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

Encouraging news from the Defence Secetary?

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.

Encouraging news from the Defence Secetary?

Old 3rd Aug 2021, 15:24
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 61
Posts: 1,510
Encouraging news from the Defence Secetary?

UK defence secretary wants ‘volume' Tempest production (janes.com)

The Defence Secretary has provided some clarity, for the present, has been reported regarding the future form of the Tempest.

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2021, 16:34
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 463
Originally Posted by Finningley Boy View Post
UK defence secretary wants ‘volume' Tempest production (janes.com)

The Defence Secretary has provided some clarity, for the present, has been reported regarding the future form of the Tempest.

FB
Might be good news.
Political counting: one, two, several, more, lots, many, unprecedented numbers. I wonder where volume sits on that scale and if ModVol = TreasVol?

Perhaps we could get a better guarantee of the eventual numbers if we let Boris have a snazzy Union Flag logo on each tail, in muted greys of course.
Ninthace is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2021, 16:43
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 20,988
One always starts with eye dropping numbers in procurement and often ends up with tens off, if indeed not chopped at birth... hasn't one learnt anything about Government procurement?

Still we can't be doing to bad, we are looking at giving a couple of frigates to Greece.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/two-...ted-to-greece/
NutLoose is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2021, 17:16
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Richard Burtonville, South Wales.
Posts: 2,088
Has he a few shares in BAe?

CG
charliegolf is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2021, 19:55
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 4,112
My prediction? We’ll be joining in the Airbus FCAS programme within 5 years…


Lima Juliet is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2021, 20:01
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,654
Originally Posted by charliegolf View Post
Has he a few shares in BAe?

CG
No, but his constituency is next door to Warton and Samlesbury...
Easy Street is online now  
Old 3rd Aug 2021, 20:26
  #7 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,346
LJ,

Historically it’s been the other way round, usually as the other partners with the French realise that the French idea of collaboration is that everyone pays whilst the French demand leadership over airframe, engine, avionics and software…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofi...yphoon#Origins
ORAC is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2021, 23:02
  #8 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 61
Posts: 1,510
If I recall correctly, the French objections at the time were the priority of Germany, UK and Italy for primarily an Interceptor. The French wanted to place emphasis on a Ground Attack aircraft. As things now stand, both airframes can do anything well enough, a bit like the latest Block F-16s.

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2021, 19:40
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: one side of la Manche
Posts: 166
Originally Posted by Finningley Boy View Post
If I recall correctly, the French objections at the time were the priority of Germany, UK and Italy for primarily an Interceptor. The French wanted to place emphasis on a Ground Attack aircraft. As things now stand, both airframes can do anything well enough, a bit like the latest Block F-16s.

FB
Strange priority (of UK) since I understand it (ie AST 403) was originally conceived as replacement for the Harrier and Jaguar. As explained to me (at Staff College) RAF philosophy was that a good fighter (aka interceptor) would be a better basis for a ground attack aircraft than would a ground attack aircraft for an interceptor.

Batco
BATCO is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2021, 10:48
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,392
Originally Posted by Finningley Boy View Post
If I recall correctly, the French objections at the time were the priority of Germany, UK and Italy for primarily an Interceptor. The French wanted to place emphasis on a Ground Attack aircraft. As things now stand, both airframes can do anything well enough, a bit like the latest Block F-16s.

FB
Weight was also an issue as the French wanted an aircraft that was carrier compatible, which meant a lighter aircraft than the UK would accept (1000Kg difference if I recall correctly)
Davef68 is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2021, 19:09
  #11 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Welwyn Garden City
Age: 61
Posts: 1,510
Originally Posted by BATCO View Post
Strange priority (of UK) since I understand it (ie AST 403) was originally conceived as replacement for the Harrier and Jaguar. As explained to me (at Staff College) RAF philosophy was that a good fighter (aka interceptor) would be a better basis for a ground attack aircraft than would a ground attack aircraft for an interceptor.

Batco
Bang on BATCO, EFA, or as you describe AST 403 to use Air Staff requirement number, was originally a requirement to replace the Harrier and Jaguar. It would also replace the Phantom in Germany, and else where, as a Battlefield Air Superiority Fighter. However, emphasis on which ever role came about through the individual nations stating more specific requirements. Germany and Italy wanted an F-4 and F-104 replacement respectively, ie Air Defence, the UK wanted something with a high energy to replace the RAFG Phantoms in particular. The French needs were for a Jaguar replacement first and foremost. Just how the refinements are applied to suit one prominent design or the other I'm not sure, but I imagine something to do with endurance at low-level versus performance at high-altitude. But I recall back around the end of the 80s start of the 90s at some point the French wanted to go their own way. Thereafter, between 1991 and 1994, the entire project, for those which remained ran into stormy weather with the Germans threatening to pull out, the Defence Minister, Volker Ruhe, urged us to drop it as well, the old argument, cold war relic etc, etc. Just the same, The Germans wanted something else, only cheaoer and not so many Bells and Whistles, to the point of looking to a partnership with Russia on a project for, if I recall, the Mig 142. Ok I'll stop before I stick my neck out too far.

FB
Finningley Boy is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.