despite it being a six nation project the company had 50% of the industrial share. Leonardo had 25% industrial share, Saab 25% and the rest of the countries like Greece and Spain only had subcontracting involvement (Switzerland for example only performed wind tunnel and weapon carriage tests) matching their financial contribution (France 50% of first phase, Sweden 25% of first phase, Italy 22% of first phase, Spain 8% of second phase, etc..).

 

[WatcherZero]

The GCAP vs NGF timeline is worth its own discussion IMHO.

I wouldn't put too much weight on the target service entries. 2035 for GCAP is very aspirational and likely unachievable, whereas 2040-45 for NGF appears to be more conservative and probably more realistic.

What matters more is the timelines for individual components (airframe development, engine development etc):

1) Demonstrators: 2027 is for the UK-only tech demonstrator, similar to EAP in the 1980s. Whereas in 2029 we may see an actual joint French/German/Spanish NGF demonstrator which I expect will be closer to the end product (similar to YF-22/X-35/Rafale A). The actual GCAP prototype won't fly until 2030... which is a very aggressive timeline IMHO since development only started last year and won't be complete until 2027. I expect this 2030 GCAP first flight to still look more like a test bed than a full prototype (e.g. it probably still won't have the right engines).

2) Engine development appears to be running roughly even. While it's true that Rolls Royce is (way?) ahead in terms of core technology development, the GCAP engine partnership between RR - IHI - Avio has only been up and running for a short amount of time relative to the NGF NEFE partnership between Safran - MTU - ITP.

Bottom line is the 2035 timeline for GCAP smells more like when the first pre-production aircraft will be delivered (similar to the first Eurofighter IPA aircraft which was delivered 8 years after DA1 prototype first flight)... with extensive testing remaining and a slow ramp-up to operational service. Whereas 2040-2045 for NGF smells like an in-service date for the first operational squadron. Apples and oranges...

All three countries are producing 2027 demonstrator aircraft while UK and Japan are providing aerial laboratories, each demonstrator will show off the best local content and in 2029 the design will be locked down choosing the best performing from the national demonstrators with the first pre-production GCAP prototype to fly in 2030/2031 (the design of the GCAP itself is being developed separately to the national demonstrators which will focus on testing competing design elements i.e. different wing/tail arrangements, etc..).

The FCAS demonstrator to fly in 2029 is a French only demonstrator with an old M88 engine, sensors will separately start development in 2027 on a Spanish flying lab aircraft while in parallel Germany will test the Remote Carrier. Dassault has indicated the first pre-production of the FCAS might not fly until 2040 with IOC in 2045!

 

[Scott Kenny]

To give Italy and the UK credit where due, they have a strong partnership track record and compatible requirements. Japan seems good at compromise and able to fit in easily. That puts GCAP on the right footing.

It also helps that UK and Japan had very similar requirements already (very long range CAP), so the required compromise in requirements is "whose range do we pick?" I suspect that both agreed, without seeing the numbers, that the longer range between the two requirements was more desirable.

 

[dark sidius]

All three countries are producing 2027 demonstrator aircraft while UK and Japan are providing aerial laboratories, each demonstrator will show off the best local content and in 2029 the design will be locked down choosing the best performing from the national demonstrators with the first pre-production GCAP prototype to fly in 2030/2031 (the design of the GCAP itself is being developed separately to the national demonstrators which will focus on testing competing design elements i.e. different wing/tail arrangements, etc..).

The FCAS demonstrator to fly in 2029 is a French only demonstrator with an old M88 engine, sensors will separately start development in 2027 on a Spanish flying lab aircraft while in parallel Germany will test the Remote Carrier. Dassault has indicated the first pre-production of the FCAS might not fly until 2040 with IOC in 2045!

This program is dead...

 

[galgot]

This program is dead...

Thanks for the info. I'll wait for the coroner's report.

 

[FighterJock]

So what will happen now?

 

[Archibald]

Probably nothing. It was just a little flame war on a corner of the Internet.