Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

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

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

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

Old 5th Oct 2018, 12:50
  #181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,176
Pure Pursuit,

Except for the fact that it is NOT 'their" 4th generation fighter it is Eurofighter Gmbh's 4th generation fighter who ARE working on new and enhanced capabilities but are rather hamstrung by reluctant customers.

When will we ever learn not to trust reductionist myth pedallers?
pr00ne is offline  
Old 5th Oct 2018, 16:51
  #182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 129
Originally Posted by pr00ne View Post
Pure Pursuit,

Except for the fact that it is NOT 'their" 4th generation fighter it is Eurofighter Gmbh's 4th generation fighter who ARE working on new and enhanced capabilities but are rather hamstrung by reluctant customers.

When will we ever learn not to trust reductionist myth pedallers?
Or: UK don’t have the money for their planned typhoon upgrades - how can they make Tempest work.

The project as a result of the four partner nations is unnecessarily complex in terms of getting unified decisions on cost and direction. Despite this and subsequent the BAE apologist viewpoint that some people offer, there are many I have spoken to in the project at different levels seem to think the RAF aren’t getting VFM.

EAP: the Typhoons peers have had E-Scan for well over 10 years. F-15C (2006), F-22 (IOC), F-18E/F (2007). At present the typhoon AESA is many years from service.
flighthappens is offline  
Old 5th Oct 2018, 17:08
  #183 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: River Thames & Surrey
Age: 71
Posts: 8,298
Originally Posted by white rabbit View Post
The intention is for it to be in both manned and unmanned versions.
But in 1957, Duncan Sandys said 'no more manned aircraft'.
chevvron is offline  
Old 6th Oct 2018, 12:38
  #184 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: upstairs
Posts: 202
Originally Posted by flighthappens View Post


Or: UK don’t have the money for their planned typhoon upgrades - how can they make Tempest work.

The project as a result of the four partner nations is unnecessarily complex in terms of getting unified decisions on cost and direction. Despite this and subsequent the BAE apologist viewpoint that some people offer, there are many I have spoken to in the project at different levels seem to think the RAF aren’t getting VFM.

EAP: the Typhoons peers have had E-Scan for well over 10 years. F-15C (2006), F-22 (IOC), F-18E/F (2007). At present the typhoon AESA is many years from service.
Not just the UK. Some years ago a trick question was doing the rounds at EF: "Which Nation is paying their bills?" The answer of course was "None of them." Note that I wasn't having a dig at the UK in particular. (Note also that all of the peers you mention have the benefit from the world's largest military budget)

As an "apologist" if I had any to defend industry, I'd point out that industry initially funded around 60% of the AESA investment from their own coffers. This came from a Project Manager I've known for over 20 years so a credible source.

EAP
EAP86 is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2018, 01:58
  #185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Fife
Posts: 228
Noting the similarity of that giant pie in the sky Airfix kit to one or 2 Chinese designs, could I proffer that in spite of the derision Chinese strategy tends to attract, its actually not a terribly bad idea to accost proven designs and reap the benefits at reduced cost and risk.

Is there therefore not an argument for some consortium buying up the YF-23 plans and just building that instead? Obviously with a relevant software upgrade amongst other minor mods as appropriate.

Have we not now reached the stage that certainly UK Plc should start asking itself, just how good does this thing actually have to be, if the development costs and vulnerability to cancellation actually mean we would only ever end up with a handful, if any? Quantity has a quality of its own after all.

If you built an updated YF-23 you might even find you had the US as a potential customer.

Just my tuppenceworth

Cooch
Coochycool is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2018, 04:11
  #186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Dundee
Posts: 88
Originally Posted by flighthappens View Post
At present the typhoon AESA is many years from service
Define ‘many’?
My company has orders to supply production items for e-Captor next year so I call BS on your comment.
Speedywheels is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2018, 07:52
  #187 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 1,610
Originally Posted by Speedywheels View Post


Define ‘many’?
My company has orders to supply production items for e-Captor next year so I call BS on your comment.
2020 for the Kuwaitis, so one-and-a-bit years away. Will still be several years after this before any of the core nations field an AESA operationally, which I think was the crux of the OP's observation. Indeed, I understand that the core nations have yet to decide on precisely which configuration of AESA they want, with the UK and Germany after enhanced capabilities that Italy and Spain aren't too fussed about.
melmothtw is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2018, 18:57
  #188 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,115
Hi Engines,

I think that within whatever Tempest turns out to be we will struggle (but perhaps achieve - let’s dare to dream) to square all the relevant circles; for example ‘High end for RAF but suited to export’, ‘Cutting edge but free of ITAR’, ‘Multi-nation collaboration that shares NRE with partners, guarantees orders but remains agile and simple’, ‘Primarily uses MBDA stores but allows the export customers choice to use existing stockpiles’. ‘Ground breaking but on time’.

I think that given the barely (but possibly!) surmountable challenge they’ve been set - it will suit British industry to stay well away from shipborne recovery and launch as a layer of complexity and a technical challenge they simply don’t want to consider.


orca is online now  
Old 23rd Feb 2019, 16:26
  #189 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,056
AW&ST: Saab Considers Joining FCAS Design Effort

Sweden’s Saab has further hinted that the company could be close to joining the UK’s Future Combat Air System (FCAS) effort.

CEO Hakan Buskhe told investors that the company has had “fruitful discussions” with the UK and other partners on FCAS as he presented the company’s 2018 annual results on Feb. 15. He said any cooperation strategy on a future program would have to “build our capability, not drain it.” He added he had not yet seen results of Spain joining the Franco/German set up—its entrance was formally recognized on Feb. 14—but said: “We can’t really see our part on that.”

Last year the company confirmed it was having a “deepening dialog” with London about the UK’s Combat Air Strategy and FCAS Technology Initiative, formally launched at the Farnborough Airshow last year. The UK Combat Air Strategy calls on the UK to take the lead in a multinational cooperation effort to develop and produce a combat aircraft and associated system to replace types such as the Eurofighter Typhoon by the early 2030s.

Saab already appears to be preparing for this date. At the end of last year, the company carried out a 6 billion Krona ($640 million) rights issue to lay the groundwork for future growth, with Bushke stating the money could be used to support cooperation with the UK down the road. The money would “increase the speed of the growth of the company,” and support what he called “megaorders.”
ORAC is online now  
Old 23rd Feb 2019, 18:12
  #190 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 59
British Italian Swedish and maybe Dutch - the Spanish will go in with the Germans & French I'll bet
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 11:08
  #191 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Bristol
Age: 37
Posts: 312
The Spanish have gone in with the Germans and the French.
unmanned_droid is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 11:27
  #192 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 75
Posts: 1,504
Tempest will probably not come to fruition. BAES no longer has the in-house requisite skills capability. Insider opinion, not mine. But maybe they can be imported?

Also, UK Government arguably doesn't have the funds to go it alone. It didn't in the 80's, and circumstances have almost certainly not created any such allowance since. IMO.

But with Sweden?

Last edited by jindabyne; 24th Feb 2019 at 11:51.
jindabyne is online now  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 19:10
  #193 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: England
Posts: 247
Originally Posted by jindabyne View Post
Tempest will probably not come to fruition. BAES no longer has the in-house requisite skills capability. Insider opinion, not mine. But maybe they can be imported?

Also, UK Government arguably doesn't have the funds to go it alone. It didn't in the 80's, and circumstances have almost certainly not created any such allowance since. IMO.

But with Sweden?
I agree. The UK and BAE have not produced a complete fighter jet for many years.
Also, having never even produced a 5th Generation, making the leap in technology to a 6th Generation is massively optimistic.

The only saving grace could be Taranis technology transfer.
Buster15 is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 19:58
  #194 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Bristol
Posts: 11
Engine options

Admittedly we only have one UK manufacturer for aero engines but I do hope that if future aircraft are going to be equipped with RR engines the contract ensures that the use of concessions and DDRs is prohibited. UK MoD pays a lot for the engines they have in their aircraft and the price is the same irrespective of how many concessions and DDRs RR apply to them. I very much doubt thare are any engines currently in service that actually comply with original design specification. RR churn out any old rubbish and apply concessions and DDRs to cover the deficiencies/defects. Supposedly overhauled engines have parts that don't conform to the limits routinely installed. Engines returned to RR for repair are routinely returned to service with defects that have not been rectified. New build engines frequently have concessions applied to non-conforming parts and DDRs incorrectly applied to new parts. Unfortunately the contracts to supply engines permit these behaviours.

Last edited by Donkey9871; 25th Feb 2019 at 22:54. Reason: Typo
Donkey9871 is offline  
Old 25th Feb 2019, 14:48
  #195 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 551
The entire design chain for high speed aircraft is facing extinction, largely for lack of relevance to the actual challenges of the day.
Nobody needs a 6th generation fighter. Also, given the costs, it stretches credulity to believe that a handful of such will be relevant in any plausible fight.
So these efforts smack of a desperate make work, with no real purpose other than to preserve some capability in the unlikely event it might be needed sometime
etudiant is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2019, 02:08
  #196 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 3,924
Originally Posted by flighthappens View Post
EAP: the Typhoons peers have had E-Scan for well over 10 years. F-15C (2006), F-22 (IOC), F-18E/F (2007). At present the typhoon AESA is many years from service.
1) Typhoon AESA will be in service (with Kuwait) next year
2) Typhoon AESA has a repositioner, unlike any of the first gen AESAs you list......
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2019, 03:35
  #197 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 129
Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
1) Typhoon AESA will be in service (with Kuwait) next year
2) Typhoon AESA has a repositioner, unlike any of the first gen AESAs you list......
when will it see frontline RAF service?

What percentage of the fleet will be so outfitted?
flighthappens is offline  
Old 26th Feb 2019, 07:44
  #198 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,115
What price for a seat at the first discussion between a Super Hornet APG-79 user, a F-35 APG-81 user and the Johnny Come Lately Typhoon driver talking frankly about their kit?

I’d love to think that the repositioner was worth waiting over a decade for!

In the available time - have we sorted out the MIDS fit?
orca is online now  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 15:13
  #199 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Essex
Posts: 352
Even if it's possible, even if it can be funded, I don't trust the UK to run this kind of project. Here's why.

Proposed developments to Harrier were abandoned.
TSR-2
Tornado ADV was pursued despite the program being more expensive and less capable than just buying F-15s.
Huge delays and cost overruns on Typhoon; widely agreed to be less effective than far cheaper Su-35. Some commentators describe it as obsolete at introduction; no more effective than developed F-15s.
Built carriers big enough to cat/trap, then bought more expensive, less capable VTOL-capable aircraft for them, creating worst possible price-performance ratio; carriers almost impossible to staff or protect anyway.

Why would any reasonable person not conclude that British military procurement policy has, for decades, been utterly, utterly catastrophic? And that's just aviation-related stuff. One is tempted toward the conclusion that these decisions are so political that government is incapable of making rational decisions, to the point where it's severely affecting national security.
Phil_R is offline  
Old 27th Feb 2019, 15:34
  #200 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,136
Originally Posted by Phil_R View Post
Even if it's possible, even if it can be funded, I don't trust the UK to run this kind of project. Here's why.

...Typhoon; widely agreed to be less effective than far cheaper Su-35...
By whom? links, sources?

Notwithstanding that the Typhoon was an international programme and not one run solely by the UK, it has been the UK that, admittedly slowly, have been at the forefront of developing the Typhoon whilst the other partner nations have dragged their feet, much as they did during it's initial design/development...

-RP
Rhino power is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.