Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 LastLast
Results 301 to 330 of 425

Thread: Airbus: European Future Fighter Program

  1. #301
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    Quote Originally Posted by TooCool_12f View Post
    just had a thought... for those nitpicking on "Europe" and putting forward the "continent".. as Russia is on it, we may say that "Europe" has a 5th gen fighter in development which is the PAK-FA...

    So, while we go that way: why not just partner with Russia, and everybody buys PAK-FAs or its derivatives, more or less customized? The french, for example, could put their RBE-2 AESA on it, with a much larger antenna (space in the nose cone allows it)..

    European nations looking at the F-35 could drop it instantly, and you'd get the whole continent full or air forces lining up PAK-FAs in much more significant numbers..

    of course, I have some doubts that it would be very appreciated on the other side of the Atlantic
    Any real reason for a) destroying the likes of Dassault and b) put the entire European western air forces at the tender mercies of camarade Vladimir Putin?

  2. #302
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    Quote Originally Posted by haavarla View Post
    Yes i'm thinking about US push against European countries whom do trade with Rus
    This part of reason why we see Germany and France going forward at this point with next Gen EF and not F-35.
    US foreign policy.. or should i say policing at its best..
    Trading with Russia has nothing to do with this program, maintaining a indigenous capabiliy (first and foremost) and the possibility that one day Germany and France might be faced with a dangerous military power (guess whom) without the US backing has everything to do with this program.

  3. #303
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,388
    Fighter is only small part of large package of products that Macron wants to extract money from Germany to fund it.
    Plus the threat to EU comes from US allies. Turkey is first among them. Egypt is supporting a General in libya (with Russian weopons) that will overthrough EU backed government. Saudi dont want even attend G20 summit in Germany. there will be very poor export prospects for such fighter built with Germanic content. i doubt they going to export such fighter to China adverseries. The fighter project is already too late.

  4. #304
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    219
    What?! The threat to the of future EU come from France and Italy leaving. Turkey is nether a threat to EU are somehow more of a US ally than a EU one. Egypt and Russia are opposing EU influence established by force in Libya. Maybe EU should have considered that before it decided to make a mess of Libya in the first place. Yea the Germans have the bad habit of offending potential customers of their exports. That's a German problem not an EU one. Your right about China it will soon be ahead of europe in fight design. It's only to late for a fifth gen aircraft. The potential for europe pulling together and making a sixth gen aircraft has potential.

  5. #305
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    127
    What if Russia disarms, and no longer develops any fighters.
    Then we could save a lot of money, since we do not have to protect ourselves
    against a country making unveiled threats on a regular basis.

  6. #306
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    6,315
    Thread cleaned up.

    Please leave the politics and national banter out of it.

    Thank you.
    Regards,

    Frank

  7. #307
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,489
    ...also because such discourses completely forgo the real industrial, operational and economical issues about this development.
    France and Germany(+Spain) have a great common aereonautical and defence industrial base in the form of Airbus and Eurocopter, no one of them have partecipated in the development of F-35 and didn't plan to buy it anyway but having Eurofighter, Rafale however give them the opportunity to take the necessary time to develop and produce a new generation fighter without having any serious downfall in their self defence capability, a plane with excellent exp'ort possibility, even toward Italy and UK itself that would need a substitute for Typhoon anyway.

    So given that they have both the productive basis, the operational requisite and the market space to make of it a most probable success, why they did not be allowed to try it?
    In case they would found convenient partnerships or experience technical difficulties they would be more than happy to eventually enlarge the numbers of partecipants, so why bother?
    Better doing so than starting all together and lose pieces along the road like happened with EFA.

  8. #308
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,401
    Affinities ?!! There is not such that prevail. It's a market, a defense market where competition must rule to get the most out of every taxpayers Euro.
    Do you think that Affinities is anywhere involved with IT giant like Apple or Samsung? And when SpaceX started from scratch (it is now the world’s most valuable privately held companies), what would you think was in their mind ? Affinity, perfumed encent, body hormones ?

    Non-sensical industrial planning as only one single output as already experienced by Airbus: FAILURE. Archaism*, should I say, is not a science.

    *neither is Feodalism
    Last edited by TomcatViP; 31st July 2017 at 18:05.

  9. #309
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    437
    It seems like the United Kingdom has just given the middle finger to and undermined the Airbus: European Future Fighter Program by issuing an Open Licence to British Companies that want to transfer any form of military technology to Turkey's TF-X program. This level of blanket export approval is unprecedented.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...7-ogel-tfx.pdf
    Last edited by Bayar; 31st July 2017 at 16:35.

