Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Posted: 05 Mar 2023, 17:48
News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.
https://ukdefenceforum.net/
By the time GCAP moves to induction stage, India will have a defense budget of over $250 billion. Any one who is not clinically insane would want to be a part of that. Especially given the potential for a huge order to replace the Su30 and the Mig29 fleets.Spitfire9 wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 12:21In particular I see India as a possible buyer because I can see its 5G AMCA project never reaching its Mk2 stage due to lack of a suitable engine being available. The plan is for the IAF to receive 40 underpowered AMCA Mk1 (98kN engines instead of the 110kN the design requires), to be followed by 80 AMCA Mk2 powered by 110kN engines. India cannot build fast jet engines. I suspect that India will not fund the design of a 110kN engine by a foreign OEM and will be looking for a foreign 5G or 6G supplier in a few years.
This is a somewhat childish concern. These jets will have very advanced monitoring due to their connected nature and the operators would require constant supply of spares throughout the life cycle. The OEMs can ground the entire fleet through lack of spares in a matter of a couple of years.Jake1992 wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 16:55The security risk from the wests stand point is with them sharing the tech of what would be our new main line fighter with the likes of Russia to suit there own needs, like you said India doesn’t give 2 hoots about us so once they’ve got the aircraft why would they care about screwing us over after.
ThreeHeadedLion wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 23:04By the time GCAP moves to induction stage, India will have a defense budget of over $250 billion. Any one who is not clinically insane would want to be a part of that. Especially given the potential for a huge order to replace the Su30 and the Mig29 fleets.Spitfire9 wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 12:21In particular I see India as a possible buyer because I can see its 5G AMCA project never reaching its Mk2 stage due to lack of a suitable engine being available. The plan is for the IAF to receive 40 underpowered AMCA Mk1 (98kN engines instead of the 110kN the design requires), to be followed by 80 AMCA Mk2 powered by 110kN engines. India cannot build fast jet engines. I suspect that India will not fund the design of a 110kN engine by a foreign OEM and will be looking for a foreign 5G or 6G supplier in a few years.
The big challenge is making a sale off the shelf and not getting them involved in the development. Also, the antagonistic relations that exist between Italy-India and Sweden-India are a big drag on the hopes of making such a sale. It would have been ideal if this was just a clean development between UK and Japan with India being a committed off the shelf customer. As things stand they will probably end up buying the American export variant or maybe the FCAS if the French can minimise the project dependence on Germany.
This is a somewhat childish concern. These jets will have very advanced monitoring due to their connected nature and the operators would require constant supply of spares throughout the life cycle. The OEMs can ground the entire fleet through lack of spares in a matter of a couple of years.Jake1992 wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 16:55The security risk from the wests stand point is with them sharing the tech of what would be our new main line fighter with the likes of Russia to suit there own needs, like you said India doesn’t give 2 hoots about us so once they’ve got the aircraft why would they care about screwing us over after.
The Russians will have to offer them something mind boggling for them to expose their front line jets at the risk of the entire fleet being grounded. Not to mention the huge risk they face if the Russians leak that info to the chinese, who their jets are primarily pointed at.
The Saudis might have a' questionable' record, but they have an excess of folding money that will lead to a second batch of Thypoon and a significant investment in Tempest.Gtal wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 23:49ThreeHeadedLion wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 23:04By the time GCAP moves to induction stage, India will have a defense budget of over $250 billion. Any one who is not clinically insane would want to be a part of that. Especially given the potential for a huge order to replace the Su30 and the Mig29 fleets.Spitfire9 wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 12:21In particular I see India as a possible buyer because I can see its 5G AMCA project never reaching its Mk2 stage due to lack of a suitable engine being available. The plan is for the IAF to receive 40 underpowered AMCA Mk1 (98kN engines instead of the 110kN the design requires), to be followed by 80 AMCA Mk2 powered by 110kN engines. India cannot build fast jet engines. I suspect that India will not fund the design of a 110kN engine by a foreign OEM and will be looking for a foreign 5G or 6G supplier in a few years.
The big challenge is making a sale off the shelf and not getting them involved in the development. Also, the antagonistic relations that exist between Italy-India and Sweden-India are a big drag on the hopes of making such a sale. It would have been ideal if this was just a clean development between UK and Japan with India being a committed off the shelf customer. As things stand they will probably end up buying the American export variant or maybe the FCAS if the French can minimise the project dependence on Germany.
This is a somewhat childish concern. These jets will have very advanced monitoring due to their connected nature and the operators would require constant supply of spares throughout the life cycle. The OEMs can ground the entire fleet through lack of spares in a matter of a couple of years.Jake1992 wrote: ↑05 Mar 2023, 16:55The security risk from the wests stand point is with them sharing the tech of what would be our new main line fighter with the likes of Russia to suit there own needs, like you said India doesn’t give 2 hoots about us so once they’ve got the aircraft why would they care about screwing us over after.
The Russians will have to offer them something mind boggling for them to expose their front line jets at the risk of the entire fleet being grounded. Not to mention the huge risk they face if the Russians leak that info to the chinese, who their jets are primarily pointed at.
That's a weird logic,
India wants freedom of action, which they don't get under US ITAR.
That is why they buy French and Russian stuff.
FCAS will be completely ITAR free and provide them operational independence.
It's just that they might not get to buy any more of them after they go on a vicious warcrime spree and/or perpetrate large scale crimes against humanity like the Saudis.
By the way, this ridiculous hipocracy of the West, but especially the US, proavtively supporting a repressive fundamentalist Dictator in his genocidal bombing and blockading of his neighbour, is why no one outside of Nato and US Vassals takes the outrage feigned on Ukraine serious today..
Is the UK ITAR-free? In my estimation the 'special relationship' entails the UK doing as the US wants when the two countries have differing views.. Would that extend to the UK trying to impose the US' will on other GCAP partners, though? For example, the UK blocking GCAP supply or spares and services to a country that had fallen out of favour with the US?
Well the UK is a country...
The UK is not a country, it's a Sovereign State containing four constituent nations.
Agree - i think that the French will "pump" Germany and France for money for as long as they can get away with it until it all falls apart..
Same old, the French want their cake and eat it as ever... And get someone else to pay for it.TheLoneRanger wrote: ↑10 Mar 2023, 12:24 https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/ac ... 27.article
>> All is "well" in the FCAS programme ..
Not sure I agree with that. F1 cars are bespoke prototypes. The same can’t be said with aircraft, numbers of military jets and certain airliners are the same. The skill sets in the design and production are largely similar, suppliers and certification of product largely the same for civil and military aircraft.SD67 wrote: ↑13 Mar 2023, 18:48 Personally don’t think civil and military aircraft sit naturally in the same corporation, it’s like the Ferrari F1 team owning an HGV manufacturer.
If the French go it alone then Airbus will be out of fast jet business just as BAE and SAAB are long out of civilian air.
Airbus build 1000 a year, they sell to commercial customers based on fuel efficiency ie cost / mile. Performance hasn’t changed in 50 years. A320 has been in production since 1986, first real change was NEO in 2014. So 30 years basically pumping out the same product. Tolouse is set up like a truck factory just grinding down on hours / unit. Apart from 787 plus the A350 wing they’re all still made of metal. There’s no stealth, electronic warfare bleeding edge powerplants, classified tech exotic materials, optional manning or directed energy. Maybe Ferrari F1 is an exaggeration but these industries are diverging I also doubt Boeing will build another fighter, T7 is a SAABSW1 wrote: ↑13 Mar 2023, 20:10Not sure I agree with that. F1 cars are bespoke prototypes. The same can’t be said with aircraft, numbers of military jets and certain airliners are the same. The skill sets in the design and production are largely similar, suppliers and certification of product largely the same for civil and military aircraft.SD67 wrote: ↑13 Mar 2023, 18:48 Personally don’t think civil and military aircraft sit naturally in the same corporation, it’s like the Ferrari F1 team owning an HGV manufacturer.
If the French go it alone then Airbus will be out of fast jet business just as BAE and SAAB are long out of civilian air.
The a400m a350 and a220 are all composite wings. The power plants on a350 are cutting edge. The design of composite structure on a civil airliners and a military one are very similar I’ve done both. A350f is being looked at for single pilot operations and the current auto land function for very poor visibility is as close to optionally manned tech as you get.SD67 wrote: ↑13 Mar 2023, 20:28Airbus build 1000 a year, they sell to commercial customers based on fuel efficiency ie cost / mile. Performance hasn’t changed in 50 years. A320 has been in production since 1986, first real change was NEO in 2014. So 30 years basically pumping out the same product. Tolouse is set up like a truck factory just grinding down on hours / unit. Apart from 787 plus the A350 wing they’re all still made of metal. There’s no stealth, electronic warfare bleeding edge powerplants, classified tech exotic materials, optional manning or directed energy. Maybe Ferrari F1 is an exaggeration but these industries are diverging I also doubt Boeing will build another fighter, T7 is a SAABSW1 wrote: ↑13 Mar 2023, 20:10Not sure I agree with that. F1 cars are bespoke prototypes. The same can’t be said with aircraft, numbers of military jets and certain airliners are the same. The skill sets in the design and production are largely similar, suppliers and certification of product largely the same for civil and military aircraft.SD67 wrote: ↑13 Mar 2023, 18:48 Personally don’t think civil and military aircraft sit naturally in the same corporation, it’s like the Ferrari F1 team owning an HGV manufacturer.
If the French go it alone then Airbus will be out of fast jet business just as BAE and SAAB are long out of civilian air.
Exor, the investment company of the Agnelli family, that controls Ferrari also control CNH who make tractors and construction equipment and IVECO who make HGVs and busses plus they still have one of the larger stakes in Stellantis who make a large number of much more mundane cars than a Ferrari.
Reminds me that Lamborghini had experience in making tractors but no experience in making cars. The first car they made eclipsed anything Ferrari made.tomuk wrote: ↑14 Mar 2023, 01:05Exor, the investment company of the Agnelli family, that controls Ferrari also control CNH who make tractors and construction equipment and IVECO who make HGVs and busses plus they still have one of the larger stakes in Stellantis who make a large number of much more mundane cars than a Ferrari.