The Ministry of Defence has confirmed continued progress on the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), with over £2 billion invested to date and formal programme structures now in place to deliver the next-generation fighter aircraft under the trilateral Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) with Japan and Italy.
In a written response to James Cartlidge MP, Defence Minister Maria Eagle noted that the UK “has invested over £2 billion already in FCAS/GCAP and the associated Team Tempest research and development programme.” She also confirmed that the Future Combat Air System’s Outline Business Case 1 (OBC1) was submitted in March 2021, following the Strategic Outline Case in December 2018.
The FCAS initiative encompasses a broader ‘system of systems’ to ensure future air superiority, while GCAP is delivering the central crewed platform — a sixth-generation combat aircraft intended to replace the Eurofighter Typhoon in the mid-2030s.
Significant milestones in the programme’s governance have been reached in recent months. A new trilateral body, the GCAP International Government Organisation (GIGO), has been established to coordinate timelines and strategic goals across the UK, Japan, and Italy.
Meanwhile, industry partners BAE Systems, Leonardo, and Japan Aircraft Industrial Enhancement Co Ltd (JAIEC) have agreed to form a new joint venture company to oversee development of the aircraft. Both the GIGO and the new industrial headquarters will be based in Reading, placing the UK at the heart of programme delivery.
“Progress continues to be made on the Future Combat Air System (FCAS). The core platform, that will sit at its heart, is being delivered through the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP),” said Eagle.
The sixth-generation fighter will incorporate advanced stealth technologies, cutting-edge sensors, and the ability to team with autonomous systems. Alongside the aircraft, the broader FCAS framework will integrate weapons, AI, cloud-based command systems, and supporting assets to create a networked combat capability.
Exciting times – recently the RAF suggested the requirements included weapon bays with twice the capacity of the F-35A, and enough internal fuel to cross the Atlantic. So, if Argentina gets unruly, Black Buck II is officially on the cards 🙂
Vertical stabilisers are interesting, given that the Chinese have dropped them, and the Americans seem to be going the same way on their advanced new air superiority fighters. That being said, the design isn’t finalised, so the GCAP fighter might lose them as well. If not, I assume that all-aspect stealth isn’t as necessary as some are suggesting for a competitive air superiority fighter into the 2030s.
I think the decision to omit the vertical stabiliser will be as much about high speed as manuverability. Very difficult to have super sonic flight in a tailless design.
I also think the USAF probably looked at what LM was pitching and thought it was unaffordable.
They did the same with the CCA Level 1 which is why Anduril and General Atomics were selected. LM pitched a Uber expensive design and the USAF wanted cheap.
The USAF is short on funds and it wanted NGAD, Sentinel and B21.
Something had to give.
I question Stealth as being a permanent requirement as the more wide spread the technique is the more likely technology will be able to detect them.
There’s more chance of england winning the next world cup than stealth design disappearing any time soon, probably not in our lifetime. There is no way we will see aircraft design roll back so tech the best part of a century old and dirt cheap which anyone can get hold of can detect the latest warplanes. If something totally new comes along it’s going to be expensive and of limited availability, potentially with high power demands not suited to small vehicles, radar will still have a place for the foreseeable future.
Low/Very Low Observable, or what was referred to as Stealth, won’t go away, it’s become the baseline. The next generation jets like Tempest and F-47 will focus on reducing RCS further across multiple radar bands, but also will try to reduce heat signature in response to the development of IRST.
Potentially contemplate the designation fighter-bomber? GCAP is going to be a beast in flight. 🤔
I’m surprised how [relatively] smooth this project is going given the sums involved. It seems that everyone (even the Treasury) have realised that FCAS/GCAP is the last game in town if the UK is to retain a place at the top table in terms of sovereign military combat aircraft industrial capability. Without Tempest – Sweden, Türkiye, India and South Korea are just some of the countries that will leave us in their dust.
Do not jinx it
I wonder what the cup holders look like on a 6th gen jet?
They must be super fancy.
The design approaches of the individual teams is certainly interesting. At the moment Tempest seems to be going with small vertical tails but no canards. Which is contrary to what we know( think) about the US and Chinese efforts. Up until recently , the general opinion of the arm chair experts( me included) , that canards b*gg**ed up stealth and I know the Typhoon has a setting which the canards can be set to minimise forward RCS.
Any design is a balance of compromises, one assumes the Tempest team don’t think omitting the tails is worth the trade off somewhere else.
I also wouldn’t be surprised if the tails can be rotated flat during some modes of flight or the GCAP team are having some fun throwing out red herrings to their competitors.
Trump has all but sunk oversea sales of the F46 , FCAS seems to be mired in politics . Potentially leaving the 6 th gen market wide open to GCAP although Lockheed’s ideas for a 5th gen plus F35 could put a big spanner in the works, assuming the can get past the kill switch debacle.
There’s no kill switch debacle for the F-35. That’s just made up nonsense.
As for the F-47, my guess is Congress will prevent the sale to foreign countries just as they did with the F-22.
Has the fix come in for the comments?
No bots any more, and I have a tickbox to “Notify me via email if anyone answers my comment”.
Hurrah!