Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Jensy wrote: Considering how poorly EJ200 sold outside Eurofighter
Turkey was v keen, but...
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1049
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Jensy »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Jensy wrote: Considering how poorly EJ200 sold outside Eurofighter
Turkey was v keen, but...
The exception that proves the rule? Maybe too keen for their own good.

Gripen NG, especially with hindsight, would have been the perfect aircraft for it. Extra power, newer, lighter engine and supposedly only a modified air intake away from physical compatibility..... Of course the GE lot would probably tell you it required very expensive new 'left handed' jigs to fly on the British side of the road.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5625
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by SW1 »

Jensy wrote:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Jensy wrote: Considering how poorly EJ200 sold outside Eurofighter
Turkey was v keen, but...
The exception that proves the rule? Maybe too keen for their own good.

Gripen NG, especially with hindsight, would have been the perfect aircraft for it. Extra power, newer, lighter engine and supposedly only a modified air intake away from physical compatibility..... Of course the GE lot would probably tell you it required very expensive new 'left handed' jigs to fly on the British side of the road.
I think it tells you the engine in the original gripen was a license built GE engine and the relationship and supply lines were already there

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

SW1 wrote:and supply lines were already there
Well, the story does not stop in the lineage between the Gripen. generations, namely F414-GE-400 engines provide today's combat-proven Boeing Super Hornet and ... The F414-GE-39E powers Saab's Next Generation Gripen aircraft.
- SH for the Finnish AF is of course speculation, whereas their legacy F-18s employ two F404-GE-402s, rated at 17,700 lbst each (F-18E/F models feature the F414-GE-400 turbofan, a worthy successor, providing 35 percent more thrust).

Engine maintenance/ refurbs/ replacements are quite a complex business, with special facilities and a specialised work force... Now, is there perhaps some Nordic co-operation in the offing? Patria already maintains all NH-90s, across the Nordics, just to mention a parallel (and local means better security of supply).
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1049
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Jensy »

SW1 wrote: license built GE engine and the relationship and supply lines were already there
I don't disagree. Back in the late 90s the comparative advantages were weighed up and the F414 was viewed as a better option. Industrial and political goals were clearly better met by Volvo continuing to building GE products under licence.

Doesn't for one moment mean that the powerplants were comparable. You have a rehashed 70s design going against a state of art engine, without the constraints of US export licenses. I believe thrust vectoring was even offered for the Gripen NG.

My comment was on lost opportunities for the EJ200, not the global reach of GE. Specifically their competitive influence on this decision Vs BAE, who still owned 30% of the Gripen programme at this point and clearly saw the advantages of selling two aircraft with the same powerplant.

Meriv9
Member
Posts: 185
Joined: 05 Feb 2016, 00:19
Italy

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Meriv9 »

Careful those are two different Avio.
GKN swallowed up the majority of Volvo Aero and it's facilities in Sweden. Avio might be a shadow of its former self, with most of their civilian products taken over by GE, but they still have some very unique experience with the ESA's Ariane space programme, which could offer expertise that neither the UK or Sweden have had in half a century. Finally we have RR, for all its many flaws, still the second largest engine manufacturer on the planet.
Avio aero that produces engines and is GE.

https://it.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avio_Aero
And

Avio, just Avio, that is the space one.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avio


As you said it is part of Arianne but most importantly we are the producers of the Vega vector.
The rocket, named after Vega, the brightest star in the constellation Lyra,[9] is a single-body launcher (no strap-on boosters) with three solid rocket stages: the P80 first stage, the Zefiro 23 second stage, and the Zefiro 9 third stage. The upper module is a liquid rocket called AVUM. The improved version of the P80 stage, the P120C, will be used as the side boosters of the Ariane 6. Italy is the leading contributor to the Vega program (65%), followed by France (13%)
Considering that for what I understand the Ariane 6 will be powered by an evolution of the Vega we could say that our expertise is quite substantial.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by shark bait »

Ron5 wrote:They're gonna need a new engine for many reasons.
Like what? The only answer I've seen is 'Lasers', which seems a little far fetched for me.

Bear in mind there's still a load of headroom left to exploit through modernising the EJ200, which may be preferable to a horrifically expensive new engine program. I don't get why every fighter program has to be accompanied by a new engine program these day, there's very little left to do these days. It's squeezing out marginal gains for a lot of money that would be better invested elsewhere.
@LandSharkUK

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Lord Jim »

And how many RB199s were sold to non Tornado users? There are not that many examples of engines designed for one aircraft (fast jet) being used on another these days. Most nations consider them part of a single systems. The Gripen is a rare example from Sweden, not just because it is a foreign engine but that the Swedes didn't heavily modify it.

For its size and compactness the EJ200 is a very good and powerful engine. It could form the core of a new RR engine of an evolved version could be used for whatever results from the Tempest programme. It is very probable that it will be used for the first prototypes/demonstrators to fly though.

Jake1992
Senior Member
Posts: 2003
Joined: 28 Aug 2016, 22:35
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Jake1992 »

I thought I read back in Jan that RR were looking to develop a ramjet engine set up for Temepest or was that just pie in the sky talk from a press department ?

User avatar
Zero Gravitas
Member
Posts: 293
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:36
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Zero Gravitas »

Timmymagic wrote:
inch wrote:but luckily tempest doesn't have to compete with it just our russian/Chinese future offerings which hopefully be alot less tech than future USA offering
Anyone hoping for the US to retain a technology lead over the Chinese really isn't paying attention at the moment..
Go on?

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by inch »

They probably will retain lead as far as 6th gen concerned ,so for a lot of years yet in service ,China can't match USA on Stealth tech,engine tech,even if they manage to level up alittle on electronics it takes the whole package for the platform ,so China not going to catch for the offering anyway , haven't even managed leveling up on 5th gen tech yet ,engine ,stealth etc .as far as tempest concerned China dubious they match UK tech or stealth yet also even for the next tempest and Chinese equlivent at that time

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by inch »

Sorry should have read UK engine tech and stealth tech

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Ron5 »

Here's one for Lord Jim ..

New digital engineering technologies said to deliver up to 30% cost savings

By Jon Hemmerdinger29 September 2020

Digital-engineering and -manufacturing processes have already revolutionized how aerospace products are designed and built.

But aerospace companies are now working to bring digital technologies to higher levels, making use of new blended digital tools capable of generating double-digit savings, say experts who spoke on a FlightGlobal-hosted digital-engineering webinar, sponsored by Siemens, on 29 September.

But challenges exist, including the difficulty of convincing business managers to invest in new systems amid the remarkably severe aerospace industry downturn.

“Our aim is to halve the time it takes to get our products to market,” BAE Systems manufacturing technology director Andy Schofield said during the webinar. Technology enables the “taking of significant lead times out of manufacturing details and processes”.

The US Air Force recently bestowed “e” to the name of Boeings T-7A, seen above. The designation reflects digital tools used to design the “eT-7A”.

Some customers of aerospace technology company Siemens Digital Industries Software are “consistently” achieving 20-30% reductions in development cycle times, says Siemens vice-president of aerospace and defence Dale Tutt.

Savings can compile with each generation of new products and technologies. “It really starts to add up,” he says.

Defense companies and major civil aircraft makers have been using digital system for decades. Boeing, for instance, brought such technologies to bear on development of its 777 several decades ago.

Initially, digital systems enabled transition from physical design “drafting boards” to computer-aided designs, and also involved digitising formerly-paper records.

New systems employ machine learning, artificial intelligence and digital-twin capabilities.

Critically, aerospace companies are increasingly blending various technologies together, enabling different design and development teams to access various data. Companies are also bringing suppliers onboard – giving them access to systems, which benefits the broader manufacturing ecosystem.

Manufactures can increasingly sidestep the process of “extracting” relevant data and sending that data to suppliers. Rather, technology allows suppliers to “reach in and grab” the data they need, says Paul Niewald, Boeing chief T-7A engineer and senior director.

Boeing brought “product-definition software” to bear in developing its T-7A trainer. Nodding to technology used to create the T-7A’s, the US Air Force recently bestowed the letter “e” to the aircraft’s name, calling it the eT-7A.

The move is part of a broader USAF effort to add an “e” to programmes that make full use of digital-engineering technology.

“Digital engineering allowed us to… connect a lot of things together that previously we hadn’t, so that we all had that information at the same time and were all working with the most-current data set,” Niewald says. “We kept in cadence so that one team didn’t get out in front of the other… You always had this loop back.”

“The thing that has really transformed the way we are designing and building airplanes is moving individual elements to… comprehensive digital plans… connected by digital twins,” adds Siemens’ Tutt.

Experts also expect design, development and manufacturing technologies will become “more virtual” in the coming decades, and will include more artificial intelligence.

“Designers will get to see the impact of their design downstream,” Niewald says. “We are going to see more compression of times… We are going to see these programmes continue to get faster.”

BAE’s Schofield expects companies will shift to “autonomous and automated movement of parts through the factory”.

But advancing to higher degrees of digitalization can require significant investment, and fighting for funds during a downturn is no easy task.

“Gone are the days where’s there’s a lot of discretionary funds to do R&D,” says Niewald. “The business case needs to be put together… It is difficult.”

Roders96
Member
Posts: 225
Joined: 26 Aug 2019, 14:41
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Roders96 »

All these cost saving technologies are great.

I'll just be very surprised if any monopoly ever passes them onto the consumer in the form of lower prices.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Ron5 »

Roders96 wrote:All these cost saving technologies are great.

I'll just be very surprised if any monopoly ever passes them onto the consumer in the form of lower prices.
What monopoly? UK aircraft are bought from half a dozen different manufacturers. Maybe you are referring to Sweden or France?

Roders96
Member
Posts: 225
Joined: 26 Aug 2019, 14:41
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Roders96 »

UK complex fighter manufacturing, apologies, thought that was obvious.

The F35 had a good start but tempest is going to cut its budget, the writing is on the wall.

mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by mr.fred »

Roders96 wrote:The F35 had a good start but they've tempest is going to cut its budget, the writing is on the wall.
Could you rewrite that? I don't understand what you are trying to say.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Lord Jim »

Roders96 wrote:All these cost saving technologies are great.

I'll just be very surprised if any monopoly ever passes them onto the consumer in the form of lower prices.
SAAB and Boeing did just that with their T-7A or the eT-7A as they are now calling it, allowing them to submit the bit for the USAFs advanced Trainer programme and win by being significantly lower than the competition whilst still being financially viable to the two companies involved.

SAAB in on board the Tempest programme and has these tools, which will be further developed by the Tempest programme and should help significantly reduce the programmes costs compared to one run along more traditional lines. The same technology can also be used to manage the design and implementation of upgrade programmes for existing platforms like the Typhoon and Gripen.

Roders96
Member
Posts: 225
Joined: 26 Aug 2019, 14:41
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Roders96 »

Oh I don't doubt they will be more efficiently produced - I'll just be very surprised if this comes in the form of lower costs for the taxpayer - rather than fatter profit margins.

Even though LM have built both the dominant new fighters of the past two decades, F22 and F35, the USA still has a much more competitive military aircraft industry than over here. LM, NG, Boeing and even newer entries to the field have a credible chance of bidding for and winning big contracts. There's still that competition on price that lets SAAB and Boeing win by undercutting the competition.

Over here there's no chance for competition to squeeze the profit margin because there isn't any competition.

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 870
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Defiance »

If UK Govt hadn't told the industry to merge or die then maybe we wouldn't be in this situation ...

If BAE (and MOD - remember Team Tempest is a joint-BAE/MOD activity) blows it on price then Tempest won't happen, you think they're not acutely aware of their position? If they cock this up then it's game over.

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1049
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Jensy »

Meanwhile on the other side of La Manche...



Original German story: https://m.faz.net/aktuell/politik/fcas- ... ssion=true

You know what they call a System of Systems in Paris?
FCAS is not about an aircraft, rather the next generation of a flying network system is being developed in which manned and unmanned systems, clouds and various sensors and weapons work together. More future, i.e. more innovative technological developments, hardly includes a joint armaments project - but that also means: a lot of bilateral conflict potential.
Rafale with cheese:
The decisive role of the Bundestag in particular is irritating to Paris. He refuses to simply release development funds for the FCAS for years without proof of success. Because parliament saw the initial problems coming, the money is only gradually being released, making guidelines and asking questions. This approach is completely alien to France. For Paris it seems like a constant questioning of the trust and the German commitment to the project, and like a subtle attempt to control the French partner.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Ron5 »

Defiance wrote:Team Tempest is a joint-BAE/MOD activity
Team Tempest is a lot more than just Bae.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Ron5 »

mr.fred wrote:
Roders96 wrote:The F35 had a good start but they've tempest is going to cut its budget, the writing is on the wall.
Could you rewrite that? I don't understand what you are trying to say.
He's trying to weasel his way out of saying UK Fighter manufacturing is a Bae monopoly after he belatedly realized that the F-35 is a Lockheed Martin product.

LANCA which I think will be the next "fighter" acquired is unlikely to be Bae either.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Ron5 »

Jensy wrote:Meanwhile on the other side of La Manche...
The worst two international partners ever (honorable mention to India), together, just the two of them, on a highly visible, highly political and very expensive program.

What possibly could go wrong? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Ron5 »

On another forum a million miles away, a Japanese speaker says that in the 2021 Japanese Defense budget there is a line item for a joint Japanese-UK project for wide area radar with a budget line of 4 billion yen (about $40m I think).

Any idea what this is and is it related to tempest?

Post Reply