  10. #310
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,954
    not related to this subject in any way... so OT in this thread

  11. #311
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    437
    Actually its related a lot. The UK was left out of the Airbus future fighter. So in order for them to keep their competitive edge they are transferring technology to others like Turkey and Japan and thereby keeping their engineering teams working. So how successful in terms of exports would the Airbus fighter be when the Japanese and Turks will be pumping out comparable aircraft at cheaper prices?

  12. #312
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,954
    when (if ever) they do make comparable fighters, we may eventually compare.. for now, this discussion is about european fighter (if it ever get to existence) and Turkey and its fighter projects belong to Turkish Aerospace thread

  13. #313
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    437
    My comment above have nothing to do with the Turkish Aerospace thread as its about British Aerospace companies like Rolls-Royce and BAE Systems exporting technology. I don't understand why you guys get so defensive as soon as you seen the word "Turkish". Relax! Its only referring to a country BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce are exporting to.

  14. #314
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    Affinities ?!! There is not such that prevail. It's a market, a defense market where competition must rule to get the most out of every taxpayers Euro.
    Do you think that Affinities is anywhere involved with IT giant like Apple or Samsung? And when SpaceX started from scratch (it is now the world’s most valuable privately held companies), what would you think was in their mind ? Affinity, perfumed encent, body hormones ?

    Non-sensical industrial planning as only one single output as already experienced by Airbus: FAILURE. Archaism*, should I add, is not a science.

    *neither is Feodalism
    Didnt understood you, Airbus is THE European aerospace sucess story, absolutely nothing else comes close. We actually could make a point that without Airbus there would be a very nice chance that "European Aerospace" would be an almost inexistant "thing" and not a world leader in quite a lot of the aerospace sector.
    And the term "Affinities" is an interesting one, any military project by definition is a political statement, there´s not much "free market" at play by obvious reasons. Western Europe would not buy Mig´s in the sixties by... obvious reasons, albeit they would be cheaper than BAC Lightings or Mirage III´s. The same aplies to the US, or Russia, or China, or...
    Germany, France, Great Britain, Italy, Spain and Sweden (less) do have "affinities" both political, operational (the two and a half "xeroxes" need replacement in the future), industrial (maintaining some capability inhouse, not relying entirely on a third party, the US) and budgetary (not one single of them have the budget to develop entirely on their own a MALE plus a combat system).

    Cheers

  15. #315
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,954
    Bayar,


    Is BAe or Rolls Royce part of the agreement of France and germany? Answer: no

    so what BAe does is OT here


    Then, I don't think the british will export their engine technologies to be made by turkish kebab shops... I'd rather bet on Turkish Aerospace companies, so, it does belong to turkish aerospace thread and not here..

    in short: you're OT here

  16. #316
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,401
    My dear friend, you are blinded by history. Although I think this fighter project IS a tremendous opportunity for Airbus and more generally for the Aerospace industry all over Europe, it will be not while resorting to the old habits that have plagued the last 20 years projects. In case you can't see, Airbus is not anymore the success story it was at the time the most talented Industrials all over Europe where agglomerated into a single entity.

    Politic makes sure blood is not spilt in vain.
    Last edited by TomcatViP; 31st July 2017 at 17:29.

  17. #317
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    Actually its related a lot. The UK was left out of the Airbus future fighter. So in order for them to keep their competitive edge they are transferring technology to others like Turkey and Japan and thereby keeping their engineering teams working. So how successful in terms of exports would the Airbus fighter be when the Japanese and Turks will be pumping out comparable aircraft at cheaper prices?
    And by what miracle Japan would be delivering "cheaper" airframes?
    How that turned out for the Mitsubishi F-1, the Mitsubishi F-2, the MRJ, the Kawasaki C-1, the Kawasaki C-2, etc?

    And i really loved the bit about Turkey! Turkey has designed and produced the ... Hurkus, a turboprop trainer and sudenly its going to design and build a fifth generation fighter on a string budget, with political stability and political backup akin to a gelatine for what amounts to a two decade project while at the same time beating the crap out of France and Germany´s aerospace industries! Any idea of how many dozens of countries have tried and failed to break into the high end combat airframe club for the last century? The only ones which got a measure of success were the Chinese and they have poured countless resources at it for six decades!
    Nationalistic Hubris at its best!

    And just to finish this:
    The pact between France and Germany to develop a next-generation fighter does not threaten the Franco-British unmanned combat air vehicle project on which Dassault and BAE Systems are partnered, the French company’s chief executive insists.

    In fact, Éric Trappier believes all three countries may combine their efforts into an initiative to develop a successor to the Eurofighter Typhoon and Dassault Rafale, despite concerns that Brexit could leave the UK isolated from future pan-European defence programmes.
    https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...cav-in-439733/

  18. #318
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    My dear friend, you are blinded by history. Although I think this fighter project IS a tremendous opportunity for Airbus and more generally for the Aerospace industry all over Europe, it will be not while resorting to the old habits that have plagued the last 20 years projects. In case you can't see, Airbus is not anymore the success story it was at the time the most talented Industrials all over Europe where agglomerated into a single entity.
    Its not?!
    Its one of the two world leaders in commercial airframes, its a world leader in helicopters, its a world leader in sattelite launch, etc, etc, etc!
    Hell, take Airbus out of the European scenario and there´s precious litle left!

  19. #319
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,401
    What products are real best sellers?
    - A320
    - A 330
    - Ecureuil
    - Dauphin
    - Bo105 derivatives
    Etc...
    A400 Failure
    A340 Failure (not their fault - market insight was risky)
    A380 Failure
    Tiger Failure
    NH90 Failure
    Post Ariane V: impressing lack of reactiveness in front a huge blind spot for commercial launches (commercial means truly market driven launches)
    ...

    You'll get the picture.
    Last edited by TomcatViP; 31st July 2017 at 18:28.

  20. #320
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cemetery Junction
    Posts
    13,431
    A350 has about 850 orders so far. That's a definite success.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  21. #321
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,401
    yes, and?

  22. #322
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,388
    Quote Originally Posted by swerve View Post
    A350 has about 850 orders so far. That's a definite success.
    Success mean 100% domestically built and sales not influenced by international finance. EU is badly failing in both.

  23. #323
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cemetery Junction
    Posts
    13,431
    yes, and?
    Your list makes it look as if their last successful aircraft was 25 years ago. It's misleading.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  24. #324
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,401
    ok. Not my intention.

  25. #325
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,379
    I also think that you cannot label Tiger or NH90 failures because one operator couldn't specify their equipment properly.

    It is too simple to say Airbus products on that list are failures, because they all work incredibly well for the people that operate them. I would much rather Europe had the balls to design and produce an aircraft like the A380 than sit on a warmed over design from the 1960s.

    And whilst we are at it, the A400M is a fantastic aircraft that was only made to work once Airbus took it over.

  26. #326
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    219
    Tiger and NH90 were failures based upon their lack of exports. Promised exports were why those projects were approved.

  27. #327
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    456
    I think it's bit too early saying A380 is a failure..afterall without 747-8 anymore as competition..A380 is the only Super Jumbo in the class. When an airline looking more capacity then 777-9 or A350 can offer, A380 is there. It's niche market frm begining, thus it can get volume as 777, 787, A350 or A330 nor it's design on that volume anyway.

    Besides if German and French politician can agree on common fighter platform, and Airbus is up to the job..getting both German and French need for 5th gen Fighter is a success already. Just like Transall, it's a success since it fill the need of both Luftwaffee and Arme de'l air transport need. It may not be an export success, but it fill the initial goal for both AF. That's a success in my opinion.

  28. #328
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,371
    Airbus is THE European aerospace sucess story
    What a load of bull.

    It's a success story for those who want to destroy national industries & independence, or for those who want a european lockmart to grow so huge that they dictate politics. For the rest of us it's a theft of national know how.

    Nic

  29. #329
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,401
    I also think that you cannot label Tiger or NH90 failures because one operator couldn't specify their equipment properly.

    It is too simple to say Airbus products on that list are failures, because they all work incredibly well for the people that operate them. I would much rather Europe had the balls to design and produce an aircraft like the A380 than sit on a warmed over design from the 1960s.

    And whilst we are at it, the A400M is a fantastic aircraft that was only made to work once Airbus took it over.
    Even if the Tiger is a remarkable platform in term of agility, it early versions proved often inadequate to combat with Fr soldering on the old Gazelle even in the most dangerous zone (see Lybia). And I am not even mentioning the inacceptable anemic sortie rate or the cost of spare.
    Regarding the NH90, you have a system well known for being a decade late, that have quite inadequate exit or defensive geometry for an assault helo and with a heavy share of scandalous corrosion problem (that were discussed heavily here).

    I don't know when you last have seen a successful program, but let's admit, those are not. The AW159 might be one to see. The BK117 also etc...
    Last edited by TomcatViP; 2nd August 2017 at 10:06.

  30. #330
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Limousin France
    Posts
    955
    I feel getting German or France to agree on a common fighter is hard but getting both to agree good luck it will only happen if France is ready to give up Dassault

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

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