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

H_K said:
This is a classic case of “concern trolling”. Francis Tusa bats for the home team (UK) and I suspect he’s enjoying twisting the knife in the wound to “help” the patient along.
Click to expand...

I think that is misrepresenting Francis' position. He's a big fan of French procurement efforts and openness on the military front, often comparing it very favourably against the UK's MoD in recent years. Particularly in parliamentary reports and AFV production and delivery. Yes he's from the UK, but he's very favourably disposed to the French to say the least...
 
H_K said:
This is a classic case of “concern trolling”. Francis Tusa bats for the home team (UK) and I suspect he’s enjoying twisting the knife in the wound to “help” the patient along.

He (intentionally?) mischaracterizes many of the French decisions. The small-scale hypersonic research program, Aarok MALE UAV trials, limited support for Indian fighter programs have nothing to do with SCAF, just like BAE’s support for Turkey’s own fighter program has nothing to do with GCAP.

Likewise the potential Neuron-like UCAV is not part of SCAF’s scope and continuous Rafale improvements are no different from similar Eurofighter programs like Quadriga.

That leaves the question mark of small/medium remote carriers and the French combat cloud designed to support the Rafale user base of 500-600 aircraft. Obviously this has the potential to serve as a “plan B” if SCAF fails or is delayed, but you can hardly blame the French gov/industry/air force to be working on delivering incremental improvements over the next 15-20 years prior to SCAF’s entry in service.
Click to expand...
Crud, those are likely to be chunks of tech that will go into SCAF!
 
I was very optimistic when the SCAF/FCAS program was announced.

I started to doubt when the German parliamentarians started to delay the allocation of funds for the program by indicating that they wanted to defend German interests for the SCAF/FCAS and MGCS programs... And, since then, the problems have not ceased ... Recently, in response to German parliamentarians, the French senate even created a commission to defend French interests in the SCAF/FCAS program...

Not to mention that, to avoid delays and increases in the costs of the A-400M program (due to the multiplicity of partners and their requests) the program had to remain two during the definition phase, and only after that new partners should be allowed. But, for economic reasons, a third partner was accepted...

Since then, there have been difficulties with the refusals of Dassault, prime contractor for SCAF/FCAS, to share sensitive information (the reason given being that in the event of the program being stopped, the partners will have acquired know-how which could be used for programs competing with those of Dassault). We don't even know if this problem is solved or not.

As if that were not enough, the MGCS (initially linked to the SCAF/FCAS for the sharing of work between France and Germany) risks being cancelled, the German side visibly seeking other partners...

Finally, very often in his public speeches, Eric Trappier criticizes, more or less explicitly, the cooperation on this program, regularly repeating his preference for a purely national program...

On a broader level, the economic prospects for France and Germany are not good at the moment (and the fact that they are not good for Great Britain either does not change much to this problem).

In short, I do not know what will come out of this program, but I will not venture the slightest forecast on its future and in what form (-s?) it will evolve...
 
Last edited:
welp, if the French and Germans do split, perhaps the French should work on a light weight project.. bringing back the days of the success of the Mirage 3. A potential design could look like some of those LWF 5th gen concepts our members are designing in the Aircraft Design section. It would target a different market than the F-35, KAAN, GCAPS.
 
helmutkohl said:
welp, if the French and Germans do split, perhaps the French should work on a light weight project.. bringing back the days of the success of the Mirage 3. A potential design could look like some of those LWF 5th gen concepts our members are designing in the Aircraft Design section. It would target a different market than the F-35, KAAN, GCAPS.
Click to expand...
I would focus more on the UCAS market.
 
helmutkohl said:
welp, if the French and Germans do split, perhaps the French should work on a light weight project.. bringing back the days of the success of the Mirage 3. A potential design could look like some of those LWF 5th gen concepts our members are designing in the Aircraft Design section. It would target a different market than the F-35, KAAN, GCAPS.
Click to expand...
They still need to replace Rafale at some point.
 
Deltafan said:
On a broader level, the economic prospects for France and Germany are not good at the moment (and the fact that they are not good for Great Britain either does not change much to this problem).
Click to expand...

This development is not surprising. Look on the France history and look on the German history and notice the differences.
The pushing ahead of Germany with the ESSI and not care(?) about France could be count as an early indication of German-France conflict. It would be interesting to know the French side's view on FCAS, MGCS and ESSI.
en.wikipedia.org

European Sky Shield Initiative - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Anyway, the Germans are so smart to get cooperation partners. What is going wrong that France cannot find cooperation partners?

If we look on the problems in the projects EC665 and NH90, then the EU has a fundamental problem with cooperation. What is the root cause of this problems?

For the moment France has to develop a Rafale 2.0 alone, which maybe looking like a F-22 finally.
 
Last edited:
Sry but i didnt put that link in instead one about the News about tempest and Germany. I try to correct that so the right link is shown.
 
Suri #1010: EC665 and NH90, then the EU has a fundamental problem with cooperation. What is the root cause of this problems?

It's not the EU (which is a vague notion, scarcely a common aspiration, not a cohesive Centre of Authority: Kissinger wondered who to call for a European view on a Statesman issue): Euro-Aero collaboration has been troubled by the mind-set of Senior politicians making Policy.

A reason most clans dissuade their nubiles from pursuing men old enough to be Daddy is nothing in common, so incompatible hopes.
So, quite properly, Marcel took Mirage IIIs as his qualification to parent any team including him (as Alouette long did for Eurocopter).
So Next Gen (Mirage 2000; Cougars etc) springing directly from 1960s' achievements benefitted from parental guidance.

Not now. General Atomics? Who he? Space X? Who he? How can Raytheon, a consumer durables outfit (Whirlpool washing machines), dominate GW and own Pratt and Sikorsky? CASA arrived in EF2000 knowing little but MRO on USAFE F-100s/F-4s, yet performed estimably (less so on A400M), so an asset on a 6G team, where any parent set in his ways will wield pen and paper in a CAD Metasphere.

EC665/NH90 progress was hindered by Marignane's wish for all the classmates to do it like we do it here: Daddy knows best.
 
Last edited:
alertken said:
How can Raytheon, a consumer durables outfit (Whirlpool washing machines), dominate GW and own Pratt and Sikorsky?
Click to expand...

MBDA does very well in the GW business, even without the enormous US market...
 
alertken said:
EC665/NH90 progress was hindered by Marignane's wish for all the classmates to do it like we do it here: Daddy knows best.
Click to expand...
I think you need to spell out your argument more. Too easy to just point the finger.

What exactly about Tiger & NH90’s problems are down to Eurocopter France’s failures? (Especially NH90… keeping in mind France only had 31% workshare).
 
Project Management. both at Industrial and at Customer level: for example, attention from Day One to In-Service Sustainment. The only way to handle JVs is to pursue only what is in the Best Interests of the Project. That did not happen on (A400M), Tigre and NH90. So on (A400M &) Tigre the Customer OCCAR (on NH90: NAHEMA), must share responsibility with the Industrial Teams. Maybe their glacial timescale was in part caused by exactly that effort to reach consensus. But time matters: Full Operational Capability achieved in the 4th decade from Feasibility Study is no trophy on any CV. Compromise was evidently in short supply, including at the the team at Marignane in the crucial period 1985-95. Compare and contrast with how the similar resources at MBDA have pulled together as one.
 
All collaborative programmes have an element of the deal between the chicken and the pig"I'll provide the eggs you provide the bacon".
France kept Concorde alive by treaty and killed off AFVG. The UK had to take Gazelles and SA330 as designed but got to make Lynx and Jaguar the way it wanted.
MRCA/Tornado was perhaps successful because noone got the plane they wanted (UKVG for RAF single seater F4 for Luftwaffe).
 
Do you realize what you are writing? This is not a project to design hanguns but one for one of the most formidable weapon in a country arsenal, and one that can easily be compromised by unwanted access to its technology.

Hell yeah, restriction to exports are part of the concept.
 
TomcatViP said:
Do you realize what you are writing? This is not a project to design hanguns but one for one of the most formidable weapon in a country arsenal, and one that can easily be compromised by unwanted access to its technology.

Hell yeah, restriction to exports are part of the concept.
Click to expand...
Then given Germany's behavior regarding Typhoon, France is foolish to work with them.

Germany was willing to burn 1000+ jobs at home and quite possibly their relationship with the UK in NATO entirely, to stop an export that would have kept production lines going and irreplaceable skilled workers employed for another decade while GCAP and FCAS worked through their development.

Congratulations, Germany, you just doubled the cost of your next combat aircraft and delayed its entry into service by at least 5 years because you shut down the assembly lines and laid off the workers who know how to build combat aircraft.
 
I an sorry but in Typhoon design and manufacturing there is not much irreplaceable.
Germans will do better opening a line for a real modern fighter. The F-35 fuselage project will produce a more reliable working force for example.
 
Lockheed F104 Starfighter assembled in West Germany. Sixty years later Lockheed F35 assembled in Germany. So much for Tornado and Typhoon.
 
Scott Kenny said:
If France hasn't already written something like a "No vetoes on exports" clause into the agreement, France is being stupid.
Click to expand...
There has been an agreement since 2019 between France and Germany on arms exports.

www.latribune.fr

L'accord sur le contrôle des exportations d'armes a été mis en vigueur par Berlin et Paris

L'accord franco-allemand dans le domaine des exportations devrait en principe faciliter les exportations des industriels français. Mais l'efficacité de cet accord va se voir essentiellement à l'usage.
www.latribune.fr www.latribune.fr

In principle, France and Germany cannot oppose an international sale of the partner. “Except in exceptional circumstances” when this export “harms its direct interests or its national security”. “And if one of the two parties objects, it must inform the other within a maximum period of two months from the moment it is informed of the export project,” according to the agreement. This provision concerns all intergovernmental programs, including future SCAF (future air combat system) and MGCS (future tank) projects, and their subsystems as well as programs resulting from industrial cooperation.
(...)
The general principles of Article 3 are (...) with the "de minimis" principle which sets a threshold of German products intended for integration at 20% of the value of the final French system, and vice versa. “This value does not include maintenance activities, spare parts, training or repairs,” the agreement states.
(…)
a long, very long list of products representing a large part of the French catalog has been excluded from article 3 ("de minimis" principle). Clearly, this list brings together all the equipment that Nexter, Arquus, MBDA, Dassault Aviation, Safran and Thales can export.
(…)
All of these weapon systems are therefore excluded from the application of the de minimis principle: machine guns, submachine guns, fully automatic rifles, cannons, howitzers, artillery pieces, mortars, anti-tank weapons, lethal projectile launchers, rifles, recoilless guns, smooth-bore weapons, ammunition intended for the aforementioned weapons, propellant charges or independent rockets, bombs, torpedoes, grenades, rockets, mines, missiles, depth charges, explosive warheads and homing devices, propulsion systems intended for aforementioned weapons, chassis and turrets specially designed for combat tanks, engines for aircraft propulsion and, finally, complete cells for combat aircraft.
Click to expand...

In summary (by simplifying a lot):

-If Germany contributes, in value, less than 20% of an armament, it will not be able to prevent its sale by France.

-Excluded from this case is a list of weapons (including the New Generation Fighter/NGF of the FCAS). In this list, even if it contributes more than 20% of the value of the weapon, Germany will not be able to prevent the sale of this weapon, unless this export "harms its direct interests or its national security ".


In principle...

(For those who want to know everything, the complete and official text of the agreement, in French, sorry:
https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/accord_cle42111e.pdf )
 
Last edited:
Scott Kenny said:
Then given Germany's behavior regarding Typhoon, France is foolish to work with them.
Click to expand...
Who knows who is the fool in the end of the story.
Scott Kenny said:
Germany was willing to burn 1000+ jobs at home and quite possibly their relationship with the UK in NATO entirely, to stop an export that would have kept production lines going and irreplaceable skilled workers employed for another decade while GCAP and FCAS worked through their development.
Click to expand...
First of all those ~50 jets would not kept the line alive themself. As noted in the EF thread for the line to stay alive and profitable it needs atleast 100 Jets so others (Germany and probaly Spain) would have to pay for the other 50 Jets to keep it alive. So in the end Germany would need to pay for (lets say G 60/40 SP) for 60% of the other Fighter or around 30 Jets Just to keep the line alive we're the offers do nothing? Why should say do that for them. And this is only so If the 50 saudi EFs werent token into account.
Scott Kenny said:
Congratulations, Germany, you just doubled the cost of your next combat aircraft and delayed its entry into service by at least 5 years because you shut down the assembly lines and laid off the workers who know how to build combat aircraft.
Click to expand...
One bad mouth would say that this is a favor for france and FCAS.......
 
kqcke for you said:
First of all those ~50 jets would not kept the line alive themself. As noted in the EF thread for the line to stay alive and profitable it needs atleast 100 Jets so others (Germany and probaly Spain) would have to pay for the other 50 Jets to keep it alive. So in the end Germany would need to pay for (lets say G 60/40 SP) for 60% of the other Fighter or around 30 Jets Just to keep the line alive we're the offers do nothing? Why should say do that for them. And this is only so If the 50 saudi EFs werent token into account.
Click to expand...

With Quadriga, Halcon I and II, Typhoon EK, Egypt order and the Saudi 48 the partners should be in a good place. Any additional order beyond that from Germany is the icing on the cake...
 
alertken said:
... Best Interests of the Project.
Click to expand...
What are the interests of a Project?
a) get a maximum of of financial profit, so make everything expensive as possible an delay it as possible?
b) follow the interest of the country? This may be keeping or capturing know-how from others, keep as many as possible people employed to reduce the number of people who life from social benefit, ...
c) make the air-force/army happy with very useful low cost products and high quality so that the air-force/army has a chance to protect the country and its population?
d) ...
...


Deltafan said:
... unless this export "harms its direct interests ... ".
Click to expand...

What are the interests of a country?
With regards to the history; the interests of a country could change very fast. And if the interest is the global domination similar to the Nazis, then every one with a different religion or opinion could be a threat of the interests.
Further, an agreement of supply has no value if someone is not willing to supply or jam the supply line.
 
timmymagic said:
With Quadriga, Halcon I and II, Typhoon EK, Egypt order and the Saudi 48 the partners should be in a good place. Any additional order beyond that from Germany is the icing on the cake...
Click to expand...
No this was for the time after quadriga and before FCAS. Halcon II is part of it. So even If lets say the 48 Saudi Jets are token into it then germany still needs to buy 52 Jets for it to make sense. Not enough to fully replace Tranche 2 and even less with the EK. I just dont see them buy so many anymore.
 

Attachments

  • F8UTfheXQAAiFm1.jpeg
    F8UTfheXQAAiFm1.jpeg
    219.6 KB · Views: 46
kqcke for you said:
No this was for the time after quadriga and before FCAS. Halcon II is part of it. So even If lets say the 48 Saudi Jets are token into it then germany still needs to buy 52 Jets for it to make sense. Not enough to fully replace Tranche 2 and even less with the EK. I just dont see them buy so many anymore.
Click to expand...
How many more Typhoons does the UK need?
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom