Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 240 of 416

Thread: Airbus: European Future Fighter Program

  1. #211
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,953
    Well you government is planning on replacing Rafale with the help of the rest of Europe, so I wonder what you make of it?
    don't give a damn.. the government is here for 5 years... the way they started to act in just a couple of months in power, they will probably get even less voices than the ex-presidents party by the next election (6% of expressed votes, for reminder)... the project has zero chance to get beyond the point of real scrutiny by then.. so, whatever he signs can be binned by serious people once they get to look into it.

  2. #212
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,953
    I dont understand the idea that Rafale is good for 50 years of operation. if nothing els, that will kill the french aerospace sector.
    and yet, you have today the F-15 that has first flown 45 years ago and that still has a certain number of years of front line service ahead of it... If they plan for replacement by 2050 (give or take a few years), they'll need to start development in about 10 years from now.. until then, there's Rafale modernization program running, improving the bird continuously, the MLU that will come next, and so on.. they'll have something to do up to then.. on the other hand, make a political fighter decided by "jupiter junior" and made by airbus with german leadership, and you definitely do kill the french aeronautical industry

  3. #213
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    and yet, you have today the F-15 that has first flown 45 years ago and that still has a certain number of years of front line service ahead of it...
    But the Raptor was introduced more than a decade ago... No one disputes that the Rafale MIGHT have some kind of utility around 2040/50, but if anyone believes that it can be a credible "tip of the spear" for the French Armed Forces against any evolved adversary when the likes of the USAF and the US navy are going into full "PCA/FXX" mode NOW, they are seriously deluded.

    until then, there's Rafale modernization program running, improving the bird continuously, the MLU that will come next, and so on.. they'll have something to do up to then..
    If there´s no need for anything else but Rafales from here till 2050, any French production line for something that flies and is combat capable will have been closed for at least TWO decades by 2050.

    on the other hand, make a political fighter decided by "jupiter junior" and made by airbus with german leadership, and you definitely do kill the french aeronautical industry
    France is spending a mit less than 2% of its GDP in defence, for their main future projects either a) it works with partners, b) or it buys american, c) or it raises (very handsomely) its defense budget. Unless someone in the East or Midle East go seriously berserk option c) seems to be (for the foreseable future) out of the cards.
    Last edited by Sintra; 14th July 2017 at 21:15.

  4. #214
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    219
    Saying the Rafale doesn't need replacing tell 2050. Mostly comes down to starting replacement program 2030 instead 2020. It's largely a play for time to get more Rafale sales. In the longterm it's irrelevant to the longterm military ability of EU if France replaces Rafale in the 2050 time frame or 2035 time frame. The economic consideration of program supporting French capability versus one supporting EU as whole is the choice that has made. Well it appears to have been to be made already.

  5. #215
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Republic of Ireland, EU
    Posts
    261
    BAE says unfazed by Franco-German fighter project, sees future role

    The head of military aviation at UK defence contractor BAE Systems said on Friday (14 July) he did not feel threatened by Franco-German plans to develop a new European fighter and predicted Britain would end up participating in some way.

    France and Germany unveiled plans on Thursday for a new European fighter to tighten defence and security cooperation. The two countries currently compete for sales, with Germany and Britain both part of the Eurofighter consortium.
    Rest at the link
    http://www.euractiv.com/section/poli...ime=1500049513

  6. #216
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Eastern Switzerland
    Posts
    2,035
    I read in the local newspaper today there's also a new tank on the table. If so, great, let everyone do what they do best. I.e. the French take the lead in the fighter program, with ze Germans leading the tank program.
    I suppose the new fighter is also a Rafale M replacement? That would be great, limits weight from the start. What's the weight limit on CdG?
    How can less be more? It's impossible. More is more.
    Yngwie Malmsteen

  7. #217
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    219
    You mean a leopard II replacement? Ask US if they think Germans were a good partner for tank replacement. Then ask UK if they think Germans are were good partners on the eurofighter.

    The best use of Germans on any projects is technical competence. Leave the leadership to those that care about military utility foremost. Hint it isn't the Germans.

  8. #218
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    977
    http://www.defensenews.com/articles/...ropean-defense

    Interview: French procurement chief Laurent Collet-Billon on the pursuit of a European defense

    By: Pierre Tran, June 18, 2017

    There is [the] Tornado replacement for Germany by 2035, and then Eurofighter and Rafale replacement in 2040-45. And before 2035, the question of UCAV has also to be addressed. How do we arrange a common roadmap? There will be dialog with other European countries, the start of a long road.

  9. #219
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    I read in the local newspaper today there's also a new tank on the table.
    Its called the "Main Ground Combat System (MGCS)", Nexter and Krauss Maffei have been working on it for two years now, the concept development phase should be completed this year.

  10. #220
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    437
    Interesting...

    BAE exec: We'll have a hand in a next-gen fighter 'one way or another'

    By: Andrew Chuter, July 14, 2017 (Photo Credit: James Way/Staff)

    FAIRFORD, England — BAE Systems wants a stake in any new European fighter program, says the executive running the British company’s combat air activities.

    “I can’t say what it will be, and I can’t say when. … One way or another, the U.K. and BAE will have an involvement," said Chris Boardman, managing director of BAE’s military air and information activities, told reporters at a briefing at the Royal International Air Tattoo, known as RIAT, being held here.

    Industry executives at the show said it wasn’t just the British who are watching possible developments of the program. Sweden has shown an interest, as well, said one executive.

    The RIAT briefing was called to announce the Typhoon jet built by BAE and others had reached another milestone in its development as a multirole aircraft with the first test firing of the Brimstone 2 ground attack missile, but the briefing was largely hijacked by questions about the British reaction to the Franco-German proposal July 13 to jointly develop a new fighter jet.

    France and Germany agreed to study jointly developing a new fast jet to succeed Dassault Aviation’s Rafale in French Air Force service and the Panavia Tornado jets being used by the Germans following a joint Cabinet meeting held in Paris.

    Other joint defense programs were also proposed, including an air-to-ground missile and an updated version of the Tiger attack helicopter.

    The two countries want to put together a roadmap to develop a new fighter as early as the middle of next year, a timeline executives at the tattoo said was highly ambitious given the pace of agreeing European joint programs in the past.

    BAE already jointly produces the Typhoon with Airbus and Leonardo of Italy and has a significant stake in the Lockheed Martin-led F-35 program that would likely be a rival to any new jet.

    Boardman said that regardless of how plans for the European jet matured, BAE was already involved in a new next-generation fighter in a recently agreed deal with Turkey to help develop the TF-X jet with Turkish Aerospace Industries

    “We have engineers deploying to Turkey as we speak to start work,” he said.


    He said BAE also had a memorandum of understanding with Japan on possible development of a new fighter.

    Some executives at the show were wondering whether the Franco-German move was part of the fallout from Britain’s plans to exit the European Union. One executive said it could raise questions about the future of joint industry programs in the Lancaster House bilateral defense treaty between London and Paris.

    The 2010 treaty led to BAE forming a joint project with Dassault and other leading British and French companies to develop a future unmanned combat air vehicle operational technology demonstrator in a program valued at nearly $2 billion.

    Boardman dismissed suggestions the program could be compromised by the new fighter proposal. He said he had seen no letup in the pace of discussion over the next phase of the program.

    A decision is expected by the end of the year to OK production of the demonstrator, said Boardman.

    http://www.defensenews.com/articles/...-defense-bills

  11. #221
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,159
    And the french are dubbed "arrogant"?

  12. #222
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,953
    funny, french and germans decide to make a thing together, then you have BAE that comes "we have decided that you want us in your program..."


    kinda sound funny, no?

  13. #223
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,370
    Partnering with someone who made the EF isn't funny in the least IMO.

  14. #224
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    55
    You mean a leopard II replacement? Ask US if they think Germans were a good partner for tank replacement. Then ask UK if they think Germans are were good partners on the eurofighter.
    What about the C-160 Transall and the Alpha Jet? Both very good planes and succesful examples of French-German cooperation...

  15. #225
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    5,199
    What about the C-160 Transall and the Alpha Jet? Both very good planes and succesful examples of French-German cooperation...
    It is sad that you have to go back 50 years to find a program where a partnership with Germany was successful. C-160 began design in the late 1950s. Alpha jet began design in the late 1960s.

  16. #226
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,388
    Those 1950s era aviation technolgy was far less complex. now both software and hardware demands are huge. It is Macron show boat project by slapping European name on everything hoping that Germany will pay for it due to its EU name.

    http://www.straitstimes.com/world/eu...nt-fighter-jet
    The aim of this joint fighter jet project is to do research and development together... to use it together... and to coordinate on exports,” Macron said, calling it “a profound revolution

  17. #227
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    437
    AFAIK, Rolls-Royce has a lot of input into the EUROJET EJ200 engine for the Eurofighter Typhoon. In fact, alot of the IP is still owned by Rolls-Royce.

    Does Germany-France want to use an improved version of the Snecma M88 or the Eurojet EJ-200!

  18. #228
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    219
    Well France does that's for sure.

  19. #229
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,398
    A breakthrough in propulsion technologies is adamant for any meaningful industrial advances against concurrent non-US design. Aside from an increased efficiency, the future aero engine will have to benefit from advanced flow stream management, generate a high level of electrical power, use gas flows to increase propulsion, reduce aircraft drag or add to the level of LO. In other words, the needs are here to field a new design that can only fit the requirement. An UCAV engine is not as demanding.

  20. #230
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    437
    Quote Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
    A breakthrough in propulsion technologies is adamant for any meaningful industrial advances against concurrent non-US design. Aside from an increased efficiency, the future aero engine will have to benefit from advanced flow stream management, generate a high level of electrical power, use gas flows to increase propulsion, reduce aircraft drag or add to the level of LO. In other words, the needs are here to field a new design that can only fit the requirement. An UCAV engine is not as demanding.
    I think Turkey was smart in investing billions into propulsion technology. It was even smarter to enter into a partnership with Rolls-Royce. Brexit seems to have favored Turkey alot :-)
    Last edited by Bayar; 20th July 2017 at 08:59.

  21. #231
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,379
    Well surely France was treating the M88 based FCAS engine as being suitable for use in the Rafale. After all if you stick an IR managed, efficient jet engine into your 1990s jet, it might be possible to justify its use till 2050?

  22. #232
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,882
    [QUOTE]
    don't give a damn.. the government is here for 5 years... the way they started to act in just a couple of months in power, they will probably get even less voices than the ex-presidents party by the next election (6% of expressed votes, for reminder)... the project has zero chance to get beyond the point of real scrutiny by then.. so, whatever he signs can be binned by serious people once they get to look into it.
    Viva La France!!
    Seriously this is thinking as long forward as your nose is..

    In the name of Aviation, lets Just hope you are in a small minority with it.
    Last edited by haavarla; 20th July 2017 at 12:42.
    Thanks

  23. #233
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Bayar View Post
    AFAIK, Rolls-Royce has a lot of input into the EUROJET EJ200 engine for the Eurofighter Typhoon. In fact, alot of the IP is still owned by Rolls-Royce.

    Does Germany-France want to use an improved version of the Snecma M88 or the Eurojet EJ-200!
    While RR are propulsion technology leaders in Europe and would clearly have been capable of building something very like the EJ200 entirely on their own, MTU is responsible for much of the engine's excellent HP & LP compressor systems. So although they lack RR's broad spectrum skills, their strong point in compressor technology covers precisely the area where M88 doesn't quite match its counterpart. SNECMA & MTU combined have skill sets which are nicely complementary and should be able to produce a very good fighter engine as a team.

