French 6th generation fighter

TomcatViP said:
Absolutely. And France was offered F-106 production from GD. No doubt that Dassault had a good eye at the airframe structure and main components. Assembly modes are fairly similar.
Click to expand...
It's clear from the Mirage timeline and the appearance of the Mirage I that it was not copied from the F-106 in particular. The first tailless deltas were the Lippisch designs in Germany during WWII. Convair and Dassault both chose thin deltas for transonic drag instead of Lippisch's thick deltas, so I suspect the similarities were mostly a matter of form following function once the tailless delta planform was selected.
 
Same thing goes with the RAF Vulcan bomber that was also based on intelligence gained from Lippisch after WW2, I think that many of the western countries gained a lot of information on delta wings from that time.
 
Good luck to France, I would really like to see what France comes up with next to succeed Rafale.
 
Same thoughts here Scott Kenny over the size of the Future sixth generation fighter for France, it really needs to be at lease the size of the Su-57 or slightly bigger than it to have any sort of impact. But the thoughts are of the naval variant and the size of the France Libre carrier.
 
FighterJock said:
Same thoughts here Scott Kenny over the size of the Future sixth generation fighter for France, it really needs to be at lease the size of the Su-57 or slightly bigger than it to have any sort of impact. But the thoughts are of the naval variant and the size of the France Libre carrier.
Click to expand...
Su-57 worked out b/c Russia had an engine more or less off the shelf(courtesy of Soviet investment). To a large degree, it still pays off as a rolling improvement program.

France pays for everything out of its pocket. Aiming for 35-40t class was realistic with Germany（though probably childish), now it's both unrealistic - and that's probably for the better. 25-30t class aircraft off F5 is probably the only way forward available. F5 itself is already taxing (UAE jumped out) enough; France committed to enough 100% grandeur programs to avoid excessive grandeur with this one.
 
Not James Stockdale said:
It's clear from the Mirage timeline and the appearance of the Mirage I that it was not copied from the F-106 in particular. The first tailless deltas were the Lippisch designs in Germany during WWII. Convair and Dassault both chose thin deltas for transonic drag instead of Lippisch's thick deltas, so I suspect the similarities were mostly a matter of form following function once the tailless delta planform was selected.
Click to expand...

I've always understood that Dassault designed the Mirage after seeing the Fairey FD.2 when it operated from Cazaux in France . . .

cheers ,
Robin .
 
robunos said:
I've always understood that Dassault designed the Mirage after seeing the Fairey FD.2 when it operated from Cazaux in France . . .

cheers ,
Robin .
Click to expand...
The trials in Cazaux were more than a year after the Mirage I first flew and at about the same time as the Mirage III's first flight. The Wikipedia page says the Mirage III first flew 2 days after the FD.2 left France. There isn't much you can do with a tailless delta planform, and the main thing that can vary is the intake, which is radically different. Maybe there was some confirmation that the goal of the Mirage III could actually be achieved, but I doubt much more.
 
I suppose the French could double down on the carrier requirement, and make it STOL or STOBAR with only optional CATOBAR capability. That way, they'd have a solid basis to sell it alongside GCAP/Tempest to the other Euro nations (and Japan) that operate LHD-style carriers, as an alternative or complement to the F-35B.
 
robunos said:
I've always understood that Dassault designed the Mirage after seeing the Fairey FD.2 when it operated from Cazaux in France . . .

cheers ,
Robin .
Click to expand...
The Mirage was already designed and done when the FD.2 shown up at Cazaux.
In fact the first Mirage III (that already came after other Mirages prototypes) was just came out 2 days after the FD.2 went back to UK. A bit short for copying it ...
Dassault was interested still to see how Fairey dealt with a supersonic delta, because it's always interesting to see how others do with the same configuration.
That said, in "Mirage, Warplane of the World" by J.Gee, 1977, about the Fairey Delta and the visit at Cazaux, Marcel Dassault was quoted as saying something like "If it were not for the clumsy way in which you tackle things in Britain, you could have made the Mirage yourselves".

I have yet to find from where that "Mirage was copied from the Fairey delta" legend first originated.

Anyways. OT.

Ainen said:
Su-57 worked out b/c Russia had an engine more or less off the shelf(courtesy of Soviet investment). To a large degree, it still pays off as a rolling improvement program.

France pays for everything out of its pocket. Aiming for 35-40t class was realistic with Germany（though probably childish), now it's both unrealistic - and that's probably for the better. 25-30t class aircraft off F5 is probably the only way forward available. F5 itself is already taxing (UAE jumped out) enough; France committed to enough 100% grandeur programs to avoid excessive grandeur with this one.
Click to expand...
This. A monster of 35t was unrealistic from the beginning anyway. I even doubt Germany, who was pushing for a heavier jet really needs something like that.
If Dassault do something alone, I suspect it will be a bit heavier than a Rafale (because LO airframe from the beginning, thus internal weapon bay), but that's all.
Funding something as big as US or Chineses "6th gens" is completely unrealistic. It's not even what it's needed.
 
Last edited:
FighterJock said:
Same thoughts here Scott Kenny over the size of the Future sixth generation fighter for France, it really needs to be at lease the size of the Su-57 or slightly bigger than it to have any sort of impact. But the thoughts are of the naval variant and the size of the France Libre carrier.
Click to expand...
Dassault always made the smaller jet possible, to reduce price for export.
 
robunos said:
I've always understood that Dassault designed the Mirage after seeing the Fairey FD.2 when it operated from Cazaux in France . . .

cheers ,
Robin .
Click to expand...
I don't know. But the Fairey nose and the Mirage IV one are very similar....
 
galgot said:
A monster of 35t
Click to expand...
You mean the size of an F14? Because 35tonne MTOW is a Tomcat. F15E is higher than that.


BonPlan2 said:
Dassault always made the smaller jet possible, to reduce price for export.
Click to expand...
Still constrained by the requirement to carry ASN4G, presumably internally. Which makes for a large airframe to carry that long load.

If by some oddity France decides that they don't need to carry the ASN4G internally for stealth, then you can get a smaller airframe.

But carrier compatibility still suggests something not more than 21 tonnes empty (by US measures), and with a maximum takeoff weight of not more than 45 tonnes with full external and internal load.
 
Scott Kenny said:
You mean the size of an F14? Because 35tonne MTOW is a Tomcat. F15E is higher than that.



Still constrained by the requirement to carry ASN4G, presumably internally. Which makes for a large airframe to carry that long load.

If by some oddity France decides that they don't need to carry the ASN4G internally for stealth, then you can get a smaller airframe.

But carrier compatibility still suggests something not more than 21 tonnes empty (by US measures), and with a maximum takeoff weight of not more than 45 tonnes with full external and internal load.
Click to expand...
A F-14 size fighter jet is a big jet by French standard.
Not something France could realistically fund, buy and operate in sufficient numbers to be something militarily meaningful.
The biggest supersonic mil jet operated in France was the Mirage IV, 14,5 t empty, 33t full. 62 built. And it only came to be because it was needed for the nukes.
Of note, it's not that the Armée de l'Air or MN wouldn't have liked having a big jet fighter in the past, it's more that each time they expressed interest in having that kind of heavier fighter jets, maths came crashing their dreams.
Dassault could make nice big beauties prototypes, Mirage G8, Super Mirage, Mirage 4000, but then French treasury shown they could only fund, buy and operate 1 or 2 squadrons max of these beauties. Which would oblige to fill the gap with other "cheap" types to at least have a meaningful operational force, which having other types making the whole enterprise not so cheap at all.

Rafale came to be because:
- Dassault managed to make it light enough it was thought it would be much cheaper than something the size of new F-14 or F-15, turns out the thing is still expensive, at the limit of what France could fund and buy in numbers. Could have worked better budget wise if the def. budget had stayed the same as during Cold War all that time.
- It's a jet that would replace and fulfil the role of all the previous Armée de l'Air and MN stuff, thus having an op. force of ONE type, which cut costs significantly. Turns out, we still operate Mirage 2000s, because the end of Cold War defence cuts spanned the Rafale acquisitions on too long time.

So yes, for a Rafale successor, given the budget increase (how long will that last?...) , and the need to carry that ASN4G nuke which seems to be bigger than the previous thing, plus, maybe the need to be carried internally because LO, something a bit bigger and heavier than Rafale would be needed. But I'm afraid here again maths will come and say sorry, you can't have everything.
 
Last edited:
galgot said:
So yes, for a Rafale successor, given the budget increase (how long will that last?...) , and the need to carry that ASN4G nuke which seems to be bigger than the previous thing, plus, maybe the need to be carried internally because LO, something a bit bigger and heavier than Rafale would be needed. But I'm afraid here again maths will come and say sorry, you can't have everything.
Click to expand...
That's when Dassault and/or the Fighter Procurement Office asks the politicians the hard questions: Do you not want the plane to carry ASN4G, then? Are you opposed to France having a stealth fighter? In order to carry ASN4G, the plane must be at least this big. Therefore it will cost about this much. You're a politician, it is your job to find the money!

And plot their glorious public destruction.
 
Scott Kenny said:
That's when Dassault and/or the Fighter Procurement Office asks the politicians the hard questions: Do you not want the plane to carry ASN4G, then? Are you opposed to France having a stealth fighter? In order to carry ASN4G, the plane must be at least this big. Therefore it will cost about this much. You're a politician, it is your job to find the money!

And plot their glorious public destruction.
Click to expand...
Right.
Of course Dassault would love to do a "big beauty" and be able to sell it. But given that kind of "big fighter dreams" ambitions already happened numerous times, it's obvious Dassault knows better what a French budget can or can't afford. Because, logically, the company has been here and selling stuff for a longer time than any one in charge of budgets in changing French governments.
That is why they usually come with some kind of "plan B". So we'll see.
 
Last edited:
Scott Kenny said:
That's when Dassault and/or the Fighter Procurement Office asks the politicians the hard questions: Do you not want the plane to carry ASN4G, then? Are you opposed to France having a stealth fighter? In order to carry ASN4G, the plane must be at least this big. Therefore it will cost about this much. You're a politician, it is your job to find the money!

And plot their glorious public destruction.
Click to expand...
Just don't carry it inside. It isn't that difficult to solve.
If Rafale can do it just fine, asking similarly sized plane to have enough space and clearance is a matter of request.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Still constrained by the requirement to carry ASN4G, presumably internally. Which makes for a large airframe to carry that long load.
Click to expand...
Such a long range missile (1000km range) don't really need the same stealth measures than B61....
And it is possible to carry it semi recessed in the frame, also.
 
BonPlan2 said:
Such a long range missile (1000km range) don't really need the same stealth measures than B61....
And it is possible to carry it semi recessed in the frame, also.
Click to expand...
Or perhaps with a stealthy conformal fairing that would wrap around the top of the ASN4G to help it blend in with the fighter's underfuselage. That way the fairing could be dropped after launch returning the aircraft to completely stealthy configuration.
 
BonPlan2 said:
Such a long range missile (1000km range) don't really need the same stealth measures than B61....
And it is possible to carry it semi recessed in the frame, also.
Click to expand...
Semi recessed does not yield a stealthy airframe while carrying. A Conformal fairing may yield a decently stealthy airframe.

I'm assuming that we're talking about the France 6gen launching ASN4G more or less at the Polish border, which means within the outer edges of the Russian IADS. And given that ASN4G is explicitly intended as a sub-strategic "warning" shot, you'd better believe that France expects the planes carrying it to be shot at.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Semi recessed does not yield a stealthy airframe while carrying. A Conformal fairing may yield a decently stealthy airframe.

I'm assuming that we're talking about the France 6gen launching ASN4G more or less at the Polish border, which means within the outer edges of the Russian IADS. And given that ASN4G is explicitly intended as a sub-strategic "warning" shot, you'd better believe that France expects the planes carrying it to be shot at.
Click to expand...
Earth isn't flat, i.e. there's little preventing even Rafale from doing it, and very unlikely something will change here.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I'm assuming that we're talking about the France 6gen launching ASN4G more or less at the Polish border, which means within the outer edges of the Russian IADS. And given that ASN4G is explicitly intended as a sub-strategic "warning" shot, you'd better believe that France expects the planes carrying it to be shot at.
Click to expand...
ASN4G, as ASMPA today is made for warning shot, but not only, if not 50 units, more or less, is a too big number.
 
H_K said:
Or perhaps with a stealthy conformal fairing that would wrap around the top of the ASN4G to help it blend in with the fighter's underfuselage. That way the fairing could be dropped after launch returning the aircraft to completely stealthy configuration.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of the Mirage IVA / Mirage IVP.

On the Mirage IVA the atomic bomb was semi-recessed in the plane belly. There was a great play on words between "soute à bombe" (bomb bay) and "voûte à bombe" (arched bay). When no bomb was carried the recess was filled with a conformal fuel tank or a reconnaissance package.

The Mirage IVP could have had a modified fuel tank with the ASMP recessed into it; or carrying the pylon. Instead they created a specific structure (carrying no fuel) filling the recess and carrying the ASMP pylon.

See this post and blog - https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/mirage-project-and-numbers.432/page-2#post-765202

https://spotaero.blogspot.com/2013/06/lhistoire-du-mirage-iv-p-de-1978-1996.html
 

Attachments

  • Sans titre 14.jpg
    Sans titre 14.jpg
    75.8 KB · Views: 28
  • Sans titre 75.jpg
    Sans titre 75.jpg
    264.1 KB · Views: 27
Last edited by a moderator:
https://www.boursorama.com/bourse/a...eurs-d-avion-9348fb00b8516b2b1a08e367c5bfeead

Safran Says Funding for FCAS Engine Will End in September, Will Prioritize French Requirements​


Safran CEO Olivier Andriès said on Tuesday that funding for the development of a future fighter engine with Germany's MTU Aero Engines will come to an end from September following the cancellation of the Franco-German-Spanish Future Combat Air System (FCAS) program.

He added that, if future fighter aircraft requirements diverge between partner countries, Safran will prioritize French needs.

France and Germany announced the termination of the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) program in early June after months of disagreements between Dassault Aviation and Airbus. As part of the project, Safran had been developing the engine jointly with MTU Aero Engines.

"Following the termination of the program, Phase 2 will not take place, and therefore funding will cease from the month of September," Olivier Andriès said.​
​
"We only have the resources to develop one next-generation fighter engine, and we will obviously prioritize the French roadmap" if the participating countries requirements diverge, the Safran CEO added.​

Andriès was speaking to journalists during the presentation of the company's half-year financial results.
Click to expand...
 
Erdosain said:
Can France build a sixth-generation fighter jet on its own?
Click to expand...
While usually the response to any headline with a question mark in it is "no", the French have the technical and industrial capabilities to build the plane.

The bigger question is how badly the size of the French economy is going to mess with the design. See also every time the French air force dropped a very high-end design spec on Dassault and then suffered sticker shock, only for Mr. Dassault to have planned ahead with company funds for a smaller less capable aircraft that France could afford in the quantities they needed.
 
The Indian MoD's Standing Committee on Defence has informed Parliament that the Ministry has initiated efforts to join the France-led FCAS program.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...-programme/articleshow/133041513.cms?from=mdr

Paywalled, but this is the essence:

"Synopsis
India has begun efforts to join France's sixth-generation fighter jet development program. This collaborative approach is seen as more feasible for future combat aircraft. Discussions on this potential partnership occurred at the defense minister level. France's previous sixth-generation program with Germany faced cancellation due to disagreements. This opens an opportunity for a new India-France joint venture."

====

My comment: The AMCA was never meant to replace the Su-30MKI, so there's certainly a requirement for ~250+ next-gen air superiority airframes for post-2040. The Navy might also be interested as all future carriers are meant to be CATOBAR.

We'll see what comes of it.
 
Well, I started efforts to replace our current Renault SCENIC with either a Porsche, a Ferrari or a Lamborghini as our next family car, now with all the kids out! It has the same realistic chance of being real some day.
 
Of course the political side of it is ripe with many possible problems, changes of heart, requirements, renegotiations down the road. Headwinds present for the next 15 years even if such cooperation is confirmed tomorrow.

That said, the idea behind it is very sound financially and politically.

France has tech but lacks money and volume to make the plane cheap-ish. India lacks tech but has enough money. And certainly needs volumes that would likely outrun french inventory in the long run.

Indian industry is in no position to dictate terms like german industry did.

Politically, past cooperation between india and france has been quite prominent. And indian air force doesn't seem to mind the strings attached to Rafale usage.

India might be content with getting limited tech transfer and local production licence. Something Dassault might be fine with.

In a sense, for all the possible and likely issues, India might be as good of a partner for France as germany. Even better IF indian industry accepts being the junior partner.
 
totoro said:
France has tech but lacks money and volume to make the plane cheap-ish. India lacks tech but has enough money. And certainly needs volumes that would likely outrun french inventory in the long run.
Click to expand...
The problem is 20 years ago, you could replace "France" and "Fcas" with "Russia" and "FGFA".
All the same ingredients which broke down FGFA are there, in an overdrive.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom