UK unveils new next generation fighter jet, the 'Tempest'

[Easy Street]

Makes you wonder why there is not a case therefore for just converting the airliner with some longer range missiles and using a (largely female of course) rear crew of analysts.
" Knit one , pearl one and Oh! .......press a button."
:)

If you give up on stealth then longer ranged missiles will only help if opposing stealth fighters can be detected at commensurately longer ranges. And the distance-squared-squared equation for required radar power rapidly turns that into a bit of a challenge.

[ORAC]

Interesting point is that, unlike it’s US and Chinese counterparts, it doesn’t have a roof mounted wing shaped “canard” to reflect that of the Tempest.

Which would seem to suggest that 360 degree wing mounted distributed radar/EW sensors/modules requiring testing and integration with the radar aren’t a factor.

Unless, of course, there will be another test bed or it is just omitted from the artists impression….


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1600x978/image_1ae136411a66f29ae992961f87307d7bccdea2b9.jpeg


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1920x844/fiird_047af52c85ed4390f42a91fcb45ba1f8a28b16c6.jpg

[chopper2004]

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/dsei/2021/09/15/leonardo-fine-tunes-its-757-jetliner-converted-into-a-tempest-test-rig/

Leonardo fine-tunes its 757 jetliner converted into a Tempest test rig

ROME – Leonardo has announced more details of the 757 test bed aircraft it will use in the Tempest program, including a 28 ton payload for equipment and six locations for sensors.

Dubbed Excalibur, the aircraft has been remodeled with a pointed nose to mimic the likely Tempest (https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/dsei/2021/09/15/japan-could-become-partner-nation-on-uk-led-future-fighter-effort-says-program-director/) design by Leonardo’s partner, UK firm 2Excel…….


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x1024/image_fdde2de27f65869136550f264ecac81550811323.jpeg

I wondered what it was when wondered past the 2Excel booth


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/6c8db84d_e9bd_4445_9123_ee8ca1f021db_6e13a342b586678cfd55c54 d481e48a2ac16d04a.jpeg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/720x960/445dbf1b_5774_4169_8e9f_17dba142bdec_380faf81e6f969635e5f017 c2579bf647039c1fb.jpeg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x720/afb40a33_1a06_4a38_9c78_eef638030642_3da57c21b4c33422053f410 57ac4059937859b4c.jpeg

cheers

[chopper2004]

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Indo-Pacific/Japan-in-talks-on-BAE-joining-development-of-next-gen-fighter-jet


https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x539/091a0490_9df9_4a39_9dc1_8476e3cb9e36_a60309b0fb51d7ee20d23dc 35887956b0ecb27d1.jpeg

[melmothtw]

Interesting point is that, unlike it’s US and Chinese counterparts, it doesn’t have a roof mounted wing shaped “canard” to reflect that of the Tempest.

Which would seem to suggest that 360 degree wing mounted distributed radar/EW sensors/modules requiring testing and integration with the radar aren’t a factor.

Unless, of course, there will be another test bed or it is just omitted from the artists impression….


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1600x978/image_1ae136411a66f29ae992961f87307d7bccdea2b9.jpeg


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1920x844/fiird_047af52c85ed4390f42a91fcb45ba1f8a28b16c6.jpg
You touched on it at the end, but the model/concept so far seen is generic and not intended to be the actual configuration.

[NutLoose]

Looking like the UK and Japan may merge programmes, makes me laugh when they call it an exclusive as Chopper2004 posted a link to it in May!

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/exclusive-britain-japan-aim-merge-tempest-f-x-fighter-programmes-sources-2022-07-14/?taid=62d0481606f6890001c80327&utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

[jolihokistix]

Further thoughts by readers under this article.
https://japantoday.com/category/politics/exclusive-britain-and-japan-aim-to-merge-tempest-and-f-x-fighter-programmes-sources

[safetypee]

Further explanation here https://informamarkets.turtl.co/story/farnborough-airshow-issue-1/page/17/1
basically industry has have joint projects in order to afford them.

[Buster15]

Further thoughts by readers under this article.
https://japantoday.com/category/politics/exclusive-britain-and-japan-aim-to-merge-tempest-and-f-x-fighter-programmes-sources

News update from Rolls Royce regarding the Orpheus Programme engine for Tempest.
And BAE claim Tempest first flight in the next 5 years.
Looks like things are moving at pace along with Japanese involvement.
​​​​​​
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.rolls-royce.com/&ved=2ahUKEwi1oJrY7IT5AhUSEcAKHYi_DU8QFnoECCEQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3gs3ooL5PFylG6ukK0a7O_

[ORAC]

Interesting latest iteration if the design - looks far more like the proposed fighter-bomber version of the YF-23 than anything else - and obvious a long range interceptor in the mould of the F-3 than a short range dog fighter.


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/680x425/image_342b2132b2730c8f8f1f684b799d8014659fee09.jpeg

That, of course, is what the Japanese want for the longer ranges in the Pacific.

It was also interesting hearing the BAE FCAS MD be quizzed at Farnborough by Sky News concerning rumours of Australia joining the programme - and evading the question rather than denying it.

Proposed FB-23 fighter-bomber..


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1857x1873/image_f813f9dbdf40bca0a3c5a1a881e53465a9a421f4.png

[dead_pan]

I wonder if they'll re-do the mock-up which has been doing the rounds at RIAT etc, in light of this design iteration? The mock-up looks kind of weird with its beak-like nose. It will still beat the F35 in the aesthetics department.

[safetypee]

The UK is to build a technology demonstrator of it Tempest …

Revised configuration model - page 2

https://informamarkets.turtl.co/story/farnborough-airshow-issue-2/page/7/1

[Jackonicko]

Interesting latest iteration if the design - looks far more like the proposed fighter-bomber version of the YF-23 than anything else - and obvious a long range interceptor in the mould of the F-3 than a short range dog fighter.


A whole day earlier I posted this:18th Jul 2022, 14:16

https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/647865-adios-pregnant-pelican-uk-fly-new-tempest-demonstrator-within-five-years.html

[dead_pan]

Meanwhile, in Korea:

https://twitter.com/Fighterman_FFRC/status/1549297925628407808?t=vslG-B4TiAxKX9epcSAnbQ&s=19

[unmanned_droid]

The farnborough PR machine is in full flow. Unlikely to lead to much concrete action.

Have been partly involved with a small project with a customer based in Japan. It's a complete pain all in the name of being polite and showing deference to the customer e.g. meetings carry on until the customer is happy - I left after being half hour over the end time on the last one. Also the time difference will cause integration problems. These may seem like small problems but will make life harder than it needs to be.

What have Warton actually done since the end of Typhoon major design? A lot of concepting and in service support on existing products. Unless something really interesting has been happening in the middle of nowhere Australia I think there will be some interesting times ahead. The exception to this is the work they've been doing in Turkey - I saw this as a means to get in to the actual Tempest program when jobs were being advertised during covid, but since clearances were apparently taking months because UKCS was/is on a go slow I couldn't wait around to find out.

I have low confidence we'll see a demonstrator in under 7 years if it even happens (and I'm going to say they'll claim virtual twins will allow them to not make a demonstrator....).

[etudiant]

The farnborough PR machine is in full flow. Unlikely to lead to much concrete action.

Have been partly involved with a small project with a customer based in Japan. It's a complete pain all in the name of being polite and showing deference to the customer e.g. meetings carry on until the customer is happy - I left after being half hour over the end time on the last one. Also the time difference will cause integration problems. These may seem like small problems but will make life harder than it needs to be.

What have Warton actually done since the end of Typhoon major design? A lot of concepting and in service support on existing products. Unless something really interesting has been happening in the middle of nowhere Australia I think there will be some interesting times ahead. The exception to this is the work they've been doing in Turkey - I saw this as a means to get in to the actual Tempest program when jobs were being advertised during covid, but since clearances were apparently taking months because UKCS was/is on a go slow I couldn't wait around to find out.

I have low confidence we'll see a demonstrator in under 7 years if it even happens (and I'm going to say they'll claim virtual twins will allow them to not make a demonstrator....).

There is afaik no indication that Japan and Britain have agreed on the purpose of this 'demonstrator'.
While the basic technology may be common, there is a world of difference between a long range strike aircraft and a European air superiority fighter.
Presumably the hope is that melding British engine and aerodynamics know how with Japanese manufacturing capabilities, electronics and software skills will allow both parties to benefit.
However, I don't know of any such prior effort being successful.

[Jackonicko]

The demonstrator is not an Anglo-Japanese programme, though it will have both Italian and Japanese participation.

[Sue Vêtements]

Maybe this has already been answered, but why are they reusing old names now?

Seems odd that they can't think up new ones ... and unnecessarily confusing. They could even use a similar meteorological convention like Cyclone [1]

Texan and Bulldog are two more that got reused




[1] ok, cyclone was an engine and I guess Zephyr and Sirocco would be confusing too

[Video Mixdown]

Maybe this has already been answered, but why are they reusing old names now? Seems odd that they can't think up new ones ... and unnecessarily confusing.
Many aircraft names have been reused over the years. I can't imagine it causing any confusion at all.

[NutLoose]

Tempest seems an odd name especially when we have a Tempest that will fly this year, an original one.

So 5 years until it flies, 10 years using it to verify design and systems concept for the service variant, then another 5 years debating numbers and cost grounds of final design followed by us buying an off the shelf US aircraft, that we will then modify and generally muck about with adding billions and a further 5 year delay to in service date… how am I doing so far?

[ORAC]

I’d say 0/10.

Remember the EAP?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Aerospace_EAP

[NutLoose]

I’d say 0/10.

Remember the EAP?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Aerospace_EAP

So as it will be a combined Japanese / U.K. aircraft and as you say 0/10

Then Zero it is.

[ORAC]

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/japan-britain-italy-announce-joint-fighter-project-early-next-week-sources-2022-12-02/

Japan, Britain and Italy to announce joint fighter project as early as next week - sources

TOKYO, Dec 2 (Reuters) - Japan, Britain and Italy will announce a groundbreaking agreement as early as next week to jointly develop a new advanced jet fighter, two sources with knowledge of the plan told Reuters.

For Tokyo and London it represents the culmination of ever closer defence ties, which in turn give Britain a bigger security role in Asia and provide Japan with new security partners that can help it counter neighbouring China's growing military power.

The push to merge the British led Tempest jet fighter project with Japan's F-X fighter programme (https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/exclusive-britain-japan-aim-merge-tempest-f-x-fighter-programmes-sources-2022-07-14/) was first reported by Reuters in July. It will be the first time that Japan has collaborated with countries beyond the United States on a major defence equipment project.

The announcement will come before Japan releases a new national security strategy and military procurement plan around mid December, the sources said.

That arms build up, which could double the country's defence budget to around 5% of gross domestic product(GDP) over the next five years, will pay for new weapons including long-range missiles designed to deter China from resorting to military action in and around the East China Sea.

Talks between Japan, Britain and Italy on the new jet fighter, which will be led by BAE Systems Plc and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries will continue next year to hammer details of the project, such as work share and the designs of variants that each partner will deploy, the sources said.

Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party is also looking at proposals to relax its military export rules (https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/japans-ruling-party-mulls-military-export-rules-change-amid-push-joint-uk-2022-11-25/) so that the joint jet fighter could be exported, Itsunori Onodera, a former Japanese defence minister and influential lawmaker said in an interview last month.

[Lonewolf_50]

It would appear that congratulations are in order-almost.
TBH, I love the name "Tempest" and I hope it will be kept (even though our own forces doubtless won't buy any).

[ORAC]

https://twitter.com/raestimr/status/1603033775054651395?s=61&t=yozwnldmx75tpwlyw0siyg


VERY interesting thoughts from renowned US aerospace analyst Richard Aboulafia on the UK/Italy/ Japan 'Global Combat Air Programme' future fighter news: "this is an exceptional concept, for 8 reasons:"

https://richardaboulafia.com/november-2022-letter

​​​​​​​

[Thud_and_Blunder]

It's not often that I find an industry commentary entertaining, but that Richard Aboulafia article certainly made me smile.

[ORAC]

Certainly cynical over the Franco-German programme….

[Mogwi]

So as it will be a combined Japanese / U.K. aircraft and as you say 0/10

Then Zero it is.

What about Divine Wind if you need a met term? 😈

Mog

[BEagle]

'Cyclone' would be possible? Although the B model might have limited export potential to Germany or Israel??

[SLXOwft]

The Nakajima Ki-84's Japanese name Hayate - can translated Tempest, so the future RAF could be following Daves with Franks. ...hat, coat etc.

[Davef68]

There have been lots of names repeated over the years. e.g. Hawker Fury was both a predecessor and a successor of the Hurricane/Typhoon/Tempest line. At least (until the recent Ensign) we don't put II or III after names when they are reused.

[melmothtw]

There have been lots of names repeated over the years. e.g. Hawker Fury was both a predecessor and a successor of the Hurricane/Typhoon/Tempest line. At least (until the recent Ensign) we don't put II or III after names when they are reused.

Envoy, rather than Ensign.

Oddly, we did take Globemaster III from the US, but dropped the II from Lightning. There is no consistency in MoD naming conventions of aircraft.

[Asturias56]

Is "consistency" a good thing? It's only a name after all

[SLXOwft]

Italy defence minister demands equal weight in UK, Japan fighter partnership (http://Italy defence minister demands equal weight in UK, Japan fighter partnership)

Trouble ahead?
19/12/2022
ROME (Reuters) - Italy must have equal treatment in a partnership with Britain and Japan to develop a new jet fighter, Rome's defence minister told Reuters, as talks proceed to define the roles each country has in the ambitious project.
...
Defence Minister Guido Crosetto, a co-founder of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's Brothers of Italy party, said Rome would make a final decision on how much to invest in the multi-billion-dollar project after more details had been defined.
...
"Italy can only continue along this path if it has the same weight as Japan and Britain on technology, research and later, if it comes to that, on the results," he said in an interview, adding that he wanted a "33%-33%-33%" breakdown.
...
Crosetto said there should be no bar on joining forces with the rival European programme, adding that the GCAP should also aim to find new partners, especially within Europe.
"I think the challenge is to accelerate significantly the research and technology part and then become attractive to other nations in the next two or three years," he said.

[Davef68]

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/dsei/2021/09/15/leonardo-fine-tunes-its-757-jetliner-converted-into-a-tempest-test-rig/

Leonardo fine-tunes its 757 jetliner converted into a Tempest test rig

ROME – Leonardo has announced more details of the 757 test bed aircraft it will use in the Tempest program, including a 28 ton payload for equipment and six locations for sensors.

Dubbed Excalibur, the aircraft has been remodeled with a pointed nose to mimic the likely Tempest (https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/dsei/2021/09/15/japan-could-become-partner-nation-on-uk-led-future-fighter-effort-says-program-director/) design by Leonardo’s partner, UK firm 2Excel…….


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x1024/image_fdde2de27f65869136550f264ecac81550811323.jpeg

Heard today this airframe has been permanently withdrawn from use and possibly scrapped, without any actual Tempest related work done with it.

[unmanned_droid]

This project is gonna be a s**t show.

[pr00ne]

This project is gonna be a s**t show.

Which is what embittered anti British cynics said about:

MRCA, Jaguar, Harrier, Typhoon……..

[melmothtw]

Heard today this airframe has been permanently withdrawn from use and possibly scrapped, without any actual Tempest related work done with it.
Any source for that?

[Easy Street]

Any source for that?

According to the CAA online register (https://www.caa.co.uk/aircraft-register/g-info/search-g-info/)the aircraft (G-BYAW) was "permanently withdrawn from use" on 17 October. That sounds a lot like "scrapped" to me, unless there is a plan to operate it on the military register...

[ORAC]

Reported here as broken up at Lasham.

https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/boeing-757-200-g-byaw-2excel-aviation/r6gmz3

[Buster15]

Italy defence minister demands equal weight in UK, Japan fighter partnership (http://Italy defence minister demands equal weight in UK, Japan fighter partnership)

Trouble ahead?
19/12/2022
ROME (Reuters) - Italy must have equal treatment in a partnership with Britain and Japan to develop a new jet fighter, Rome's defence minister told Reuters, as talks proceed to define the roles each country has in the ambitious project.
...
Defence Minister Guido Crosetto, a co-founder of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's Brothers of Italy party, said Rome would make a final decision on how much to invest in the multi-billion-dollar project after more details had been defined.
...
"Italy can only continue along this path if it has the same weight as Japan and Britain on technology, research and later, if it comes to that, on the results," he said in an interview, adding that he wanted a "33%-33%-33%" breakdown.
...
Crosetto said there should be no bar on joining forces with the rival European programme, adding that the GCAP should also aim to find new partners, especially within Europe.
"I think the challenge is to accelerate significantly the research and technology part and then become attractive to other nations in the next two or three years," he said.

Based upon Tornado and Typhoon programmes, the workshare becomes a function of how many jets are ordered by the partner nation and the level of technology that nation brings to the consortium. Italy can demand what they like. But if they order fewer jets, that becomes their workshare.
​​​​

[Asturias56]

After 50+ years of international programmes you'd have thought we could do without all the posturing that goes with them. As Buster says you get what you pay for (unless France is involved)

[Mil-26Man]

Well, the UK is describing GCAP as 'a partnership of equals', if that puts Italy's mind at ease...

https://twitter.com/GarethJennings3/status/1601064221864734721

[Davef68]

According to the CAA online register (https://www.caa.co.uk/aircraft-register/g-info/search-g-info/)the aircraft (G-BYAW) was "permanently withdrawn from use" on 17 October. That sounds a lot like "scrapped" to me, unless there is a plan to operate it on the military register...

That's usually down as 'transferred to MOD/Military register', It's sat engineless at Lasham for the last three years (Last photo I can find from June this year below). So it seems there has been a significant change of plan. A dig around Companies House records shows the mortgage/charge on the aircraft was also removed in October around the time it was PWFU.

G-BYAW Boeing 757-204 by Graham Tiller, on Flickr

[8674planes]

Saudis intend to join FCAS:

https://twitter.com/kbsalsaud/status/1630968002467201029?t=5O16m0VbAVW5bi5ITlh19g&s=19

We signed a declaration of KSA’s intent to participate in the Future Combat Air System program (FCAS) which will strengthen KSA’s defensive capabilities through a comprehensive partnership that includes joint production and R&D projects for future air systems.

[melmothtw]

This project is gonna be a s**t show.

It won't. Don't believe what you read here about Excalibur being binned, it hasn't.

[ORAC]

https://twitter.com/gabriel64869839/status/1635997456990076928?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A


Latest GCAP / TEMPEST mock up. The wing has changed the most from earlier TEMPEST concepts, as result of merging UK and Japanese work.

​​​​​​​

[Davef68]

It won't. Don't believe what you read here about Excalibur being binned, it hasn't.

The project might not be, but then G-BYAW isn't the airframe to be used - that was scrapped last October as mentioned - big image, so just a link

https://i.ibb.co/tBM1f7G/DSC7364.jpg

https://i.ibb.co/3fhB7p1/gbyaw.jpg (https://i.ibb.co/tBM1f7G/DSC7364.jpg)

I wonder if it ever was the intended testbed

[Imagegear]

Does the team think that this technology transfer is compatible with the recent brokering of improved relations between Saudi and Iran by China?

IG

[ORAC]

“Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer”…..

[melmothtw]

The project might not be, but then G-BYAW isn't the airframe to be used - that was scrapped last October as mentioned - big image, so just a link

https://i.ibb.co/tBM1f7G/DSC7364.jpg

https://i.ibb.co/3fhB7p1/gbyaw.jpg (https://i.ibb.co/tBM1f7G/DSC7364.jpg)

I wonder if it ever was the intended testbed

I'm aware of the airframe in question being binned / having served its purpose. Excalibur is not dead.

[henra]

Latest GCAP / TEMPEST mock up. The wing has changed the most from earlier TEMPEST concepts, as result of merging UK and Japanese work.

Nice mixture of F-101 and Buccaneer planform of the main wing with an YF-23 tail.

[ORAC]

https://twitter.com/justin_br0nk/status/1651556142802190336?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A


I know this won't be popular, but believe it's important for the UK to be realistic about the (much higher than acknowledged) cost of a competitive #GCAP fighter, to reduce risks:

https://t.co/2aer9BIx5n

The Global Combat Air Programme is Writing Cheques that Defence Can’t Cash

[Asturias56]

"the development and procurement of Typhoon cost the four core partner states somewhere in the region of £100 billion in FY 2022/23 terms. This cost estimate excludes weapons development, fleet operating costs, infrastructure and personnel training.

By contrast, for the entire GCAP system-of-systems, the UK has so far committed to spending £2 billion (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/defence-to-invest-2bn-in-next-stage-of-uk-combat-air-system) during the initial research and scoping phases, and Italy has only committed to €1.8 billion (https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/air-warfare/italy-puts-extra-18-billion-toward-tempest-funding/), with an ambition to ultimately spend another €2 billion by 2034. Recent UK announcements of £250 million (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/250-million-contract-for-next-phase-for-future-combat-air-system) and £656 million (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/major-funding-boost-to-progress-future-fighter-jet-programme) funding tranches have only covered the contract allocation of the previously committed £2 billion, not new money. Perhaps more worryingly, the most up-to-date public version of the MoD’s Major Projects Portfolio (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1092313/MOD_Government_Major_Projects_Portfolio_Data_March_2022.csv/preview) lists the total estimated programme cost up to the forecast retirement date of 2070 at just £10.69 billion. This total would include through-life ownership, mid-life upgrade and operating costs, so a significant portion of it would not be allocated to funding initial development and acquisition."

[TheWestCoast]

It's going to be interesting to see if this thread is still going if/when this jet makes it into operational service.

[henra]

Perhaps more worryingly, the most up-to-date public version of the MoD’s Major Projects Portfolio (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1092313/MOD_Government_Major_Projects_Portfolio_Data_March_2022.csv/preview) lists the total estimated programme cost up to the forecast retirement date of 2070 at just £10.69 billion. This total would include through-life ownership, mid-life upgrade and operating costs, so a significant portion of it would not be allocated to funding initial development and acquisition."
But the way I read it and looking at the figure it would surely not include any manufacturing/procurement, would it?
The 100 billion for the Typhoon on the other hand includes the procurement/manufacturing of ~600 Aircraft + engines. Which is >50billion alone. I smell an apples to oranges comparison.
That said, 10 billion is indeed nothing when it comes to development of a new fighter aircraft.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

But the way I read it and looking at the figure it would surely not include any manufacturing/procurement, would it?
The 100 billion for the Typhoon on the other hand includes the procurement/manufacturing of ~600 Aircraft + engines. Which is >50billion alone. I smell an apples to oranges comparison.
That said, 10 billion is indeed nothing when it comes to development of a new fighter aircraft.

Bold move critiquing Prof Bronk's analytical skills. For the UK:

Within this figure, development costs alone were £6.7 billion, or £11.11 billion in inflation-adjusted terms

[Asturias56]

It's going to be interesting to see if this thread is still going if/when this jet makes it into operational service.


The Future Carrier Thread started in April 2006 - and what IS astounding is that the OP, WEBF, is still posting fanboy posts on a regular basis. :rolleyes:

[ORAC]

https://twitter.com/totherchris/status/1656250620641198081?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A


A thread on spending towards the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) and whether the UK should persevere.

This thread is partly in response to an article by RUSI. Be sure to read this article, we're on the same side, and challenging / Red Teaming thoughts are what drives a better outcome. I do recommend following the author @Justin_Br0nk as well.

Debate is good. There are two flaws in the article's argument that I would challenge:

1️⃣ The spend;
2️⃣ Throwing in the towel.….

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1656250620641198081.html
​​​​​​​

[PPRuNeUser0211]

A thread on spending towards the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) and whether the UK should persevere.

This thread is partly in response to an article by RUSI. Be sure to read this article, we're on the same side, and challenging / Red Teaming thoughts are what drives a better outcome. I do recommend following the author @Justin_Br0nk as well.

Debate is good. There are two flaws in the article's argument that I would challenge:

1️⃣ The spend;
2️⃣ Throwing in the towel.….

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1656250620641198081.html

​​​​​​​The author makes a good point on including spend on "tempest related programs". However, I would argue that including spend on 4.5/5th gen aircraft sensors and ASE etc is a bit of a stretch. I'd also suggest that a top tier place at the table for future drone programmes (as might be afforded by the Prof's argument) would be more helpful than a top tier place at the table for future crewed aircraft.

[Easy Street]

Quite. The idea of including assorted weapons and previous-generation equipment costs in the investment total only creates a relevant comparison if the same philosophy was applied to the cited development costs for previous combat aircraft. I'd hazard a guess that that was not the case: "let's inflate our development cost figures by adding on every conceivable ancestor and ancillary capability", said no-one ever.

The debate about whether 6th gen fighters due to enter service circa 2040 should have a pilot is one thing (highly contestable IMO... look at the recent sharp uptick in AI progress and consider that 2040 is still 17 years away). But to my mind it helps clarify things if we ask whether 7th gen fighters are likely to need one. If you accept that's vanishingly unlikely, then going all-in on drone development and accepting we might be forced to buy an American piloted 6th gen export variant if it turns out to have been the wrong decision suddenly becomes a much more tolerable risk. The rationale for investing huge sums in domestic piloted 6th gen combat aircraft expertise then looks much less about preserving strategic capabilities for the future, and much more of a business proposition. But a business proposition requires an honest view of likely export numbers, with full consideration of unit price competiveness and the exportability constraints likely to accompany the LO and AESA technology required to satisfy the prime customer requirements. Not a straightforward argument at all.

[Asturias56]

"But a business proposition requires an honest view of likely export numbers"

Let's be honest -apart from co-production what was the last UK export success? Hawk?

When anyone looks at buying something they will look at the UK Govt's constant habit of reducing the total order for every aircraft we've planned to buy for the last 60 + years.

[t43562]

​​​​​​​The author makes a good point on including spend on "tempest related programs". However, I would argue that including spend on 4.5/5th gen aircraft sensors and ASE etc is a bit of a stretch. I'd also suggest that a top tier place at the table for future drone programmes (as might be afforded by the Prof's argument) would be more helpful than a top tier place at the table for future crewed aircraft.

UK industry has some capabilities. Whether you choose to label them as 4/5 generation is a trick of argument. Lets just say that they can do better than what is in current 4.5 generation aircraft now because they have been working a lot since those 4.5 gen aircraft last got updated. What could we build now without doing any research at all? Probably something better than what we have.

Without investment those capabilites will die.

It doesn't matter how the investment comes - it has to be made if you want to not become completely dependent. If you like being dependent then fine. I wonder why would a drone with super high tech expensive kit that cannot really do the full set of missions be the answer? Perhaps it is better to build something we can afford with relatively current technology that doesn't stretch the technological envelope too much.

[ORAC]

There does seem to be an assumption that designing a 6th Gen top end drone is somehow different to designing a 6th Gen aircraft.

At the top end they’re likely to be manned/unmanned airframes with similar range, engines, sensors etc. Yes, you can take out the seat and the man to reduce size, increase range etc - but if you reinforce the structure for higher G you add more back. Look at the NGAD where they are looking at $500M per manned aircraft controlling drone wingmen - which will probably resemble Tempest in most regards.

At the lower end you can design with one use engines for kamikaze drones such as in Ukraine, but that’s not really a viable export market because everyone will be doing it.

So the dividing line - and cost savings - is far more nuanced than being suggested.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

UK industry has some capabilities. Whether you choose to label them as 4/5 generation is a trick of argument. Lets just say that they can do better than what is in current 4.5 generation aircraft now because they have been working a lot since those 4.5 gen aircraft last got updated. What could we build now without doing any research at all? Probably something better than what we have.

Without investment those capabilites will die.

It doesn't matter how the investment comes - it has to be made if you want to not become completely dependent. If you like being dependent then fine. I wonder why would a drone with super high tech expensive kit that cannot really do the full set of missions be the answer? Perhaps it is better to build something we can afford with relatively current technology that doesn't stretch the technological envelope too much.

My argument is not that the investment shouldn't be made on 4.5/5th gen to keep them relevant. Just that it's double counting to include development cost from them in a 6th gen platform which will require enhanced capabilities. You wouldn't include the development of tornado mission equipment in the development cost of Typhoon, though you might well use it as a starting point and build on it. Clearly there will also be some bespoke technologies that aren't from previous gen aircraft (AI development for example). But there's also a middle ground where "previous gen" development stops and "next gen" development starts. Where that is can be argued, but it's not a radar explicitly designed for Typhoon as an example.

[t43562]

My argument is not that the investment shouldn't be made on 4.5/5th gen to keep them relevant. Just that it's double counting to include development cost from them in a 6th gen platform which will require enhanced capabilities. You wouldn't include the development of tornado mission equipment in the development cost of Typhoon, though you might well use it as a starting point and build on it. Clearly there will also be some bespoke technologies that aren't from previous gen aircraft (AI development for example). But there's also a middle ground where "previous gen" development stops and "next gen" development starts. Where that is can be argued, but it's not a radar explicitly designed for Typhoon as an example.

I get you, I think. I'm trying to say more that if development could be a kind of continual process rather than stop start it might turn out that you could sort of do that. The latest radar that Leonardo has is probably not in any Typhoons yet. It's aimed at being able to fit in a Typhoon so it should fit in any newer aircraft if the design is not too radically different.

The newer aircraft shouldn't have all new systems no matter how much one might think that "every new requirement is essential". The total risk should always be limited. Then you accept it's not going to be the same as what the US can pay for and that you might have to upgrade bits of it over time to improve it. So you try to leave a little capacity in space, power and all the other "budgets".

Anyhow To be fair I know nothing. I just work on upgrading software. I find that people try to make exquisite things from the outset and end up not having time to finish them. It's better to have something straighforward that works that you can improve on - if you have the time - and if you don't have time no worries because you have at least something that works in a basic way.

[chopper2004]

According to the JaSDF FB page, they are present at the air combat conference in Italy with Wiggy and Italian counterpart


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1121x1628/img_0520_23e4bdfdc26d2dfc82bd1a64fa34e455edeea3ea.jpeg

cheers

[melmothtw]

I'm aware of the airframe in question being binned / having served its purpose. Excalibur is not dead.

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/2excel-aviation-advances-gcap-flight-test-757

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2023/06/13/uk-vendors-unveil-tech-for-powering-tempest-warplane-demo/

UK vendors unveil tech for powering Tempest warplane demo

LONDON — British companies involved in the trinational program to develop the Tempest (https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2023/04/13/uks-team-tempest-gets-822-million-to-advance-next-gen-warplane-tech/) sixth-generation combat jet have lifted the lid on a fraction of the technologies being employed to fly a demonstrator aircraft within the next four years.

A new power plant manufacturing process, a bespoke simulator and auto-coding software all got a name check in a progress statement due for release by BAE Systems June 14.

BAE Systems, Rolls-Royce, Leonardo UK, MBDA, the Ministry of Defence and a number of British small- and medium-sized companies are collaborating to build the first British flying combat air demonstrator since the Experimental Aircraft Program took to the skies in 1986 – a design that eventually became the Typhoon fighter.

The British Tempest team are developing the sixth-generation fighter alongside Italy (https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2023/01/27/italy-taps-local-defense-companies-to-work-on-next-gen-warplane/) and Japan, working on what is known as the Global Combat Air Program (https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2022/12/09/move-over-tempest-japan-pact-takes-uk-italy-fighter-plan-global/).

The demonstrator program is, for the moment at least, a British effort. Separately, however, various technology development initiatives, including a new gas turbine, radar and other technologies, are being worked on by the nations involved in GCAP.

Richard Berthon, director for future combat air at the MoD, said the British demonstrator program will prove integration and develop national skills while providing data and learning in support of Tempest entering service by 2035.

“Tempest is no longer just an idea or concept on a computer; our industry partners have made real, tangible progress and are bringing the program to life through innovative projects, such as the flying demonstrator,” he said.

In what BAE described as a first for military aircraft, the company said engineers have used auto-coding to create safety-critical systems software in a matter of days rather than weeks.

“This enables rapid assessment of the flight control systems during more complex flight maneuvers with the simulator capturing crucial data about how the jet will handle and perform, years before its first flight,” said BAE.

A new facility at BAE Systems air combat center in Warton, Lancashire, has already enabled test pilots from BAE, Rolls-Royce and the Royal Air Force to fly more than 150 hours on the demonstrator aircraft in a new, bespoke simulator.

Rolls-Royce engineers have also been undertaking aerodynamic engine testing, employing new manufacturing processes to produce an engine duct which BAE says is “uniquely shaped to slow the air from supersonic to sub-sonic speeds at the engine face.”

According to the company, the intake has fewer moving parts than a traditional fighter jet design, enhancing the aircraft’s stealthiness.

Ejection seat trials involving a rocket propelled sled traveling at more than 500mph also got a mention in the statement, though no details were given.

[Jackonicko]

Defence News weren't there.

I was, Francis Tusa was, Craig Hoyle from Flight was, Tony Osborne from AWST was, a couple of local reporters were, and so were four Japanese reporters.

Plenty of details were given about the ejection seat tests, but perhaps not if you were simply relying on the press release!Crew escape system testing

Working alongside Martin Baker, a team of BAE Systems engineers led ejection seat trials, using an aerodynamically representative forward fuselage section mounted on a rocket-propelled sled - travelling at speeds of up to 450 kts. The seat for the Flying Technology Demonstrator will be an unmodified Martin Baker Mk16A ejection seat as used in the Typhoon, and aircrew will wear Typhoon flying gear, including the AEA and Mk 10 helmet, which were also used by the test mannequins.



The crew escape system team also included experts from GKN (canopy design), Hamble Aerostructures (fitment of detonator cords), and rig manufacturers EDM Ltd, as well as specialists from the Royal Air Force's Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO) and scientists from the Ministry of Defence.



The crew escape system test campaign started on 16 December 2021 with a static firing at Martin Baker’s factory airfield at Chalgrove, proving the canopy design – which was a cast acrylic design incorporating MDC technology from the BAE Hawk advanced jet trainer. This was followed by a series of four sled test seat qualification firings at Langford Lodge in Northern Ireland. Firings were made at two speeds (280 kts and 450 kts), using two different classes of mannequin. The class 1 mannequin represented a lightweight female pilot in summer flying gear, while the class 6 mannequin represented a heavy male pilot in winter kit.



The first firing was made on 31 March 2022, at 280 kts, with a second following on 28 April at 450 kts. Another 280 kt firing was achieved on 23 June and the final 450 kt test was undertaken three months ahead of schedule at the end of June.

[ORAC]

Full steam ahead it seems…

https://twitter.com/ftusa284/status/1676578223201697793?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A


Francis Tusa:

An interesting 2 days at @BAESystemsAir Kingdom of Warton, looking at both GCAP/Tempest, as well as possible Typhoon evolutions. Just spent the morning on the phone, UK and int'l, to triangulate what we were briefed on, so a few thoughts...

​​​​​​​

[melmothtw]

Excalibur lives https://www.janes.com/defence-news/air-platforms/latest/leonardo-progresses-excalibur-with-second-757-airframe-acquired-for-flight-testing

[ORAC]

As well as Excalibur, QinetiQ now have their own trials platform…

https://www.qinetiq.com/en/news/qinetiq-successfully-conducts-inaugural-flight-test-with-fitted-fast-jet-radome

QinetiQ successfully conducts inaugural flight test with fitted fast jet radome

In partnership with BAE, QinetiQ’s Airborne Technology Demonstrator delivers landmark trial of future radar and sense integration capabilities.


https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1110x500/qinetiq_successfully_conducts_inaugural_flight_test_with_fit ted_fast_jet_radome_d8844b81944f90cef5bf57288d7caf358f92b1c4 .jpg

[Davef68]

Is that an F3 radome?

[SLXOwft]

Looks more like Typhoon to me (no probe, but I may be wrong).

[rattman]

Looks more like Typhoon to me (no probe, but I may be wrong).

Correct its a test bird for Typhoons not tempest

[NutLoose]

More on the new radar for the Typhoon

The UK Ministry of Defence (MOD) has awarded BAE Systems a £870 million contract to deliver a new radar for the Royal Air Force’s (RAF) Typhoon fighter jet fleet.

The new radar, called the European Common Radar System Mk2 (ECRS Mk2), will enhance the Typhoon’s air control capabilities and provide it with cutting-edge electronic warfare capabilities.
Multi-function array radar (MFA)The ECRS Mk2 is a multi-functional array (MFA) radar that can perform both traditional radar functions, such as search and targeting, as well as electronic warfare tasks.

This means that the Typhoon will be able to detect and jam enemy radars, as well as track multiple targets in the air and on the ground simultaneously.

The contract is part of the UK Government’s £2.35 billion investment in the continued technology advancements in Typhoon capabilities. The ECRS Mk2 is expected to enter service with the RAF in the early 2030s.

The new radar will be a significant upgrade for the Typhoon fleet, which is currently equipped with the CAPTOR-E radar. The CAPTOR-E is a capable radar, but the ECRS Mk2 will provide the Typhoon with a significant increase in range, accuracy, and electronic warfare capabilities.

The ECRS Mk2 is being developed by BAE Systems and Leonardo UK. The work is expected to create and sustain more than 600 highly-skilled jobs across the UK.

The delivery of the ECRS Mk2 is a significant milestone in the continued development of the Typhoon fighter jet. The Typhoon is a highly capable and versatile aircraft, and the ECRS Mk2 will further enhance its capabilities, making it one of the most advanced fighter jets in the world.
Benefits of the ECRS Mk2 radarThe ECRS Mk2 radar will provide a number of benefits for the RAF Typhoon fleet, including:


Increased range and accuracy
Enhanced electronic warfare capabilities
The ability to track multiple targets simultaneously
Improved situational awareness
Increased survivability

The ECRS Mk2 will also be compatible with future upgrades to the Typhoon, such as the integration of new weapons and sensors.
The future of the TyphoonThe Typhoon is the most advanced aircraft in the RAF’s inventory, and it is used for a variety of roles, including air superiority, ground attack, and reconnaissance.

A highly agile aircraft, and it is currently equipped with a state-of-the-art avionics suite. This allows it to operate in all weather conditions, and it can engage targets both within and beyond visual range.

The RAF Typhoon has been deployed in a number of operations, including the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the 2011 intervention in Libya, and the ongoing fight against ISIS. It has also been used for air policing duties, and it has been involved in a number of training exercises.

The Typhoon is a highly capable and versatile aircraft, and the ECRS Mk2 radar will further enhance its capabilities.

The Typhoon is expected to remain in service with the RAF until the 2040s, and the ECRS Mk2 will ensure that it remains a formidable adversary for decades to come.


https://aviationsourcenews.com/military/bae-systems-to-deliver-new-radar-for-raf-typhoon-fighter-jets/

[Asturias56]

according to Flight it won't be delivered for years.................

[HOVIS]

Was the Typhoon really involved in the 2003 invasion of Iraq? GW2 started in March 2003. Typhoon entry into service wasn't until later that year, August?

[ORAC]

No.

https://www.raf.mod.uk/our-organisation/units/air-historical-branch/post-coldwar-studies/the-royal-air-force-and-uk-air-power-in-operation-telic-iraq-2003/

[ORAC]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/aug/11/saudi-arabia-asks-to-join-uk-italy-japan-joint-air-combat-programme-tempest-gcap

Saudis ask to join UK, Italy and Japan’s joint air combat programme

Saudi Arabia has asked the UK, Japan and Italy to be made a full partner in their joint effort to build the next generation of fighter jets, in a move backed by the British government.

Companies from the UK, Japan and Italy (https://www.theguardian.com/world/italy) are working together to build a new fighter jet and other systems such as drones under the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), also known as Tempest. The programme aims to deliver the first planes by 2035, a tight turnaround.

The addition of Saudi Arabia to the programme could be attractive for the partners because of the potential for sharing the billions of pounds in costs with one of the world’s biggest defence spenders, but may create tensions between them…..

Within the trio of GCAP partners, the UK is understood to be leading the effort to add Saudi Arabia. However, Japanese officials have expressed firm opposition to the Saudis joining, according to the Financial Times, which first reported the request. Japan has been slowly loosening controls on weapons exports (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/05/japan-constitutional-changes-enhance-defence-capacity) that were part of its legacy of pacifism after the second world war.

A senior UK defence source said: “The kingdom of Saudi Arabia is one of the UK’s strategic partnerships and UK defence is keen to deepen work on GCAP. We see Saudi Arabia as a key partner in the fighter programme and we are working to ensure strong progress as soon as possible.”

Saudi Arabia has had its eye on joining Tempest for some time. It signed a memorandum of understanding with the UK in March saying that the countries would carry out a “partnering feasibility study” to look at a future combat air partnership and closer industrial collaboration. Its defence minister, Khalid bin Salman, tweeted that the deal meant the country would join the international jet effort, only for the UK to hurriedly say it was a separate agreement.

It is thought that the talks on Saudi Arabia joining formally are still at a relatively early stage, and are being handled in the UK by the MOD….

[Imagegear]

As I see it, while any agreement may be with the partners, Saudi Arabia is not averse to sharing it's information and technology with some of the UK's more agressive opponents.. The Japanese are well aware of Saudi backdoor connections and in my opinion, have adopted the correct approach to the project and ruled out accepting Saudi's contribution. It should not be all about money, unfortunately for the UK, any potential partners will leverage their greed to get what they want.

IG

[DuckDodgers]

A fundamentally ridiculous position, the U.K. needs to turn this off immediately. There’s a long way to go in trusting KSA across all facets despite recent reforms.

[Asturias56]

we need their money I'm afraid - we can't afford to do it ourselves

[pr00ne]

we need their money I'm afraid - we can't afford to do it ourselves

We are not doing it alone, we are doing it with Japan and Italy, that is 3 of the wealthiest nations on the planet. We do not need money from the likes of the Saudi Royal Family.

[ORAC]

Keep your friends close - and your enemies closer. Plus the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

If they buy from us we have sway in updates, spares, software etc - and currently a reasonably stable regime surrounded b6 Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen etc where, currently, the West still has an 8nterest in oil supplies.

Or would it be better for us if China takes over as their supplier with J-20s etc and becomes the predominate influence and oil customer?

[Buster15]

Keep your friends close - and your enemies closer. Plus the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

If they buy from us we have sway in updates, spares, software etc - and currently a reasonably stable regime surrounded b6 Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen etc where, currently, the West still has an 8nterest in oil supplies.

Or would it be better for us if China takes over as their supplier with J-20s etc and becomes the predominate influence and oil customer?

Agreed. Not sure why some are against this. After all we did sell Tornado, Hawk and Typhoon to the RSAF.
Yes I do understand that this is a proposal to join in the development of the new fighter jet as opposed to acquisition. But Saudi Arabia would most likely only have a very limited workshare because of their limited capabilities. They have as yet ordered any 5th generation jets and will need to either do that or join another new development programme with someone else who would be extremely eager to bring them onboard.

[Mogwi]

Agreed. After all we did sell Tornado, Hawk and Typhoon to the RSAF.

Not to mention the Hunter, Lightning and of course the mighty Westland Wapiti!

Mog

[Asturias56]

" We do not need money from the likes of the Saudi Royal Family."

At times over the last 50 years they've been effectively the only export customer for UK aircraft -- we know the costs of building new combat aircraft is so astronomical that effectively only the USA, China and a coalition of other countries can afford it - I can't see the UK, Japan & Italy being able to do it by themselves I'm afraid

[Video Mixdown]

" We do not need money from the likes of the Saudi Royal Family."

At times over the last 50 years they've been effectively the only export customer for UK aircraft -- we know the costs of building new combat aircraft is so astronomical that effectively only the USA, China and a coalition of other countries can afford it - I can't see the UK, Japan & Italy being able to do it by themselves I'm afraid
An entirely predictable opinion. I suppose it'd be rude to ask if you've got any facts to back it up?

[Easy Street]

An entirely predictable opinion. I suppose it'd be rude to ask if you've got any facts to back it up?

The existence of the "Partnering Feasibility Study" does not exactly leave me with the impression that the UK is confident in the affordability of Tempest. Yes, a lot of it will be about relationship management with the Saudis, but the existence of such an activity would be less likely if the programme was on a sound financial footing. There will obviously be people in Whitehall strongly opposed to such a partnership, for reasons of security if nothing else, so ask yourself why anyone would argue against them, and with enough force to convince ministers to leave the door cracked open in this way.

[Asturias56]

"I suppose it'd be rude to ask if you've got any facts to back it up?"

Look at the history of the last 50 years - - almost all serious European military hardware has been produced by consortiums of countries and several of those failed because of costs/work share issues
The UK and Italy are middling economic entities - Japan is richer but has rarely participated in multi- national developments. The estimated costs are already way north of £ 25 Bn - up to £ 40 Bn - which is way above any indicative long term funding. We can't even afford to buy F-35's at a reasonable rate - how do you think we can afford a completely new aircraft?

look at the comments here
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/tempest-facts-on-britains-new-fighter-jet-programme/

The current £ 2Bn is really to keep the design teams at BAe etc ticking over

[Buster15]

The existence of the "Partnering Feasibility Study" does not exactly leave me with the impression that the UK is confident in the affordability of Tempest. Yes, a lot of it will be about relationship management with the Saudis, but the existence of such an activity would be less likely if the programme was on a sound financial footing. There will obviously be people in Whitehall strongly opposed to such a partnership, for reasons of security if nothing else, so ask yourself why anyone would argue against them, and with enough force to convince ministers to leave the door cracked open in this way.

Security.... isn't Saudi Arabia supposed to be our strategic security partner in the middle east?
.Edit. It has been stared that BAE Warton would not exist in its current format were it not for the Saudi orders and updates of Tornado and Typhoon.

[Asturias56]

It's also worth pointing out that Tempest is being developed in the same time frame as SSN-AUKUS

I can't see how the UK can afford both programmes

[Easy Street]

Security.... isn't Saudi Arabia supposed to be our strategic security partner in the middle east?

Security in terms of regional power, yes. Security in terms of being trusted with the kind of secrets we share with the Five Eyes or even NATO? Not likely.

[Buster15]

Security in terms of regional power, yes. Security in terms of being trusted with the kind of secrets we share with the Five Eyes or even NATO? Not likely.

Is it being developed through NATO, because Tornado was and Typhoon is.

[ORAC]

Is it being developed through NATO, because Tornado was and Typhoon is.


Err, no - they were developed through international consortia, but NATO had nothing to do with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panavia_Tornado#Panavia_Aircraft_GmbH

​​​​​​​https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon#Origins

[Buster15]

Err, no - they were developed through international consortia, but NATO had nothing to do with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panavia_Tornado#Panavia_Aircraft_GmbH

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon#Origins

Sorry but that is just wrong.
MRCA Tornado was developed through funding by each the 3 partner nations through the NATO MRCA Management Agency NAMMA. Officials from each of the MoD and Airforce were seconded to NAMMA in Munich.
NAMMA was then broadened to NETMA to encompass Eurofighter.
NAMMA and NETMA were/are the Management Agencies and prime customer through which the projects are ordered and managed including development, acquisition and spares ordering. The N standing for NATO and the NATO logo is on all of the formal paperwork.

[Buster15]

It's also worth pointing out that Tempest is being developed in the same time frame as SSN-AUKUS

I can't see how the UK can afford both programmes

It is right to question whether the UK can actually afford the GCAP/Tempest programme and I have actually written to my MP asking this same question. He tells me that he has passed me question onto the Defence Sec and I am still waiting for a response.
But on reflection, it would have been much cheaper for the UK to have partnered with the other European programme, notwithstanding the issues associated with the French demanding leadership.
But it has decided not to do that and gone ahead with Tempest, initially alone and then with Italy and now Japan.

Frankly I will be surprised if Europe can actually deliver both and GCAP/Tempest appears to be making some progress towards a first flight.
What interests me most is what engine will be used for this first flight assuming it actually happens in the projected timescale. Whether a version of EJ200 or an all new engine.

[rattman]

Frankly I will be surprised if Europe can actually deliver both and GCAP/Tempest appears to be making some progress towards a first flight.


Personally think that Australia will join specifically with MQ-28 as the Lanca part of the program. Maybe some dollars kicked in as well. Also think sweden will upgrade from observer status to an actual participant and theres also a chance that germany will withdraw from FCAS and participate in tempest instead

[Easy Street]

theres also a chance that germany will withdraw from FCAS and participate in tempest instead

The French are very welcome to keep the Germans as their FCAS partner. Intransigence over workshare and export licensing outweigh the undoubted financial heft they could bring.

[t43562]

"I suppose it'd be rude to ask if you've got any facts to back it up?"

Look at the history of the last 50 years - - almost all serious European military hardware has been produced by consortiums of countries and several of those failed because of costs/work share issues
The UK and Italy are middling economic entities - Japan is richer but has rarely participated in multi- national developments. The estimated costs are already way north of £ 25 Bn - up to £ 40 Bn - which is way above any indicative long term funding. We can't even afford to buy F-35's at a reasonable rate - how do you think we can afford a completely new aircraft?

look at the comments here
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/tempest-facts-on-britains-new-fighter-jet-programme/

The current £ 2Bn is really to keep the design teams at BAe etc ticking over

Turkey seems to do quite a lot - I presume it has some help and it cuts its coat according to its cloth.

[Asturias56]

Yeah but then you're facing the same issues you'd have with the Saudis - see the F35 issues

as money flows to different parts of the world - or rather as the appetite to spend money on military developments does so - we're all going to find some of our new "friends" a bit uncomfortable.

[artee]

Yeah but then you're facing the same issues you'd have with the Saudis - see the F35 issues

as money flows to different parts of the world - or rather as the appetite to spend money on military developments does so - we're all going to find some of our new "friends" a bit uncomfortable.
If it's anythng like football (soccer), it's only a question of amount of money, before we accept them as welcome business "partners". "Uncomfortable" is for those with olde-worlde ideas of morality and values.

[typerated]

Finally will be a fighter without a gun!
Maybe?

[ORAC]

They’re looking at LDEW (laser) rather than a gun.

Advantages are no ammunition limit and usable against drones etc. Depending how it’s mounted with the EO system it can also be used off bresight and for self-defence against SAW and AAM.

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2021/03/15/britains-dragonfire-ship-laser-gun-to-get-accuracy-boost/

[Asturias56]

only needs a small N power plant in the back to power it as well!

or a very long extension lead.....................

[t43562]

only needs a small N power plant in the back to power it as well!

or a very long extension lead.....................
Apparently Rolls Royce's engines will have fancy, built-in generators. From what I've read one major problem is that lasers are very inefficient so there's a great deal of heat that has to be removed.

[Asturias56]

easily solved

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/527x307/2023_08_20_145055_7133c031a1feb5a0f778fc02e935b5b53b72eac1.j pg

[ORAC]

https://aircosmosinternational.com/article/tempest-rolls-royce-manufactures-electrical-starter-generator-2745#:~:text=The%20two%2Dspool%20mounted%20electrical,electr ically%20between%20the%20two%20spools.

Tempest: Rolls-Royce manufactures electrical starter generator

The future sixth-generation British combat aircraft, Tempest, intended to replace the Eurofighter Typhoon within the RAF, will benefit from additional electrical systems, including an embedded turbine engine starting device developed by Rolls-Royce.

Rolls-Royce could equip the future Tempest, intended to replace the Eurofighter Typhoon within the RAF, with an embedded electrical starter generator system for turbine engines. Purpose of the operation: save space and provide the large amount of electrical power required by future fighters.

Indeed, “existing aircraft engines generate power through a gearbox underneath the engine, which drives a generator. In addition to adding moving parts and complexity, the space required outside the engine for the gearbox and generator makes the airframe larger, which is undesirable in a stealthy platform”, explained Conrad Banks, Chief Engineer for Future Programmes at Rolls-Royce.

In 2014, Rolls-Royce designed an electrical starter generator that was fully embedded in the core of a gas turbine engine, now known as the Embedded Electrical Starter Generator or E2SG demonstrator program.

The launch of the second phase of the project in 2017 saw the inclusion of a second electrical generator connected to the other spool of the engine. It also included an energy storage system in the electrical network and the ability to intelligently manage the supply of power between all these systems.

The two-spool mounted electrical machines allows, by combination of operation as either a motor or a generator, the production of a series of functional effects on the engine, including the transfer of power electrically between the two spools.

Throughout the Tempest program, Rolls-Royce will be continuing to mature the electrical technologies demonstrated by the E2SG program, with a third phase of testing likely to include a novel thermal management system being integrated with the overall system.

https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/press-releases.aspx

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/dsei-japan-2023-ihi-rolls-royce-progress-gcap-fighter-engine

Unverified reports that RR say they expect to be able to generate 1mw of electrical power out of the engine…

[Asturias56]

lots of technology demonstrator stuff but I doubt we'll see a real aircarft......................

[LowObservable]

https://aircosmosinternational.com/article/tempest-rolls-royce-manufactures-electrical-starter-generator-2745#:~:text=The%20two%2Dspool%20mounted%20electrical,electr ically%20between%20the%20two%20spools.

Tempest: Rolls-Royce manufactures electrical starter generator

The future sixth-generation British combat aircraft, Tempest, intended to replace the Eurofighter Typhoon within the RAF, will benefit from additional electrical systems, including an embedded turbine engine starting device developed by Rolls-Royce.

Rolls-Royce could equip the future Tempest, intended to replace the Eurofighter Typhoon within the RAF, with an embedded electrical starter generator system for turbine engines. Purpose of the operation: save space and provide the large amount of electrical power required by future fighters.

Indeed, “existing aircraft engines generate power through a gearbox underneath the engine, which drives a generator. In addition to adding moving parts and complexity, the space required outside the engine for the gearbox and generator makes the airframe larger, which is undesirable in a stealthy platform”, explained Conrad Banks, Chief Engineer for Future Programmes at Rolls-Royce.

In 2014, Rolls-Royce designed an electrical starter generator that was fully embedded in the core of a gas turbine engine, now known as the Embedded Electrical Starter Generator or E2SG demonstrator program.

The launch of the second phase of the project in 2017 saw the inclusion of a second electrical generator connected to the other spool of the engine. It also included an energy storage system in the electrical network and the ability to intelligently manage the supply of power between all these systems.

The two-spool mounted electrical machines allows, by combination of operation as either a motor or a generator, the production of a series of functional effects on the engine, including the transfer of power electrically between the two spools.

Throughout the Tempest program, Rolls-Royce will be continuing to mature the electrical technologies demonstrated by the E2SG program, with a third phase of testing likely to include a novel thermal management system being integrated with the overall system.

https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/press-releases.aspx

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/dsei-japan-2023-ihi-rolls-royce-progress-gcap-fighter-engine

Unverified reports that RR say they expect to be able to generate 1mw of electrical power out of the engine…

A good idea, if an obvious one given the F-35 history, where cooling requirements outran the supply. Not sure why, but it was a known issue in 2010. I can't think of any other aircraft that has required a major retrofit because of thermal management issues.

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2023/09/11/uk-italy-japan-companies-eye-novel-sensor-mix-for-gcap-warplane/

UK, Italy, Japan companies eye novel sensor mix for GCAP warplane

ROME — As the trinational Global Combat Air Program fighter program accelerates, partners Japan (https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2023/08/08/italy-air-force-hauls-an-f-35-contingent-to-japan-for-first-ever-drill/), Italy (https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2023/01/27/italy-taps-local-defense-companies-to-work-on-next-gen-warplane/) and the U.K. (https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2023/02/10/wallace-urges-italy-japan-to-stick-with-just-launched-fighter-project/) are planning to define the sensor hardware to go onboard the jet by mid-2025 and form a new industrial joint venture to divide up work share, a senior official has told Defense News.…

[ORAC]

https://x.com/geoallison/status/1701513678732820674?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A
​​​​​​​

📢 BREAKING: UK, Japan, and Italy's defence industry leaders have reached a trilateral Collaboration Agreement for the Global Combat Air Programme aiming to deliver the next-gen combat aircraft by 2035. Also, here's a new image.


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/image_73a6e43185185a2b0fcbb38acaa6197d4df3a376.jpeg

[ORAC]

Those air intakes remind me of the F-105….


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1280x1280/image_94837f54543aa623977a5d7b2129fe3c070a97d9.jpeg

[Buster15]

📢 BREAKING: UK, Japan, and Italy's defence industry leaders have reached a trilateral Collaboration Agreement for the Global Combat Air Programme aiming to deliver the next-gen combat aircraft by 2035. Also, here's a new image.


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/image_73a6e43185185a2b0fcbb38acaa6197d4df3a376.jpeg
​​​​​​ Great news as far as I am concerned. Now let's see how it progresses.

[Buster15]

lots of technology demonstrator stuff but I doubt we'll see a real aircarft......................

Well I don't agree with you about that. And hopefully this will re establish a European fighter jet capability which was badly affected by the F35 programme.

[pr00ne]

Well I don't agree with you about that. And hopefully this will re establish a European fighter jet capability which was badly affected by the F35 programme.

Typhoon, Rafale and Grippen totally escape you did they?

And the UK is still European, and a vital and key part of F-35 conception, selection, design and production.

[Buster15]

Typhoon, Rafale and Grippen totally escape you did they?

And the UK is still European, and a vital and key part of F-35 conception, selection, design and production.

No of course not. And no need to be so caustic was there. But Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen are not 5th generation. And F35 is outselling these European fighter jets in Europe as well as the rest of the world. And yes of course I am aware that the UK is involved in F35. But as a supplier.

[pr00ne]

No of course not. And no need to be so caustic was there. But Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen are not 5th generation. And F35 is outselling these European fighter jets in Europe as well as the rest of the world. And yes of course I am aware that the UK is involved in F35. But as a supplier.

NOT as a supplier, as a Tier One partner. Fully involved in selecting suppliers.

[Buster15]

NOT as a supplier, as a Tier One partner. Fully involved in selecting suppliers.

​​​​​​Hair splitting really. What percentage of each aircraft is the UK/BAE contribution. Is it 15% on average.
But if you think that European industry has not been adversely affected by F35, up to you. But the 2 6th generation European programmes might disagree.

[rattman]

NOT as a supplier, as a Tier One partner. Fully involved in selecting suppliers.

and yet they still cant get meteor integrated in the aircraft. Tier one partner is just a supplier. Italy has a much greater footprint in the F-35 than the UK

[tartare]

Why are the intakes angled inwards so sharply?
RCS?
Or is there some sort of airflow, vortex benefit?

[PPRuNeUser0211]

and yet they still cant get meteor integrated in the aircraft. Tier one partner is just a supplier. Italy has a much greater footprint in the F-35 than the UK

Yeah but no....the Italians certainly disagree with you rattman. Best estimates on workshare are about 15% Vs 4% respectively, and as mentioned above - tier one does not equal supplier. As an example, full participation in OT&E which is rather vital for combat air.

In November, deals were awarded to repair 65 of a possible 774 repairable items on the aircraft for the period 2021-2015, with 48 going to the UK, 14 to the Netherlands and three to Australia, making up eight percent of the total items to repair.


"Small Italian firms were excluded because the competition favored large companies," said Crosetto.


As it won the lion's share of contracts, the UK ministry of defense said in November that its F-35 maintenance site in Wales would consequently become "a global repair hub providing maintenance, repair, overhaul and upgrade services for F-35 avionic and aircraft components."
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2017/02/10/italy-s-defense-industry-chief-attacks-f-35-broken-promises/

[ORAC]

Why are the intakes angled inwards so sharply?
RCS?
Or is there some sort of airflow, vortex benefit?


https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/90551/what-inspired-the-unique-design-of-the-f-105-thunderchief-intakes

https://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675068664_F-105B_air-induction_fuselage-bleed-door_vertical-fin-air-intake

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diverterless_supersonic_inlet

[Video Mixdown]

and yet they still cant get meteor integrated in the aircraft. Tier one partner is just a supplier. Italy has a much greater footprint in the F-35 than the UK
The F-35B lift fan and thrust vectoring system is designed and built in the UK by Rolls-Royce. Its VSTOL control system was developed from the UK's VAAC Harrier programme. Every F-35 is fitted with a Martin Baker ejection seat. Sounds like rather more than 'just a supplier' to me.

[ORAC]

When it comes to designing a 6th Gen CTOL FJ expertise in designing the lift fan for a STOVL engine isn’t exactly top of the essential criteria.

Which is why RR is working away with MHI on a new engine including things such as E2SG, Leonardo on a next generation radar - without US partnership etc.

I think there is a general feeling in both Europe, Japan and elsewhere that we have lost our own expertise and become too dependent on US technology.

[SLXOwft]

Wariness of the US can be summed up in two lots of four letters ... ITAR & pork.

[pr00ne]

and yet they still cant get meteor integrated in the aircraft. Tier one partner is just a supplier. Italy has a much greater footprint in the F-35 than the UK

Wrong!

Tier one is much more than a mere supplier, and it started long before the F-35 was chosen as the JSF.
Just because the UK MoD won’t fund Meteor integration is nothing to do with the deep UK involvement in the F-35.

[SLXOwft]

I understood Italy (and assuming it gets FMS approval Greece) also want to integrate Meteor, and the slippage is due to changes in the software upgrade programme - am I wrong?

[downsizer]

Or could it be because Meteor isn't ready and there aren't any w/clipped fins?

[Asturias56]

When it comes to designing a 6th Gen CTOL FJ expertise in designing the lift fan for a STOVL engine isn’t exactly top of the essential criteria.

Which is why RR is working away with MHI on a new engine including things such as E2SG, Leonardo on a next generation radar - without US partnership etc.

I think there is a general feeling in both Europe, Japan and elsewhere that we have lost our own expertise and become too dependent on US technology.

because the technology gets ever more expensive and the willingness to buy the eventual (expensive) kit decreases at the same time?

Most non-US countries are very rapidly heading towards Augustine's famous single fighterLaw (#16) - which he calculated would happen in 2054.....................

[tartare]

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/90551/what-inspired-the-unique-design-of-the-f-105-thunderchief-intakes

https://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675068664_F-105B_air-induction_fuselage-bleed-door_vertical-fin-air-intake

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diverterless_supersonic_inlet

Thank you - interesting.

[Buster15]

When it comes to designing a 6th Gen CTOL FJ expertise in designing the lift fan for a STOVL engine isn’t exactly top of the essential criteria.

Which is why RR is working away with MHI on a new engine including things such as E2SG, Leonardo on a next generation radar - without US partnership etc.

I think there is a general feeling in both Europe, Japan and elsewhere that we have lost our own expertise and become too dependent on US technology.

That is my understanding as well.

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/germany-may-abandon-100bn-fighter-jet-project-with-france-2n7ffv5g5

Germany may abandon €100bn fighter jet project with France

Germany is considering abandoning its flagship €100 billion future combat jet project with France and joining a rival programme with Britain instead, The Times has been told.

As an overture to a potential deal, the German chancellor is also understood to be in talks over lifting Berlin’s veto on a delivery of Eurofighter Typhoon jets to Saudi Arabia, which the UK views as an important strategic priority.

A pact along these lines would be a significant coup for London and reflect a steadily worsening rift between France and Germany, which are at odds over issues from energy and air defence to diplomatic protocol…..

One senior German official said Scholz saw no point in FCAS competing with Tempest and wanted either to merge the two or, failing that, to jettison FCAS and join Tempest. The chancellor is also said to be exasperated by the preferential treatment France has given its own aerospace companies in the initial stages of the FCAS project.

The ill feeling is exacerbated by a wider souring of relations between France and Germany on a number of different policy fronts.

Paris has, for example, snubbed Scholz’s “Sky Shield” initiative to bundle together European countries’ air and missile defence procurement, because it regards Germany’s preference for “off the shelf” systems from countries such as the US and Israel as an affront to its own research and development in this domain.

“When France says European defence policy, it means French industrial interests,” a senior source in Germany’s ruling coalition said. “Scholz feels he has far more in common with the British than with the French on these issues.”….

The next-generation combat aircraft decision is closely linked to a British-German wrangle over a delivery of 48 Eurofighter Typhoon jets to Saudi Arabia (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/germany-may-end-veto-on-uk-deal-to-sell-typhoons-to-saudi-arabia-cxtq8grgm), in a package potentially worth more than £5 billion.

The jet aircraft are jointly manufactured by Britain, Germany, Spain and Italy, which means Berlin has the ability to block their export. It has done so up to now on the grounds that a Saudi-led coalition has been blamed for killing thousands of civilians in the Yemeni civil war….

Sources across Scholz’s three-party coalition say they are now increasingly confident that the Eurofighter sale will be unblocked in the near future. This is partly because the chancellor worries that prospective partners will shy away from entering multinational defence projects with Germany in future if it is seen to be single-handedly thwarting exports.

[Asturias56]

“When France says European defence policy, it means French industrial interests,”

Well there's no change there then.................. :rolleyes:

[t43562]

“When France says European defence policy, it means French industrial interests,”

Well there's no change there then.................. :rolleyes:

Looking after their interests seems to have worked quite well for the Rafale recently. Should one really be proud of NOT looking after one's industrial interests?

[Video Mixdown]

Looking after their interests seems to have worked quite well for the Rafale recently. Should one really be proud of NOT looking after one's industrial interests?
All very well for domestic projects, but if it makes the effective management of a multi-national project so difficult that partners start talking about pulling out it is self-defeating.

[Ohrly]

All very well for domestic projects, but if it makes the effective management of a multi-national project so difficult that partners start talking about pulling out it is self-defeating.

Unless of course you are more than happy to go it alone. The only multi-national FJ projects France has participated in were the Jaguar and Alpha Jet in the 1960s.

[ORAC]

Francis Tusa:

https://x.com/ftusa284/status/1719997930638131366?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A


Germany might *think* it can join GCAP, but....

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1719997930638131366.html
​​​​​​​

[Less Hair]

It might just indicate that the French are too aggressive, demanding the lead everywhere. They certainly could not fund it going alone.
Who is left, then? South Korea, Singapore, Turkey, Brazil, India, Canada? How about another project?

[Asturias56]

Suspect it'll be trade off - the French will lead on the aircraft and the Germans will lead on the next generation tank

[melmothtw]

Suspect it'll be trade off - the French will lead on the aircraft and the Germans will lead on the next generation tank

I suspect you may be about five years behind the curve Asturia, as both of those work splits have already been decided as you describe.

[ORAC]

About that new tank (MGCS) joint venture….

https://www.armyrecognition.com/defense_news_october_2023_global_security_army_industry/e-mbt_tank_emerges_as_temporary_solution_for_germany_and_franc e_after_mgcs_program_collaboration_failure.html


​​​​​​​E-MBT tank emerges as temporary solution for Germany and France after MGCS program collaboration failure

[SLXOwft]

Unless of course you are more than happy to go it alone. The only multi-national FJ projects France has participated in were the Jaguar and Alpha Jet in the 1960s.

It has participated in more (some of which were admittedly canned after they left) but took its ball home when it didn't get its way, AFVG, FEFA (Eurofighter), NMBR-3 but the Germans are also slippery partners e.g. ditching MAW for P-8s, slashing their order once Panavia was firmly a GmbH based in Bayern.

It may not make economic. technological, or programme management sense to have Germany onboard in Tempest but politics may overide them.

[Less Hair]

Their money still might be welcome. Plus bigger expected orders with a certain country threatening invading NATO.

[melmothtw]

It has participated in more (some of which were admittedly canned after they left) but took its ball home when it didn't get its way, AFVG, FEFA (Eurofighter), NMBR-3 but the Germans are also slippery partners e.g. ditching MAW for P-8s, slashing their order once Panavia was firmly a GmbH based in Bayern.It may not make economic. technological, or programme management sense to have Germany onboard in Tempest but politics may overide them.

Did the UK not also slash its Tornado (and Eurofighter for that matter) numbers?

[Asturias56]

I suspect you may be about five years behind the curve Asturia, as both of those work splits have already been decided as you describe.

if its been decided why are the Germans thinking of pulling out? (allegedly)

[henra]

if its been decided why are the Germans thinking of pulling out? (allegedly)

Because France seems to be not sticking to the agreement. In le Bourget they openly announced developing Combat Cloud and Unmanned systems (which is the Airbus Part of FCAS) in parallel. So not only taking the manned Fighterjet Part (which was agreed after some hardball play by French Industry and Government) but now also developing the rest of FCAS for themselves. And in case of the tank they are currently on the move out. So only wanting Money from Germany (and Spain) for their development of the Fighterjet part but not buying the Airbus Elements of FCAS nor buying the Tank.
I'm not sure in the longer term they are doing themselves really a favor. I can't see anyone joining any future French Arms Joint Venture in the foreseeable future looking at how they are trying to rip off their partners.

[henra]

It may not make economic. technological, or programme management sense to have Germany onboard in Tempest but politics may overide them.
I would rather say it would make economical sense. Potential for an additional >100 aircraft sales. Which is a lot for a Gen5+ Aircraft. Probably an 30+% increase in production numbers. And program partners typically pay more for their aircraft than 'pure buyers'. Allowing for either cheaper sales prices or adding more tech.

[Commando Cody]

Because France seems to be not sticking to the agreement. In le Bourget they openly announced developing Combat Cloud and Unmanned systems (which is the Airbus Part of FCAS) in parallel. So not only taking the manned Fighterjet Part (which was agreed after some hardball play by French Industry and Government) but now also developing the rest of FCAS for themselves. And in case of the tank they are currently on the move out. So only wanting Money from Germany (and Spain) for their development of the Fighterjet part but not buying the Airbus Elements of FCAS nor buying the Tank.
I'm not sure in the longer term they are doing themselves really a favor. I can't see anyone joining any future French Arms Joint Venture in the foreseeable future looking at how they are trying to rip off their partners.

One might also look at previous joint projects fixed and rotary winged with France and see parallels. The French have a history of starting out they want to be collaborative, but then demanding control and the largest share, if not all, of production. If they enter into a "You buy mine and I'll by yours" they then don't follow through on all the "I'll buy yours" part.

[Lonewolf_50]

if its been decided why are the Germans thinking of pulling out? (allegedly) Perhaps they don't want to get the French pregnant. :cool:

[ORAC]

The main problem I would see is timescale.

The present plan, possible with the present partners, is to have the first engineering airframe airborne for 2035. Add Germany to the mix and negotiating work would add at least a decade to that - which is not available - plus the cost escalation would equal if not exceed any contribution.

Then there is the design. The UK and Japan need a twin engined long range interceptor for long range oceanic type patrols and intercepts, Germany needs a having bought F-35, needs a short range dogfighter (which is what Typhoon was designed for). I can’t see the present partners making that compromise.

[henra]

Then there is the design. The UK and Japan need a twin engined long range interceptor for long range oceanic type patrols and intercepts, Germany needs a having bought F-35, needs a short range dogfighter (which is what Typhoon was designed for). I can’t see the present partners making that compromise.
I don't think there would be so much disagreement about sizing and specialisation of the Jet. I don't think a dedicated Dogfighter is what Germany seeks in this but rather an Air Dominance Fighter. And that is not so far from what UK and Japan would need. I don't see them aiming at something Mig31esque either. And Typhoon is also not so much a dedicated Dogfighter. It is optimised for supercruise, supersonic turning and positioning. More focussed at Air Dominance albeit not with huge range.

[Easy Street]

Typhoon most certainly was designed with dogfighting in mind and the only machine with a clear advantage over it is F-22. The notorious occasion where the Indians swept the board clean with Su-27 was down to poor exercise planning leaving the Typhoons encumbered by role equipment without the kit to remove it to face their completely clean opponents!

The risk of declaring that GCAP won't need WVR capability is that timid politicians or senior military impose restrictive ROE requiring visual ID. Hopefully the sensor suite will be good enough to argue the opposite case.

[Asturias56]

" poor exercise planning leaving the Typhoons encumbered by role equipment without the kit to remove it to face their completely clean opponents!"

And of course that could NEVER happen in real life................. that's the point of exercises - they ARE realistic

[ORAC]

And of course that could NEVER happen in real life................. that's the point of exercises - they ARE realistic


In real life you press the button and clean the wings before committing to the engagement - not something the bean counters will allow in peacetime!

Cant speak for modern times, but it SOP back in the day to put F4s in C or D fit on the middle and outer CAPs and rotate them through the tanker so that they were using just external tank fuel so that, when committing and dropping the tanks they’d be entering the fight with full internal fuel.

[Easy Street]

" poor exercise planning leaving the Typhoons encumbered by role equipment without the kit to remove it to face their completely clean opponents!"

And of course that could NEVER happen in real life................. that's the point of exercises - they ARE realistic

To ORAC's response I would add that dropping fuel tanks (and indeed other stores) would upset the green lobby and require expensive clean up operations, doubly angering the bean counters. It would also require absolutely enormous surface danger areas into which the stores could safely fall given that they would not be aimed in any way.

But more fundamentally if you don't have the insight to air combat to know this then perhaps you should not be commenting!

[Asturias56]

Nothing to do with air combat procedures

I believe that what can go wrong will go wrong - and to carry out an exercise with "poor exercise planning leaving the Typhoons encumbered by role equipment without the kit to remove it " may have inadvertently flagged a possible issue that presumably will stay with those responsible and (hopefully) ensure that if things turn hot they will remember the incident. We've managed to lose an F-35 due to simple procedures being forgotten/waived/ignored. :(

[ORAC]

https://x.com/garethjennings3/status/1721924588022477206?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A


Sweden confirms that involvement in Tempest is now officially dead.

"We walked away from tri-lateral studies with UK and Italy about a year ago and launched a national study. I will not answer questions why it didn’t work with the UK and FCAS." - official IFC23

For those who think Europe can't support two next-gen fighter programmes, we may be about to get three!

"It is not decided if we will build a system, develop a system with others, or acquire a system. We can say it will be done both nationally and with partners."

@JanesINTEL story on #Sweden's plans for a next-generation combat aircraft, complete with timeline, to come. FMV visualisation (purely illustrative, I'm sure).

[ORAC]

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/budget-policy-operations/empowered-government-agency-develop-gcap-sixth-gen-fighter

‘Empowered’ Government Agency To Develop GCAP Into Sixth-Gen Fighter

The Global Combat Air Program nations—Italy, Japan, and the UK—have agreed to form a government agency that will run development of the future crewed combat aircraft.

Created through a trilateral treaty, the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP) International Government Organization—or GIGO—is the “empowered” organization that will lead the multinational project from development into production, service entry and beyond….

The GIGO agency aims to eliminate shortcomings associated with previous fighter programs.

The NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency, for example, was created to manage those aircraft programs but never was empowered to do so. Instead it was left to an industry-led organization, Eurofighter, to coordinate the program’s partners.

GIGO will function more like the U.S. Joint Program Office for the Lockheed Martin F-35, placing contracts for the different phases of the GCAP program regardless of whether they are unilaterally or bilaterally needed. It will also define and prioritize requirements and resolve issues between partners, and most crucially, it will manage and support exports, albeit within the guidelines of the partner nations.

GIGO is to be based in the UK—its final location is to be determined—and run initially by a Japanese national.

The agency will be joined by an industrial joint-venture counterpart formed by the three airframers—the UK’s BAE Systems, Italy’s Leonardo and Japan’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. The joint-venture also will be headquartered in the UK and headed initially by an Italian national.

The creation of that joint venture will follow trilateral agreements signed by companies working in the different program pillars that look at how they enhance their cooperation and share information….

According to the Japanese Defense Ministry, the three ministers also confirmed the work distribution will be “proportionate to each country’s contribution by financial and technical means under the spirit of equal partnership.”

However, the timelines are tight. Government and industry have just one year to prepare to begin work. They will need to develop the platform and prepare it for service entry in 2035, before five years of “rapid spiral development” to ready it for the front line….

[Ninthace]

Please tell me the GIGO acronym is a joke!

[SamYeager]

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/budget-policy-operations/empowered-government-agency-develop-gcap-sixth-gen-fighter

‘Empowered’ Government Agency To Develop GCAP Into Sixth-Gen Fighter

The Global Combat Air Program nations—Italy, Japan, and the UK—have agreed to form a government agency that will run development of the future crewed combat aircraft.

Created through a trilateral treaty, the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP) International Government Organization—or GIGO—is the “empowered” organization that will lead the multinational project from development into production, service entry and beyond….


I'm having difficulty believing this article wasn't intended to be released on 1 April.

[Mogwi]

They will need to develop the platform and prepare it for service entry in 2035, before five years of “rapid spiral development” to ready it for the front line….

That doesn’t sound very good for an aircraft!

Mog

[melmothtw]

They will need to develop the platform and prepare it for service entry in 2035, before five years of “rapid spiral development” to ready it for the front line….

That doesn’t sound very good for an aircraft!

Mog

Is that not the same philosophy the USAF had for the F-15 - introduce it into service quickly but at a very baseline standard, and then rapidly spiral develop it once it's operational? The advantage being that you're not shooting for the impossible 100% solution that would prevent the aircraft ever entering service in the first place.

[Lonewolf_50]

Please tell me the GIGO acronym is a joke! Well, I laughed as soon as I read it.
GIGO will function more like the U.S. Joint Program Office for the Lockheed Martin F-35, At which point I gagged.

[Asturias56]

Is that not the same philosophy the USAF had for the F-15 - introduce it into service quickly but at a very baseline standard, and then rapidly spiral develop it once it's operational? The advantage being that you're not shooting for the impossible 100% solution that would prevent the aircraft ever entering service in the first place.

looks like thats what they're doing with the B21 (see other thread)

But the US has veered between early production and late production (after a lot of prototypes) ever since 1945 - RAND published a study by Lorell et al in 1998IIRC

You win some, you lose some

[ORAC]

We may not have 5 years before it’s needed, let alone 15+….

[ORAC]

https://x.com/gabriel64869839/status/1752271015520964716?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A


​​​​​​​The software for the GCAP/Tempest demonstrator has been written and is already being "tested to a very high standard of maturity", while the aircraft itself is in build, according to Herman Claesen, managing director FCAS at BAE Systems.

[ORAC]

https://x.com/indopac_info/status/1753395282140921981?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A


The US will collaborate with Japan on a next-generation drone project, US Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall said.

The collaborative combat aircraft (CCA) project will be developed solely by US contractors. However, “there will be other opportunities” to work with Japan, Nikkei Asia quoted Kendall as saying.…

​​​​​​​The project will be built on the recently signed joint research agreement to merge AI and machine learning with advanced unmanned air vehicles.

The aircraft the collaboration will develop is intended to fly alongside Japan’s next-generation fighter aircraft, which Tokyo is developing with the UK and Italy.

“I think there is a lot of technical capability that Japan can bring to the table and that we can all benefit from working together,” Nikkei Asia quoted Kendall as saying.…

[ORAC]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/over-1-8-billion-spent-so-far-on-new-stealth-fighter/

Over £1.8 billion spent so far on new stealth fighter

This is part of a budget of over £12 billion over the next 10 years.

The information came to light via a written response to a parliamentary question. James Cartlidge, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, stated:

“The March 2021 Defence Command Paper reaffirmed that that we will invest more than £2 billion in the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) out to 2025, and we have spent over £1.8 billion so far. This is part of a budget of over £12 billion over the next 10 years. The amount that we ultimately invest will be determined at future decision points.

Furthermore, the Ministry of Defence has invested over £1.1 billion in R&D through the Future Combat Air System Technology Initiative (FCAS TI), with a further £600 million from our Team Tempest industry partners to date.”

….Under the current timeline, the programme expects to begin the formal development phase from 2025, with a demonstrator to fly in 2027, and production aircraft to begin entering service from 2035.

[Jackonicko]

They showed a new model of GCAP at WDS. It's certainly a lot better looking than the 'Pregnant Pelican' full scale mock up.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1134x1511/gcap_new_model_jpeg_d5269043a93d11a3e0ed03f2449dcba476d2f924 .jpg

[Asturias56]

"Over £1.8 billion spent so far on new stealth fighter" is true as far as it goes but a little misleading - more accurate to say the money was spent on keeping BAe and others in business. Look tathe announcement the other day on teh money spent on "research" into a new UK N warhead - its the cost of maintaining an industry really

[Uberteknik]

"Over £1.8 billion spent so far on new stealth fighter" is true as far as it goes but a little misleading - more accurate to say the money was spent on keeping BAe and others in business. Look tathe announcement the other day on teh money spent on "research" into a new UK N warhead - its the cost of maintaining an industry really In your humble opinion of course. What's your point? Defence is of key strategic importance.
Think of it as money spent protecting the entire investment made on health, education, social welfare et.al. It:s also the price paid to stay at the cutting edge of technology and 'soft power' globally. I'd say the money spent is an absolute bargain. I'd wager the NHS alone wastes more money in one year than these defence budgets over their entire lifespans.
In my humble opinion of course.
​​​

[Asturias56]

"Defence is of key strategic importance."

I agree of course ,as do almost everyone on here - but not to politicians, the Great British Public or most of the rest of the country. The issue starts when someone "weaponises" statements like "Over £1.8 billion spent so far on new stealth fighter" and then suggests that this is outrageous waste, korupsi, madness and it should instead be spent on pensioners, the NHS, tax cuts...................... and that's what happens.

No-one ever sets out a coherent, consistent, long term strategy or UK defence/defence industry - it all seems to be made up every week to meet the latest photo call/Daily Mail headline..

[Uberteknik]

"Defence is of key strategic importance."

I agree of course ,as do almost everyone on here - but not to politicians, the Great British Public or most of the rest of the country. The issue starts when someone "weaponises" statements like "Over £1.8 billion spent so far on new stealth fighter" and then suggests that this is outrageous waste, korupsi, madness and it should instead be spent on pensioners, the NHS, tax cuts...................... and that's what happens.

No-one ever sets out a coherent, consistent, long term strategy or UK defence/defence industry - it all seems to be made up every week to meet the latest photo call/Daily Mail headline..Ahhh. My bad. Apologies. Should have gone to Specsavers lol. Yes, agree and thanks for the clarification.

[Asturias56]

No problem............... :ok:

[dctyke]

Nothing to do with air combat procedures

I believe that what can go wrong will go wrong - and to carry out an exercise with "poor exercise planning leaving the Typhoons encumbered by role equipment without the kit to remove it " may have inadvertently flagged a possible issue that presumably will stay with those responsible and (hopefully) ensure that if things turn hot they will remember the incident. We've managed to lose an F-35 due to simple procedures being forgotten/waived/ignored. :(

Out of interest (having re-roled and de-roled more fast jets that I care to remember) what specific kit do you need to remove role equipment from a Typhoon?

[Asturias56]

No idea - see Easy Streets post #405 last november above

[downsizer]

Out of interest (having re-roled and de-roled more fast jets that I care to remember) what specific kit do you need to remove role equipment from a Typhoon?

Quite, but reading back the post 405, I'm guessing stillages for drop tanks? VAPs?

[Canary Boy]

Apologies if this is old information, but a very interesting read nonetheless:
https://www.aerosociety.com/news/the-only-way-is-tempest/

[Easy Street]

Quite, but reading back the post 405, I'm guessing stillages for drop tanks? VAPs?

Bingo. It was a few days in India enroute back from some east Asian exercise; they only had the kit which could be transported on the tanker, and if memory serves correctly even that was effectively hand tools only as the tanker had had to land at a different airfield. Of course, being British we were too polite (insecure?) to say "no" or perhaps even "you must be joking" to an invitation to some diplomatically-motivated activity, so BFM with tanks on against clean Su-27s it was, generating predictably awful PR for Typhoon in what should have been the prime of its export life. Still, got some nice photos eh?