International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by Vayutuvan »

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... t-of-orbit
Chinese Satellite Observed Grappling Another and Pulling It Out of Orbit
On January 22, China's Shijian-21 satellite, or SJ-21, disappeared from its regular position in orbit during daylight hours when observations were difficult to make with optical telescopes. SJ-21 was then observed executing a "large maneuver" to bring it closely alongside another satellite, a dead BeiDou Navigation System satellite. SJ-21 then pulled the dead satellite out of its normal geosynchronous orbit and placed it a few hundred miles away in what is known as a graveyard orbit. These distant orbits are designated for defunct satellites at the end of their lives and are intended to reduce the risk of collision with operational assets....

According to Chinese state news outlets, SJ-21 was designed to "test and verify space debris mitigation technologies."

SJ-21's recent maneuver raises questions and concerns about these types of satellites and their potential for military use. Todd Harrison, director of CSIS's Aerospace Project, told Breaking Defense that SJ-21's actions present "more questions than answers," adding that while we can observe the satellite's actions, "the intent behind it and what China plans to do with this technology is a more subjective assessment."

This isn't the first time SJ-21 has made headlines with its questionable behavior. In November 2021, just a month after its launch, an unknown object was seen orbiting alongside SJ-21. At the time, Space Force designated the unidentified object as a spent apogee kick motor, but it was also reported that it might have been an experimental payload designed to test SJ-21's ability to perform remote operations and manipulate other satellites....

Analyzing the potential applications of these dual-use satellites is difficult.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by John »

There is some speculation that Barak-8 ER was the one that knocked down the Houthi BM

https://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/2022 ... e-with-us/
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

John wrote:There is some speculation that Barak-8 ER was the one that knocked down the Houthi BM

https://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/2022 ... e-with-us/
It has been officially confirmed that it was THAAD and that the system performed its first and second operational intercept of a ballistic missile during those few attacks on UAE. The missiles were classified as MRBM class which would suggest that they were beyond the PATRIOT's engagement envelope which is around 1300-1500 km ranged weapons for those operating the MSE missiles (which UAE does IIRC). You are not realistically (with any sort of cross range from the battery/launcher) going to defeat anything beyond a range of 1,500 km ballistic missile without a dedicated BMD sensor looking at those relevant altitudes and track trajectories.

The article from the Jewish center even speculates that it was the Spyder which suggests that the author(s) don't know the basics of missile defense or how these things work. They even throw in a strawman that some speculated that it was a Korean system when NO ONE speculated that and theattribution to THAAD was made soon post the attack and confirmation. You can't secretly deploy a unit of Barak 8 or any SAM system, train persons, and not have the world discover that in the current times of OSINT and excellent technical imagery available from the private sector.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by John »

^ Yea I was skeptical of that article but there was talk only a week ago of Barak-8 being purchased temp (or lease) by UAE till Korean SAM system arrive so thought there might be some kinda of a cover for a secret transfer of few systems.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

John wrote:^ Yea I was skeptical of that article but there was talk only a week ago of Barak-8 being purchased temp (or lease) by UAE till Korean SAM system arrive so thought there might be some kinda of a cover for a secret transfer of few systems.
No it really isn't. You can't hide anything these days when it is meant to be operational, set aside the mobilization of an entire air-defense unit that gets deployed to a third country, or gets sold and is employed by it. You can't hide emplaced radars, launchers, command and control elements not to mention the back and forth movement of trainers, maintainers, and support staff. You're looking at a battalion sized air defense hardware and manpower that no one can pick up by licensing Planet images which folks tracking air defense movements routinely do?

Not to mention that in this case we have a direct confirmation of which system successfully engaged it. Yet these fools write articles claiming that it might even have been Spyder :rotfl:.

This takes marketing to the next level TBH. "Our system is so good that its users are able to shoot down missiles even without having it..."They should have claimed it was Arrow which would have been somewhat believable given that Israel at least deploys that system against this threat and regularly tests it for such an extended range scenario.
there was talk only a week ago of Barak-8 being purchased temp (or lease) by UAE till Korean SAM
UAE is replacing its medium ranged HAWK system with K-SAM. Any talk of renting Israeli equipment would allow them to accelerate their HAWK sunset and have some interim capability while their K SAM systems arrive and are operationalized. HAWK is completely obsolete and since they are one of the few remaining users (with US having retired it long ago) the cost of sustainment is quite high. Renting an Israeli medium ranged SAM, wouldn't magically convert them to a THAAD analog that is able to shoot down Medium to Intermediate ranged ballistic threats at those cross ranges. Even Israel operates the Arrow system for this threat type which is somewhat comparable to THAAD at least for targets that don't require advanced discrimination.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by ldev »

Elon Musk is on a roll!! Way to go!! He's left Bezos counting deliveries in the Amazon fulfillment center far far away from Blue Origin :wink:

SpaceX's Falcon 9 Just Set A Truly Incredible Record
According to Arstechnica, SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket has reached the milestone of 111 successful consecutive launches. This ends the glory days of the U.S. Atlas rocket and the legendary "Kings of Rockets," the Russian Soyuz and Proton rockets. In total, the Falcon launched 139 times and failed once in 2015 on a mission to reach the International Space Station cutting its streak to 111 launches.
and the target for 2022 is an average of one launch per week which will result in SpaceX alone lifting 2/3rd of all payload to orbit. Amazing performance by a company that had it's first successful orbital launch in September 2008, less than 14 years ago:

Elon Musk
@elonmusk
·
Feb 3
Congrats SpaceX Falcon team!
Quote Tweet
Eric Berger
@SciGuySpace
· Feb 3
The Falcon 9 rocket has now flown more consecutive successful missions, 111, than any orbital rocket in history.


Elon Musk
@elonmusk
If things go well, Falcon will launch about once a week on average in 2022, delivering ~2/3 of all Earth payload to orbit

4:32 PM · Feb 3, 2022·Twitter for iPhone
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1489351220628230147?
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by Rakesh »

That letter looks photoshopped/edited. I did find a news article though. Interestingly, with the exception of one Republican, the rest of the signatories are all Democrats. One can see that in the article.

Over 50 US Representatives urge Biden administration to stop F-16 sale to Turkey
https://www.ekathimerini.com/society/di ... to-turkey/
05 Feb 2022

https://twitter.com/AceJaceu/status/148 ... uqfbh7OtTA ----> 50 US Representatives have sent a letter to the Biden Administration, urging him not to sell new F16 Block 70s to Turkey. The 50 US Representatives are driven by being anti-Turkey, anti-Pakistan and anti-Azerbaijan coalition, which is not good for US national interests, but only for third party countries.

Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

Greece progresses F-35 procurement plans

Greece's plans to acquire the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) are set to take a step forward, with a team from the programme office scheduled to visit the country in February.

The US Ambassador to Greece, Geoffrey Pyatt, told national media in late January of the planned visit as the Hellenic Air Force (HAF) seeks to progress its plan to acquire the F-35A as part of a wider ramp-up of its combat aviation forces.

“Let me start with the most important point, which is, Greece will be part of the F-35 programme. I think that's clearly understood by the government, by the Hellenic Air Force, but also by the US government. You've heard expressions to that effect not just from me but from senior officials of the State Department,” Ambassador Pyatt said..
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

Selling Turkey F-16V's looks like a good compromise given that the F-35 program termination was a reactionary step to S-400. F-16 sales may be a minimum they have to do to maintain current state of relationship that they can build upon post Erdogan.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by kit »

brar_w wrote:The problem is that the Boeing's F/A-18 orders are about to dry up for the US Navy which is unlikely to include any in its FY-23 budget request. The Canadians have ruled it out and will order the F-35A later this year. The Swiss, and Finns have done the same. The Germans could potentially pick it but regardless there is good chance that the Super Hornet ends production in the 2025-2027 timeframe with its St. Louis line being converted to full time life-extension and sustainment activities. The MOD probably cannot decide and sign a contract within that window and a production re-start will be costly and add to the overall cost. So this would appear to be Dassault's to lose short of any dramatic carrier integration issues like not fitting on the elevators without acceptable compromises.
If Boeing does not expect a SH order or cant fulfil a prospective one., why would they send it and go through all the selection process ?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

kit wrote:
brar_w wrote:The problem is that the Boeing's F/A-18 orders are about to dry up for the US Navy which is unlikely to include any in its FY-23 budget request. The Canadians have ruled it out and will order the F-35A later this year. The Swiss, and Finns have done the same. The Germans could potentially pick it but regardless there is good chance that the Super Hornet ends production in the 2025-2027 timeframe with its St. Louis line being converted to full time life-extension and sustainment activities. The MOD probably cannot decide and sign a contract within that window and a production re-start will be costly and add to the overall cost. So this would appear to be Dassault's to lose short of any dramatic carrier integration issues like not fitting on the elevators without acceptable compromises.
If Boeing does not expect a SH order or cant fulfil a prospective one., why would they send it and go through all the selection process ?
Why wouldn’t they? They think they will be selected in Germany and may receive additional orders from the USN that may see them live through most of this decade. That may be a low probability event but they are still selling the aircraft to US and foreign customers. They also have no way of being certain on when the MOD will actually place orders. Or if at all. They also will maintain the ability to start production after the pause as they are retaining that capability at their production line. So from their prospective , there is all the reason to continue to market and promote the aircraft in India, Germany and any other potential prospective market. But the writing is on the wall. Finland and Switzerland, both prior Hornet users, did not select the Super Hornet (they were surely hoping to win in at least one of these two), and Canada, another Hornet user, eliminated them from consideration and will probably also choose the F-35A this year. There are talks that the German government may re-consider buying F-35's, and if that is the case then they are not going to also buy the Super Hornet / Growler combination that Boeing is pitching. Only way they get the German order is if its politicians don't allow the F-35 to be considered by the Air Force. So practically everything hinges on the German order for them, and the generosity of the US Congress to extend their current production run by a few more lots by adding aircraft for the USN beyond current USN need.
Last edited by brar_w on 09 Feb 2022 21:37, edited 1 time in total.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by ldev »

brar_w wrote:
kit wrote:
If Boeing does not expect a SH order or cant fulfil a prospective one., why would they send it and go through all the selection process ?
Why wouldn’t they? They think they will be selected in Germany and may receive additional orders from the USN that may see them live through most of this decade. That may be a low probability event but they are still selling the aircraft to US and foreign customers. They also have no way of being certain on when the MOD will actually place orders. They also will maintain the ability to start production after the pause as they are retaining that capability at their production line. So from their prospective , there is all the reason to continue to market and promote the aircraft in India, Germany and any other potential prospective market.
It looks like the new German government is leaning in favor of the F-35 for the nuclear role to replace the Tornado employed currently for that purpose. This is notwithstanding the displeasure that a potential F-35 acquisition will invite from France over the FCAS joint venture.

Germany eyes Lockheed F-35 fighter jet; no final decision -source
BERLIN/WASHINGTON, Feb 3 (Reuters) - Germany is leaning toward purchasing the U.S. fighter jet F-35 built by Lockheed Martin (LMT.N) to replace its ageing Tornado in the role of nuclear sharing, a German defence source told Reuters on Thursday, but a final decision has not been taken.

Another source, close to the German military, said a possible F-35 purchase was "back on the table", but no decisions were expected anytime soon.
Germany's new coalition said it will purchase a replacement early in its four-year term in office. Without this move, Berlin would drop out of nuclear sharing when the last Tornado retires around 2030. read more

The German defence source said Scholz was expected to raise the issue during a trip to Washington next week.

Should Germany decide to buy the F-35, it would be a blow for Boeing (BA.N), whose F-18 was favoured by former German Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer to replace the Tornado.

A decision to go with a U.S. fighter jet could upset France. Paris has been warily watching past German deliberations over whether to settle on the F-18 or the F-35, concerned it could undermine the development of a joint Franco-German fighter jet that is supposed to be ready in the 2040s.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by kit »

So the Germans could very well decide the F18 "deal" for India :mrgreen:
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

Yes the fate of Super Hornet production rests on the German decision. US Congress will fund the line and keep it open through the German decision cycle so if they decide to re-consider and pick the F-35A (which their AF wanted from the start), then the Super Hornet production will end following late 2024 deliveries to the US Navy. The line will still remain and the workforce will transition to service life and block III upgrades but the cost to restart the supply chain will not be trivial and would have to be passed on to any new future customer. A positive outcome in Germany will add about 2 years to the production plan, taking it through most of 2026 and allowing Boeing to continue to market it to potential future customers though there are limited competitions left over the next 2-3 years.
Chinmay
BRFite
Posts: 262
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:25

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by Chinmay »

Twitter link

Indonesia orders 42 Rafales
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by Pratyush »

It almost seems like India was the door opener for Dassault.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by kit »

Pratyush wrote:It almost seems like India was the door opener for Dassault.
Good point.

Indias evaluation system is one of the best..most comprehensive ones., other countries won't need to spend that much for the technicalities.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by ldev »

And Dassault is feeling good enough about itself after it's string of recent successes specially the UAE order that they are butting heads with the Germans and Airbus over work share and technology for the FCAS project :lol:

And Boeing is feeling the heat and offering to up it's overall F-18 offering for the Luftwaffe:

Boeing pledges expanded German industry involvement if the nation buys the F-18
Boeing is ready to expand its German supplier network if the new Berlin government chooses to purchase versions of its F-18 fighter jet to replace a portion of the country’s Tornados, the company announced Tuesday.
But an unrelated hiccup in the complex French-German-Spanish Future Combat Air System may open the playing field in new ways, according to industry officials in Berlin. Aircraft maker Dassault, France’s national lead for the marquee program, has so far refused to share access to critical avionics information for the eventual FCAS plane, dubbed the Next-Generation Weapon System.

Germany has rejected such black box technology, with officials arguing access to the entire technology package is crucial for future maintenance and development work.
Franco-German Dispute Stalls New European Fighter-Jet Plans
Development of a future European fighter jet first mooted by former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron in 2017 is paralyzed by a dispute between leading industry suppliers.

The head of Dassault Aviation SA on Wednesday warned talks with the German arm of Airbus SE have been bogged down by a power struggle over “division of labor” :lol: that could threaten the project.

“We still have difficulties with Airbus,” Dassault Chief Executive Officer Eric Trappier said at a press conference in Paris. “It’s not always easy to negotiate with the Germans.”

The French maker of the Rafale combat plane and Airbus are in negotiations on the next development phase of the jet, known as the New Generation Fighter, that wouldn’t enter service until about 2040. Airbus must accept “the expertise will be in France rather than elsewhere,” Trappier said.

“What’s clear is that Dassault will be the leader,” he said. :lol:

The possibility that Germany could order U.S. fighter jets to carry nuclear weapons as part of a longstanding NATO agreement is also weighing on the project, Trappier said.
I predict that eventually Germany will leave FCAS or the project will be diluted so that Germany does some basic ancillary work on it. That will leave France and Spain. As it is work share initially was 50:50 split between Airbus representing Germany and Dassault representing France. Then when Spain joined the project, Airbus represented both Germany and Spain. So each partner's work share decreased to an equal 33.33%. Dassault and France are unhappy with this dilution so this will be a source of constant friction going forward.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by Rakesh »

The new milestone in aero engines. Beautiful.

Hybrid-electric flight: Honeywell answers five common questions on how to power these aircraft
https://aerospace.honeywell.com/us/en/l ... ric-flight
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by Rakesh »

Subcontractor provided inferior Chinese parts to Taiwan’s Sky Bow missile program
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4437347
09 Feb 2022
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

ldev wrote:And Dassault is feeling good enough about itself after it's string of recent successes specially the UAE order that they are butting heads with the Germans and Airbus over work share and technology for the FCAS project :lol:

And Boeing is feeling the heat and offering to up it's overall F-18 offering for the Luftwaffe: .....
Germany has no incentive to leave the FCAS program. France has all the incentives in the world to dilute German role and/or eventually leave the partnership. Spain is basically an insignificant tag-along partner with no bargaining power. FCAS will be a 5.5 generation program and France will not like to be restricted by German veto power over exports. The 2040s operational timeline gives France enough time to slowly work towards developing tech. Lack of German funding will mean some scope and capability reduction but given this is an industrial priority first it wouldn't matter to them. The UK Tempest is a more natural fit for Germany anyways and it if wasn't for Brexit they may have been a part of that program already.

Boeing has done very well on the Super Hornet and will be doing very well upgrading hundreds to the Block III configuration. Time for them to now develop the US Navy's next gen fighter for which they will no doubt be the leading candidate. MQ-25 production will keep their production machine warm as they transition to NGF.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by Rakesh »

It looks like history will repeat herself.

France went on her own with the Rafale, after walking out from the European Combat Aircraft (ECA) program. The other European nations developed the Eurofighter program. A plane that never lived up to her potential because of bickering between the European partner nations. But despite that, the Typhoon has earned a number of export orders (Austria, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Saudi Arabia) apart from the four partner nations (UK, Germany, Italy and Spain). The Rafale has also been a success story.

* United Arab Emirates: 80
* Egypt: 54
* India: 36
* Qatar: 36
* Greece: 24
* Croatia: 12
* Indonesia: 42

That is a total of 248 Rafales for export orders alone. The French have a confirmed order of 180 for their own air arms. That is a a combined production run of 428 aircraft. That number will only go up if any of the above nations do repeat orders. The Typhoon still leads though, with a combined production run of almost 600 aircraft to date (partner nations + export orders).

If the disagreements continue (and it likely will), France will go at it alone with FCAS. They need a carrier capable version and that requires money to develop. Dassault will recover that investment when they will export the FCAS to some of these very nations listed above. Dassault has more than recovered the money invested in the Rafale program with confirmed export orders of 248 aircraft. The program can certainly be labelled a success story, as they have exported more than their own air arms actually operate.

Germany is better off joining the Tempest program. They can bicker with the British. Let them have fun with that.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

You have the Super Hornet and Typhoon leading the 4+ generation production game. Followed by Rafale and then the Gripen. Splitting to 2 or even 3 programs yet again means that we'll see a similar fragmentation of combat aircraft programs in Europe and both (or all 3) will be 5.5 gen instead of something more dramatic that offers a full generation of capability leap over FGFA.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by ldev »

brar_w wrote: Germany has no incentive to leave the FCAS program. France has all the incentives in the world to dilute German role and/or eventually leave the partnership. Spain is basically an insignificant tag-along partner with no bargaining power. FCAS will be a 5.5 generation program and France will not like to be restricted by German veto power over exports. The 2040s operational timeline gives France enough time to slowly work towards developing tech. Lack of German funding will mean some scope and capability reduction but given this is an industrial priority first it wouldn't matter to them. The UK Tempest is a more natural fit for Germany anyways and it if wasn't for Brexit they may have been a part of that program already.
It looks like negotiations between Dassault and Airbus have come to a head. From the bloomberg article I linked in my earlier post:
Should the collaboration founder, Dassault retains a plan B, Trappier said, without giving details. While he ruled out a collaboration with the U.K., saying talks with that country’s suppliers on the future European fighter have ended, he said Airbus doesn’t share his vision of how industry should be organized to develop the plane.
I would suspect that Plan B for Dassault will be to get funding from a financial partner for FCAS, most likely a Gulf country, most likely the UAE which besides being in a position to provide funding would love the prestige of being a "partner country" for FCAS. Besides roping in a partner country ensures guaranteed sales and increased production which should bring down the traditionally stratospheric cost of a French military hardware

I wonder if Brexit was really an obstacle for Germany given that Italy has no issues with being part of Tempest. I would say that Tempest is a more harmonious partnership because each company brings tangible domain expertise i.e. Rolls Royce, BAE, Saab, Leonardo. And now Rolls Royce is working with Japan to develop a demonstrator engine for the Tempest. I would say that the original partnership in 2017 was done in the name of "European solidarity".

When you say 5.5 gen, would it be accurate to say that the area that the Europeans will lag behind compared to say NGAD will be LPI communications/data transfer?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

Italy UK partnership is different from UK German partnership. Germany is the big dog in Europe, and Brexit meant that it had to do something to ensure that no further desertions took place and that the UK had to pay some sort of price for its decision. Now that its happened, and the French - German FCAS is coming up against expected headwind, they could very well consider a partnership with Italy UK and Sweden on the Tempest. Spain could also follow.

How will UAE partner on FCAS? Financier perhaps, but they have nothing to contribute in terms of a partner either in terms of development or industrial capacity.
When you say 5.5 gen, would it be accurate to say that the area that the Europeans will lag behind compared to say NGAD will be LPI communications/data transfer?
Smaller leaps relative to F-22, F-35, Su-57 etc relative to other aircraft that will also operate in the same timeframe that will offer greater leaps. SO far, neither team Tempest nor FCAS have established anything that shows either a dramatic (generational) capability leap over F-22/F-35, or concepts and technologies that don't/can't exist on 5GFA at all. With fragmented market and multiple development programs they would do well to put FCAS/Tempest leap over F22/F35 similar to what the Typhoon/Rafale were able to do over F-teens, M2K etc.

NGAD benefits from more than a 1,000 FGFA having been delivered, multiple VLO demonstrator or production programs successfully concluded, and the B-21 being in rate production prior to it (NGAD) entering its Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase. Plus its being designed to counter China and that theater and capability requires a much greater leap over F22/F35 class than what marginal or incremental improvements would deliver (if those would suffice then they'd simply develop newer variants of that to meet NGAD requirements). You can't squeeze three decades of R&D and production experience in less than half that timeframe.

Also worth looking into annual NGAD R&D spend and projected spend and contrast that with what FCAS or Tempest are projecting. These are similar economies with very similar R&D costs. And you have a much shorter leap on NGAD as they have a more advanced baseline starting point from which they are building up. So you can put things together and find that the team that's starting from a more prepared/advanced baseline is projecting higher spend to get to its goal vs a team starting from much lower and spending less. That can help paint a decent picture of what the ambitions are for each of these efforts.
Last edited by brar_w on 10 Feb 2022 22:04, edited 4 times in total.
ldev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2616
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by ldev »

brar_w wrote:Italy UK partnership is different from UK German partnership. Germany is the big dog in Europe, and Brexit meant that it had to do something to ensure that no further desertions took place and that the UK had to pay some sort of price for its decision. Now that its happened, and the French - German FCAS is coming up against expected headwind, they could very well consider a partnership with Italy UK and Sweden on the Tempest. Spain could also follow.

How will UAE partner on FCAS? Financier perhaps, but they have nothing to contribute in terms of a partner either in terms of development or industrial capacity.
Correct, UAE will just provide the funding and be happy with the "partner" status that brings. From the French standpoint, besides the funding, it brings in guaranteed sales upfront, similar to the F-35. And I think you are correct that if the French have hardened their position considerably plus if Germany goes in for the F-35, then the dissolution of the FCAS is almost certain. In any event, most people have opined that Europe does not need 2 programs, but French desire for leadership in any program will ensure that in fact there will be 2 European programs.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

They will be lucky to have just 2 programs. I feel there will be room for a third. Sweden may decide to split and produce something that is more affordable (and less ambitious/capable) than either the FCAS or Tempest. They could leverage sub-systems, propulsion etc from across these next gen programs but produce an airframe that is significantly smaller and less capable (and thus cheaper).
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by Rakesh »

brar_w wrote:You have the Super Hornet and Typhoon leading the 4+ generation production game. Followed by Rafale and then the Gripen. Splitting to 2 or even 3 programs yet again means that we'll see a similar fragmentation of combat aircraft programs in Europe and both (or all 3) will be 5.5 gen instead of something more dramatic that offers a full generation of capability leap over FGFA.
Budgets for defence programs are always limited and when it comes to Western Europe, even more so. Late last year, the Chief of the Italian Air Force predicted that the FCAS and Tempest programs will join forces.

FCAS, Tempest fighter jet programmes will merge - Italy's air force chief
https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/ ... 021-11-23/
23 Nov 2021

I don't see how that will work, seeing that FCAS is planned to have a carrier capable variant. But none of the other European nations (UK, Germany, Italy, Spain, etc) would be interested in investing in that. The UK has a solution with the F-35B, so why invest money in a whole new program which is going to replicate what the F-35B does? Italy already operates the F-35B on their light aircraft carrier, the Cavour. Germany will likely go the F-35 route as well to replace her Tornado fleet. I don't see how the F-18 will prevail over the F-35 in a contest. Spain does have an amphibious assault ship (Juan Carlos I) and will likely end up with the F-35B to replace their ageing AV-8B Harrier IIs. What else is there really? It is F-35 all the way for these nations.

France is a unique case. Stubbornly independent which translates into horrendously expensive platforms, but they doggedly pursue that. FCAS will run way over budget and will be delayed. But France will be wary to join hands with the British on anything. There is deep resentment from the French over Brexit and lately AUKUS. The French have learnt the hard way, that the British cannot be trusted. Just like Rafale and Typhoon, in a few decades from now, we will see FCAS and Tempest fighting for export orders.

Totally unrelated to this discussion (but just a good example of British trustworthiness or the lack of it!) ---> An Indian Ambassador was advised by his British counterpart that if India purchased the Typhoon over the Rafale, that England will send Vijay Mallya back to India to face charges. This is post MMRCA 1.0 by the way. See this video ---> https://twitter.com/CittiMedia/status/1 ... COABWA6xIg
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by Rakesh »

Brar, any input on why the Tyhoon's AESA service entry is now pushed to 2028?

https://twitter.com/FTusa284/status/148 ... pQ6cH-hKxg ---> MoD Annual Report and Accounts out - finally! Going through them, and there is confirmation for what I've heard off the record: Typhoon AESA Radar 2 is due to "enter service" in 2028. Yes, you read that correctly: 2028.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

^^ It's a thing about UK budgets and product maturity in terms of capability development and enhancements. The Typhoon has an AESA. The initial version of it is flying on the Kuwaiti aircraft. Here we often tend to overlook product development, pre and post production planned/evolved enhancements etc, but it takes a long time to fully develop, test and roll out that capability and I think the capability that the RAF wants from the AESA radar isn't there on the variant that is flying on the Kuwaiti aircraft (armchair discussions generally tend to atribute parity just because its the same capability while in the real world there is a fair bit of nuance and product maturity that comes with time and through operational feedback and experience). The RAF will likely accept the variant that is much better, more mature with P3I rolled which is another 5-6 years away.
Last edited by brar_w on 11 Feb 2022 00:20, edited 1 time in total.
V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 1379
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by V_Raman »

Why would Germany buy f18 - they already have the typhoon ?! why do they need another 4th gen foreign fighter?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

V_Raman wrote:Why would Germany buy f18 - they already have the typhoon ?! why do they need another 4th gen foreign fighter?
Three factors -

1) Needed for the NATO nuclear mission currently performed by the Tornado
2) Growler is needed for the ECR mission currently performed by the Tornado
3) It is not the F-35 (buying which may stress their FCAS program)
V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 1379
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by V_Raman »

cant they adapt the typhoon for nuclear mission? with all their industrial might?! or add pods to make it ECR ready?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

V_Raman wrote:cant they adapt the typhoon for nuclear mission? with all their industrial might?! or add pods to make it ECR ready?
Yes absolutely. It will cost them a ton and they would have to get in line as the US would have to certify its nuclear weapons on a new platform, and a brand new nuclear platform itself. Its not going to happen inside 6-10 years given the amount of work and priority as the US is currently prioritizing full nuclear certification (initial has been obtained) for F-35A, and will do the same for B-21. No other partner is going to pay for it so they will be left carrying all the cost alone.

They can also absolutely create an ECR variant for Typhoon. They'd have to spend very similar amount of money that the US Navy spent on the Growler program, and the Next generation Jammer programs (of which there are (will be) three separate programs to cover the entire electro magnetic spectrum of interest).

Creating a Growler analog that is as capable isn't a trivial matter both technically or financially. The R&D phase alone will cost them more than what they've likely budgeted for these aircraft (just these variants) but it is a possibility if they want to spend a few hundred million a pop to develop the capability before going out and buying it. The USN could afford it because their requirement was for 150-200 Growlers b/w USN, Australia etc. Airbus would very much like that but it is a multi-billion dollar R&D program that will likely take a decade or more of development, testing and certification. One thing that Germany doesn't like doing is spending a ton of money on defense so any program to develop analogs to a nuclear delivery platform or a Growler like Typhoon variant will be subject to future German defense spending uncertainty and obviously technical risk. No other Typhoon user wants this capability. Britain and Italy don't have the nuclear mission requirement, and Italy is going to be using the F-35A to replace its Tornado across the entire mission set. To make things even more impractical, Germany is liberal in exercising its veto on defense exports which makes users wary of buying hardware that has German components so the likes of Airbus will not spend their own money to develop some of these capabilities because they can't recover it via export given German policy and use of veto.

They could simply buy F-35A's and solve each of those needs with one platform. This is what their Air Force chief publicly recommended doing before he was fired for being public about it. With talks that they may begin to have another look at this shows that the costs of buying two Super Hornet variants (and nuclear certification costs for the SH for the work that is not yet done) and still being left with a 4+ gen platform for the 2030-2060 timeframe isn't as smart or very cheap.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by Rakesh »

The latest on Indonesia! Deal has yet to be signed. 36 F-15IDs for US $13.9 billion.

INDONESIA – F-15ID AIRCRAFT
https://www.dsca.mil/press-media/major- ... d-aircraft
10 Feb 2022
The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Indonesia of F-15ID aircraft and related equipment for an estimated cost of $13.9 billion.
LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 673
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by LakshmanPST »

A noob question:-
Germany does not have nukes... Then why do they need a platform certified for delivering nukes...?
Will they use the nukes from US/UK/France on all NATO platforms...?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Post by brar_w »

Germany participates in the nuclear sharing mission of NATO and has US nuclear weapons housed on its soil, and its Tornado aircraft modified to deliver them. As that platform is replaced, it wants to maintain a platform that can ensure continuity of that mission.
Post Reply