Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by RetroSicotte »

SKB wrote:The US is not 'years ahead'. They just have a blank cheque, whereas we don't. The UK could easily built a 'Tempest' (or whatever this fictional plane would be called) on its own if it had the same advantages of the US military budget.
Very inaccurate. It's not simply a question of money. It's a question of scale and persistence of development. The US has so so so much more experience at building next generation jets than the UK does. The difference between a country that has prototyped, researched, theorised...and a country that has actually went out and from scratch done it and brought them out of "concept" and into practical, workable end user form is vast.

The US simply has more knowledge over a broader range of systems than the UK owing to the length of time it's been doing it to disseminate the skillsets and known quantities. That isn't a criticism of the UK's aerospace industry being very capable, but it's simply how it occurs when one considers everything that goes into these from a nations that's been doing 10 times as much work as the UK for decades now.

Even if given the same budget, the UK would still be running catchup in many areas.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by SW1 »

Define what you’re mean by “next generation”. As for bring concepts to production and inservice the only one I can think of is f22. If you don’t count typhoon or gripen that uk was involved in.

As an example I would argue the uk/Europe is far ahead of the US in irst systems on jets hence why US primes started buying certain European companies. We know how to design and certify aeroplanes, aerospace is a global business there is no such thing as a uk only sourced solution. You can have a uk set of requirements to design a plane to, and ask for a design to meet them this is a different thing.

User avatar
Cooper
Member
Posts: 347
Joined: 01 May 2015, 08:11
Korea North

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Cooper »

RetroSicotte wrote:Even if given the same budget, the UK would still be running catchup in many areas.
Nonsense.

All the areas of next gen fighter tech are well understood by numerous countries at this stage.

Stealth...I doubt their is very little we don't know about stealth properties and how to apply them.

Engine techonlogy...Rolls Royce can build an engine as good as anything P&W or General Electric can

Missile tech...Meteor is a world beater

Pilot targeting....Striker 2 helmets are the envy of F22 pilots.

Hell, it was a Brit who led their F117 development team back in the day.

Money is what keeps the Americans ahead of the game, nothing else...like the old saying goes, 'no Bucks, no Buck Rodgers'.

Give unlimited funds to 3 or 4 countries in the world today and their indigenous scientific base could build a world beating next gen fighter.

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 »

Cooper wrote:Money is what keeps the Americans ahead of the game
The gap just widened - or rather, our chances of catch-up just diminished - if the news of Japanese money headed that way are accurate.

If one compares project funding it is a partial comparison. The target is set at the same level, but if in high jump you can jump from a meter higher than the competition, then you are more likely to achieve that level: Wiki gives us
United States 511.1 2.744% 1,586.35

Japan 165.7 3.147% 1,297.39

United Kingdom 44.8 1.701% 692.9

R&D absolute level (expenditure), relative to GDP and per head (in money, obviously that puts the decimal point in a different place, so that's in USD whereas the first figure on each line is in Bn USD )
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)

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Timmymagic »

Looks like the Japanese are going on their own...

Not all bad news though, they may be looking to co-operate on lots of the systems inside, which is pretty much what Tempest is about.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-japan ... KKBN21E12E

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Ron5 »

Timmymagic wrote:Looks like the Japanese are going on their own...

Not all bad news though, they may be looking to co-operate on lots of the systems inside, which is pretty much what Tempest is about.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-japan ... KKBN21E12E
With every new story displaying a different answer, I guess we can pick the one we like the most to believe.

And I think king fu flu will have a big say in the final decision.

User avatar
Cooper
Member
Posts: 347
Joined: 01 May 2015, 08:11
Korea North

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Cooper »

Project Tempest is the cover story on the latest Issue of Flight international and sounds very promising with the program progressing well despite the disruption caused by the pandemic..

Image

JakobS
Junior Member
Posts: 5
Joined: 27 May 2015, 12:33
Norway

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by JakobS »

The Swedish government on Tuesday revealed its plans to improve its military capabilities including development of a new fighter jet to replace the JAS 39 Grippen.

“The development of the next generation fighter aircraft will commence,” Swedish Carl Anders Peter Hultqvist said in a statement June 16, without divulging any more details.

Swedish Air Force JAS 39/D combat aircraft will be maintained, as the new fighter JAS 39 E is integrated into the squadrons and becomes operational. This will allow the service to keep six fighter squadrons.

The Army will be reorganized and consist of three mechanized brigades, one smaller motorized brigade and, on the island of Gotland, one mechanized battalion with support elements. Additional ranger, intelligence, security, artillery, engineer, logistics and air defence units will be added.

When it comes to the Navy the existing corvettes will be upgraded with new air-defence missiles. Two new corvettes will be acquired in order to replace two older ones after 2025. One existing submarine will get a mid-life upgrade and therefore the number of submarines will increase from four to five. A new amphibious battalion will be established on the west coast of Sweden.

In 2020, the government will also establish a national cyber security centre. This centre will strengthen Sweden’s ability to prevent, detect and handle antagonistic cyber threats and reduce cyber related vulnerabilities. It will also provide support to private and public actors on how to improve their cyber security and protection against cyber attacks.

In July 2019, Governments of Sweden and the United Kingdom (UK) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to develop future combat aircraft capabilities and combat aircraft systems. The collaboration offers the opportunity to further insert advanced technologies into JAS 39 Gripen.
https://www.defenseworld.net/news/27229 ... vkPxy8zIWo

J. Tattersall

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by J. Tattersall »

JakobS wrote:The Swedish government on Tuesday revealed its plans to improve its military capabilities
Interesting ! Putting next generation jets to one side it will be interesting to see to what extent Swedish defence pivots towards the EU or towards NATO/US/UK. Of course Sweden is also a member of the 9 nation JEF.

JakobS
Junior Member
Posts: 5
Joined: 27 May 2015, 12:33
Norway

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by JakobS »

J. Tattersall wrote:
JakobS wrote:Putting next generation jets to one side it will be interesting to see to what extent Swedish defence pivots towards the EU or towards NATO/US/UK. Of course Sweden is also a member of the 9 nation JEF.
That's a question that does not really have to be asked, the answer is rock solid for the last option 8-)

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 »

JakobS wrote: offers the opportunity to further insert advanced technologies into JAS 39 Gripen.
As Sweden said already on signing, a year ago. But this also strengthens the path for those same technologies making their way into Typhoon, by way of upgrades... it is 15 years from now to Tempest delivering a new a/c. Will have to buy the Flight intl issue to see what they say about that.
JakobS wrote: the answer is rock solid for the last option
while not forgetting the hosting agreement with Nato/ USA; cant remember if it was signed double (JEF/ Northern Group makes it triple).
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: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Jensy »

Image

Just posted the full story in the Project Mosquito thread but thought this Tempest CGI was worth sharing here.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Ron5 »

UK keeps Tempest programme on target, despite downturn

By Craig Hoyle30 June 2020

As the last decade was nearing an end, the UK unveiled and then expanded an ambitious programme to develop a new class of future combat air systems (FCAS) with the potential to bolster not only its military capability, but also the fortunes of its defence industry.

Had the coronavirus outbreak not intervened, the nation’s Tempest project would again have grabbed headlines from 20 July at the Farnborough air show – the same location where it was revealed with great fanfare in 2018.

Buoyed by the signature of agreements with Sweden and then Italy last year, the UK’s plan to develop a variety of equipment to succeed the Eurofighter Typhoon in service from the middle of next decade has since made quiet but steady progress.

A Team Tempest industry team brings together the expertise of national defence champion BAE Systems and propulsion house Rolls-Royce, along with the UK arms of Leonardo and MBDA. Working with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the Royal Air Force (RAF) Rapid Capabilities Office, their collective ambition is to deliver a new manned fighter, along with unmanned systems – operating as a so-called “additive capability” – and increasingly sophisticated and networked air-launched weapons.

A notional Tempest fighter shown at the last Farnborough event gave some indication of the UK’s thinking, but a firmer set of concepts is now shaping up, ahead of the delivery of an outline business case proposal to the MoD at the end of this year.

“BAE Systems and our industrial partners in Team Tempest will be supporting this submission with evidence of our technology and transformation progress to help deliver confidence that UK industry will be well positioned to help lead the design and development of a next-generation combat air system,” says Andrew Kennedy, strategic campaigns director at BAE Systems Air.

Despite the disruption caused by the coronavirus crisis, and the Brexit process before it, the timing of the proposal’s delivery remains on the schedule set within the UK’s overarching Combat Air Strategy document, published in mid-2018.

“Throughout the lockdown period, we have continued to work in collaboration with the MoD and our Team Tempest partners, and at this point, we have been able to minimise any impact on our work,” Kennedy says. “We are confident that any short-term delays can be mitigated as we continue to progress according to the original timescales – and ultimately achieving initial operating capability in 2035.”

While it was light on specific programme details, the Combat Air Strategy document made much of the need for international participation as a means of reducing overall programme costs.

“Effective international partnering and collaboration in the combat air sector offers the UK the best opportunity to deliver our military capability requirements while managing cost and maximising wider national policy and prosperity outcomes,” it states. “Value for money in acquisition is heavily dependent on programme volume to offset upfront investment in research and development. Our approach to partnering will seek to achieve this, including through exports… [and] leverage the technological and industrial strengths of our partners to further drive down costs.”
EARLY STEPS

A first trilateral meeting involving key personnel from all three nations was conducted online in May, underscoring the building relationship between them, both at a government and industry level.

“We are working with Sweden on a long-term roadmap for UK/Swedish co-operation in combat air, including a collaborative FCAS acquisition programme, detailed research and technology studies and enhancing information sharing,” BAE says. This follows the signature of a 10-year, bilateral memorandum of understanding at a government level, followed by another pact covering manufacturers.

The UK and Sweden could harmonise requirements to replace their Typhoon and Gripen fleets

“We have taken the industrial collaboration further, in terms of what needs to be done by different parts of the industry,” Saab chief executive Micael Johansson said in late April. “We focus completely on the UK-Sweden collaboration, and look into how Italy will join and to what extent,” he adds.

“It’s a very good collaboration so far, and excellent with industry and also government to government,” he says. “I think we have good concepts and a good approach to this – a rather wide approach, not locking us into concepts too early.”

Of Rome’s involvement, BAE says: “Detailed discussions have been progressing at a government-to-government and industry level. We are developing a combat air roadmap together as we mature our discussions on Tempest requirements.”

One of the UK’s other key objectives with Tempest is to adopt a new model for international partnerships, along the lines of the “best athlete” approach used by Lockheed Martin for the F-35 Lightning II.

“We absolutely want the best players involved and we see this being best achieved through collaborative international partnerships which will develop a flexible, affordable and exportable product,” Kennedy says. “We will continue to engage with existing and potential new partners to ensure we develop an optimal partnership that meets the needs of all participants.”

Other nations could still join the Tempest effort, and dialogue has continued with Japan.

How such an “innovative, agile industrial collaborative construct” will work in practice is among the topics now being discussed by the UK, Sweden and Italy.

“This is a long journey,” notes Alastair Morrison, Leonardo’s deputy managing director UK. “There needs to be alignment of intent going right out to entry into service around 2035 and beyond.

“Both of the international partners are really gearing up, and there seems to be a real eagerness to take things forward,” Morrison says. “The challenge that’s in front of us for Tempest is to be a viable programme for the UK, and for Sweden and Italy.”

Pointing to his company’s long experience on the four-nation Eurofighter programme, Morrison notes: “We are going to have to do things differently to what we’ve done before. We are going to have to be a lot more genuinely co-operative. We know the things that have worked not so well in the past – we are going to make sure that we don’t make the same mistakes going forward.

“In Typhoon we had a certain way of working, and a lot of the things that are good and some of the things that are more difficult come from that way of working. With Tempest, we realise that can’t apply again – technology and life is different now. We can’t go about duplicating a whole lot of infrastructure, or making things so fragmented that you don’t get the commonality in purpose.”

While the MoD and its Team Tempest partners finesse their approach to international involvement, much work has been done to assess the breadth of technologies required to deliver an FCAS capability.
SMARTER PROCESSES

“We have made tremendous progress, achieving a number of important milestones,” Kennedy says. “Across Team Tempest, there are six different technology-led workstreams working in parallel. Key to the success of this – and to the evidence which must form part of the outline business case – is that we are able to demonstrate how we are transforming the way we work to ensure that we can deliver this future combat air capability faster, smarter and more cost-effectively than ever before.”

For BAE, this process has included employing digital design tools and model-based systems engineering techniques, along with exploring the potential workings of a “factory of the future” at its Warton final assembly site in Lancashire.

“This includes partnering with small and medium-sized enterprises, academia and industrial organisations in sectors we have never traditionally partnered before – from automotive manufacturers to computer game developers,” Kennedy says.

“All of these efforts so far are already showing benefit. We have examples of work which would have previously taken two or three years being done in a matter of weeks.”

MBDA, meanwhile, used the DSEI exhibition in London in September 2019 to reveal several conceptual weapons it believes could be used by an operational FCAS.

“Being a Team Tempest partner, involved from the inception, is helping ensure that innovative weapons systems complement the cutting-edge design and the novel technologies of the platform around them,” it says.

In addition to a pair of deep-strike cruise missile designs, its display also showed a ground-attack “micromissile”, and a derivative “hard kill” defensive weapon.

MBDA unveiled multiple weapon concepts for Tempest in September 2019

Along with BAE, MBDA is also exploring what it describes as “innovative payload bay and launcher concepts, [to] facilitate an improved weapon load-out”, such as a space-saving twin launcher for use with short-range air-to-air missiles.

While firm details of the development work being conducted in support of the UK’s future combat air capability will be closely guarded, one of the Tempest project’s most visible early activities will involve a second-hand airliner first flown a quarter of a century ago.

Retired by TUI in November 2019, the Boeing 757-200 (G-BYAW) has been acquired by 2Excel Aviation for conversion into a flying testbed, under a subcontract from Leonardo.

Cirium fleets data indicates that the winglet-equipped twinjet – which accumulated almost 87,000 flight hours and 29,300 cycles in commercial service from April 1995 – will enter a conversion phase in June 2021, with work to conclude by the end of the following year.

The R-R RB211-powered 757 is currently in storage at 2Excel’s facility at Lasham airfield in Hampshire.

Morrison tells Flight International that the process for defining the ex-airliner’s future configuration has yet to be finalised. However, this is likely to be akin to Lockheed’s 737-derived co-operative avionics testbed, nicknamed the CATBird, which was flown during the F-35 programme’s development phase. This would require the integration of multiple sensors, including an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, to support trials.

UK programme’s 2Excel-prepared 757 testbed could have similarities with Lockheed Martin F-35’s CATBird platform

Morrison says that while “instrumented hack” aircraft were used to test avionics equipment during the Eurofighter’s development, the approach adopted for Tempest means that Leonardo has been working closely with BAE, MBDA and R-R from the outset this time.

“Because of the integrated nature of the sensor suite with the other features that we’re putting forward, it’s regarded as an essential thing that we have to do,” he says of the testbed. “This is going to have to be versatile – we want to make sure that we can get the maximum use out of it.

“Everything that we are producing this time round, there will be a lot more integration about it, and a lot more on the software side,” he says.

While a Tempest platform would use AESA technology, Morrison notes: “How it will be embodied on the overall system is one of the things we are studying at the moment. We are starting from an architecture point of view – not with sensors stuck on the aircraft, but at the heart of the design.”

Summing up the work conducted since the Tempest concept’s unveiling two years ago, Morrison says that “Domestically, there is a huge amount of activity going on just now.”

While the economies of the UK and its two international partners will face a period of unprecedented stress when exiting the coronavirus crisis, Kennedy argues that the need to advance with the next-generation fighter capability remains undiminished.

“We do not know yet what the full economic and social consequences of the pandemic will be, but it is clear that stimulating the economy and the benefits that brings will be a national priority,” he says. “Tempest is well positioned to help drive this recovery.”

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

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by inch »

Well I do hope they can build it with new partners going forward but not France Germany and Spain ,

User avatar
Jensy
Senior Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Jensy »

inch wrote:Well I do hope they can build it with new partners going forward but not France Germany and Spain ,
Judging by the aspirations for future aircraft on the Australia thread (EA-18/F-35 replacements from 2035), I'd say they might be another partner we should be trying to attract.

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1732
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Pseudo »

Jensy wrote:Judging by the aspirations for future aircraft on the Australia thread (EA-18/F-35 replacements from 2035), I'd say they might be another partner we should be trying to attract.
I'd suggest that if a way could be found to provide Canada with a relatively inexpensive interim solution such as surplus T1 Typhoon's then there could be two potential partners 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 »

Pseudo wrote: provide Canada with a relatively inexpensive interim solution such as surplus T1 Typhoon's
The then-new gvmnt switched away from the expeditionary emphasis and thus the primary rqrmnt became to patrol/ defend their vast airspace
- T1s can't do conformals; but later editions can
- incidentally the new SHornet, about to start to roll out from factory, has the conformals option available. Not that Boeing has built the best possible relationship with Canada, lately
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
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1732
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Pseudo »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:The then-new gvmnt switched away from the expeditionary emphasis and thus the primary rqrmnt became to patrol/ defend their vast airspace
- T1s can't do conformals; but later editions can
AFAIK nor can the ex-RAAF F-18A/B's that Canada is currently planning to procure as an interim replacement for its CF-18's.
- incidentally the new SHornet, about to start to roll out from factory, has the conformals option available. Not that Boeing has built the best possible relationship with Canada, lately
I can't see a Trudeau government going with the F-35, Gripen's insufficient to Canada's requirements and as you say Boeing and Canada have toxic relationship. T1's would be big capability improvement over the CF-18 as an interim measure and involvement in Tempest would give the government something positive to offer the Canadian aerospace industry.

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 »

Pseudo wrote:T1's would be big capability improvement over the CF-18 as an interim measure
Not sure about that; but we both agree that the latest SH (with conformals) is an option laid to waste, by the scorched earth tactics that Boeing deployed on the civil aviation side of things
... just to land the asset they tried to kill in the hands of "some one" who can actually leverage it in the market, to the 'max' ... once the market comes back

So getting Canada onboard with Tempest; a pipe dream?
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)

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by SW1 »

As airbus withdrew eurofighter from the Canadian competition somewhere between a snowball in hell chance of typhoons in Canada or indeed tempest.

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1732
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Pseudo »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Not sure about that; but we both agree that the latest SH (with conformals) is an option laid to waste, by the scorched earth tactics that Boeing deployed on the civil aviation side of things
... just to land the asset they tried to kill in the hands of "some one" who can actually leverage it in the market, to the 'max' ... once the market comes back
Doesn't the Typhoon have a superior combat range to the Super Hornet even with CFT's? I don't think that I've ever seen anyone suggest that the SH's air combat capabilities were superior to Typhoon which is what I'd assume would be critical for an patrol/air defence focused requirement. If the CAF had a significant expeditionary requirement I could see the SH being a decent enough middle-ground compromise, but you're saying that they're moving away from that so the Typhoon's relatively modest air-to-ground capabilities might well be sufficient for their needs.
So getting Canada onboard with Tempest; a pipe dream?
Oh, I absolutely think that Canada and/or Australia joining the programme is pure fantasy land but a lot of things are until they happen. All I'm trying to point out is that there might be some decent reasons for them to do so. Whether they're compelling enough for it to happen, who knows?

But, as I said both the CAF and RAAF appear to have a similar requirement for a capable air superiority fighter with some decent legs on it, which pretty much the starting point for the RAF requirement.

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 »

Pseudo wrote: as I said both the CAF and RAAF appear to have a similar requirement for a capable air superiority fighter with some decent legs on it, which pretty much the starting point for the RAF requirement.
Without going into the detail (as we don't have the detail), I would say that CAF is closer to aninterceptor and RAAF is somewhere between us (we need both, in one?) and an air superiority fighter, as evidenced/ embodied by/in the F-22?
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)

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Ron5 »

Pseudo wrote:both the CAF and RAAF appear to have a similar requirement for a capable air superiority fighter with some decent legs on it, which pretty much the starting point for the RAF requirement.
If that is correct, and I'm sure you are, where does Sweden fit in? I doubt if they need a long range aircraft.

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1732
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Tuvalu

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Pseudo »

Ron5 wrote:
Pseudo wrote:both the CAF and RAAF appear to have a similar requirement for a capable air superiority fighter with some decent legs on it, which pretty much the starting point for the RAF requirement.
If that is correct, and I'm sure you are, where does Sweden fit in? I doubt if they need a long range aircraft.
The original announcement of Sweden's involvement mentioned that they weren't really interested in Tempest itself but the technologies that would be developed for it.
Saab on Friday celebrated its inclusion in a British-led push to build a sixth-generation warplane, with executives eyeing near-term improvements to the company’s Gripen E aircraft rather than the creation of a brand-new fighter in the more distant future.

Saab CEO Håkan Buskhe described the prospect of jointly developing Britain’s notional Tempest platform as only one of several possible outcomes of the tie-up inked by the two countries’ defense ministers July 18.

The lower-hanging fruit, he said, lies in Saab participating in cutting-edge research that could help boost the performance of its latest Gripen E fighter. The jet is “75 percent software,” he explained, which presents the possibility of new capabilities without major hardware changes.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

Post by Ron5 »

Pseudo wrote:
Ron5 wrote:
Pseudo wrote:both the CAF and RAAF appear to have a similar requirement for a capable air superiority fighter with some decent legs on it, which pretty much the starting point for the RAF requirement.
If that is correct, and I'm sure you are, where does Sweden fit in? I doubt if they need a long range aircraft.
The original announcement of Sweden's involvement mentioned that they weren't really interested in Tempest itself but the technologies that would be developed for it.
Saab on Friday celebrated its inclusion in a British-led push to build a sixth-generation warplane, with executives eyeing near-term improvements to the company’s Gripen E aircraft rather than the creation of a brand-new fighter in the more distant future.

Saab CEO Håkan Buskhe described the prospect of jointly developing Britain’s notional Tempest platform as only one of several possible outcomes of the tie-up inked by the two countries’ defense ministers July 18.

The lower-hanging fruit, he said, lies in Saab participating in cutting-edge research that could help boost the performance of its latest Gripen E fighter. The jet is “75 percent software,” he explained, which presents the possibility of new capabilities without major hardware changes.
Thanks. I wish I knew how that actually worked in practice. Has it ever?

Post Reply