BAE Systems isn't doing anything on its own. To think otherwise is fantasy.

If you actually think how many aircraft British Aerospace and BAE Systems have actually designed themselves you'll find yourself using the fingers of one hand. Most of BAe's products were 'legacy' types from BAC and Hawker Siddeley.
Then look at how many times BAE dumped its product lines to avoid shelling out development costs, the 125 and 146 being prime examples. Now the Hawk is almost out of life, so BAE gets India to share the costs, India wins in its 'Make in India' policy and BAE wins in getting a cheap production line if the re-winged Hawk does extend its life and gains extra customers. Once Hawk is dead BAE is out of the trainer market for good.
BAE has done much tinkering with UAVs and stealth research probably since the 1980s, but there has been little if any tangible benefits beyond what may have got into Typhoon and the F-35. Typhoon is the last remaining military aircraft link until production ends. BAE Systems doesn't really build aircraft any more, it does lucrative design work and sub-contract work. BAe might just have made the EAP into a fighter had it been forced to go it alone, but toady its impossible that Taranis could become a UK-only programme.
 
I don't say that Taranis is going to be a UK only project or that the Typhoon replacement is going to be a UK only project.

What I do say, is that the French aren't in a hurry to replace Rafale, the Germans weren't in a hurry to get Typhoon and they will not be the first to replace it- consequently the decision to do anything other than talk about their replacement will be a long and drawn out process.

FCAS has great potential for the French and the British, in terms of actually building a stealth aircraft, development of all the sensors and communications for future aircraft and to some extent the propulsion for a Rafale upgrade.

It is also likely that the development of a UCAV will spur/inform future fighter tactics and development. Both sides have repeatedly stated that FCAS is not just about the unmanned demonstrator.

My opinion is that FCAS is enough for France for the immediate future and that any agreement with Germany is merely a place holder until something firm needs to happen.

So what the UK needs is a commitment to a project beyond building one demonstrator or talking to the US/Japan about whether we can share development with them. Turkey may yield some useful flying technology for the British to incorporate, but even their fighter is too young to allow a firm UK project initiation.

Talk of Hawk is only about keeping jobs now. We need to be able to redirect people onto something for the future and that needs action, not words.
 
Being in a hurry or not - there's no reason to expect substantial quantities of operationally effective fighters from this effort before 2040. They may claim 2035, but delays will happen short of much more major conventional warfare in Europe.

What matters is how urgent the piece will be in 203x, not how urgent it is today. The early studies that are usually done for such a project don't cost terribly much, it's only reasonable to launch them now to avoid further delay. They should have started with that as the first EF came into service.
 
AI + Big Data, the global technosphere, and the changing nature of international competition (think OBOR), are going to turn warfare on its head, to the extent that they have not already done so.

Autonomy, directed energy, portable electrical power and additive manufacturing will change the way that armed forces are equipped, to operate in the world outlined in the above sentence. (The previous First Sea Lord said in public in September that an autonomous SSN, achievable in a next-generation timeframe at most, would always beat a manned SSN. I was expecting Zombie Lord Nelson to materialize and beat him to a pulp with his good arm.)

Anytime we think about a clean-sheet-of-paper product, we should remember all this.
 
It's for those reasons that I am very dubious about the value of '5th generation' like the TFX to the UK, other than to keep BAE in work whilst we dither.

The UK has already initiated the studies for the next fighter project. BAE have been developing the AI for UAVs for most of this century and I believe this sort of lead is what will distinguish the British FCAS from it's neighbour.

They will share structural work and an engine but will they think the same?

Is there any evidence that any other potential FCAS partner has been thinking about the use of DEW and energy storage requirements , developing AI and working on LO for decades?
 

Attachments

  • 20180425_Airbus-fcas-concept_ILA_Berlin_2018.jpg
    20180425_Airbus-fcas-concept_ILA_Berlin_2018.jpg
    25.4 KB · Views: 557
  • 20180425_Airbus-fcas-concept_ILA_Berlin_2018_1.png
    20180425_Airbus-fcas-concept_ILA_Berlin_2018_1.png
    40.5 KB · Views: 553
  • 20180425_Airbus-fcas-concept_ILA_Berlin_2018_2.jpg
    20180425_Airbus-fcas-concept_ILA_Berlin_2018_2.jpg
    204.7 KB · Views: 569
MTU reveals next-generation fighter engine


MTU Aero Engines has revealed a new future powerplant for combat aircraft to be ready for fielding in the early 2030s.

Conceptual artwork of the Next European Fighter Engine, which was revealed at the ILA Airshow in Berlin. (IHS Markit/Gareth Jennings)Conceptual artwork of the Next European Fighter Engine, which was revealed at the ILA Airshow in Berlin. (IHS Markit/Gareth Jennings)

The manufacturer disclosed the Next European Fighter Engine (NEFE) in a product brochure distributed at the ILA Airshow in Berlin in late April.

As noted in the brochure, the NEFE is being developed alongside the New Fighter (NF) combat aircraft and the Next-Generation Weapon System (NGWS) as part of a wider drive to preserve European defence industrial sovereignty under the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) project.

To meet the planned 2040 in-service date of the future combat aircraft being developed by Airbus and Dassault, MTU is already engaged in defining the aircraft’s twin-engined powerplant under the direction of the German Federal Ministry of Defence (BMVg).

In developing the NEFE, MTU has to meet a number of exacting requirements that include improved thrust and lower fuel consumption over current powerplants; low development and manufacturing costs; efficient maintenance and long projectable maintenance intervals; high electrical power extraction for aircraft systems; as well as maximum robustness and reliability.

“For the next-generation engine, MTU has identified various technologies of the future, which it wants to develop further,” the brochure stated, adding that these include multi-disciplinary methods and simulations in the design of engine concepts and in the components. Additive manufacturing and the use of ‘bionic design’ also open up new possibilities, MTU said. Furthermore, new designs and new materials, such as ceramic matrix composites, reduce the weight while enabling higher engine temperatures for more power delivery.

http://www.janes.com/article/79573/ila-2018-mtu-reveals-next-generation-fighter-engine
 
Hmm, so "reveals" now means "done a few paper studies"...

Likewise, Airbus and Dassault "launch" fighter development with no whiff whatsoever of any government contract

Where is the money for any of this? It basically just seems to be Airbus and Dassault and MTU shouting "give me money". Good pr but little actual work.
 
I totally agree with that. This is why it woul be good to have the actual statement from officials and not this kind of pre-digested media report.
Airbus CEO was more realistic on Tuesday (quoted on Keypub/News forum).

Airbus’s German operation is working with French warplane specialist Dassault Aviation SA on a fighter platform involving a range of aerial products, including drones and “swarms” of small aircraft, Enders said [...].
“We’re not talking about ‘a’ military aircraft,” he said in Berlin. “We’re talking about a system of military-combat airborne elements. It’s a different system.” It’s not even clear whether there will be role for a piloted plane, the CEO added, saying that depends on requirements specified by the French and German governments.
 
Dassault will be project manager for the FCAS (same name as the French-British UCAV [dead ?] project) and the plane will be navalisable.

I have links in French, but this link is better for a forum in British :

https://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/dassault-named-leader-of-future-european-fighter.80971/
 
Interesting that no other stories picked that up. The message appears to be very different whether the French or the Germans are doing the briefing. No doubt Dassault is manoeuvring to get a fait accompli before Germany can bring in more partner countries e.g. UK, Sweden, Italy, Spain...
 
They are going to have to get more partner nations involved, if for nothing else to spread the R&D costs and reduce the unit costs. Although analysis has shown that single-nation developments like Rafale and Gripen are not necessarily more expensive than multi-national collaborations, the political will still has to be there to take on those costs.

It took three nations to fund the Tornado (844 aircraft exc. Saudi exports). For Typhoon it required four nations and only 472 out of the 1998 production contract for 620 (exc. exports) have been ordered/built. The UK has spent £22.9 billion already and perhaps as much as £37 billion by completion. Germany had spent €21.3 billion by 2004 (around €120 million unit cost, lately reduced to €90 mil), the Spanish have paid €11.7 billion (roughly resulting in €160 million per airframe).

180 Rafales out of originally 286 planned have been ordered and 150 completed so far. The total programme cost (to FY2013) was around €45.9 billion, with a unit cost of €160.5 million (latterly €101.1 million for the F3+).

By comparison the Dutch government are spending €4.5 billion for 37 F-35s (equated to €121.6 million each) but of course the F-35 as a complete programme is far higher, more than France and Germany could sustain on their own assuming the new fighter is of equivalent (hopefully superior) standard. If France and Germany take 150 each and Spain takes 70 then it could perhaps sustain a reasonable production run. But who knows what future economics between now and 2040 will result in. In 1988 Parliament was told Eurofighter would cost £7 billion and since then £30 billion has been added to the bill!
 
red admiral said:
Interesting that no other stories picked that up. The message appears to be very different whether the French or the Germans are doing the briefing. No doubt Dassault is manoeuvring to get a fait accompli before Germany can bring in more partner countries e.g. UK, Sweden, Italy, Spain...
How bad can be these arrogant Frenchs. Not like all these kind Typhoon and F-35 builders and buyers ;D

And, of course, only Germany wants to bring in more partner countries... ("no doubt" is the best evidence that I ever read) ::)

It seems, however, and according to German Minister Ursula von de Leyen, that France will be "leader nation" for the project :

https://www.lopinion.fr/blog/secret-defense/l-allemagne-confirme-que-france-dassault-seront-leaders-l-avion-combat-148671

But it's probably disinformation from France, once more again, like the information that as Dassault will be leader for the manned plane, Airbus will be leader for all the system of systems (with UCAV) of the project...
 
