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

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.

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? :p

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/

Has he a few shares in BAe?

CG

My prediction? We’ll be joining in the Airbus FCAS programme within 5 years…

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....2c40de678.jpeg

No, but his constituency is next door to Warton and Samlesbury...

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

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

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)

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