  24. #234
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    437
    EJ-200: Maximum thrust: 60kN (13,500lbf) dry thrust; 90kN (20,250lbf) with reheat
    Snecma M88: Maximum thrust: 50 kN (11,250 lbf) dry, 75 kN (16,860 lbf) wet (afterburning)

    Whereas Rolls-Royce/Kale Aerospace are working on a European equivalent to the YF119-PW-100L with thrust vectoring nozzle (basically Pratt & Whitney F119 with TVN).

    Europe just needs to put politics aside and pool all their resources into one engine project or they will all lag behind the US.

  25. #235
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,953
    Viva La France!!
    Seriously this is thinking as long forward as your nose is..

    In the name of Aviation, lets Just hope you are in a small minority with it.
    my nose is just fine, thank you

    now how about switching your neurons on for a few seconds and think about it seriously?

    question 1

    - is there a country named Europe?

    no

    question 2

    - from there on, is there anything resembling a single european policy?

    no

    question 3

    - can you make a common asset among different european countries?

    yes, as long as their needs are common

    question 4

    - are german and french needs common?

    no

    question 5

    - why?

    see question 2



    What's more, countries announcing "we will make the new fighter together" sound incredibly USSR-ish... even the USA don't say "we will make..." they say "we will acquire...", then, they put up a set of requirements and let the companies compete for the production.. and, normally, let the best proposition win. Just look at the Typhoon... it started pretty much as the same program that originated the rafale, and then, in 1984, the french split... they were in the same boat as everybody else.. yet, as soon as they split, the rafale started gaining advance over the typhoon, flew before, got into service before, got its developments before.. are the french so much better than the others? yes or no, in the end, it doesn't matter.. what really does matter is that the development was coherent and sustained by clear needs being expressed and related developments financed continuously. the typhoon development was hampered by politics more than anything else.

    So, IN THE NAME OF AVIATION (and my tax money) I really hope that someone serious (coming in charge after that clown) will get a deeper look into it and make sure that it either efficiently does take care of nations' needs, or get the h.ll out of there

  26. #236
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,379
    Very eloquently put.

    The French have a long history of making projects with the Germans (although I realise Airbus is a bit broader than that). However, these pan-European projects often produce fruit as long as they have good leadership. Look what France achieved with nEUROn: pulling the expertise from across the EU and beyond together, in order to produce something none of the individual partners could have done singly.

    You might argue that nEUROn was a French product, but for the sake of politics (at least), it was deemed necessary to bring in other players.
    Last edited by mrmalaya; 20th July 2017 at 15:08.

  27. #237
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,882
    If you don't have a goal to reach for then you have nothing.
    As far as Dassault goes(or any other Europen manufactor), if you don't pull your **** together, and move forward.. then yes you will never ever move past the Eu-carnards.

    And to be fair, reading your somewhat sour view on past aviation history will not help matters one bit.
    Thanks

  28. #238
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,388
    EJ-200: Maximum thrust: 60kN (13,500lbf) dry thrust; 90kN (20,250lbf) with reheat
    Snecma M88: Maximum thrust: 50 kN (11,250 lbf) dry, 75 kN (16,860 lbf) wet (afterburning)

    Whereas Rolls-Royce/Kale Aerospace are working on a European equivalent to the YF119-PW-100L with thrust vectoring nozzle (basically Pratt & Whitney F119 with TVN).

    Europe just needs to put politics aside and pool all their resources into one engine project or they will all lag behind the US.
    BAE /RR want to expand into Turkey. while Germany/French expand business into Iran. both these trends will ultimately lead to blacklists by others in Middleast.

  29. #239
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    437
    I cant speak for the European project but with regards to the BAE and Rolls Royce involvement in TF-X, the condition of BAE & RR taking part is that Turkey owns all IP and is thus free to export the technology to whoever they want. So no, BAE and RR are not expanding into Turkey. In any event BAE and RR have partnered up with Turkey in many projects.

  30. #240
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,388
    If BAE and RR sold any tech that advance Turkey projects . It may face losses that it will not be able to survive. not even China sell advance technology to Turkey and Iran.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 11 users browsing this thread. (2 members and 9 guests)

  1. Deino,
  2. mupp

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES