F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

[Lord Jim]

As such development costs will likely be proportionately higher

One of the key drivers for Tempest is to develop a new technologies and new ways of doing things so that any resultant platforms costs are kept down, avoiding the current spiralling costs of each new generation of fighter. Unless the US comes up with a Stealthy low cost fighter they are willing to export, unlike the F-22, any platform resulting from Tempest should find a very health market for export. In addition with the requirement for both Carrier and land operations a core requirement of FCAS, the latter will possibly be more expensive than the result of Tempest. A key market will be users of the F-16, so as I mentioned earlier alot is going to depend on what the US comes up with. The "Clean sheet", design would be interesting but there is no money for it in the existing procurement plans so something will have to give to fund it.

[ArmChairCivvy]

with the requirement for both Carrier and land operations a core requirement of FCAS, the latter will possibly be more expensive than the result of Tempest.

History produces mixed success as for strengthening, after the fact, airframes for carrier use. However that does not prove anything about the process of working it the other way: design to carrier requirement first, and 'lighten up' later
- the French AF chief was presenting to the Belgian parlamentarians that they should buy into (when that fighter competition was still running) the Rafale development path, FCAS being a Rafale XL
- that thinking is still alive if there will be three prototypes built, as the next step... that will do nothing to help with the price of the end product, all in, though

[marktigger]

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/320 ... 7-E12fa3rs

interesting piece

[Defiance]

Not particularly, it appears to think the 'clean sheet' fighter is guaranteed to proceed when in reality it represents a thought exploration piece as part of an examination of future air requirements. That's not to say it won't happen entirely, but it's a far cry from bringing out the trumpets and declaring the F-35 is a failure as this article does.

This is like counting your chickens when you might actually buy goose eggs

[Little J]

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/320295-the-us-air-force-quietly-admits-the-f-35-is-a-failure?fbclid=IwAR1WBKeAgd715D5K6Utd7oI34JbeWx9wWp5g3KV4cdBzi90uX7-E12fa3rs

interesting piece

So they now realise what has been said for years (they pushed the design to high end) and don't want to risk it to often. And now need a 4.5 gen design to do the 'mundane' stuff...

Lets sell them some Typhoon's

[serge750]

Perhaps the SAAB Gripen would fit the bill, Lo cost to buy & run but still capable

[Lord Jim]

The trade offs that were made in the design of the F-35 will certainly hurt the programme going forward with other nations looking to reduce their purchases or alter their choice of next generation platform. the F-35 still has an important role to play as a day one stealth platform, but if later used with external stores becomes a very expensive to operate platform for the job at hand. Existing platform ranging from the Typhoon to the Gripen to even the South Korean FA-50 are likely to benefit. We could also see far more investment in next generation EW with AESA radar becoming more essential across the board. Finally I see the UK putting more into TEMPEST and restricting out F-35 buy to lass than half originally proposed.

[Scimitar54]

Not if “Carrier Strike” or “CEPP” with the QEC Carriers is to be viable throughout their 50 year lifespan.

[Lord Jim]

Who knows what platforms will be available in 25 years time, there might be an alternative to the F-35B or we might even have decided to convert our carriers to CATOBAR or STOBAR operations.

[Scimitar54]

But Tempest will not have been made to be Carrier operable!