SD67 wrote: ↑03 Aug 2023, 23:02Hey mate not on a rant at all. But I think fast combat air is where we should circle the wagons, second only to SSNs / SSBNs. Everything else, strategically, is a long long way behind.mrclark303 wrote: ↑03 Aug 2023, 17:42You seem to be confusing me with the guy on YouTube, did I say I agreed with his hypothesis .... Hmm No, I didn't, I mearly put the idea forward for debateSD67 wrote: ↑03 Aug 2023, 15:07And here comes, right on time, our old friend - the "affordable off the shelf US option". How many times have we seen this guy? Always turns up just when a UK project is getting traction, then once the project is cancelled he suddenly becomes somewhat less affordable. 20 years to get UK weapons integrated on F35 do we seriously think LM are going to help us build our own little Spey Phantom successor?mrclark303 wrote: ↑03 Aug 2023, 13:58 As a side note, I watched a really interesting Ward Carol ( ex Tomcat RIO and interested guy, recommended) Video on YouTube the other day, he had a wider discussion regarding gen 6 etc with a British guy who certainly knew his stuff, apologies guys, I can't remember his name.
The interesting part was specifically regarding Tempest.
He specifically hypothersised that even taking high tech manufacturing and rapid prototyping into account, the size and complexity being aimed for will cost circa 40 billion.
So let's say 15 billion each for Japan and the UK and 10 billion to Italy...
Is that affordable within our current defence budget?
Can Italy afford 10 billion?
I think the answer is no and no, if the UK can sustain 2.5% of GDP pushing forward on defence then perhaps, 3% then it's doable.
So, if his hypothesis is correct, it seems a reasonable assumption and it's unaffordable, where do we go next?
An F35A deal seems most likely and affordable, perhaps a future block 5 with increased UK content and assembly in the UK, to keep Warton etc open.
15 Billion development over 10 years for the UK is eminently affordable - arguably less than the army's vehicle programs and not that much more than morpheus. There's I believe 20 billion set aside for fast air in the 10 year equipment plan. To put that in perspective, nuclear enterprise gets 60 billion over the same timescale.
This is before you start to consider loss of exports, loss of sovereignty, exposure to the USD which is killing us at the moment, and thw spin off benefits in AI, materials technology etc.
Instead of immediately going off on an F35 rant, take a breath, get off your orange box and actually examine the possibilities?
It's meant to be a discussion on defence related matters, is £15 billion affordable, is it though ?
We are talking our Thypoon contribution, made at at a time when defence spending was considerably higher in relation to the costs.
We will find out soon enough, because the next government will have to fully commit, or back out.
And we have two fantastic partners who share with us similar requirements, similar threat perception, and top tier industrial capabilities.
Seriously if the 3rd 5th and 7th economies in the world cannot between them develop a fighter then there is something wrong.
In terms of whether 15 billion is affordable - MHO is if you want 6th gen capabilities you are going to pay for it. Either in up front capex, or ongoing licensing / support / maintenance.
Sorry mate, bad day and feeling rather touchy, my apologies...
On the subject of 15 billion, the thing that really worried me is experts are gravly concerned we really can't afford it, when people with in depth knowledge of defence and security red flag it, it's a concern.
I would imagine that when the order is signed by all the partners (say 150 each UK and Japan, 60 - 80 Italy) and the development programme commences, there's going to be an immediate 6 billion injection required.
This is going to be a compressed development programme, probably with the bulk of the money spent within 10 years. Eurofighter was as slow as molasses and still rumbles on..
I think a lot is going to depend on a sustainable defence budget increase to 2.5%, preferably 3%.
I totally agree though that fast air sits alongside warship and submarine capability, as something we need to retain in house.