Airbus post-FCAS next generation fighter aircraft

Ainen said:
With this wing shape, I have an idea for a name. You can hear it from the picture.
p.s. not Qaher-313
Click to expand...
Let's be fair to them, this isn't meant to represent anything in particular. It's just a crappy AI-generated concept made for publicity...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
snne said:
Let's be fair to them, this isn't meant to represent anything in particular. It's just a crappy AI-generated concept made for publicity...
Click to expand...
padme-meme.jpg

It's quite consistent throughout the video, and tbh, not too dissimilar from some of the pre-Eurofighter studies they conducted in the past.
 
They probaly put some toughts into the video even if the design is a placeholder.
 
The only thing that's meant to be somewhat representative of real world stuff is manned/unmanned teaming. Everything else is just models made for advertisement.

Canards by themselves could materialize later down the road, so could gullwings, but these are individual aspects.
 
snne said:
Let's be fair to them, this isn't meant to represent anything in particular. It's just a crappy AI-generated concept made for publicity...
Click to expand...
You mean also the text, right?
"An exciting step for European sovereignty"
 
Last edited:
Airbus could probably execute some sort of a plane on its own, if it had to. But in that case, it may really be only a warmed up extention of eurofighter airframe. If 2040 deadline has any chance of being even remotely met. Providing Airbus has enough IP ownership in it, which it might, with owning nearly 50% of the Eurofighter consortium. That said, the rest is owned by BAE and Alenia, which are direct competitors for export market, as they're part of the GCAP consortium. Perhaps a bigger issue might be engines. Airbus (or even SAAB if it joins) don't really have many engine options. Best bet would be to try to secure Eurofighter's engines. But again, german firms hold 30% there. Spanish firm hold 16%. British RR holds 35 and Italian firm 19%. So again, there could be some throttling of access or at least development of more advanced versions.

If SAAB could be talked into joining, chances rise to execute a half decent plane. Given Swedish needs, that's actually pretty likely in my opinion. For as long as Airbus and Germany aren't asking for exclusive leadership on the project. Still, even that doesn't solve the engine issue. In theory, they could try sourcing from the states but such dependence is politicaly unwise. If an outside engine was to be sourced, it'd have to be complete transfer of tech, with no strings attached. It's unlikely US would go for that. Korea and Turkey are working on their own engines but who knows when those will be ready and how good they'll be. And with so much uncertainty, you can't start work on a plane if you don't know the engine output planned. Basically - the most realistic option is to design the plane around two existing EJ200 engines and then pray that a more advanced version will be politically and technologically available in 10 or 20 years time.

So what if it won't exactly be the most capable fighter jet in world - it's likely gonna be a decade or two behind the top of the curve - but at least it will help the domestic industry and it will not be subject to sanctions. Given the only realistic potential threat - Russia - it should be more than enough.
 
Even if Germany were to develop an aircraft with characteristics similar to, say, the J-35 - I'm not saying physically similar - using technologies from the Eurofighter and EJ200 engines, it is the best, quick and most affordable path to technological sovereignty, a step towards self-defense and a boon for domestic industry.
It will create a platform for many decades to come with the potential to adapt to future innovations and needs.
 
Since we don't know the characteristics of J35, that's hard to say. But what Airbus probably can't do on its own, and definitely not by 2040, is something similar in capability to F-35. But again, it's not necessarily needed, considering its security situation. Talking about the SAAB option, it's not so much that they'd add much capability and make the plane visibly more capable - but their involvement should make everything go faster and smoother, with less things to learn first. Providing, of course, Airbus and SAAB can first come to a full agreement on who get what out of it all.
 
totoro said:
But what Airbus probably can't do on its own, and definitely not by 2040, is something similar in capability to F-35.
Click to expand...
You assume Germany can't produce analog to a plane, first conceived in mid-1990s, flown in mid-2000s and finished in mid-2010s?
This is quite arrogant honestly. T5 Eurofoghter as a starting point already provides significant part of the required equipment.
 
Last edited:
Spanish update... Indra is expected to remain the leader on the Spanish side (not Airbus ES).

The current focus is on negotiating a new agreement between Spain & Germany. Saab is not part of these negotiations and is not expected to join immediately; they would also need the approval of the Swedish government. The Spanish believe that Germany and Spain can be successful without Saab or other partners.

Spain will negotiate with Germany to manufacture a sixth-generation fighter jet​

https://www.eleconomista.es/industr...nia-fabricar-un-caza-de-sexta-generacion.html
Spain will negotiate with Germany to launch a new sixth-generation fighter jet program , similar to the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) , which is currently being decommissioned. Within the Spanish industry, it is believed that both countries could execute a project of this magnitude without needing other partners, although they are not ruling out the possibility of additional companies joining, with the Swedish firm Saab being the most highly regarded.

Indra will be Spain's leader in any international program to develop a next-generation fighter jet, barring a major political shift. The Spanish company has held preliminary talks with Saab, which has indicated it needs the approval of the Swedish government to join any initiative.

However, our sources explain that "Saab is neither included nor expected in the short term." In that regard, they assert that the priority now is to undo all the agreements with France related to the FCAS program, something that will take some time. Although they insist that there is an intention to begin working closely with Germany as soon as possible.

Until now, some voices questioned whether Germany and Spain could independently manufacture a new-generation fighter jet and lead a new system of systems. However, various sources consulted do not rule out this possibility, emphasizing that, although it would be "risky," if there is ever a time to do it, it is now, as Europe is allocating record military budgets to rearm.

Spain had already committed around €2 billion to the FCAS program, but the total budget for the program was €100 billion, to be shared among the partners. The most expensive part was the manufacture of the fighter jets, which we now know will not be carried out. Therefore, it is expected that the German and Spanish governments will now be able to invest that money in a new project.

In any case, nothing is finalized yet, and high-level negotiations are ongoing after it was confirmed that the fighter jet that France, Germany, and Spain planned to build under the FCAS program has been scrapped. Any further developments will have to be announced by the respective governments of the countries involved.
Click to expand...
 
totoro said:
Airbus could probably execute some sort of a plane on its own, if it had to. But in that case, it may really be only a warmed up extention of eurofighter airframe. If 2040 deadline has any chance of being even remotely met. Providing Airbus has enough IP ownership in it, which it might, with owning nearly 50% of the Eurofighter consortium. That said, the rest is owned by BAE and Alenia, which are direct competitors for export market, as they're part of the GCAP consortium. Perhaps a bigger issue might be engines. Airbus (or even SAAB if it joins) don't really have many engine options. Best bet would be to try to secure Eurofighter's engines. But again, german firms hold 30% there. Spanish firm hold 16%. British RR holds 35 and Italian firm 19%. So again, there could be some throttling of access or at least development of more advanced versions.

If SAAB could be talked into joining, chances rise to execute a half decent plane. Given Swedish needs, that's actually pretty likely in my opinion. For as long as Airbus and Germany aren't asking for exclusive leadership on the project. Still, even that doesn't solve the engine issue. In theory, they could try sourcing from the states but such dependence is politicaly unwise. If an outside engine was to be sourced, it'd have to be complete transfer of tech, with no strings attached. It's unlikely US would go for that. Korea and Turkey are working on their own engines but who knows when those will be ready and how good they'll be. And with so much uncertainty, you can't start work on a plane if you don't know the engine output planned. Basically - the most realistic option is to design the plane around two existing EJ200 engines and then pray that a more advanced version will be politically and technologically available in 10 or 20 years time.

So what if it won't exactly be the most capable fighter jet in world - it's likely gonna be a decade or two behind the top of the curve - but at least it will help the domestic industry and it will not be subject to sanctions. Given the only realistic potential threat - Russia - it should be more than enough.
Click to expand...
I wonder if Ukraine would be interested in joining a programme led by Airbus and SAAB. They would certainly be interested in fielding a replacement for Gripen E/F in the long term. They might not be able to provide much in funding but there might some useful expertise when it comes to engines in Ivchenko/MotorSich.
 
https://aviationweek.com/defense/ai...-seeks-significant-positioning-future-fighter
“We are currently setting ourselves up to not lose time,” Airbus Defense and Space CEO Michael Schöllhorn told investors on the sidelines of the Farnborough Airshow. “My preference does entail we find a solution that gives Airbus a significant position in a sixth-generation fighter with a Spanish and German industrial footprint.”

While he would not identify potential paths forward, he said, “There's a few options in Europe to work together.”
Click to expand...
 
As expected Airbus may have some trouble finding an engine for their future glider, as Safran indicates that the Eumet joint venture is most likely winding down by September.

www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/jet-engine-maker-safran-raises-targets-after-record-first-half-margin-2026-07-28/
Questions remain, however, over the future of Safran's fighter-engine joint venture with Germany's MTU Aero Engines after the collapse of a Franco-German-Spanish FCAS fighter. Andries said the venture, which sources say ⁠has operated smoothly in contrast to feuding that triggered the collapse of the fighter itself, is funded until September and its future will depend on paths each country takes in future developments.

Safran cannot commit to two entirely different next-generation military engines and will give ⁠priority to France's military development requirements, he added. Sources familiar with the matter say the engine venture is set to close with its engineers redeployed in the absence of new funding, unless France and Germany decide to develop two broadly similar planes, something most analysts now consider unlikely.
Click to expand...
 
H_K said:
As expected Airbus may have some trouble finding an engine for their future glider, as Safran indicates that the Eumet joint venture is most likely winding down by September.
Click to expand...
Sadly, we don't know what was discussed during the meeting, but perhaps Francken/Belgium now sees an opportunity to secure a place in the engine program, with the Safran option seemingly off the table.
 
SAFRAN is also based in Belgium...with real SAFRAN assets in the future of military aircraft propulsion. Do not minor that angle.
If nobody find a middle ground b/w the two new dissimilar projects surfacing from FCAS collapse (that itself is a result of the ex-Franco-British FCAS), both would be gliders.


https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safran_Aero_Boosters
 
Last edited:
But Safran Belgium is as much Safran as Safran (not sure if I do understand myself here...)

In other words, It's like a two stroke engine, both sates are necessary to get the momentum going. ;)
 
Do you guys think that MTU and RR Germany can build an engine together?
 
Last edited:
snne said:
Didn't Orpheus already get through CDR and start testing?

https://aviationweek.com/defense/ai...-royce-preparing-orpheus-be-cca-engine-family
Click to expand...

There are two completed Orpheus demonstration engines of differing outputs but I don't know what thrust they have (I think they might be in the 4 to 6.5kn range intended for cruise missiles). Germany had previously said their requirement was engines of 20-30kn for powering drones of 4-6 tons. They would certainly want this to be locally assembled in Germany, probably at the Dahlewitz plant that currently produces the RR Pearl turbofan engines for biz jets, with some of that Pearl DNA and supply chain being incorporated as well.
 
Last edited:
Well, they could all build AN engine. question of how good and how advanced of an engine is a matter of time and money invested. neither of which is likely there to spare. if EJ200 level is enough, that is likely doable in an acceptable timeframe. simpler engines for subsonic CCAs could probably be done in just a few years.
 
totoro said:
Well, they could all build AN engine. question of how good and how advanced of an engine is a matter of time and money invested. neither of which is likely there to spare. if EJ200 level is enough, that is likely doable in an acceptable timeframe. simpler engines for subsonic CCAs could probably be done in just a few years.
Click to expand...

The engine bit can be resolved with one phonecall. One.
To Rolls Royce Plc.

"That new 12.5 ton engine that you are proposing to develop with the Indians?
We're interested"

Et voila...
 
Sure. IF Germany doesn't want to develop its own engine industry. And if it wants to expose itself to the risk of third party interference (however small it may or may not be) decades down the road, both in export market competition and self sustainability of own air force.

In a fragmented world where more and more countries want tech independence, even middle powers like Turkey and South Korea are developing own engines. So it may not be strange or even ill advisable if a country like Germany desires the same.

IF that is something Germany desires, It would be a huge undertaking, but depending on actual perfomance goals and time tables, its doable.

Even then, Finding a partner like RR can be good, providing tech export is included. With the goal of later domestic variants of said engine to be made in Germany, without restrictions. Of course, RR may not be interested in that... Im not sure RR would want to give India no strings attached engine design and tech either.
 
Other countries like South Korea or Turkey are trying to develop their own engines … so why not Germany ?

The main hurdle I can see is the Luftwaffe’s top brass… They would have to be willing to accept an engine that is, at leat at first, less capable than what Germany could simply buy the shelf or license build from the US (or through GCAP).
 
I do not know what will happen to Airbus post FCAS Titus K? I cannot see them develop the fighter on their own and prey that an order will somehow turn up.
 
Airbus Defense is (largely) a conglomerate of former German airspace defense giants. They probably would love to return to how things have been.
I am not a German, but these conversations of national inability to produce engines - by Germany ffs, - should really sound humiliating.
 
Sintra said:
The engine bit can be resolved with one phonecall. One.
To Rolls Royce Plc.

"That new 12.5 ton engine that you are proposing to develop with the Indians?
We're interested"

Et voila...
Click to expand...

When talking Indian shop , that answer might not be as straight forward as you imagine , after the bollywood dance off you learn they could be talking a 8 or 9 or 12.5ton or more likely no engine at all. Or just trying to get some technology transfer for an engine not developed in the 70's.
 
Mr.T said:
When talking Indian shop , that answer might not be as straight forward as you imagine , after the bollywood dance off you learn they could be talking a 8 or 9 or 12.5ton or more likely no engine at all. Or just trying to get some technology transfer for an engine not developed in the 70's.
Click to expand...

You didnt understood, India is entirely irrelevant.
If the German MOD needs a foreign partner to work with MTU in order to develop a new 10/13 ton engine they just need to call Rolls Royce, who a) happens to have tried to sell such a development to at least three different countries (South Korea and India being the latest) in the last decade and b) happens to have ten thousand chaps already working in Germany.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom