UK-France Future Combat Air System (FCAS)

totoro said:
If the political will to pursue to project is still there?

In light of the UK election result I would not be surprised if the UK side of FCAS suddenly went to Bombardier in Belfast! :eek:

Seriously, the whole Brexit issue will complicate things, although I will believe any high end combat system from UK/Europe when I see it.
 
This could be the UK cranked delta version of the planform Dassault has been publicising in the past couple of years.

Dates from Farnborough last year.

Obviously BAE like their intake.

It also looks to me as if the fuselage forward of the wing is narrower and more pointed than the French design we have been shown.
 

Attachments

  • DSCN3913.jpg
    DSCN3913.jpg
    89.1 KB · Views: 508
  • th.jpg
    th.jpg
    5.6 KB · Views: 494
mrmalaya said:
It also looks to me as if the fuselage forward of the wing is narrower and more pointed than the French design we have been shown.
It seems :
 

Attachments

  • BAE FCAS.jpg
    BAE FCAS.jpg
    89.1 KB · Views: 54
  • BAE-Dassault FCAS-SCAF.png
    BAE-Dassault FCAS-SCAF.png
    128.4 KB · Views: 66
You agree?

The fuselage joins the wing inboard or at the same point as the rear fuselage, whereas on the French artwork its been outboard of that point since the beginning.

At the end of the day its comparison of a model from BAE, but its the first one that appears in context and resembles the supposed shared design.
 
mrmalaya said:
You agree?
Yes.

As the 2 prototypes FCAS/SCAF must have the same "basis" but different "systems". It will be interesting to compare their shapes, when they will fly.
 
...
 

Attachments

  • FT2016_C05_Stefan_Andersson_Future_Combat_Air_System.pdf
    2.6 MB · Views: 81
  • FT2016_C06_Peter-Furenback.pdf
    796.2 KB · Views: 69
  • FT2016_C07_ArBaWing.pdf
    2.7 MB · Views: 66
The white box / black box approach sounds wrong to me. The limitation among all variables won't come from the level of comprehension but from the cognitive flows. We know from air combat history that SA surges before going down to zero. This where and how AI will sustain the combativeness of the SoS: supplementing human when a lot of small decision have to be done in a short time for a limited effect (the kill of one single bandit).

On the contrary, adding difficulty while building the tactical picture would have a detrimental effect and lead to inherent malfunctions b/w the pair human/AI. It is of utmost importance that the pilot remain the tactical battle manager (with suggestion from the AI obviously) since once decision would have to be taken (shoot, position, intercept for example), the better the comprehension, the quicker the chain and effect. Past that point where the SA degrades due to the shortness of decision time and surge of little information, the AI would be better suited to take the decision.

In other word, it will be ill-suited to see tomorrow AI as a revolution that will need its own set of rules in air combat but, at least for the next decade, something more evolutionary. AI comes as something new in the civil world. It is not in the Aerospace where a crude form of it has been existing since combat automation (autonomously directed fighter for example).
 
Great, now UK, Germany and Sweden have separate programmes with identical names...
 
In the 80's Americans referred to FEFA as 'Five Europeans 'Fooling' Around' (Fooling us the clean version).

3 x FCAS may suggest similar thoughts!
 
It almost seems deliberate on the part of SAAB and Airbus, where the France/UK project is government to government. A bit like, "Oh you guys have FCAS but don't forget we can do FCAS too, nudge, nudge".

I think the problem for them is that the Anglo-French Programme has a lot of practical work behind and ahead of it, with tangible aircraft being built, whereas SAAB and Airbus are still trying to find concrete programmes to hang some ideas on.
 
Maybe its just a lack of imaginative acronyms?
 
UK preparing ambitious combat air strategy

The UK Ministry of Defence will publish a new combat air strategy document later this year, which defence secretary Gavin Williamson says will “bring together the best of British engineering, skill and design, and deliver a compelling vision for the future of air power".

France and Germany late last year expressed their willingness to develop a future combat aircraft to follow their Dassault Rafale and Eurofighter programmes. UK involvement in such a scheme remains uncertain, in part due to the effect of its departure from the EU in March 2019.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/uk-preparing-ambitious-combat-air-strategy-446123/
 
http://aviationweek.com/defense/britain-crafting-future-combat-aircraft-strategy

Britain Crafting Future Combat Aircraft Strategy
Feb 21, 2018 Tony Osborne | Aerospace Daily & Defense Report

LONDON—The British government is drawing up a long-awaited future combat aircraft strategy which could outline how Britain will replace the Eurofighter Typhoon.
Details of the Combat Air Strategy document, due to be published this summer, were revealed Feb. 21. Officials say it will examine the operational capabilities needed in the future and whether the skills and resources to deliver them are available within British industry. The work will consider new and emerging technologies as well as export potential, officials say.

Aerospace DAILY reported in January that civil servants were drawing up a draft combat air strategy.

British Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson said the document would result in “bold and ambitious plans” and “bring together the best of British engineering, skill and design, and deliver a compelling vision for the future of air power.”
Britain’s last defense industry strategy document, published in 2005, said the introduction of the Eurofighter and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter meant the UK did not need to build a new fast jet aircraft for more than 30 years because the Eurofighter and F-35 were likely to have long operational lives.

Thirteen years on, it is unclear whether the document will call for Britain to work on a new fighter alone or look for closer European or international cooperation. It could also call for the development of a new training aircraft as a follow-on to the successful Hawk.

The announcement has been widely welcomed by industry. It has been lobbying the government for a decision on a post-Typhoon vision, particularly in light of joint Franco-German fighter plans revealed last summer, which caught Britain largely off guard.

The need for a strategy was further strengthened by BAE Systems’ decision in October 2017 to lay off workers because of a shortage of Typhoon and Hawk orders, although the line was subsequently buoyed by the Typhoon order from Qatar. At the time, BAE’s Chris Boardman, the company’s managing director for military aviation, urged the government to detail a “combat air vision of the future.

“We are not looking for a handout, but a clear view for military aerospace beyond Typhoon,” he added. “It would be good for the country and the defense industry.”

As the UK’s largest defense company, BAE Systems is likely to be the biggest beneficiary of any future British combat aircraft program.

With the Qatar order, Typhoon production is now set to continue until 2024.

“We welcome the government’s commitment to developing the UK’s Combat Air Strategy, which recognizes the central role of the air sector in our nation’s defenses and prosperity,” a company statement said. “We look forward to working closely with the government as we further develop UK’s world-leading combat air capability.”

Paul Everitt, CEO of UK aerospace trade organization ADS, said there is a “vital need” for industry and government to work together to ensure the UK remains a “world-leading military air power and a highly competitive and capable option in the export market. The UK’s world-leading combat air sector welcome today’s announcement and will actively support the strategy’s development through the coming months.”

As well as building the Typhoon and Hawk, BAE has a significant share in the construction and development of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. British engineers also are involved in the development of a future Turkish fighter, the TF-X, as well as ongoing development of a joint Anglo-French unmanned combat air vehicle due to fly in 2025. But the program’s future appears hazy, with the next phase, a potentially costly design and development program, currently subject to delay.
 
Sounds laudable enough but I'm not holding my breath that it will be particularly innovative coming straight off the back of the Defence Modernisation Programme (aka Defence Review).
I suspect FCAS might be toted as a useful money-saving tool by reducing pilot manpower demands and flight training costs.
An all-new fighter or trainer seem unlikely compared to going ahead with FCAS, assuming the French can be brought on board (would they realisticaly pursue Neutron and a manned fighter at the same time?).

It's refreshing to see industrial aspects attached to this, though in reality this is about keeping BAE Systems aviation arm in business beyond 2025. By then they aren't likely to be making anything (supposing a few Hawk buyers can be rustled up).
 
The French are likely to hold on to Rafale for longer than the UK will operate Typhoon (given that Rafale is doing the job of the F35 and Typhoon for the French). They are very enthusiastic about the FCAS UCAV because it allows them to keep the all French Rafale alive and relevant for longer (as well as representing their first genuine LO design).

In the UK we have a tendancy to be less jingoistic about these projects because (save for Taranis), we have been sharing construction of our fighters/fast jets for decades.

I understand that there is a clear distinction between the VLO technology being used in the UK UCAV and French UCAV, but there is little detail beyond what I posted as to whether there are significant differences in the aiframe or operational spec.

I personally don't think we will cooperate with Europe for the Typhoon replacement. We have the F35 to do A2G and I have always said that Japan offers a good synergy with our needs- provided they stick with a domestic design.
 
Ministerial announcement due in April.

Britain moving away from strike and placing emphasis on reconnaissance (because there isn't room for F35 and a UCAV in the future LO budget?)

https://www.defensenews.com/intel-geoint/isr/2018/02/22/france-us-are-negotiating-isr-capability-for-reaper-drones-official-reveals/
 
Yes I posted in haste, so please forgive the reference to an LO budget (although your reply indicates that you took my point).

France needs something to help Rafale, but we have long thought of this type of thing as helping to inform the intelligence picture from deep into enemy territory.
 
JFC Fuller said:
Relevant: Defence HQ is briefing today that the decision on what variant any F-35 order beyond the planned 48 F-35Bs is has still not been made.

All government energies expended on Brexit?
 
It could just be that now the RAF is operating it's own manned LO fighter (with all the 'exciting' new capabilities the F35 apparently brings), it's harder to make the case for funding an unmanned stealthy wingman.
 
JFC Fuller, I wondered if you had a link or could point in the direction of one, for the MoD F35 comment?
 
Dassault are pointing the finger at Brexit as they feel FCAS stalling:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/brexit-throws-anglo-french-fcas-programme-into-doubt-446592/?cmpid=SOC|Twitter|Flightglobal|sf183961242|sf183961242&sfid=701w0000000uP3H#sf183961242

Is the UK starting to see less synergy with the French on this rather than Brexit causing a problem?
 
Perhaps the 'powers that be' have finally caught on to what those who work in the UK's northwest have been saying for quite a while - in that BAE can do the whole job...? One can only hope ;)
 
Nothing is likely to happen from the UK side until the Defence Modernisation Programme and the new Future Combat Aircraft Strategy is completed, so probably not until 2019 at the earliest.
I don't think this has anything to do with Brexit but rather the lack of government willingness to part development cash on a programme neither air force seems to be clamouring for. I guess once we get an industrial and a military strategy in place then thing will move.
I feel this is Dassault trying to shake up both the three governments (Britain, Germany and France) to actually agree to something and fund something rather than just words, whether that's an Anglo-French UCAV or a Franco-German fighter. The former still seems the most likely to go ahead at some point.
 
I agree that it's far easier for a French Defence exec to blame Brexit.

F35 induction was also mentioned in the briefing as well to be fair.

I would love to know how much BAE et al are invested in the idea of working with Dassault.
 
mrmalaya said:
I would love to know how much BAE et al are invested in the idea of working with Dassault.

Dassault has never successfully partnered with anyone before. Difficult to see the causes behind that changing anytime soon
 
http://aviationweek.com/awindefense/britain-takes-new-direction-ucav
 
red admiral said:
mrmalaya said:
I would love to know how much BAE et al are invested in the idea of working with Dassault.

Dassault has never successfully partnered with anyone before. Difficult to see the causes behind that changing anytime soon

Alphajet does not agree... :mad:
 
Dassault merged with bought Breguet in 1971. Jaguar and Alpha Jet may have started under the Breguet banner, but first flight and production were very much a concern for the merged company Dassault-Breguet (since renamed Dassault Aviation).
 
Nope, while the Jaguar was a Breguet design, the TA-501 was a Dassault design, teamed with Dornier.

Wow, the anti - Dassault feelings are quite annoying (to stay polite). Nearly as much as hated as De Gaulle ::)
 
Arjen said:
Dassault merged with bought Breguet in 1971. Jaguar and Alpha Jet may have started under the Breguet banner, but first flight and production were very much a concern for the merged company Dassault-Breguet (since renamed Dassault Aviation).

While Dassault somewhat dropped the Jaguar under a bus for their own F-1, the Alpha Jet did not suffered such fate and was in continuous development until the late 80's.
 
It would make a lot of sense tbh. As we have dicussed earlier, the RAF doesn't need an unmanned F35, but the French do.

Might I ask if there is any more information on this tender you mentioned?
 
Archibald said:
Nope, while the Jaguar was a Breguet design, the TA-501 was a Dassault design, teamed with Dornier.

No, TA501 was developed from Breguet 126 and the Dornier 375 before Dassault and Breguet merged. The design work was pretty much done prior to Dassault joining. On all other projects, Dassault has insisted on total design leadership, regardless of whether it is best placed to do so or not. This isn't hate, simply an observation of Dassault's continued culture of independence which isn't conducive to successful partnering. Reports seem to indicate Airbus is experiencing the same joy in their FR-GER future fighter study e.g.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-germany-defence/airbus-dassault-vie-for-leadership-of-franco-german-fighter-idUSKBN1D31W0
 
Flight have finally reported on the Industry Day on 13th March, which JFC Fuller highlighted above.
The "Team Tempest" formed to submit a bid includes BAE Systems, Leonardo, MBDA and Rolls-Royce. So it involves everyone across the UK industry. The aim seems to be to follow on from Taranis but also as a development alongside the Anglo-French FCAS. I wonder how much of the work done on MAGMA will feed into this?

I still can't help thinking this is just another funding drip feed to keep the industry doing something. How radically different is it likely to be from Taranis or is this just a cut-price FCAS in case the latter programme goes nowhere?

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/team-tempest-pursues-ucas-demonstrator-deal-447301/
 
http://aviationweek.com/combat-aircraft/fighter-jet-will-reinvigorate-stunted-european-defense-industry?utm_rid=CPEN1000000230026&utm_campaign=14674&utm_medium=email&elq2=dfca9c966e4a432c917585957b09888e

Heralding a new era of European multinational defense programs, Airbus and Dassault Aviation are putting aside years of fierce competition to work side by side on the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), while France will take the lead in platform development.

The fighter is the flagship in a wave of new cooperative programs European governments hope to use to strengthen their resolve against a resurgent and increasingly aggressive Russia, as well as to halt the tide of European cash flowing into U.S. coffers for new armaments.
 
bobbymike said:
http://aviationweek.com/combat-aircraft/fighter-jet-will-reinvigorate-stunted-european-defense-industry?utm_rid=CPEN1000000230026&utm_campaign=14674&utm_medium=email&elq2=dfca9c966e4a432c917585957b09888e

Heralding a new era of European multinational defense programs, Airbus and Dassault Aviation are putting aside years of fierce competition to work side by side on the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), while France will take the lead in platform development.

The fighter is the flagship in a wave of new cooperative programs European governments hope to use to strengthen their resolve against a resurgent and increasingly aggressive Russia, as well as to halt the tide of European cash flowing into U.S. coffers for new armaments.

Yes,

But there is a little problem. There are now two Future Combat Air Systems : the (dead ?) programme of the British-French UCAV (That Britain wanted finally to be only UAV) in this topic and the new programme of the French-German manned fighter (and its system of systems), with its own topic in the link.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,29201.135.html
 
Maybe to differentiate between the projects we should identify the new Franco-German fighter under the French acronym SCAF (Système de combat aérien du futur européen)?
 
....and hopefully we will get something more concrete on FCAS in the coming weeks.

We could however be facing the prospect of the programme having run its entire length with virtually no comment on it by the UK team!
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom