The Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) is a new partnership and ambitious endeavour between the UK, Japan and Italy to deliver the next generation of combat air fighter jets.

Due to take to the skies by 2035, the Ministry of Defence say that the ambition is for this to be a next-generation jet enhanced by a network of capabilities such as uncrewed aircraft, advanced sensors, cutting-edge weapons and innovative data systems.

Rishi Sunak, UK Prime Minister:

“The security of the United Kingdom, both today and for future generations, will always be of paramount importance to this Government. That’s why we need to stay at the cutting-edge of advancements in defence technology – outpacing and out-manoeuvring those who seek to do us harm. The international partnership we have announced today with Italy and Japan aims to do just that, underlining that the security of the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific regions are indivisible. The next-generation of combat aircraft we design will protect us and our allies around the world by harnessing the strength of our world-beating defence industry – creating jobs while saving lives.”

Charles Woodburn, Chief Executive, BAE System:

“The launch of the Global Combat Air Programme firmly positions the UK, alongside Japan and Italy, as leaders in the design, development and production of next generation combat air capability. With our UK industry partners, we look forward to strengthening our ties with Japanese and Italian industries as we work together to deliver this programme of huge importance to our global defence and security. The agreement with Japan and Italy is fundamental to meeting the goals set out in the UK Combat Air Strategy and is set to create and sustain thousands of high value jobs and benefit hundreds of companies across the UK, contributing to long-term economic prosperity and safeguarding sovereign combat air capability for generations to come.”

The UK, Italy and Japan will now work to establish the core platform concept and set up the structures needed to deliver this massive defence project, ready to launch the development phase in 2025.

Ahead of the development phase, partners will also agree the cost-sharing arrangements based on a joint assessment of costs and national budgets. Alongside the development of the core future combat aircraft with Italy and Japan, the UK say it will assess needs on any additional capabilities, for example weapons and Uncrewed Air Vehicles.

According to a statement from the Ministry of Defence:

“By combining forces with Italy and Japan on the next phase of the programme, the UK will utilise their expertise, share costs and ensure the RAF remains interoperable with our closest partners. The project is expected to create high-skilled jobs in all three countries, strengthening our industrial base and driving innovation with benefits beyond pure military use. It is anticipated that more likeminded countries may buy into GCAP in due course or collaborate on wider capabilities – boosting UK exports. The combat aircraft developed through GCAP is also expected to be compatible with other NATO partners’ fighter jets.

The UK, Italy and Japan will now work intensively to establish the core platform concept and set up the structures needed to deliver this massive defence project, ready to launch the development phase in 2025. Ahead of the development phase, partners will also agree the cost-sharing arrangements based on a joint assessment of costs and national budgets. Alongside the development of the core future combat aircraft with Italy and Japan, the UK will assess our needs on any additional capabilities, for example weapons and Uncrewed Air Vehicles.”

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said:

“This international partnership with Italy and Japan to create and design the next-generation of Combat Aircraft, represents the best collaboration of cutting edge defence technology and expertise shared across our nations, providing highly skilled jobs across the sector and long-term security for Britain and our allies.”

A flying demonstrator aircraft will be unveiled within the next five years, according to previous announcements.

British ‘Tempest’ demonstrator jet to fly within five years

Avatar photo
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. He also previously worked for the NHS. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

253 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Terence Patrick Hewett
Terence Patrick Hewett
11 months ago

Getting Japan on board is a significant achievement for Tempest. It will greatly increase the potential production run and open up markets to which we have had limited access. Well done all round.

Jim
Jim
11 months ago

I’m really hoping this does not become a Eurofighter style boondoggle on the defence budget. Lots of talk about agile design and blah blah blah which is exactly what they said about F35. If you can’t design a single seat jet fighter for £10 billion then it’s time for the industry to disband. I just pray we stick with the name Tempest, it’s too good to give up. My understanding from reading the docs though is the both historic projects Tempest and F-X will cease to exist. Perhaps we should call it Tempest F-X which saves confusion over FCAS being… Read more »

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Name is being kept; Tempest is what the RAF variant will be called while the program will be called Global Combat Air. Japanese will likely continue to call theirs F-X and then F-3 when in service.

gh
gh
11 months ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

yh

Stu
Stu
11 months ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

Japan could go for a similarly meteorologically inspired name … perhaps ‘divine wind’ or something?

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

We could always call it Zero a lot of the impetus to Japan was that they wanted to restore the capability to create such a legendary fighter. Likelihood to me is that the UK/Italy version may have a different name to the Japanese version especially if they vary somewhat. In which case Tempest might be used in the end though I guess if the previous Hawker inspired naming routine were followed then Fury would be the obvious choice after Hurricane, Tornado, Typhoon and Tempest. There must be a Japanese description of ‘wind’ that would be translatable surely as that’s understandably… Read more »

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

The Eurofighter problem was Germany.

James
James
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

Any project that involves the French to start with is always going to turn into a complete disaster until they leave.

Germany did its usual negotiating trick of saying we will order thousands of planes in exchange for 99% of the production to happen in Germany then once having the workshare agreement in writing reduced its order to a token one and still wanted all the production.

Geoffi
Geoffi
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

I read somewhere its going to be called Jaguar ?

Steve
Steve
11 months ago

Getting Japan onboard is huge, it significantly increases the chance that it will go ahead. I don’t think the UK/Italy could really have afforded to finalise the project.

Sean
Sean
11 months ago

NGAD is likely to be like the F22, only for the US only and not for export. So it makes absolute sense for other democracies to combine efforts, technologies and funding in a joint effort, such as GCAP. A little disappointing that Sweden isn’t fully involved, presumably they are more focussed on protecting their domestic industry.

Last edited 11 months ago by Sean
Jon
Jon
11 months ago
Reply to  Sean

I think Sweden has always been more interested in the drone/weapon add-ons than the core aircraft. The announcement does seem to talk about those separately.

Andrew Deacon
Andrew Deacon
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

Sweden is only just going into production with Grippen E so perhaps not surprising, though they will need to replace around 40 GrippenC/D in late 2030’s, I think they were always more interested in the drone aspects of tempest and any tech they could incorporate into grippen e at later date

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Deacon

I agree plus their capabilities in digital twinning which you can guarantee will be part of the programme if informally. And that I think will for the foreseeable their interests. The core aircraft isn’t going to match or pay strong adherence to their core requirements especially now Japan is onboard, where new strategic expediency is almost at opposite ends to those of Sweden whereas we and Italy are more in the middle between them. I suspect Sweden will cooperate on aspects to suit as you state as and where it buys into their needs but not commit at the very… Read more »

Crabfat
Crabfat
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

India’s currently a bit too close to Russia, for my money…

I’d be worried about security of classified information.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
11 months ago
Reply to  Crabfat

Agree the Indians are more likely to get Sukhoi SU32-35 series aircraft on the back of purchasing vast quantities of cheap Russian oil and gas. I wouldn’t trust any classified sensitive military technology to India, Serbia, Hungary, France or Germany.

James
James
11 months ago
Reply to  Crabfat

India wouldnt buy it, they typically only purchase big ticket items that they can then build in India itself. No chance the production of this would be outsourced to India.

John
John
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Projects like this that India have been involved in have always been a nightmare. They’ve caused many problems in the Russian projects they were a part of only to not buy the units they had committed to.

To a lesser degree, look at the back and forth saga they did with the Rafale.

Also, as crabfat said, I don’t trust them with anything more than public information.

Better off without them if you ask me.

Last edited 11 months ago by John
Glass Half Full
Glass Half Full
11 months ago
Reply to  Sean

The floated cost estimates by US Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall are for “multiple 100’s of $M’s” per NGAD. He added in a statement before the House Armed Services Committee, “this is a number that’s going to get your attention, it’s going to be an expensive airplane.” So even if NGAD isn’t restricted to US-only use, the cost is likely to be much higher than the strongly stated affordability goals/requirements stressed by both BAES and the RAF back in 2018 at the public launch of the Tempest program. Sweden isn’t really a surprise to me. I’d always expected them to… Read more »

George Parker
George Parker
11 months ago

Nice to see this progressing, even if 2035 seems a long time to wait. Good news that the technically advanced Japanese are even more involved. It’s just a shame we cannot include the Chinese people exiled on Taiwan too. They live under a permanent threat from the evil ChiComs and need help.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
11 months ago
Reply to  George Parker

Just watch the French try and derail this with a hissy fit.

They will recruit, the ever willing and ever useless, Von Lyeren to declare that EU competency (read French) is required in these projects.

The Italians are pretty fed up with the French games over Horizon and other projects never mind Typhoon and are equally not very happy about how the F35 project went.

Jon
Jon
11 months ago

Even the USN must be unhappy with the USAF’s dominance of F-35 as they seem to be running a rival NGAD programme of their own.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

Oh yes they absolutely were/are, livid over the F-22 project which pretty much ignored their needs for the benefit of the USAF and why they ended up with the compromise F-18 Super Hornet rather than a completely updated F-14 or a new aircraft of their own and then at the next opportunity get a somewhat late and to their eyes compromised F-35. They were offered a ‘strike’ version of the F-22 but it would have, apart from its stealth been a joke of an aircraft for their needs and as we now know would have been a mechanical and cost… Read more »

johnboy
johnboy
11 months ago

You cannot be serious. Why do people think this of the French, they usually go there own way. I reckon it is all down to the Daily Mail and the Sun. They must have something to blame for every thing. You are being lied to by a non dom and a Right Australian/American.

David Flandry
David Flandry
11 months ago

😉😂

George Parker
George Parker
11 months ago

Maybe it is some kind of inbuilt genetic memory but I can’t bring myself to trust the French. Same with the Germans post reunification. As for the undemocratic, unaudited EU, enough said. Common Market my ..se! I’m naturally inclined to drift towards the Anglosphere for collaborative projects but other than the US, they do not have advanced aerospace industries. The Americans are just too big and can dominate literally everything. See F35. Hence the Japanese and Italians despite the latter being EU, seem to be a good choice. South Korean aerospace is advancing in leaps and bounds too. See the… Read more »

Jim
Jim
11 months ago
Reply to  George Parker

The UK is basically the only country on the planet that does joint aircraft development with anyone. The partners change but it’s always the UK in there. We have joint developed aircraft with the USA, France, Italy,Spain,Germany and Sweden. Japan is just the latest in a long line. I still think ultimately the Franco German FCAS will fail. France will end up with an upgraded Rafal and Germany and Spain F35.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Surely all those other Countries you mention disprove the point that no one else collaborates. Japan has collaborated with the US and South Korea presently with Indonesia, Pakistan with China and India has with Russia. France would have done before if it had been able to get its way.

Sean
Sean
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

On form, the French will take over FCAS and it’ll just be whatever Dassault want to build. The Germans and Spanish will end up either buying Dassault for ‘EU solidarity’ or buying Tempest if they want the best aircraft.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  George Parker

I tend to agree the Italians of course were not allowed in to the Franco-German club because they were not cooperating with French EU intensions it’s a form of punishment that sadly Germany goes a long with through a sense of historical guilt no doubt, thus exercising its political power through the economy and vis France. We know it’s a stitch up but the new similar attempts against Poland not toeing the French line may seriously help us. France Poland were natural allies once but now anything but. Poland is intent on following its own path and especially so in… Read more »

George Parker
George Parker
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Italy, Japan, Poland and South Korea. Sounds good to me. If I had my way, I’d add Israel to that list too. They are already up there with the best when it comes to drone technology. A sixth Gen fighter would be just what they need.

It’s a pity Hungry is ever so slightly pro-Putin.

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago
Reply to  George Parker

Yes that would have been a good group.

DJ
DJ
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

Japan & S. Korea don’t get on. To the point I don’t think it would work. Poland is not renowned for high end aircraft & related industries. They are much more a land power (army centric). Israel will limit export options. Sweden, to my mind, is the one they need to keep in the group, even if it’s on the sideline. They understand digital (I gather, the source of Boeing’s new found expertise) & high performance fighter jets. They may not end up with Tempest & instead utilise what they learn on their own lightweight fighter, but they know what… Read more »

Jon
Jon
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

I’m not sure I’d trust Japan and South Korea to play nice together, sharing toys and all that.

George Parker
George Parker
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

Sometimes former enemies work together against a common foe.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago
Reply to  George Parker

Israel will probably await NGAD. Really can’t get better terms than free equipment. 😳🙄

George Parker
George Parker
11 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Can they depend on a future woke propalistian demon-rat administration, giving them F22 level advanced technology?

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago
Reply to  George Parker

There are very few certainties left in American politics, but one candidate would be the pro-Israeli lobby. Any outcome is conceptually possible, but not necessarily an odds-on proposition.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Exactly, the Poles are alarmed by Russia to the east, and only somewhat less distrustful of the French and Germans to their west. The Poles believe the UK is a natural counterweight to all of the above, even though no longer part of EU. There is an entire group of eastern European countries that have a natural affinity w/ the Poles and wish to form a common cause for representation w/in EU and also have largely similar views of a potential UK economic/political/security role. Unfortunately, all of these countries have limited GDPs and populations, and no current cutting edge aircraft… Read more »

Terence Patrick Hewett
Terence Patrick Hewett
11 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Yes: I see Visegrad and the Baltic States reverting to some sort of counterbalance to the Franco/German power bloc, once they get richer and more developed. I see power in Europe pivoting eastwards: very 19th century.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Agree Tempest will likely gain sales in Poland. Small numbers potentially for Baltic States. Norway. Canada. Core sales in Italy Japan and UK. I could also see sales to Australia and therefore the aircraft could become the defacto 6th gen jet of choice for the democratic free countries in the world. They need to deliver this aircraft at a price point below F35 whilst surpassing significantly F35s performance and reducing the cost per hour of flight time too.

Steve
Steve
11 months ago
Reply to  George Parker

Undemocratic EU? It’s fully democratic, we as a nation just didn’t really engage with the votes for the MEPs. In Europe people actually vote for the MEPs. A bit like local elections in the UK, most of the country doesn’t care.

Jon
Jon
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve

Votes for MEPs, yes. MEPs actually running the EU, no. You have to be able to vote for the decision makers for it to be even a species of democratic. Fully democratic would mean everyone votes for the individual policies and laws. No country does that (that I’m aware of). Referenda have their own issues. MEPs have more power than they used to, but the EU still runs a democratic deficit.

Steve
Steve
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

All EU laws are voted in by the individual countries. Yes there are loads of civil servants but that’s the same for all nations. So much disinformation has been spread about the EU.

George Parker
George Parker
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

So true. The very top echelons are unelected by MEPs.

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve

We in Portugal don’t votes for MEP’s we vote for their parties…

Steve
Steve
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

That’s still democratic, very similar to the US style. In England we never really bothered with the votes. No idea on turnouts but would have been low.

ChrisLondon
ChrisLondon
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve

You will find the posters here are dominated by the right wing loony fringe, and that is speaking as someone right of centre myself. Loads of leavers still trying to pretend the referendum was valid on democratic grounds
What matters is that if we are not already back in the EU by the time Tempest is delivered we will be in the process of rejoining. I am 61 and expect us to make our first attempt to get back in before I retire.

Chris
Chris
11 months ago
Reply to  ChrisLondon

How was the referendum not valid on democratic grounds?

Jim
Jim
11 months ago

Would be great if we could pull Poland in, having Italy and Poland onside would really f**k up the commission. We would even be eligible for EU development funds 😀

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

I think whatever is left of Ukraine my be very pro-UK and they seem quite innovative.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
11 months ago

Yes but they will be destitute. The war’s cost has been immense. Rebuilding Ukraine will cost probably a trillion pounds. They aren’t going to be buying a 6th gen fighter any time soon

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
11 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

True. All I am trying to see is that in the new world post-Ukraine war, the UK may find good relations in former Soviet-Bloc countries: Poland, Estonia, and Ukraine are particularly pro-British and their people highly innovative.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

As I say above Poland is well worth courting I reckon at whatever level they could be an important market for this come the thirties and on the face of it this consortium has distinct advantages over either the Franco German or (a little less so) the US efforts as Poland wants relationship reliability, preferably some technological involvement and independence from influence all that we can offer more than the others. And over the next decade what Poland does others in its region and maybe even beyond will often follow.

DJ
DJ
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Courting for sales – sure. Courting for participation – not so sure. It’s not an area they excel at.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

🤣😂😁, EU hoisted w/ own petard!

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago
Reply to  George Parker

👍👍

NorthernAlly
NorthernAlly
11 months ago

Bet the Americans are pissed as I’ve tried to stop Japan developing its own fighter for decades.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
11 months ago
Reply to  NorthernAlly

If you will load all your tech into a ludicrously expensive F22 and then refuse to export it what do you expect.

Something better is needed than F35 for next gen air superiority.

The F35 project turned into a nightmare of complexity with compromises and nobody wants to repeat that.

Noth
Noth
11 months ago

F-22 was the same price as Typhoon back in 2006. For much much more capacity. Riddle me that?

Andrew Deacon
Andrew Deacon
11 months ago
Reply to  Noth

And yet the richest country in the world could only afford 190 odd , and only 120 odd combat capable , always look beyond the advertised sticker price

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
11 months ago
Reply to  Noth

F22 was IRL much much more expensive.

The only way you get to that number is by the Typhoon including the usual costs that MOD add to the bare purchase price.

No doubt F22 is stealthily more than a Typhoon: never suggested otherwise. Electronically F22 was more than a Typhoon but I would not be so sure once Radar2 is in Typhoon.

Jim
Jim
11 months ago

Typhoon also had more sensors, PIRATE IRST and also limited sensor fusion with Striker 2 and off bore sighting. Typhoon comes with better self protection system in the form of Pratorian as well. The F22 certainly started off as the best aircraft however due to its stealth nature it’s almost impossible to upgrade. Many of it’s electronics were outdated at the start and are very out of date now which is why the USAF a will soon be junking it. Sure there is an upgrade program now but we will see how that progresses or if it gets cancelled for… Read more »

Netking
Netking
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

I think we all know why the F-22, B-2 and the Seawolf class subs ended up being so expensive. The primary reason is the enemy they were designed to fight (Soviet Union) disappeared which created a situation where the production run was cut well short of what was planned and effectively put each program into a death spiral. Bearing in mind that these weapons were designed in the 70’s and 80’s and even decades later are arguable still unmatched speaks volumes about how advanced they were/are. Note also that the USAF recently contracted LM a $10 billion dollar contract to… Read more »

Last edited 11 months ago by Netking
Sean
Sean
11 months ago
Reply to  Netking

Spot on 👍🏻

With the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, the US went from facing a military to a lone superpower, with the then collapse of the USSR, they ended up facing a much weaker impoverished nation. Ukraine is currently showing us it was even weaker than we ever imagined.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago
Reply to  Netking

Agree w/ your assessment; w/ one slight caveat. USAF was directed to initiate contract by it’s paymaster (aka US Congress). USAF saluted smartly and initiated modernization. USAF’s original plan was the gradual retirement of the fleet. There is a precedent; we still have A-10 in the inventory, approximately one generation after the originally proposed retirement. Three guesses who dictated that. 🤔

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Spot on Jim the previous 4 generations never existed till LM retrospectively categorised them in that pr Campaign to fool the technologically challenged ie politicians and money men and enthuse the voting public. The relative costs per aircraft of any modern jet is almost impossible to determine and depends on the contract and what it covers. On paper Typhoon is the most expensive of current fighters but it’s all based on or should be through life costs. The French are notorious at pushing cocos for Rafale down the line so cheaper initially but more expensive as service life progresses but… Read more »

Rudeboy
Rudeboy
11 months ago

Typhoon avionics are more advanced than F-22. The HMI and HMS are far superior. EW systems are different but Typhoon has some advantages there. Radar on Typhoon when it gets the upgrade will be massively more advanced, but Captor-M is still a decent set.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago
Reply to  Rudeboy

Typhoon avionics are currently more advanced than F-22. Willing to wager that status will not remain after planned investment. Practically guaranteed. No judgement re whether it is the best investment of Uncle Sugar’s gold.

Rudeboy
Rudeboy
11 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

I don’t think it will. The F-22’s upgrades are fairly minor compared to the ones Typhoon is getting. And thats not because it doesn’t need it already. No advanced helmet for F-22 planned, meanwhile Typhoon gets Striker 2, F-22 fleet might get some pods with IRST which Typhoon has integrated since the outset, add in the DASS and new radar upgrades that Typhoon is getting and it won’t really be close. The Tranche 3 Typhoon will also get the new Wide Area Display which makes the F-22’s cockpit look prehistoric in comparison. US could upgrade F-22 and keep it competitive… Read more »

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago
Reply to  Rudeboy

The $10B may only be a down payment on F-22 upgrades, if Congress remains unchecked. Again, USAF planned a graceful retirement, but was countermanded. Observers often comment that it is an interesting way to run a railroad. 😳

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Your surmise that upgraded F-22 is the Congressionally mandated fallback sol’n, if NGAD derails, as well as serving as an interim testbed, is probably not far from the mark. Oh well, have to spend $700+B, in some fashion…😳

Netking
Netking
11 months ago
Reply to  Rudeboy

 The F-22’s upgrades are fairly minor compared to the ones Typhoon is getting.”

Really hard to say at this point since very little of what will be upgraded on the f-22 has not been disclosed.

“add in the DASS and new radar upgrades that Typhoon is getting and it won’t really be close.”

I would wait until they have something resembling a production model before being so sure of how good it really is.

Rfn_Weston
Rfn_Weston
11 months ago
Reply to  Noth

F-22 is around $85,000 per hour to fly. As opposed to a best estimate of $18,000 for Typhoon.

2006 is along time ago now… and Typhoon is a very different animal. With very different teeth.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Rfn_Weston

Spot on. Common sense tells you a per unit price (always nebulous at best) in 2006 gives you no serious estimate of the lifetime costs of a fighter jet unless you leave both on the ground unused. I was shocked actually that the B-2 has pretty much turned out the same way as Raptor, unaffordable, horrendously expensive to operate or maintain and out of 19 remaining of a predictably cut short order, little is known about their ability to actually operate, beyond 8 crawling along a runway for a photoshoot. Pointless being fantastic on paper stats if you can only… Read more »

Netking
Netking
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

“Pointless being fantastic on paper stats if you can only rarely exploit them” Following that logic, most of the most advanced strategic systems are rubbish as well. In terms of it’s ability to operate you are right that little is known as being a strategic asset, what it does and how it goes about it is a closely guarded secret. The little we do know is that it flew 6000 miles from the continental US to drop bombs on Syria back in 2017. Based on open source estimates, it’s the most stealthy of all the stealth platforms. You are right… Read more »

Klonkie
Klonkie
11 months ago
Reply to  Netking

Great commentary Netking- couldn’t agree more.

James
James
11 months ago
Reply to  Noth

Clever US justification, was probably the price of the parts excluding construction, software installation, delivery, tax, paint protection and profit for the manufacturer.

The numbers can be messed around with no end especially on such projects.

John Clark
John Clark
11 months ago

An absolutely moot point there Supportive bloke… The F35 in particular is a shining example of how not to organise a complex military programme. As the major players in Tempest, Japan and the UK, have the basically the same requirements and both have complimentary high technology abilities, this should all dove tail together nicely. A number of caveats…. Uncle Sam will be pissed, no doubt about it, as the project has now reached a pivotal point and will rapidly move to eliminate Italy from Tempest, with a wonderful deal on future F35 orders and probably workshare. I don’t think that’s… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
11 months ago
Reply to  John Clark

Very well put.

The issue, as we all know, with F35 is that it is such a design compromise. It isn’t really what RAF wants for air superiority as a Typhoon successor.

Then there is the issue of ITAR and technology transfer coupled with the glacial pace of UK weapons integration.

Failing to proceed with Tempest kills the indigenous UK fast jet design capability.

And I totally agree that the F35 project was a shining example of how not to do it!

John Clark
John Clark
11 months ago

Absolutely SB,

Not what the RAF would ideally like, but that old adage comes to mind.

All new military aircraft have four forces acting against them.

“Thrust, Drag, Lift and the most powerful of all politics.”

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago
Reply to  John Clark

What they could feasibly offer to Italy? they already have the only F-35 assembly outside US (the Japanese one is a smaller copy and only for themselves) also the only Upgrading and Repair Center. They also build a part of wing.

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
11 months ago

Hi SB, To be fair they said that about Typhoon as well (I did a little bit of work on Typhoon back in the day – not that I am claiming any kind of indepth insights). I just hope there is still enough corporate memory within the MoD / RAF to avoid over complicated solutions and unnecessary systems integration. Apparently, there were things on the Typhoon that were intergrated but turned out not to be worth the effort or cost (the inference being that in some case is might even have had a small negative impact..!). Sometimes less really can… Read more »

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
11 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Over complicated cure-all software is quite the curse.

It makes things very hard to debug and as you say pointless integrations have issues of their own.

Clear basic logic with sensor sharing is the way to go with fast development and avoiding bloatware problems.

Network layering offers part of the solution so there is no need to integrate some things all the way they can just sit on different layers.

NorthernAlly
NorthernAlly
11 months ago

This is why I hope they focus on just getting the basic stealth plane that can fly and fire weapons first. Get them up and running then move onto the advanced AI that that can do everything and anything. Make that a secondary objective after production has already started as it will be mostly just software you can plug in.

NorthernAlly
NorthernAlly
11 months ago
Reply to  NorthernAlly

And I know modern stealth planes are the furthest away from basic. I just mean I hope they don’t add years and years onto the development by trying to ship it with an advanced ai that would be nice but not necessary until a later date.

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
11 months ago
Reply to  NorthernAlly

That is a good call, NorthernAlly. I just hope there is no software version 4 stylee hold up to capability insertions. Managing software development will be a challenge, mainly an organisational / project management challenge – that’s not a knot I would want to try and cut through… However, the programme turns out in the end we are at the very early stage and I bet there are plenty of very excited young engineers about to find out just how hard it is going to be – bless ’em 🙂 Shooting of the innocent and rewarding of the uninvolved will… Read more »

Jon
Jon
11 months ago
Reply to  NorthernAlly

Japan will do exactly that. They will probably complete a second stealth prototype in 2024, before the main programme development even starts. By 2027, BAES will have a demonstrator (if some idiot doesn’t cancel it because “things have changed”), and by the time the two programmes fold the technologies together around the end of the decade, it could be very very good.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago

🤞🙏

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago

I would like Israelis on the integration part, they are uncomplicated and make things work.

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
11 months ago

Plus we still need the pilots to fly them, currently, it’s taking up to eight years to train them instead of two to three.

“UK has more F-35 fast jets than pilots to fly them, Ben Wallace admitsDefence Secretary Ben Wallace says “our pilot pipeline is not in a place I would want it to be”

Tuesday 1 November 2022 18:38, UK

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-has-more-f-35-fast-jets-than-pilots-to-fly-them-ben-wallace-admits-12735825

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago

The addition of the Japanese, w/ their engineering talent and especially financial resources, virtually assures that a credible product will result. My multi -part question is which AFs will be able to afford a sixth gen fighter, and how many will be purchased over a reasonable timeframe? There will be a minimum number of orders necessary to declare success…🤔

Jon
Jon
11 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

If you really believe any objective conditions are required before some politician declares success, you haven’t been watching all that carefully. How many Air Forces will depend on pricepoint and the prevailing threat assessment fifteen to twenty years from now (and possibly how many Air Forces still exist as independent commands). F-35 is doing well because it’s top dog when the threat level is high. As for how many units, that’s even more complicated by the system of systems thing. Nobody has a clue what the best balance of central fighter versus drone will be. If I had to guess,… Read more »

Tams
Tams
11 months ago
Reply to  NorthernAlly

First I’ve heard of the Americans trying to stop the Japanese developing their own fighter. A prototype F-X has flown afterall.

They have refused to sell the F-22 to Japan which pissed the Japanese off, but that’s what happens when you tie yourself to any single other country for a capability, but especially so the US (though France will also very kindly screw you over too).

It seems the Japanese have finally fully learned that lesson there.

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
11 months ago
Reply to  Tams

The Japanese demonstrator was part of the earlier Advanced Technology Demonstrator – X program that ran during the 2010’s rather than the F-X program. The earlier program was just to boost the design and production skills of Japanese industry so they could go on to produce their own fighter.

Coll
Coll
11 months ago
Reply to  NorthernAlly

Well, it was between America and the UK to collaborate on Japan’s next-gen fighter. The Americans (Lockheed) were picked, and they still squandered the opportunity. So, they have decided to work with the UK.

Jim
Jim
11 months ago
Reply to  Coll

American technology transfer controls and the shocking attitude of their defence contractors has really screwed the US long term prospects for defence exports. Once Uncle Sam starts cutting the budget companies like LM will be really screwed. Most western governments have spent the last 10 years trying to cut US components out of their weapon systems. Projects like F35 have a lot of momentum and massive R&D development from the US military but that won’t last long. The US virtually exports no ships and few land systems to anyone and I think their aircraft industry will go the same way.… Read more »

DJ
DJ
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Likely one of the reasons that Boeing concentrated on the Australian ‘Loyal Wingman’ project over the US equivalent (despite being picked to participate, they bailed on the US program when they couldn’t make the two line up). Boeing has worked out Australia has money, expertise & wants to work with those that want to work with them in a way that the US won’t. I gather it took them a while to work out the rules, but E7 & JDAM-ER etc showed how & what was possible. ITAR free is not Australia free, but a lot easier to navigate. Despite… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Coll

Yes as I elaborated above after signing with LM the US Govt laid down a whole raft of of restrictions not only about technology transfer but aspects and technology of the aircraft that Japan would not even be able to service or remove (imagine that in a conflict. would US personnel even be allowed in theatre?). It meant that Japan would not even have been able to later replace such tech with its own I read. The Japanese deemed that unacceptable even before the threatening behaviour of China, Russia and Nth Korea around its Islands, let alone now. And yes… Read more »

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
11 months ago

Another very positive step forward. But I think navigating the politics and various spending rounds over the coming years will be as big a challenge as developing the technology. Be great to see a demonstrator fly, but again expectations will have to be kept realistic. The system that enters initial service may not be leaps ahead of Typhoon or F35 but will be a platform that can be developed massively over the coming decades. For many nations upgrading F35 will be the 6th gen option, as brand new systems may well be out of the budget reach of many nations.… Read more »

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

Hi Robert,

The RAF does have experience in continuously developing its platforms especially the Typhoon. Spiral Development has allowed the RAF to develop their Typhoons with new weapons (Brimstone, Meteor) and hopefully soon the new Captor-E. They adopted the approach as a hedge to delays in the Typhoon programme.

If the same approach is adopted for Tempest might be possible to decouple some of the risks inherent in any programme this complicated.

Cheers CR

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
11 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Hopefully so mate. Typhoon development will help a lot with Tempest.

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Agreed.

On another slightly positive spin I read a book (or long article) about the development of Concorde. Turns out that at various different times both the British and French government had tried to bale on the programme but the one that wished to keeping going at the time held the ‘runners’ feet to the fire. Turned out that the terms of the contract / treaty apparently required both to agree to the termination of the programme 😆 oops!

Fingers crossed

CR
PS I also read a quote from a NASA

simon alexander
simon alexander
11 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

can’t believe that it was a normal thing to see a supersonic airliner flying above london in my childhood.
the french were so canny to establish their aerospace industry not off the back of concorde but they would have learnt a lot off that joint project.

Dave Wolfy
Dave Wolfy
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

And the other way round.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
11 months ago
Reply to  Dave Wolfy

👍

Jim
Jim
11 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Ideally we would just be moving Captor E and upgraded EJ2000 engines with high bypass ratio into a new stealthy body for tranche 1 Tempest which is how we use to do things new aircraft old engines.

But I doubt the Japanese will go for that approach.

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Engines are going to be fundamentally different than the EJ-200. Third stream of air for cooling aircraft systems, Integrated electrical starter and electrical generator for aircraft systems rather than mechanical off the gearbox, 30 years of advancement gained in part from the rapid pace of civil engine efficiency improvements, large increase in power, vectored thrust. The demonstrator will likely fly with EJ-200 engines though as the new engine won’t be ready for serial production till around 2030. You may well see a modernized EJ-200 recycled for the Indian and Turkish fighter projects though and the Turkish bid includes IP transfer… Read more »

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
11 months ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

Wasn’t RR looking at fitting the Reaction Engines precooler technology to the Tempest engine at one stage? I’m pretty sure RR are still closely involved with Reaction Engines but haven’t heard anything else about technology exploitation for awhile now.

Cheers CR

WatcherZero
WatcherZero
11 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Yes, we might see something with the engine trials or alternately they might use it as a heat exchanger to reduce the aircraft as a wholes heat signature similar to the (B-2 or F-117?) ability to partially redirect exhaust heat into a thermal store for 20 minutes or so.

Last edited 11 months ago by WatcherZero
Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Jim

RR has been working on new gen fighter engines (partly overlapping with their new gen commercial engine tech), with various potential clients for years and aspects of these engine technologies are already undergoing bench testing. Combining and adapting these technologies to the final design of the complete ‘Tempest’ engine won’t quite be like designing a whole new engine for it, most of the complexity will have already been faced, understood and is no doubt in the process of being fully developed. Engineering in reliability and scaling its tech will likely be the major job, the building blocks themselves are mostly… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago

Well that clearly hints at the adaptive engine technology I surmised they were working on and perhaps the cooling aspects too. Actually I remember reading that when it was published so might have contributed to what I had in my mind. Thanks for linking it.

DJ
DJ
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Plus 1 for that.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

That’s interesting. I think you are likely right but I do wonder with the complexity of the F-35 software which can only be altered not replaced how practical it will get come late 30s or how complex, limiting, costly and time consuming that might be. The big IF will be whether the lessons claimed to have learned from F-35 will actually happen in terms of software. The US and I’m sure the Tempest team too as they have great software expertise are all talking modular software that separates amongst other things flight systems from weapons and other non crucial systems.… Read more »

simon richards
simon richards
11 months ago

Would it not be a good idea to get Israel and India on board as well for this

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
11 months ago

Excellent news and the potential to be a world-leading platform of the future with some amazing new innovations as well according to the videos I’ve included.

https://www.raf.mod.uk/what-we-do/team-tempest/the-tech/

Rolls-Royce | Tempest – Powering the next generation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi8YVn2gtBE

Tempest: All We Know About The UK’s NEXT-GENERATION Fighter Jet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx-Rey3bA-M 

Last edited 11 months ago by Nigel Collins
WatcherZero
WatcherZero
11 months ago
Jim
Jim
11 months ago
Reply to  WatcherZero

More reason not to buy 138 😀

TypewriterMonkey
TypewriterMonkey
11 months ago

This looked inevitable when the Tempest mockup suddenly switched from the UK version to an exact copy of the Japanese one! Let’s hope that the resulting fighter is something we can afford to buy in significant numbers and does what we need in twenty years time.

Coll
Coll
11 months ago

The X-2?

TypewriterMonkey
TypewriterMonkey
11 months ago
Reply to  Coll

The later concept, after the X-2, the Mitsubishi F-X (now apparently called the F-3). (Looks vaguely like BAE Replica.)

Coll
Coll
11 months ago

Do you have a picture so we have the same reference? I’m getting several designs coming up. I also agree with the Tempest Pelican forward fuselage.

TypewriterMonkey
TypewriterMonkey
11 months ago
Reply to  Coll

The new Tempest mockup is shown on the BAE Systems (UK only) homepage, via a news item at the top of the page. For the F-X just google “Japanese Mitsubishi F-X” and the Wikipedia article on the F-X has an image in it.

Coll
Coll
11 months ago

The new model of Tempest was shown at Farnborough as well. I posted an image responding to watchzero. This one? (Link) I still think the F-3 looks like a bigger X-2. Still a good-looking plane.

GlynH
GlynH
11 months ago

Tempest never looked right to me. Unbalanced, tiny vertical fins, huge forebody. If it looks right it probably is right.

TypewriterMonkey
TypewriterMonkey
11 months ago
Reply to  GlynH

It did look a bit different, in a weird way, with it’s Pelican nose… I suppose you could call it purposeful. Definitely not as sleek looking as BAE replica which looked more YF-22-ish, or indeed the Franco-German FCAS.

Coll
Coll
11 months ago
Reply to  GlynH

To be fair, It’s only a mock-up of a concept which is subject to change. I did hear about additional ideas presented at a media day in 2018. I’m not a fan of the current mock-up with the narrow fuselage and pelican-like forebody. I do like the project replica design and the Tempest design done by an online graphics design called ‘Turbosquid’ (see attached pic) The cockpit looks more blended into the fuselage. Sadly, the cockpit has too much of a flat surface. I also like the new model that was presented at Farnborough this year.

Last edited 11 months ago by Coll
GlynH
GlynH
11 months ago
Reply to  Coll

Yeah that’s nice :). While I am happy to spit on anything to do with the Russian Federation ATM, the MiG-41 concept is/was a good looking machine.

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago
Reply to  Coll

Turbosquid is a 3D model library. Someone made the model and uploaded there.

Coll
Coll
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

Thanks. It still looks nice.

James
James
11 months ago

I doubt significant numbers will ever be seen again in the RAF.

This project will be hugely based around drones to boost numbers and capability.

Only hope is economies of scale force the production number up but being realistic the project itself will have the numbers swelled by the amount of drones that will be ordered to go with them.

WatcherZero
WatcherZero
11 months ago

The 3 renders that have been released today showing them flying over national landmarks also have a couple of notable design changes. The air intakes are swept forwards rather than back (as they originally did before the Farnborough model this year) and almost entirely wrap the bottom of the fuselage, the fuselage has gotten wider to the point its a borderline lifting body design (adding more internal stowage) while the wings have become considerably narrower almost stub like; however the rear profile is fundamentally unchanged.

Last edited 11 months ago by WatcherZero
Coll
Coll
11 months ago
Reply to  WatcherZero

There do seem to be a few designs. I have attached a design from Farnborough 2022. I guess we will see closer to the time.

Last edited 11 months ago by Coll
TypewriterMonkey
TypewriterMonkey
11 months ago
Reply to  Coll

That’s the one.

Coll
Coll
11 months ago

The first mock-up was a little hard to believe if they wanted an internal weapons bay. This is looking better.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Coll

Hey clip a bit off of it rear inboard and in that image at least, you have something close to a Lightning wing 😈. Back to the future eh.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago
Reply to  Coll

Keeps the Russians, Chinese, Americans, French and Germans guessing. A very intelligent misinformation campaign…🤔😳😁

Coll
Coll
11 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Well, that’s what I thought, but all concepts are subject to change anyway.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Coll

When I worked on a basic tech series of books in the 90s I got some great imagery from Bae for future combat aircraft concepts. Looked great but bore little similarity to anything they actually produced since. The P.1214-3 Harrier replacement was the most exotic I think, which I saw again recently. Seeing that there are aspects of Replica already in the Tempest, (they do love that kinked wing) and flatter wider tail planes are de rigueur anyway I can see it getting more like a modified Replica look as it progresses… unless it gets more Magma like, reflecting some of… Read more »

Coll
Coll
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Yeah, I have a few books called ‘British secret projects’ that covers interesting projects that never came to fruition for obvious reasons. It is clear that Tempest has aspects of Replica. This is a great concept image with the P.1214-3.

Last edited 11 months ago by Coll
Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Coll

That has a sniff of YF 23 about it. Not surprising as it’s reputation seems to grow by the year by not flying, as quickly as the F22 declines in reputation by… not flying much.

Barry Larking
Barry Larking
11 months ago

I have my doubts. The timescale, changes in geo-politics and their influence on strategy that cannot be anticipated and the juggling required on the political industrial level to appease various national ‘interests’. By the time the first prototype flies, if it does, what will the world look like in 2027-8 in this time of accelerating technical and social transformation?

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
11 months ago
Reply to  Barry Larking

There is a sense of urgency now that Russia has embarked on suicidal behaviours.

China is also throwing it weight around.

There is a timeline here to Chinese aggression.

Taiwan first then Japan? That is the fear?

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
11 months ago

And in today’s news. “Risk of miscalculation with Chinese warships highest it has ever been, expert warns China has also fitted its fleet of nuclear-powered submarines with JL-3 missiles thought to have a range of up to 6,200 miles – enough to strike the US mainland from within their own waters.” Currently fitted to six submarines if correct. https://news.sky.com/story/risk-of-miscalculation-with-chinese-warships-highest-it-has-ever-been-expert-warns-12757876 China’s DF-17 designed to strike Pacific bases: US09 DECEMBER 2022 “China’s Dong Feng-17 (DF-17) hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV)-powered medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) has been designed to strike foreign military bases and fleets in the Western Pacific, a US Pentagon report said.”… Read more »

Last edited 11 months ago by Nigel Collins
Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
11 months ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

Who knows.

It is easy enough to fit an enlarged outline hatch to a sub with nothing behind it.

It is equally possible to test launch something that looks like a sub carried ICBM what would never work in that final role.

So may or maybe not.

So all the main players have sub launched ICBMs now (maybe) how does that change anything?

You don’t launch an ICBM because you are having a bad day?

Barry Larking
Barry Larking
11 months ago

I agree. Have they the patience to wait until 2035 as we possess?

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
11 months ago

HI SB,

Yup, I recon the timescale for that timeline is at least in part going to be determined by Xi Jinping’s age. He’s 69, apparently, so ain’t going to be around for a huge amount of time…

So if you are right I bet the Japanese will be pushing the project along for all they are worth.

Then there is the fat madman in North Korea..! Geographically speaking I think being an Island state of Europe is waaayyyyyyy better than being an Island state off Asia right now.

Cheers CR

NorthernAlly
NorthernAlly
11 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

I think that’s going to be the main benefit of having Japan on board, this will be a true collaboration between two equal sized powers pushing each other forward. Unlike the f35 which was just an America project with other nations involved. Very much at the whim of the US no matter how much money you poured in.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago

Yeah if we worry imagine being in Japan’s shoes, Russians at its nearest occupied point in the next garden, China across the street and a totally bonkers North Korea down the road.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
11 months ago

The timeline is where will China’s current massive military expansion take it in the 2030s? Will it lead to direct conflict with the West/ Aukus and Japan over Taiwan or worse a campaign of conquest by China to capture the first and second island chains for conquest? The West needs to watch China very very closely.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
11 months ago

Yup, then the Aussies are next on the parade route. ☹️

DJ
DJ
11 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

There are a few other’s in between. Very long logistic trains have their problems. Not to mention a few strategic straights in the way.

John Manger
John Manger
11 months ago

Japan involved could provide the spine a project of this complexity will need. IIRC from previous (non defence) projects involving Japan, on time, on budget, and no excuses is the order of the day … Woe betide the contractor or sub-contractors that don’t deliver what has been agreed as agreed…

Tom
Tom
11 months ago

Just a couple of questions… How much money has been thrown at this so far?

A ‘demonstrator’ aircraft will be in the skies in 5 years… is that 5 years after the development phase starts in 2025?

This new fighter aircraft ‘could’ then take to the skies in 2035. Why is this aircraft going to take so long?

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
11 months ago
Reply to  Tom

Current timeline is
anglo-japanese engine development already began Jan 2022
Jaguar anglo-japanese radar development began April 2022
Japan begins a joint drone/loyal wingman project with the US 2023
National Variant designs finalized 2024, company workshare arrangements signed, and final development budget agreed. (cutoff point for additional partners to join development)
Two Joint UK-Japan engine demonstrators built by 2025 and begin testing
UK Flight Demonstrator constructed around 2025 and flying in 2027
Japanese flight Demonstrator flying in 2027
Engine development completed 2029
First Production prototype flying 2030
Enter regular service 2035

Last edited 11 months ago by Watcherzero
magwitch
magwitch
11 months ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

Both F-35 and Typhoon were 9 years from first flight to entry into service. Tempest/GCAP isn’t going to do it in 5.

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
11 months ago
Reply to  magwitch

Theres a lot of ground tests that no longer need to be done in the computer age and both aircraft suffered from post-cold war development slowdown, F-22 similarly had its development budget slashed.

This doesnt have to be the case for all aircraft, A400M for example had its first production flight in 2009 but entered service in 2013.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  magwitch

I agree it’s optimistic in the extreme, but you are forgetting about two major factors digital twinning and modular software expertise, neither of which existed when Typhoon was being developed. It’s the equivalent of the constant blue screen of death and rock solid OS today it’s a different world. I haven’t had a crash in years and I’m still on a 6 year old Mac OS. It’s symbolic of how things have changed in one let alone two decades. However all that does not exclude major set backs as you rightly highlight especially as they are arguably pushing the cutting… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago

Excellent, but lets be realistic.

Has the incoming Labour party mentioned Tempest at all? Any positive noises?

I’d read that 9 billion of defence money is going on this this decade and that is a lot of Transport Aircraft, Ships, Helicopters, and other kit.

What is the betting this is cancelled and much of that money vanishes into the fat cat MIC companies for little benefit to HM forces the moment Labour have their SDSR?

I hope the involvement of Japan and Italy help solidify this but I’m not holding my breath.

Levi Goldsteinberg
Levi Goldsteinberg
11 months ago

I’d hope that the strategic importance of building and maintaining a strong presence in east Asia would make cancelling Tempest politically unviable

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
11 months ago

Hi Daniele, Quoted on the BBC:- John Healey, Labour’s shadow defence secretary, said his party backed the partnership but warned about training. “Ministers must make clear how this fits with wider plans for the RAF’s future, including how they will prevent delays in fast-jet pilot training,” he said. I kinda agree with that, especially the training debacle..! Also, if both parties were keen to have a nation concensus on defence Healey would already know the answers to those rather basic questions. Ho hum, one day, yeh! Cheers CR PS It was even on the BBC News front page..! Now on… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Hi mate. Thanks for spotting that. Do they back wider Japan – UK collaboration or the aircraft…? If so, that is a positive, I’d like to see Labour back this, properly.
Sorry, skeptical Daniele today.

Tom
Tom
11 months ago

I’m not aware of Labour reneging of matters of defence. The Labour party decided to build two aircraft carriers, not the tories!

The Tories, upon entering power in 2010, stated they would mothball one of the aircraft carriers, not Labour!

The Tories trashed part built Nimrod aircraft with JCB’s, not Labour!
The Tories have cut the Army to the point where the UK could not take part in another Afghan size war, not The Labour Party!

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago
Reply to  Tom

Tom….Tom….if you’re playing that game you’ve picked the wrong guy.
Shall I list the Labour defence cuts 1997 up to 2010?

Do let me know, will be a pleasure.

They’re all crap when it comes to defence matters. All of them.

Klonkie
Klonkie
11 months ago

😂 therein lies the undeniable truth Mate. Poor Tom must have missed the 2004 Labour trashing of the Armed forces.

Tom
Tom
11 months ago
Reply to  Klonkie

What does it matter what happened 18 years ago???? So everything I said was false then?

Klonkie
Klonkie
11 months ago
Reply to  Tom

Hi Tom, apologies for the late reply. Let me nail my colours clearly to the mast. I’m not here to give the Tories a free pass either. However I balance this against the fact they pledged to increases defence expenditure to 2.5% of GDP. I have not seen any commentary from the opposition to support this approach. Now I may have missed an announcement to that effect (I reside in NZ). So do feel free to contradict me if that is the case . The relevance of the 2004 was (arguably) the final cut, do refer to DM’s well detailed… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago
Reply to  Klonkie

I know mate, a lot of Labour supporters here spit their Tea out when I go off on one. Doesn’t fit their view. Maybe they’re too young to recall the sheer despondency 2004 on time frame.

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
11 months ago

…or the complete destruction of various defence projects back in the 60s. e.g. TSR2 completely erased off the map in a wilful act of destruction of tooling, drawings etc.

Tom
Tom
11 months ago

Game ???? Dear oh dear… I really do not care what Labour did years ago, neither do those serving in the armed forces today! Facts are facts. Everything I said was factual, and correct.

Why you are you trying to make a drama out of nothing, is anyone’s guess.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago
Reply to  Tom

Dear oh dear nothing Tom. Labour’s record is no drama or game. Your post which reads to me as “Labour holier than thou” compared to the wicked Tories is not correct when I’m pointing out both have previous of being equally as bad on defence cuts, the very reason for my skeptical post. “Why you are you trying to make a drama out of nothing, is anyone’s guess.” No guesses, Tom, I have facts too, and happy to state them. Is your response being from someone worried a poster may also have some facts to deliver that don’t tie in… Read more »

Airborne
Airborne
11 months ago

Boom, Tom down, Tom down, we have a Tom down in the city !!!!!!

Tom
Tom
11 months ago

Old news. Your clearly not in politics in any way. Your arguments are timed out and feeble.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago
Reply to  Tom

Agreed. I’m not into politics at all, though I do have “well reasoned views” according to one respected left wing poster here. However, I know my military matters, far better than you I suspect, and those cuts I list are fact, nothing feeble about them. As I said, when I’m shown to be wrong when Labour are in power come find me and I hold my hands up. Till then, my worries remain. Feeble? That’s a poor effort there, It is you who hasn’t answered any of my points on YL, LPM, or anything else! 😆👍 Anyway, this convo is… Read more »

Cj
Cj
11 months ago

👍 we also have the snp up here who would have us all sitting in camps with tambourines singing ging gang googly.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago
Reply to  Cj

That is also Mr Corbyn’s camp fire. Sit and sing Kombaya. Numerous Labour MPs still support him. Worried? Yep.

DJ
DJ
11 months ago

At least Corbin is gone. Think positive.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago
Reply to  DJ

True! There could be worse.

James
James
11 months ago
Reply to  Tom

Labour back then is not Labour now and if Corbyn had got in, well…..

I do like how you ignore the financial reasons why all of the things you mentioned happened and that was very much down to Labour.

Tom
Tom
11 months ago
Reply to  James

Hi James… I merely replied to the suggestion that a Labour Government will be bad for the MOD, which is totally incorrect.

The financial aspect… well that is another matter. Fair point regarding Corbyn. God alone knows what path, that forever ‘card carrying’ CND individual would have taken us down.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago
Reply to  Tom

God alone knows what path, that forever ‘card carrying’ CND individual would have taken us down.

So we agree on something Tom!

When LP do not shred the forces look me up here and I will be happy, even relieved, to say “I was wrong to be worried”

Till then, hmmm.

Mark
Mark
11 months ago

Talking of let’s be realistic! There is something enthusiasm, money and today’s tech struggle to grapple with and that’s called tomorrows tech.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
11 months ago

Tempest is the only plan so I can’t see it being cut by anyone. Scaled back by whoever is in power, maybe. Personally I don’t see the tories as being some great defence supporting party. The pm was saying lots of forces won’t get a Christmas break as they will be doing civilian roles. He then said something about the pay rises would cost every person £1000 a year. What he doesn’t realise that if a rise is below inflation it’s a pay cut. Problem with that is that’s what’s been done for ages already. If inflation increases prices it… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

I don’t see the tories as being some great defence supporting party.”

Neither do I, MS. I simply point out the previous record of HM opposition when posters mention Tory cuts. Tom’s “Labour did not shred the Nimrods with JCBs” does not wash with me compared to the cuts THEY DID DO.

As usual, just trying to get a balance and facts out there.

Glass Half Full
Glass Half Full
11 months ago

The PR from BAES mentioned the program creating and sustaining thousands of jobs. Across BAES, Rolls and Leonardo plus other UK suppliers I suspect we are looking at 10’s of thousands of mostly high value, relatively highly paid, high tax generating jobs, many in the north of the country. Fast jets have been the UK success story in exports too. It will be a brave political party that kills the UK’s fast jet industry, because cancelling Tempest will do that. However, the Tempest program has to keep to the publicly stated requirements at the public launch in 2018 that the… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago

Good to see you back, GHF, I’d noted your abcense.

You are, logically, correct, and I cling to that hope that it will be too big to cut without major damage.

James
James
11 months ago

Hopefully the contracts are drawn as such that it makes them impossible to cancel and in doing so would also cost many thousands of jobs etc so very bad PR.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago

My hope is they fully understand that if they do then you can pretty much write off both Bae and RR as major technology businesses in this Country, which considering they are a substantial part of that already long stripped back sector would be near terminal destruction of the whole sector itself with a massive outflow of talent who simply couldn’t find employment here or a future that befits their talents. There would be no coming back from this and eventually whatever clout and respect with the US would fade away. It’s that important in my mind, we would just… Read more »

Nathan
Nathan
11 months ago

Absolutely stonking move. I can see this become a great international success drawing in other likeminded partners along the journey.

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
11 months ago
Reply to  Nathan

Good lord an optimist..! It is great news though. 🙂

Cheers CR

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
11 months ago

Whatever they come up with for this fighter, I hope they remember to design in a “cobra” manoeuvre-type capability. This helps make the F22 and some SU fighters so deadly in toe-to-toe close combat. Alternatively some sort of 360 degree target lock and fire would be good.

ChariotRider
ChariotRider
11 months ago

Hi AlbertStarburst,

I believe there are a number of pilot helmets already in-service able to prvide that capability with short range weapons, including on the Typhoon I think. A kind of Look, Shoot and Scoot capability (if the bad guys are behind you hanging around to count the score would probably be a bad idea).

Cheers CR

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
11 months ago
Reply to  ChariotRider

Yep, and further to DaveyB’s good reply below, I’m suggesting a full 360-degree target acquire and shoot capability may be needed. Possibly also using reverse facing missiles to cover that rear hemisphere and outclass any F22-type peer.

DaveyB
DaveyB
11 months ago

There is a problem with reverse facing missiles compared to forward facing ones. Namely they don’t have the kinetic benefit imparted by the parent aircraft. Which means they are effectively accelerating from zero if not a negative acceleration. Which will significantly cut down the missile’s range. The other issue that would need working out, is how the missile’s exhaust efflux affects the aircraft’s aerodynamics and stability. Especially as it will be causing an initial braking effect until it clears the rail. Though, will this be any worse than the yawing moment a forward facing missile generates? However, if the missile… Read more »

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
11 months ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Thanks for taking the time to do a good, considered, response DaveyB. For Tempest I was thinking for close-in point defence dogfighting when it is all going titties-up. i.e. Something to defend the rear 180-degree hemisphere. If rear-facing missile mounted on wing pylons then release first then activate rocket motor. At least they would be facing in roughly the right direction (even in a turn) and some sort of targetting via in-helmet rear projection from cameras/sensors. Broadening out there is the whole anti-SAM/AA missile defence thing. Something to defend (either kinetic, explosive, or directed energy). Again if coming from the… Read more »

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago

Cobra manoeuvre makes you loose all energy. It is just a trick for desperate times.

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
11 months ago

The only good thing a cobra manoeuvre is good for is airshow demo’s, and bleeding energy. Energy is is king for within visual maneuvering. No fighter pilot wants to get slow. You want to shoot the bad guy from 30 miles away, and head home safe and sound.

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

Agreed, and that is the received wisdom. However, check out on YouTube “growling sidewinder” for some pretty accurate digital combat situation scenarios. Yes they are not real-world examples as hopefully the algorithms are based only on Public-available data. Close in dogfighting is an issue if you cannot point and shoot first.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago

It’s been reported more than once that a Raptor would be at serious risk if it ever allowed a Typhoon within close dogfight range. Equally the YF-23 was almost as manoeuvrable without it having superior aerodynamics, while by not having it gave it other advantages over F-22 but hey the extreme demonstrations apparently looked good even if they bore no relation to real air combat. All arguable I accept depending on who you listen to, but certainly raises big questions about its ultimate value in a modern design and certainly most experts now seem to question whether it just led… Read more »

DaveyB
DaveyB
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Very true, the combination of the Typhoon’s lower drag, helps it maintain energy in high g turns around transonic speeds especially. The other part of the combination is the marriage between the helmet mounted sight and Block 6 ASRAAM. Which gives the pilot a much better capability in lock on after launch (LOAL), ie firing at targets over the shoulder. Plus when using IRST, it allows the Typhoon to remain RF silent in an engagement. Using the helmet to designate targets for ASRAAM. The only downside is that the pilot cannot see below and through the aircraft, as per the… Read more »

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
11 months ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Good input DaveyB. See also my other responses in this thread.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
11 months ago

Excellent news. Good to have the Japanese on board. It’ll help keep our wandering politicians eye on the ball and be a big boost to international credibility for the project overall.

OkamsRazor
OkamsRazor
11 months ago

Interesting comments so far. My observations are firstly that we don’t seem to have a Japanese press release. Secondly, lot of nonsense about Japanese leadership, forgetting that in the key aircraft technologies, stealth, radar and engines, Japan has no tier 1 operators. Thirdly, there are only two countries globally with in production 5th gen fighters with all aspect stealth, the US and U.K.
All the other nations now throwing their hats into the ring to build 5th gen fighters are hoping to acquire the technology along the way, including the Japanese, French and Germans.

WatcherZero
WatcherZero
11 months ago
Reply to  OkamsRazor

Few notes, firstly F-35 are being assembled in both Japan and Italy, secondly we have had a press release from Japan, it was the same text as the joint statement by UK and Italy but added they would be beginning a joint drone/loyal wingman program with the US in 2023.

OkamsRazor
OkamsRazor
11 months ago
Reply to  WatcherZero

Not sure what your point is re “assembly” but thanks for the heads up on Japanese press release, do you have a link?

OkamsRazor
OkamsRazor
11 months ago
Reply to  WatcherZero

Thanks. Interesting.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  WatcherZero

Interesting I wonder if we can expect some of this to be combined with AUKUS developments in similar areas. I think politically it’s presently too big a step for Japan to formally join that organisation but very sensible to effectively do so without the big fanfare of a formal announcement that makes Japan a bigger target and would aggravate other allies like France, South Korea and India.

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago
Reply to  OkamsRazor

Thirdly, there are only two countries globally with in production 5th gen fighters with all aspect stealth, the US and U.K.

What is the 5th Gen fighter that UK produces?

The only country that produces 5th Gen is USA, arguably you can include China J-20 and Russia Su-57 but we have to low information level for that.

Last edited 11 months ago by AlexS
Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

Every single rear fuselage and vertical and horizontal tails of the F35 is built in the UK. That’s all varients. F35A, B and C.

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

So? Italy also makes some of its wings and wing box and have an assembly line.

IP, design conception is American it is not UK.

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

J20 and SU57 are not 5th gen. Not by a long shot.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

I have read some years back that technology from Replica was rolled into the F-35 project which was a major reason we were made a tier1 collaborator, but hey how that gets reflected in IP and other considerations now is well beyond my pay grade and equally what happens as it’s new modified developments is desirably rolled into Tempest. No doubt similar to arm a nominally British Company exploiting originally British ideas and technology that over time has become involved with so much US IP that it can do little without US agreement including to who they can sell to.… Read more »

DaveyB
DaveyB
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

BAe’s Replica would have presented a serious sales threat to the F35. A good way to get rid of your opposition is to either buy out their company or make them an offer that ties them tightly to you. Being a Tier 1 partner achieved that.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

UK is the only tier 1 level partner. You can look it up what the means.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

👍

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Yes it means that UK did not developed a 5th Gen fighter obviously…
It is quite bizarre the arrogance and petulance here.

Engine?
Radar?
Electronics?
Fuselage?
etc etc…

Who designed that, created that in F-35? certainly USA not UK.
And even USA had lots of difficulties to pull it off.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

Rolls Royce builds the lift fan. Martin Baker the ejection seat, BAE Systems the defensive aids system. That’s just 3 things without looking the rest up. You can do that.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

That’s strange, just read yesterday that Bae has renewed the contract for these tail assemblies…. with the Canadian Company that had built the previous ones.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Suppliers: 100+ Tier 1 with numerous additional sub-tier suppliers filtering throughout the UK economy. Jobs Supported 20,000+Value: 15% of the value of the 3,000 +F35 jets planned will be built in the UK. 🇬🇧

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

So? how that makes UK a builder of Gen 5th fighter today?

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

I’ll say it again. 15% of the value of every single F35 that will be built for all nations buying the aircraft will be built in the UK. And that’s all 3 varients of the F35.

OkamsRazor
OkamsRazor
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

Unless you are a believer in Chinese/Russian propaganda neither are close to 5th gen fighters, they are struggling to make 4th gen engines and neither has 4th gen radar. Only gamers seem to believe their nonsense. As for F35 the U.K. is the only tier 1 production partner in the only 5th gen fighter in serial production.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  OkamsRazor

And to a degree you are correct there are technology reasons that has happened as well as purely that of friendship. Mind you the main reason, though not unrelated to it mind, is the UK giving up on any Super Harrier thoughts and more pertinently, our own new upgraded Harrier developments and taking the AV8B at the time to get into the F-35 as a tier 1 member. I remember it being reported it was a take it or leave it offer we couldn’t do both. We only get snippets of the real story mind.

OkamsRazor
OkamsRazor
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Have you ever heard of the US military industrial complex doing charity? The U.K. is a tier 1 partner on F35 for a reason. The Japanese have joined the Tempest team for a reason (yeah I know it has a different name now), they have been in bed with the US before. If they didn’t think the U.K. could deliver they wouldn’t have signed up, despite intense US lobbying.

OkamsRazor
OkamsRazor
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

The U.K. is the only tier1 partner on the F35. No I wouldn’t include China or Russia, you’d have to be pretty gullible to believe they had the production technology for all aspect stealth or the radar/engine technology for 5th gen never mind 6th gen. As an aside I believe China has just flown their first wholly domestically produced commercial airliner.

David
David
11 months ago

Navalise

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
11 months ago
Reply to  David

Was going to say the same. Might then have to add an angle deck to the QE Carriers for hybrid ops with F-35Bs. There were concept designs for this.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

That I think is totally feasible the original studies offered both with little difference in the overall design. The width of the flight deck would allow an angled deck if it were required but cost wise is it likely not sure unless the UK ( whatever form that is at the time) discovers a technological and economic money tree propelling us back up the wealth league.

James
James
11 months ago
Reply to  David

Well both Italy and Japan do have carriers…..

Paul T
Paul T
11 months ago
Reply to  David

There’s no stated requirement for any Carrier capability – it would add more costs and complexity to an already expensive and complex programme.

Rob N
Rob N
11 months ago

Hi,

What happened to Sweden. I thought they were part of Team Tempest?

AlexS
AlexS
11 months ago
Reply to  Rob N

They were or still are only observers.

DJ
DJ
11 months ago
Reply to  AlexS

According to SAAB CEO, their Tempest participation is currently in hibernation. So they haven’t gone away. They just are currently not overly engaged. SAAB should not be ignored. They are one of only a handful of western firms that are currently producing competitive fighter jets. Regardless, they are a major defence player, everything from fighter jets, missiles, naval CMS, radars, optical sensors etc. They will have something to contribute, if they have a mind to. Sometimes though it might pay to get a third party to lean a little. Australia & Brazil come to mind.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  Rob N

I think, though the cooperation was up played overall, their main Immediate involvement was/is with Saab’s digital twinning expertise, other cooperation has been under consideration in committee and I’m sure still is, but do they want or can afford such a high performance platform when they have previously concentrated on smaller, simpler aircraft with good bang for buck. From their perspective and considering their direct influence in any such project I’m sure it best to wait and see and make decisions later when less formal cooperation is already achieved. And from our side there is less need to use them… Read more »

Lee Cook
Lee Cook
11 months ago

Super news!

dan
dan
11 months ago

What happened to Germany, France and Spain?

Jon
Jon
11 months ago
Reply to  dan

Germany (Airbus) recently caved to France’s (Dassault’s) demands to run the show, and the project should be starting back up again soon. They expect a demonstrator to be produced by 2029.

John Clark
John Clark
11 months ago
Reply to  dan

European squabbling Dan, that’s what. I would imagine they are somehow disheartened by our news today. The European project is on far less certain ground than Tempest, while the US will no doubt attempt to undermine and collapse Tempest, they will precisely the same with the European effort. Rock bottom F35 prices and lucrative offset deals will be offered to both Germany and Spain, to splinter the consortium and ultimately ensure FOAS is still borne. France will struggle on with a pared back design, always compromised in physical size and the structural weight penalties of ensuring Aircraft Carrier capability. I… Read more »

James
James
11 months ago
Reply to  dan

Hopefully non which to get involved!!

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
11 months ago

Excellent news. With Japan onboard I now believe Tempest or GCAP will actually see production. Hopefully costs can be kept reasonable and the aircraft can deliver on its 6th generation capability. Just got to make sure the US doesn’t torpedo the programme through jealousy.

IwanR
IwanR
11 months ago

I’ve been following the Japanese program for quite some time. From what I can see, most of their funding ended up on the engines. With this merge, what will happen to it? Will they scrap it, or will they combine their tech with Rolls Royce?

From what I can see, this will probably end up as the best manned air to air fighter for some time. Just need to see what ends up being cut from the final production version.

James
James
11 months ago
Reply to  IwanR

If they have invested alot in the engine tech would hope that the manufacturers can cooperate and share ideas.

DJ
DJ
11 months ago
Reply to  James

I gather a lot of that cooperation was between RR & Japan’s IHI. So no great change. That, I think was one of the reasons the Japan link jelled. US did not want to play ball (except by their take it or leave it rules). UK via RR did. UK via BAE did. Italy was show me the money. Japan finally realised beating a dead horse never works. US is unlikely to voluntary change its spots. Some take longer than others to work out that the horse is dead. Politics is one thing, but there are some very high tech… Read more »

Jon
Jon
11 months ago
Reply to  IwanR

IHI’s XF9-1 engines are described as low bypass, so not adaptive. I don’t think the current version was seen as the final engine for the FX, more a work in progress. Originally this next generation engine for early 2030s was going to include Rolls helping IHI with airflow, but it ended up as fully collaborative project, announced the end of last year. I imagine the joint engine they are now both working on will be closer to the Rolls-Royce prototype engines, but with as much as they can take from IHI’s ideas and material use as possible.

Last edited 11 months ago by Jon
IwanR
IwanR
11 months ago
Reply to  Jon

Most of the impressive stuff about that project are the materials, so that is highly probable.

As far as I know, they don’t have a finished engine for the F-X/F-3. All the prototypes they’ve made doesn’t reach the stated requirements. Joining Rolls-Royce on the engine might be their best way of achieving it. Possibly a win-win for both sides.

If that was the reason, joining Tempest would actually save them money on any internal redesigns required for an adaptive engine.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
11 months ago
Reply to  IwanR

The first agreement made on the combined project was cooperation on an engine with RR some time back. From that all else eventually flowed as it meant dimensions would be similar and RR/Bae would be designing part of the engine dictated fuselage. Made a lot of sense thereafter (with cooperation on weapons and sensors for Fx already underway) to bring the two projects closer still. The question over this year was about how closely related the project it could become. This news is basically saying very close to identical it seems. I understand this announcement was to be made last… Read more »

Last edited 11 months ago by Spyinthesky
IwanR
IwanR
11 months ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Any idea how far Team Tempest has progressed on the sensors part? The Japanese has also published a lot on that part.

I actually haven’t seen a lot of overlaps between the stuff publicly released from both sides. Though admittedly, I haven’t read stuff from the Italians. The engine was the only obvious one.

Tom
Tom
11 months ago

Personally, the ‘mock up’ looks more like a variation of an F-35, with a little F-22 thrown in to make it look new and exciting.

andy reevesandy262@gmail.com
11 months ago

this is all very nice, but unlike the tempest program,if there is no VSTOL version of it then our carriers will be a waste of time and unable to carry out their function. as it is, the lack of a tempest VSTOL option could have the same impact on the capabilities of AQE and POw.

GlynH
GlynH
11 months ago

Would be sweet if we could get ASM-3A integration from day-one, even back ported to Tiffy. That ASM is Asmodean.