Hood said:
180 Rafales out of originally 286 planned have been ordered and 150 completed so far. The total programme cost (to FY2013) was around €45.9 billion, with a unit cost of €160.5 million (latterly €101.1 million for the F3+).
If Hollande wanted to stop the programme at 180, the last Military Programming Law foresees to order 30 more in 2023 (and 15 more are hoped for later).
 
How bad can be these arrogant Frenchs. Not like all these kind Typhoon and F-35 builders and buyers ;D

And, of course, only Germany wants to bring in more partner countries... ("no doubt" is the best evidence that I ever read) ::)

Marcel Dassault managed one hell of a feat: to get a worse reputation than De Gaulle as "the arrogant and annoying frenchman".

I can tell from twelve years on varied aerospace / english speaking forums that, while the "Cheese eating monkey" thing is frowned upon and long dead, both Dassault and De Gaulle reputations remain... troublesome (half joking; don't take that too seriously)
 
@Deltafan

But the non-French news outlets are definitely not saying that from what I've seen. Pretty much every story includes German intent to open this to other countries. Maybe Dassault thinks that a deal has been agreed, but there doesn't seem to be any evidence for it. It seems strange that no one else would report on this...

@Hood

Think about inflation, and whether development, procurement or whole life costs are being quoted. Quite easy to get radically different cost numbers if they're talking about different things.
 
Red Admiral,
Indeed inflation has probably been a major factor.
Interestingly I haven't come across any definitive figure on how much Typhoon has cost overall to develop and build. Instead there seems to be varying sums calculated by each government as they've become worried about the cost, but I've seen nothing on what Italy has spent or contributed to the R&D pot. Most of the online sources I've seen date from 2006-2013 so aren't completely up to date. My gut feeling is that the four-nation production and split procurement hasn't helped reduce costs but instead has had the opposite effect.

Rafale's unit price seems comparable and France has been willing (and able) to fund it alone. If Germany suddenly had the same urge to stump up €20-25 billion to go 50/50 with France then I'd say its possible. But the political reality is that it is unlikely. Also the 22 year timeline is far too long, major technological changes are going to occur before then. What game-changing technologies can Dassault and Airbus bring to the party given that Eurofighter will still be around until 2060 and F-35 to beyond that. Waiting 22 years to introduce an F-35 clone two decades late is a waste of resources. A UCAV for strike missions seems to be a safer future-proof bet and Dassault could lead on that but I'm guessing that manned aircraft is still what the air forces (and potential export buyers) desire.
 
red admiral said:
@Deltafan
But the non-French news outlets are definitely not saying that from what I've seen. Pretty much every story includes German intent to open this to other countries. Maybe Dassault thinks that a deal has been agreed, but there doesn't seem to be any evidence for it. It seems strange that no one else would report on this...
The French sources write that during ILA Ursula von der Leyen said, in French, that Germany will be leader for Eurodrone and the next MBT, and France will be leader for the FCAS.

If somebody has this speech in video, it could be interesting for the next part of this topic...

Edit :

from Deutsche Welle (Germany's public international broadcaster) :

Treibende Kraft bei der Entwicklung des neues Jets wird Frankreich sein, wie von der Leyen ankündigte

Translation :

The driving force in the development of the new jet will be France, as announced by Von der Leyen

www.dw.com/de/neuer-deutsch-französischer-kampfjet-kann-gebaut-werden/a-43552915
 
Interview of the French Defense Minister in the French Weekly Aerospace Magazine Air & Cosmos :

Scaf (this is the word used by the magazine) :

"If we want, at first, to preserve the French-German cooperation to give a solid foundation to the Scaf project, this does not exclude that this project can open later to other European partners. Some have already made the request and nothing forbids to open this project to the United Kingdom, if it wishes".

(sorry for my bad English...)
 
Airbus warns governments not to interfere in European fighter programme

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/airbus-warns-governments-not-to-interfere-in-european-fighter-programme/articleshow/64602160.cms
 
And it seems that it's foreseen to start "demonstrators", quickly :

http://www.air-cosmos.com/scaf-la-france-nation-leader-sur-le-projet-112279
 
Deltafan said:
Airbus warns governments not to interfere in European fighter programme

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/airbus-warns-governments-not-to-interfere-in-european-fighter-programme/articleshow/64602160.cms

Wishful thinking when defense programs are equally welfare/pork/kickbacks as they are weapons programs in this day and age.
 
According Belgium News media.

offers Dassault the Belgium Government a share in R&D and Production of this new French-German Fighter jet.
If Belgium buy Dassault Rafale Jets to replace aging Belgium F-16

But still there is little issue about Dassault getting the contract for this new French-German Fighter jet...
 
According to the German aircraft magazine Flug Revue, the French side, in this case the company Dassault, will take the leadership in developing the new fighter jet, while the German side, probably K+M, will lead the development of the new battle tank.
Source (German): https://www.flugrevue.de/militaerluftfahrt/kampfflugzeuge-helikopter/dassault-fuehrt-bei-deutsch-franzoesischer-fighter-entwicklung/756226
 
A new Dassault video with footage from 3:10 onwards of a new fighter design:

https://youtu.be/G3UtJ6u0QL0

You can see why they have the lead of the project, when compared to what Airbus had come up with...
 
Screenshot. Looks like all other '6th Gen' concepts...

Old Marcel used to pay such attention to tails too.
 

Attachments

  • Dassault.jpg
    Dassault.jpg
    8 KB · Views: 364
Pretty neat
 

Attachments

  • mpv-shot0224.jpg
    mpv-shot0224.jpg
    78.6 KB · Views: 156
  • mpv-shot0223.jpg
    mpv-shot0223.jpg
    121.7 KB · Views: 117
  • mpv-shot0220.jpg
    mpv-shot0220.jpg
    98 KB · Views: 257
  • mpv-shot0216.jpg
    mpv-shot0216.jpg
    111.1 KB · Views: 265
  • mpv-shot0215.jpg
    mpv-shot0215.jpg
    106.3 KB · Views: 271
  • mpv-shot0214.jpg
    mpv-shot0214.jpg
    124 KB · Views: 289
Apart from the lack of tail fins and LEVCONs the basic configuration isn't actually a million miles removed from some of the earlier Airbus concepts.

Might turn out to be generic though.
 
I would think so. Concept art rather than a real design. Most 6th Gen fighter concepts are similar. Seems everyone is setting out on the same design. I hope something more interesting comes along.
 

Attachments

  • MCQ-xwing2.png
    MCQ-xwing2.png
    1.9 MB · Views: 439
mrmalaya said:
A new Dassault video with footage from 3:10 onwards of a new fighter design:

https://youtu.be/G3UtJ6u0QL0

You can see why they have the lead of the project, when compared to what Airbus had come up with...
Thanks a (very big, big, big, big, …) lot mrmalaya ;)
 
Harrier said:
Screenshot. Looks like all other '6th Gen' concepts...

Old Marcel used to pay such attention to tails too.
Layout/Planform like PAKFA without tails?
 

Attachments

  • PAKFA prototype.jpg
    PAKFA prototype.jpg
    63.5 KB · Views: 398
  • Dassault1.jpg
    Dassault1.jpg
    8 KB · Views: 414
It might well be a generic placeholder, but it is being pushed by Dassault in the same way as their UCAV and there is now a project for it with no competitor design. In that sense, it is ahead of the what we have seen from the US, because it won't consigned to history by losing the competition.

If you want exciting placeholder designs, then the BAE ones flateric posted in the FCAS thread are certainly different....
 
Jemiba said:
Don't know if it is, what you're looking for ....
I had in mind this part of the von der Leyen's speech :
Treibende Kraft bei der Entwicklung des neues Jets wird Frankreich sein, wie von der Leyen ankündigte

But thanks for your search :)

Edit :

Would it be possible (when, and if, you'll have available time) to have a 3 views of the project plane (maybe more from the "photo" than from the "drawings", because there are little differences) ;)

Edit 2 : the video on the Dassault webpage :

https://www.dassault-aviation.tv/Wings%20for%20Europe-1637.html

I am very astonished to see that it was from 03.05.2018. Nobobdy had shown it in the other french aviation websites, in the french aviation newspapers (in particular in Air & Cosmos weekly) or in the other french media :eek:
 

Attachments

  • Dassault SCAF.png
    Dassault SCAF.png
    601.3 KB · Views: 386
I got it as a hot tip from a French Journalist on KeyPublishing forum.

It will be interesting to see how SAAB and BAE address the issue of future fighters if the discussions bear fruit.
 
...
 

Attachments

  • img_5aeb3ea131b3d.jpg
    img_5aeb3ea131b3d.jpg
    48.2 KB · Views: 327
Harrier said:
Marcel Dassault might have liked it with them!

So true ! Yet you have no idea, and here's the reason why... both Mirage IV-01 (in 1959) and Mirage 2000-01 (1978) had very ugly vertical tails. Marcel Dassault felt that was wrong, so in both case, he asked the engineers to redesign it. No kidding.
The concept shown had no tail whatsoever, so Marcel Dassault engineers would sight in relieve - "no tail - no need to redesign it entirely just to please the boss taste for aesthetics !" ;D ;D ;D

The cockpit screams "Rafale" but everything else smells "stealth" as in F-22, T-50, and J-20...
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom