Brexit throws Anglo-French FCAS programme into doubt - Flight
Dassault Aviation chief executive Éric Trappier says the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) programme is now just “marking time”. Presenting Dassault's 2017 financial results at its headquarters at St Cloud, Paris, Trappier said he was “disappointed” by the stalling of a programme that represented five or six years of design work in collaboration with BAE Systems in the UK. FCAS was expected to move into a full-scale demonstrator development programme at the end of 2017, following a formal two-year feasibility study begun in November 2014 and a further 12-month study phase last year. “We wanted a contract to build a demonstrator,” Trappier says, but that has not happened. Now, he says, attention has moved to a proposed Franco-German project that would see Dassault and Airbus design a new combat system for the 2040s, as a successor to the countries' respective Rafale and Eurofighter programmes. Details remain under discussion, but significant unmanned capabilities, perhaps as indicated by FCAS and the Dassault-led Neuron programme, are expected. While Dassault and Airbus work on the technical aspects, Trappier says the French and German governments will have to do the critical work of defining how the two countries will work together on the project. “The way in which we co-operate, that will be the most important point,” he says. Neuron was a great success, he says, because the six countries involved were well-organised with clear goals. A sign of success, he adds, is that the aircraft proved reliable enough to make demonstration flights at air shows. Dassault enjoyed a good year financially in 2017. Sales rose by more than a third to €4.8 billion, with delivery of a single Rafale to France and eight to Egypt, against a total of nine deliveries of the multirole type in 2016. Falcon business jet deliveries held steady last year at 49. Net income rose 27% to €489 million ($605 million). The top line, says Trappier, should be about the same for 2018. |
Brexit, it just keeps on delivering...
|
Originally Posted by pr00ne
(Post 10082224)
Brexit, it just keeps on delivering...
N |
Brexit and currency exchange
I know it’s the ‘trendy’ thing to blame Brexit for everything that goes wrong but I have a question.
When I went to France in 2010 I remember getting 1.06€ to the £. I was in France last month and got 1.13€ to the £. If Brexit is so bad and businesses are closing because of it why didn’t they all close in 2010? Also, for a further example, when I moved to Canada in 2012 we got 1.56$ to the £. It’s currently at 1.80. How exactly is Brexit killing us right now? I have no particular axe to grind on either side of the argument but I do suspect that our media are not wholly honest with us. BV |
sounds more like a decision by our French "colleagues" to me
|
Originally Posted by golfbananajam
(Post 10082349)
sounds more like a decision by our French "colleagues" to me
However, when it comes to aerospace, they put us to shame when it comes to safeguarding national interests and industry. |
Originally Posted by pr00ne
(Post 10082224)
Brexit, it just keeps on delivering...
See my post above if you are lacking comprehension. |
Originally Posted by glad rag
(Post 10082521)
I like the French quite a lot, ok you have to get round things, but generally they are ok.
However, when it comes to aerospace, they put us to shame when it comes to safeguarding national interests and industry. |
I thought the French and Germans had already declaredtheir hand on FCAS with the proposed Airbus 2-seat next gen fighter?
http://www.janes.com/images/assets/5...50/1712546.jpg http://abcblogs.abc.es/wp-content/up...7/IMG_5458.jpg Would be great to replace Tornado with one of these instead of more F35s... |
It would have ended in a French split anyway. At least this way the French get to take the blame - Oops! credit, earlier.
|
Perhaps Brexit is now a good enough excuse to pull out of a project which seemed very nice politically, but was likely to see BAE Systems' competitive advantage in low observable technology effectively given away to Dassault for free.
|
Originally Posted by drustsonoferp
(Post 10082895)
Perhaps Brexit is now a good enough excuse to pull out of a project which seemed very nice politically, but was likely to see BAE Systems' competitive advantage in low observable technology effectively given away to Dassault for free.
|
The rationale for investing in building such an aircraft is that you require it for your own armed forces and/or for export potential.
I would suggest that, based on recent history, and the competition from the USA/Russia/China and domestic programmes in nations such as Japan/Korea/Turkey, the export potential is low. (And BAe is in fact investing instead in partnering in the Turkish and Japanese programmes). With the dramatic shrinkage in the RAF over recent years and the introduction of the F-35B the UK market for a Typhoon replacement is small, if a couple of squadrons are replaced by additional F-35A/Bs or UAVs such as Taranis perhaps no more than a couple of squadrons for QRA which could be filled off the shelf from the next generation US fighters for the USAF and USN now being funded. In such circumstances I can see the lack of interest in the MOD/Treasury for investing a new European project within the next 20-30 years, especially with more urgent needs in other parts of the defence budget. And, let’s face it, Bae is mainly a US company these days and there are more jobs in bidding for contracts to build parts for US aircraft such as the F-35 than a European Typhoon replacement. |
Having worked for a supplier involved with a Dassault project, my opinion is that Dassault are very sharp operators and you need to be really, really on your game, therefore, it's probably best for us not to get anymore involved.
|
Sure - we can always buy advanced technology of the yanks......... just like the F-35.....
All our recent combat aircraft have been co-operative - you have to go back 30-40 years to the Harrier and the Buc. for a 100% UK aircraft - (and a lot of the later Harriers had US input) We won't put the money into a European programme and we certainly can't afford our own so it's another technology scratched off the list |
I'm sure there's a 'Commonwealth' country or two that'd jump on board. If Brexit was ever going to work, it must surely include the Commonwealth?
|
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
(Post 10083200)
All our recent combat aircraft have been co-operative - you have to go back 30-40 years to the Harrier and the Buc. for a 100% UK aircraft - (and a lot of the later Harriers had US input)
Bucc is the last I would think? |
Originally Posted by GeeRam
(Post 10083275)
There was a lot of US involvement from the very early days of the Harrier/Kestrel/P.1127, so I would exclude that tbh.
Bucc is the last I would think? |
I'm sure there's a 'Commonwealth' country or two that'd jump on board. If Brexit was ever going to work, it must surely include the Commonwealth? |
Originally Posted by Buster Hyman
(Post 10083206)
I'm sure there's a 'Commonwealth' country or two that'd jump on board. If Brexit was ever going to work, it must surely include the Commonwealth?
In fact the "Commonwealth" hardly ever think they belong in it and tend to remember the times the UK has turned their back on them in favour of Europe or the USA When did a major Commonwealth country last buy a British Combat Aircarft? Probably India when they bough the Gnat................ |
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
(Post 10083200)
Sure - we can always buy advanced technology of the yanks......... just like the F-35.....
All our recent combat aircraft have been co-operative - you have to go back 30-40 years to the Harrier and the Buc. for a 100% UK aircraft - (and a lot of the later Harriers had US input) We won't put the money into a European programme and we certainly can't afford our own so it's another technology scratched off the list Tornado has been by far the most capable strike, attack and recce fast jet the RAF has ever had, noting that it has served for over one third of the entire life of the RAF. After a relatively slow start Typhoon is now taking on that role as well as its swing role A2A. It is selling well as well. A400M may become a success but perhaps five nations was a step too far. Although not a brilliant example, even the F35 JSF has an element of international collaboration. None of these aircraft could have been introduced by the UK alone. |
Originally Posted by Buster15
(Post 10083479)
There have been certain benefits from our recent collaboration programmes.
Tornado has been by far the most capable strike, attack and recce fast jet the RAF has ever had, noting that it has served for over one third of the entire life of the RAF. After a relatively slow start Typhoon is now taking on that role as well as its swing role A2A. It is selling well as well. A400M may become a success but perhaps five nations was a step too far. Although not a brilliant example, even the F35 JSF has an element of international collaboration. None of these aircraft could have been introduced by the UK alone. If we can't afford a collaborative program we can't afford a go it alone one |
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
(Post 10083409)
The British always invoke the Commonwealth when they've been shafted by either the US or Europe
In fact the "Commonwealth" hardly ever think they belong in it and tend to remember the times the UK has turned their back on them in favour of Europe or the USA When did a major Commonwealth country last buy a British Combat Aircarft? Probably India when they bough the Gnat................ Oh, it was Franco-British.. The Intenational sales were all via Britain mind, Dassault were only sub connies in reality and of course Dassualt will only play ball if they have the total lead. Not going to happen is it. |
Originally Posted by Alber Ratman
(Post 10083831)
Try the Jaguar...:ok:
Oh, it was Franco-British.. The Intenational sales were all via Britain mind, Dassault were only sub connies in reality and of course Dassualt will only play ball if they have the total lead. Not going to happen is it. |
....Or the Sea Harrier. |
Originally Posted by MAINJAFAD
(Post 10083849)
Or the Single seat Hawk (not that much use as a trainer)....Or the Sea Harrier.
|
Originally Posted by melmothtw
(Post 10083861)
There you go, we can go into business with India. A country who's aviation industry is famed for its innovation, its efficiency, and its ability to undertake complex projects to budget and to deadline. Oh Lordy....!
|
Sod all to do with Brexit. Just another excuse for the Remainers to claim that is is though. BAe has no desire or interest in pursuing this kind of project. Too much money to be made from either screwing the MOD on projects they've taken over through acquisitions (subs, aircraft carriers, ships, etc), whose sites and capabilities will be killed off and turned into business parks as soon as the support phase of the contract is done, or from being a supplier to the US DOD.
Anyone who seriously thinks that BAe gives a flying fig about any kind of British Sovereign engineering capability or indeed, even has done for the best part of 20 years, seriously needs their head read. They know they've got HMG/MOD over a barrel in terms of supplier choices and never cease to exploit it. This capability has been leaking away since the MRCA days. That we've reached the point we have has sod all to do with Brexit. The writing has been on the wall for decades. |
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
(Post 10083200)
All our recent combat aircraft have been co-operative - you have to go back 30-40 years to the Harrier and the Buc. for a 100% UK aircraft - (and a lot of the later Harriers had US input)
|
Originally Posted by Alber Ratman
(Post 10083831)
Try the Jaguar...:ok:
Oh, it was Franco-British.. The Intenational sales were all via Britain mind, Dassault were only sub connies in reality and of course Dassualt will only play ball if they have the total lead. Not going to happen is it. The problem with a proposal like this FCAS is that it's basically a first strike platform. Guess how many European countries have an operational requirement for this? Rule out France and the UK is on its own. While Germany seems to want in, I think its only for the industrial benefits. I know that BAES (and other parts of the aviation industry) have been trying to convince the UK government about the loss of sovereign engineering capability for a lot of years (15+) and programs like this were part of the more positive outcomes. The idea that brexit isn't a large part of this latest debacle is truly laughable. EAP |
Originally Posted by Mil-26Man
(Post 10083397)
Which Commonwealth country with a domestic aerospace industry the size, expertise, capacity and governmental backing as France's are you thinking of?
|
...but I was thinking with an open mind sorry. |
This capability has been leaking away since the MRCA days. |
Was thinking of Canada actually. Anyhow if the swivel-eyed tendency have their way we'll be restarting production of Spitfires and Lancasters come next April... |
Originally Posted by dead_pan
(Post 10084548)
Anyhow if the swivel-eyed tendency have their way
|
Why do you stoop to childish name calling? Doesn't give you or your argument much credibility |
Originally Posted by GeeRam
(Post 10083275)
There was a lot of US involvement from the very early days of the Harrier/Kestrel/P.1127, so I would exclude that tbh.
Bucc is the last I would think? |
Originally Posted by MAINJAFAD
(Post 10083849)
Or the Single seat Hawk (not that much use as a trainer)....Or the Sea Harrier.
|
Originally Posted by EAP86
(Post 10084444)
By the time the UK got involved with Jaguar, the aircraft was pretty much designed. If you know where to look, you'll see signs that it's very much a French aircraft.
The problem with a proposal like this FCAS is that it's basically a first strike platform. Guess how many European countries have an operational requirement for this? Rule out France and the UK is on its own. While Germany seems to want in, I think its only for the industrial benefits. I know that BAES (and other parts of the aviation industry) have been trying to convince the UK government about the loss of sovereign engineering capability for a lot of years (15+) and programs like this were part of the more positive outcomes. The idea that brexit isn't a large part of this latest debacle is truly laughable. EAP |
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:31. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.