Register Free

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Future Franco-German MPA

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Get the P1 already! It looks BIG + it has a bomb bay & a superb blue colour.

    Nic

    Comment


      #22
      ..and frankly I hardly see Airbus Military/DS get any large, risk-prone project (or its lead) anytime soon.
      Theyve pretty much imposed the Euro Male design. Theres also the Tiger upgrade and a few others.

      Cheers
      Last edited by Sintra; 9th April 2018, 18:01.
      sigpic

      Comment


        #23
        I thought it was forbidden to be a male in europe nowadays

        Comment


          #24
          I thought it was forbidden to be a male in europe nowadays
          That might explain something
          sigpic

          Comment


            #25
            A320 is also assembled in China. they approaching 400 build. It is far cheaper to outsource this MPA build to Chinese.

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by EC 5/25 Corsair View Post
              Unlikely to be a 320, and even more a P-8 base platform, IMHO.

              I bet on a Falcon platform, as it was just selected to be the next SIGINT aircraft.
              Lol. That’ll be popular with the Germans. French design, manufactured in France, equipped with what will inevitably be mostly French mission systems. The German Navy may as well cut out the complication and go with the in-service P-8.

              If Germans are to participate, the least they can expect is a Franco-German platform i.e. an Airbus; the A318, if fuel savings are the paramount concern.

              Comment


                #27
                My favorite guess today would be toward a Q400 derivative (Airbus bought Bombardier and this airplane has much better performances to fulfill the role than the sluggish ATR-72 does).
                I bet on a Falcon platform, as it was just selected to be the next SIGINT aircraft.
                I have to agree with Vnomad about the German attitude to an all-French platform, & I think that an MPA based on something with <40% of the max TO weight of the P-8 (e.g. Q400 or the biggest Falcon) isn't going to be seriously considered. Something able to carry & power more & better sensors, plus weapons, with a long range & endurance will be wanted - even by the Germans. They deploy outside the Baltic & North Sea sometimes.

                This Franco-German initiative comes on top of a larger multinational co-operation on a possible joint future MPA, by France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Canada and Poland. That isn't an agreement to develop one, but it's working on requirements. Spain & Canada operate upgraded P-3s, & I think aren't likely to want to downgrade to a platform able to lift half as much.

                If France & Germany develop their own MPA, with whatever other countries they can get on board (Spain's probably the best bet), I think an A320 series platform is most likely, as Fedaykin says - maybe an A320neo with LEAP engines. A bit of work's already been done on airframe changes, AFAIK, & it's big enough. It also has a huge civilian user base. Otherwise, that's a list of P-8 customers.

                If it wasn't NIH, a P-1 with European systems could be a candidate, but I don't think its realistic.

                Individual W. European NATO air forces can & nowadays sometimes do share logistics, so extra types aren't much of a problem as long as neighbours also buy them. For example, nobody's buying two or three tankers: they club together.

                Development of a new MPA based on an existing platform isn't going to be in the same league as developing a new fighter, so it's not an alternative. Look at what SAAB has got a new AEW aircraft with surface search ability into the air for. It wouldn't be that cheap, but still small beer compared to a fighter.
                Last edited by swerve; 10th April 2018, 18:02.
                Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                Justinian

                Comment


                  #28
                  I won't trust an A320 for that mission (airframe wise).
                  So I presume you don't trust the 737 airframe, & thus the P-8.
                  Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
                  Justinian

                  Comment


                    #29
                    C'mon you know the difference. 320 rely on FBW to fly. There is now direct laws to handle the plane in case of damages. We already have seen airframe crashing due to in-weather severe turbulences. This is not a fighter jet with a single jokey. You will have dozen of people exposed to fire (think piratery, manpad...).
                    One thing that you need for sure is a stable, Fwd centered airframe.
                    Last edited by TomcatViP; 10th April 2018, 21:48.

                    Comment


                      #30
                      it will probably be an A320 family derivative. They'll produce the basic airframes in Toulouse and Hamburg and probably send them to Getafe for "militarization". That's what they do with A330 MRTTs and that's what i find logical for A320 MPA versions, particularly considering that Airbus military is headquartered in Madrid and that they are already producing MPA version of C295. This last part may vary depending on the actual equipment to be installed and other industrial considerations but i think that fits the two main partners and their smaller likely associate.
                      C295 is to small + the industrial share for either France or Germany wouldnt be that significant.
                      A400 could be a contender but I think AIRBUS intention is to keep militarizing comercial airframes as in the long term it makes sense regarding economies of escale.

                      P8? I don't see the point since AIRBUS already produce the airframes and even MPAs, and have part of its business focused in militarization of comercial platforms, sure it could be a less riskier maneuvre but also was A330 in the KC-X tanker competition. In the end industrial considerations are a key part for these programs and from my point of view militarization of A320 is a pretty straight forward movement for Germany, France and probably also for Spain (in much lesser numbers though).

                      Comment


                        #31
                        Originally posted by swerve View Post
                        If France & Germany develop their own MPA, with whatever other countries they can get on board (Spain's probably the best bet), I think an A320 series platform is most likely, as Fedaykin says - maybe an A320neo with LEAP engines. A bit of work's already been done on airframe changes, AFAIK, & it's big enough. It also has a huge civilian user base. Otherwise, that's a list of P-8 customers.
                        https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...rivati-445670/

                        I suspect the timing isn't entirely coincidental

                        So probably going to be based on the neo - I see no reason to impose one of the engine choices though. CFM is a no-brainer for France, but Germany would probably prefer P&W due to significant MTU involvement (LPT) - there's also a precedent in the A330MRTT which is available with all three engine choices in theory (and has been ordered with at least two of them in practice, AFAIK). The GTF being slightly better on fuel burn & range might be attractive to some export customers too.
                        sigpic

                        Comment


                          #32
                          Any future conversion will require between "six to eight months" to complete, [Alonso, head of the military division at Airbus] says.
                          Unrealistic. Alonso Pressuring the schedule... again.

                          Comment


                            #33
                            One thing that you need for sure is a stable, Fwd centered airframe.
                            that's what the 320 is... FBW =/> instability.
                            there also is a direct law.

                            Comment


                              #34
                              No really. The simplified mode is not a direct access to all ctrl commands. You won't glide a damaged 320 as easily as another platform. You won't ditch it without fighting the computer (see crash in the Hudson River) etc etc... It's not the right platform to start for a combat capable airframe. Unless altered. Something that won't be done in a 6 month botched program.

                              Comment


                                #35
                                Originally posted by TomcatViP View Post
                                No really. The simplified mode is not a direct access to all ctrl commands. You won't glide a damaged 320 as easily as another platform. You won't ditch it without fighting the computer (see crash in the Hudson River) etc etc... It's not the right platform to start for a combat capable airframe. Unless altered. Something that won't be done in a 6 month botched program.
                                The FBW "thing" is entirely irrelevant.
                                By the way the P8 also uses FBW to control the spoilers and the Kawasaki P1 is entirely controlled by a Fly by Light system.
                                sigpic

                                Comment


                                  #36
                                  The P-8 is forward centered and a naturally stable airframe. The point is there. I never mentioned pulley and cable, so don't make it my opinion. thanks in advance.

                                  Comment


                                    #37
                                    but again so is the 320..?? I don't see the point's revelancy here???

                                    Comment


                                      #38
                                      be more specific, please.

                                      Comment


                                        #39
                                        well it's pretty straight forward. your argument in favor of the Poseidon is that it had fwd CG, and is stable. but - so is the A320, so what is the revelancy of that point?

                                        Comment


                                          #40
                                          The relevancy is that there is none in your remark: the A320 has RSS implemented in its design.

                                          Comment


                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X