Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

[new guy]

Bronk is a big mouthed tit who spreads misinformation like butter on hot crumpets. Totally in the pocket of we Americans and on record as repeatedly recommending Tempest be shit canned in favor of more F-35. Because, obviously, the US can always do it better.

Prime misinformation example is the UK radar that "costs" 55 million each after spreading all the development costs over a small batch vs the 75 million pound F-35 with absolutely no development costs included. Not even the UK's contribution. Plus the hint that the F-35 radar is superior.

Putting aside the committee's lousy choice of witnesses, what strikes me above all else is the total and absolute absence of any facts or data to support the arm waving opinions. Opinions that largely just repeat absurd cliches: Japan can make lots of things at high quality, Italy is good at hardware engineering, only the US & China can make 6th gen aircraft, SA is only about money, Germany doesn't select kit based on capability etc etc.

The last comment about the committee being much better educated is laughable. More imbued with half assed opinions from a few select members of the chattering classes on a break from their taking head media tours.

[mrclark303]

Bronk is a big mouthed tit who spreads misinformation like butter on hot crumpets. Totally in the pocket of we Americans and on record as repeatedly recommending Tempest be shit canned in favor of more F-35. Because, obviously, the US can always do it better.

Prime misinformation example is the UK radar that "costs" 55 million each after spreading all the development costs over a small batch vs the 75 million pound F-35 with absolutely no development costs included. Not even the UK's contribution. Plus the hint that the F-35 radar is superior.

Putting aside the committee's lousy choice of witnesses, what strikes me above all else is the total and absolute absence of any facts or data to support the arm waving opinions. Opinions that largely just repeat absurd cliches: Japan can make lots of things at high quality, Italy is good at hardware engineering, only the US & China can make 6th gen aircraft, SA is only about money, Germany doesn't select kit based on capability etc etc.

The last comment about the committee being much better educated is laughable. More imbued with half assed opinions from a few select members of the chattering classes on a break from their taking head media tours.

Absolutely,
Lots of misinformation and half truths..

Radar 2 is by all accounts and outstanding piece of technology, alas, typical UK f#ck up, it won't be fielded across the fleet, but in only two silver bullet squadrons.

We can assume this sub fleet of 40 tranche 3 airframes will continue to be upgraded and operate alongside the Tempest fleet.

Tranche 2 will slowly wither on the vine, starved of significant upgrades..

The biggest risk to the GCAP programme is the likely Labour government. I think they are unlikely to cancel, but with a raft of public spending commitments, it's the first thing to go....

[new guy]

But a Global Hawk is in no way comparable in size to a 737.

The GH and the Triton both have a span of 39.9m versus c.36m for a Boeing 737 NG or MAX. I doubt he meant anything more specific than that.

It's a quick way to give the committee a reference point for the size of an MQ-4C, rather than an in-depth technical comparison.

He still sounds like a paid LM salesman to me. He knows, or should know, that F35A is not a sovereign capability, has a relatively small and dwindling industrial participation, and decade + long wait for integration of UK weapons. Typhoon developments cost too much because of the disjointed nature of the program - that's exactly what GCAP addresses.

Switzerland's deal for F35 was USD 6.58 billion for 40 so GBP 128 million each at current exchange rates.

I think I've previously described him, on here, as a "shill" for the US defence industry.... and worse. Even his own RUSI colleague somewhat disowns Bronk's views in the second part of the session.

F-35 pricing is about the most fluid concept in military aerospace. Simultaneously cheaper than a Super Hornet yet often quoted in multiples of hundreds of millions of Dollars. Lockheed are specialists in selling half-baked truths to desperate Europeans. Particularly back when they used briefcases of currency.

[Jensy]

GCAP is shaping up to be a far larger aircraft.

It certainly is:

[tomuk]

But a Global Hawk is in no way comparable in size to a 737.

The GH and the Triton both have a span of 39.9m versus c.36m for a Boeing 737 NG or MAX. I doubt he meant anything more specific than that.

It's a quick way to give the committee a reference point for the size of an MQ-4C, rather than an in-depth technical comparison.

Yes but it isn't a true comparison. There are gliders out there with wing spans approaching 30m, but you wouldn't say one is the same size as a 737. He is making an exaggeration support his argument.

[NickC]

Of concern as it seems not is all hunky-dory on the GCAP within the industrial design/build side, would have hoped for a harmonious relationship.

https://breakingdefense.com/2024/03/leo ... ial-plans/

[SD67]

Just flapping his arms in hope of a bigger work share.

One line had me scratching my head:

If participating nations just want a next-gen platform, he said, that “already exists — it is called F-35 and can be modified easily.”

[Jdam]

Hey if 11 years to integrate Meteor on the F-35 is not a prime example of it being "easily modifiable" then I guess there is no pleasing some people [/sarcasm]

[Markam]

Not directly related, but the defence ministers of both France and Germany claim to have made a breakthrough with the tank programme and FCAS was also mentioned as making "good progress". Quite the contrast to rumours late last year that Germany was about to quit the programme and comments by Airbus that the programme should be merged with GCAP.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 024-03-22/

[Jdam]

As long as Project Tempest was a thing France and Germany was never going to let FCAS fail.

Hopefully having both will keep both sides on their toes.

[SD67]

Just flapping his arms in hope of a bigger work share.

One line had me scratching my head:

If participating nations just want a next-gen platform, he said, that “already exists — it is called F-35 and can be modified easily.”

I kind of agree. Sounds like lastminute workshare negotiations, let's face it Italy is not the driver of this project

[Little J]

Just flapping his arms in hope of a bigger work share.

One line had me scratching my head:

If participating nations just want a next-gen platform, he said, that “already exists — it is called F-35 and can be modified easily.”

Italy has a final assembly line doesn't it? Can't think why he'd plug the F-35

[mrclark303]

Not directly related, but the defence ministers of both France and Germany claim to have made a breakthrough with the tank programme and FCAS was also mentioned as making "good progress". Quite the contrast to rumours late last year that Germany was about to quit the programme and comments by Airbus that the programme should be merged with GCAP.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 024-03-22/

You can't possibly merge FCAS with GCAP, they don't have enough common ground.

FCAS will be a compromised design because of French insistence of carrier capability. That means a limit in size and a structural weight penalty.

GCAP will be considerably bigger, more in the F22 / J20 size class.

[Jensy]

Just flapping his arms in hope of a bigger work share.

One line had me scratching my head:

If participating nations just want a next-gen platform, he said, that “already exists — it is called F-35 and can be modified easily.”

Was always going to be inevitable on the European side of GCAP. We don't have the defensive requirements of Japan, or the maturity to sharpen our minds and leave the lobbying out of the public realm.

As for the "modified easily", I think the Canadians dropped their attempt to integrate the B/C's probe in 2012. Would be curious what costs the drag chute pod is adding.

[Jake1992]

Not directly related, but the defence ministers of both France and Germany claim to have made a breakthrough with the tank programme and FCAS was also mentioned as making "good progress". Quite the contrast to rumours late last year that Germany was about to quit the programme and comments by Airbus that the programme should be merged with GCAP.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 024-03-22/

You can't possibly merge FCAS with GCAP, they don't have enough common ground.

FCAS will be a compromised design because of French insistence of carrier capability. That means a limit in size and a structural weight penalty.

GCAP will be considerably bigger, more in the F22 / J20 size class.

Now I’m no advocate for these programs to merger far from it I want us to stay as far away from the euro potential mess as possible.

With that in mind though would FCAS be that far off size wise ? We say it’ll have to be smaller for French carrier ops, now that could be true if being designed for the smaller CdG but not so much so if it’s for the future 75k ton 300m+ replacement.

I had a little look at the dimensions of the F22 ( which we think GCAP will be close to ) and carrier aircraft

F22 -
Length - 19m
Wing span - 13.5m
Max TOW - 38k kg

F35 -
Length - 17m
Wing span - 13m
Max TOW - 29k kg

F14 -
Length - 19m
Wing span - 11.5m ( 19m open )
Max TOW - 34k kg

We could see FCAS being more Tomcat size in which case it’s not hugely off the F22 or what we expect GCAP to be, and this gets me thinking with how long the QEs are expected to be in service and how this could see changes to CATOBAR at some point could we see down the line a carrier variant of GCAP like we have in the F35 family ?

[jedibeeftrix]

We could see FCAS being more Tomcat size in which case it’s not hugely off the F22 or what we expect GCAP to be, and this gets me thinking with how long the QEs are expected to be in service and how this could see changes to CATOBAR at some point could we see down the line a carrier variant of GCAP like we have in the F35 family ?

i take the point, but it isn't only the french concerned about size - in their case for carrier operations - the germans have always seemed to fetishize small aircraft.
allegedly a problem through both the tornado and typhoon programmes - as other partners pushed for larger airframe against german resistance...

[SW1]

The question that people are really asking is do you want the political construct that goes with such a joint program.

It really has little to do with the airframe requirement that’s just a smokescreen.

[serge750]

Well with project Arkroyal for the QEC class carriers - i would love to see a CATOBAR GCAP ! but with money so tight, i cant really see it unless there is a major advantage over the F35 & lots more money invested in defence ! but in the 2040's when they start plannig for carrier replacement for the F35B.....might be easier to buy the FCAS or US F/A-XX dependent on how many are needed if for example 50% are unmamaned aircraft in the carrier airwing ????

[jedibeeftrix]

Well with project Arkroyal for the QEC class carriers - i would love to see a CATOBAR GCAP ! but with money so tight, i cant really see it unless there is a major advantage over the F35 & lots more money invested in defence ! but in the 2040's when they start plannig for carrier replacement for the F35B.....might be easier to buy the FCAS or US F/A-XX dependent on how many are needed if for example 50% are unmamaned aircraft in the carrier airwing ????

The main point here being that if the UK ( under a Labour administration) insisted on joining up with France and Germany, GCAP would simply fail. I'll guarantee Japan would leave and the UK and Italy would be faced with being junior partners in the Euro programme or simply buying F35.

[Jake1992]

The question that people are really asking is do you want the political construct that goes with such a joint program.

It really has little to do with the airframe requirement that’s just a smokescreen.

Oh I completely agree and would want us to avoid a program merger or dropping of GCAP to join FCAS like the plague.

Well with project Arkroyal for the QEC class carriers - i would love to see a CATOBAR GCAP ! but with money so tight, i cant really see it unless there is a major advantage over the F35 & lots more money invested in defence ! but in the 2040's when they start plannig for carrier replacement for the F35B.....might be easier to buy the FCAS or US F/A-XX dependent on how many are needed if for example 50% are unmamaned aircraft in the carrier airwing ????

My thinking behind this trail of thought was that by the 2040s I can honestly see Japan building 2 CATOBAR carriers with the Izumo class taking over from the older Hygu class. With this in mind and the current direction of the QEs it made me think could we see a Tomcat sized carrier variant of GCAP come about for both nations.

[quote=serge750 post_id=165716 time=<a href="tel:1711282024">1711282024</a> user_id=52]
Well with project Arkroyal for the QEC class carriers - i would love to see a CATOBAR GCAP ! but with money so tight, i cant really see it unless there is a major advantage over the F35 & lots more money invested in defence ! but in the 2040's when they start plannig for carrier replacement for the F35B.....might be easier to buy the FCAS or US F/A-XX dependent on how many are needed if for example 50% are unmamaned aircraft in the carrier airwing ????

The main point here being that if the UK ( under a Labour administration) insisted on joining up with France and Germany, GCAP would simply fail. I'll guarantee Japan would leave and the UK and Italy would be faced with being junior partners in the Euro programme or simply buying F35.
[/quote]

This is my worry too, with how Starmer been over the whole EU since 2016 will he use projects like this to pull the UK closer under the guise of 1 project is better than 2 for Europe.
If he foolishly does then it’ll destroy any future projects with Japan and leave us as a 2nd fiddle to France and Germany

[jedibeeftrix]

We could see FCAS being more Tomcat size in which case it’s not hugely off the F22 or what we expect GCAP to be, and this gets me thinking with how long the QEs are expected to be in service and how this could see changes to CATOBAR at some point could we see down the line a carrier variant of GCAP like we have in the F35 family ?

i take the point, but it isn't only the french concerned about size - in their case for carrier operations - the germans have always seemed to fetishize small aircraft.
allegedly a problem through both the tornado and typhoon programmes - as other partners pushed for larger airframe against german resistance...

Spot on, the Germans don't have a requirement for range and carrying capability and will always push the dimensions as small as possible.

They will be happy with something Thypoon sized.

[new guy]

The question that people are really asking is do you want the political construct that goes with such a joint program.

It really has little to do with the airframe requirement that’s just a smokescreen.

A useful smokescreen in my opinion.

Making GCAP carrier capable is very alluring, were it not for us struggling to fulfill a 20 year plan for a far more modest capability from the QEC class as built.

I'm yet to be convinced by Project Ark Royal (if it ever goes forward). Though it would be very historically typical of us to spend a fortune on upgrading carriers and failing to get value out it.

This is my worry too, with how Starmer been over the whole EU since 2016 will he use projects like this to pull the UK closer under the guise of 1 project is better than 2 for Europe.
If he foolishly does then it’ll destroy any future projects with Japan and leave us as a 2nd fiddle to France and Germany

I think Labour's union connections, and the value of thousands of highly skilled jobs, will counteract any urges towards merging in the name of European unity. Time is also running out for that every time the election slips towards 2025.

As an aside, I've been indulging my interests in TSR.2 and P.1154 recently, and keep being amused that in some ways we could potentially end up with a combat air fleet along similar lines. A multirole STOVL single engined, medium jet and a large, long range platform scaled for the Indo-Pacific.

P.1154 itself also has many valuable lessons about trying to integrate an RAF specified platform with an aircraft carrier... Only to then go and buy a UK modified American jet,

[mrclark303]

The question that people are really asking is do you want the political construct that goes with such a joint program.

It really has little to do with the airframe requirement that’s just a smokescreen.

A useful smokescreen in my opinion.

Making GCAP carrier capable is very alluring, were it not for us struggling to fulfill a 20 year plan for a far more modest capability from the QEC class as built.

I'm yet to be convinced by Project Ark Royal (if it ever goes forward). Though it would be very historically typical of us to spend a fortune on upgrading carriers and failing to get value out it.

This is my worry too, with how Starmer been over the whole EU since 2016 will he use projects like this to pull the UK closer under the guise of 1 project is better than 2 for Europe.
If he foolishly does then it’ll destroy any future projects with Japan and leave us as a 2nd fiddle to France and Germany

I think Labour's union connections, and the value of thousands of highly skilled jobs, will counteract any urges towards merging in the name of European unity. Time is also running out for that every time the election slips towards 2025.

As an aside, I've been indulging my interests in TSR.2 and P.1154 recently, and keep being amused that in some ways we could potentially end up with a combat air fleet along similar lines. A multirole STOVL single engined, medium jet and a large, long range platform scaled for the Indo-Pacific.

P.1154 itself also has many valuable lessons about trying to integrate an RAF specified platform with an aircraft carrier... Only to then go and buy a UK modified American jet,

"A multirole STOVL single engined, medium jet and a large, long range platform scaled for the Indo-Pacific."

I share your interests in both TSR2 ( having collected just about everything ever written on the subject over the last 30 years) and also P1154, the same thoughts have crossed my mind too.

F35B is effectively a modern take on P1154 the Admiralty wanted 60 years ago.

GCAP shares a lot of the same design goals TSR2 was specifically developed for and I suspect won't be a great deal smaller than that beautiful aircraft!

[Jensy]

I share your interests in both TSR2 ( having collected just about everything ever written on the subject over the last 30 years) and also P1154, the same thoughts have crossed my mind too.

F35B is effectively a modern take on P1154 the Admiralty wanted 60 years ago.

GCAP shares a lot of the same design goals TSR2 was specifically developed for and I suspect won't be a great deal smaller than that beautiful aircraft!

Agree on every point.... But I've never found TSR-2 aesthetically pleasing! Fine piece of engineering that it was.

Incidentally the RAeS had a fantastic lecture on the topic about eight months ago: https://www.youtube.com/@Aerosociety/videos

If GCAP ends up north of 40,000 kg MTOW we'll definitely be happiest not trying to make it carrier capable!

[tomuk]

I share your interests in both TSR2 ( having collected just about everything ever written on the subject over the last 30 years) and also P1154, the same thoughts have crossed my mind too.

F35B is effectively a modern take on P1154 the Admiralty wanted 60 years ago.

GCAP shares a lot of the same design goals TSR2 was specifically developed for and I suspect won't be a great deal smaller than that beautiful aircraft!

Agree on every point.... But I've never found TSR-2 aesthetically pleasing! Fine piece of engineering that it was.

Yes TSR2 was a bit of an odd old bird very Captain Scarlett or UFO.