Internationale fighter ontwikkelingen

[Benji87]

Als A-10 vervanger? No way onbemand. Hoogstens als battle buddy.

Dat is het idee toch ook? Als je een F35 hebt met 1 of 2 loyal wingman(s) heb je een enorm arsenaal aan vuurkracht tot je beschikking. Volgens mij willen ze met de NGAD en FA-XX sowieso die kant op.

[Huzaar1]

Ik gok een onbemand toestel zoals de MQ-9 Mojave.

Als A-10 vervanger? No way onbemand. Hoogstens als battle buddy.

[Parera]

In dit artikel wordt zelfs al gesproken over een vervanger van de A10? Zit zoiets in de pijplijn dan of lopen daar studies naar?

Ik gok een onbemand toestel zoals de MQ-9 Mojave.

[Benji87]

What future for the formidable A-10 Thurderbolt II in its Close Air Support role?

The A-10 Thunderbolt II, commonly known as the Warthog, was developed by Fairchild Republic in the 1970s, primarily for the U.S. Air ....

In dit artikel wordt zelfs al gesproken over een vervanger van de A10? Zit zoiets in de pijplijn dan of lopen daar studies naar?

[Harald]

F-15EX not currently at risk of schedule breach, despite delivery delays: USAF  ( CFT's zijn niet gebudgeteerd, pas in 2028. Dus F-15EX eerst zonder de extra wapen- en brandstofcapaciteit )

The first four lots of jets — almost half the total expected buy — will not come with conformal fuel tanks, a key part of the operational profile for what the service hopes will be its missile truck going forward.

The first batch of Boeing's F-15EX Eagle II fighters is running late, but not late enough to trigger a schedule breach if current plans hold, according to an Air Force spokesperson.

However, the service also confirmed that the first four lots of jets — about half the total expected buy — will not come with conformal fuel tanks, a decision that would reduce those fighters' potential ranges and limit their ability to conduct ground attack missions.

.../...

The F-15EX can deliver more missiles than any other fighter in the Air Force's inventory, with a carrying capacity of up to 12. However, a Pentagon report released earlier this year revealed that the Air Force's "first operational F-15EX units" won't be outfitted with conformal fuel tanks (CFTs), and an Air Force spokesperson confirmed to Breaking Defense late last month that CFTs weren't funded for any of the 54 aircraft in production lots 1-4. (The two test aircraft currently in the Air Force's inventory have the CFTs.)

Those two CFTs per fighter provide hard points to mount ground-attack weapons, explained Boeing Chief F-15 Pilot Matt Giese on the sidelines of the Dubai Airshow. The fighter can still carry 12 missiles without the CFTs, but may mainly be tasked with air-to-air roles as a result, he said.

"I think it's the same capability air-to-air wise whether you're CFT or not, you just lose a lot of gas," Giese said, adding that the CFTs provide approximately an extra 9,000 pounds of fuel.

.../...

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/11/f-15ex-not-currently-at-risk-of-schedule-breach-despite-delivery-delays-usaf/

[Harald]

What future for the formidable A-10 Thurderbolt II in its Close Air Support role?

The A-10 Thunderbolt II, commonly known as the Warthog, was developed by Fairchild Republic in the 1970s, primarily for the U.S. Air Force. It serves a critical role as a close air support (CAS) and ground-attack aircraft, designed to provide vital assistance to ground forces during combat operations. But several times in a row, its future has been threatened from various sides.



Visually, the A-10 exhibits a distinct and robust appearance, characterized by its twin-engine, straight-wing configuration. It stands out with a high-mounted, straight tail featuring twin vertical stabilizers and a distinctive nose-mounted GAU-8/A Avenger 30mm rotary cannon.

In its role, the A-10 is tasked with engaging and neutralizing ground targets in close proximity to friendly forces. Additionally, it possesses the capability to perform forward air control (FAC) and combat search and rescue (CSAR) missions when required.

One of the aircraft's prominent features is the GAU-8/A Avenger 30mm cannon, capable of firing various ammunition types, including armor-piercing and high-explosive rounds. In addition to this formidable weapon, the A-10 can carry an assortment of other munitions, such as precision-guided bombs, rockets, and air-to-surface missiles.

The avionics systems on the A-10 are designed to support its operations in a low-altitude, close combat environment. These systems include a basic radar system, along with navigation and communication equipment.

The A-10's reputation for durability and survivability in combat is well-deserved. It is constructed to endure damage and remain operational, thanks to redundant systems and protective measures, including an armored cockpit and vital components.

While not known for exceptional speed or agility, the A-10 excels in its ability to loiter over a battlefield for extended periods, ensuring continuous support to ground troops. Its top speed and operational altitude are relatively modest when compared to more modern fighter aircraft.

Maintenance of the A-10 is simplified due to its straightforward airframe, facilitating maintenance and repairs even in austere conditions.

Throughout its history, the A-10 Thunderbolt II has seen extensive operational use by the USAF in various conflicts, including the Gulf War, Kosovo War, and the War on Terror. Its effectiveness in close air support roles has earned it a reputation as a valuable asset to ground forces.

However, it's essential to note some limitations of the A-10, including its vulnerability to modern air defense systems due to its lower speed and lack of advanced stealth features. Additionally, its air-to-air combat capabilities are limited.


One of the A-10 Thunderbolt II's prominent features is its GAU-8/A Avenger 30mm cannon, capable of firing various ammunition types, including armor-piercing and high-explosive rounds, at a rate of fire of approximately 3,900 rounds per minute

A-10's future threatened

The discussions surrounding the potential replacement of the A-10 Thunderbolt II reflect the ongoing debate over the role of specialized close air support (CAS) aircraft in modern warfare. While the A-10 has proven its worth in supporting ground troops, it's essential for Congress to consider the evolving nature of conflicts and the need for adaptable and cost-effective solutions.

The A-10 has earned a legendary reputation for its durability and effectiveness in close air support missions, and any decision to replace it should not be taken lightly. Congress should thoroughly evaluate the capabilities and cost-effectiveness of potential replacements, ensuring that they can fulfill the critical role of supporting troops on the ground while also considering budget constraints and evolving military strategies.

Congressional threats to replace the A-10 highlight the complex balance between maintaining legacy platforms and investing in modern technology. It's crucial to recognize that while the A-10 has unique strengths, new threats and operational requirements may necessitate more advanced aircraft. The decision should be guided by a comprehensive assessment of current and future battlefield needs.

The A-10 replacement debate underscores the importance of a robust and transparent decision-making process. Congress should engage in a thorough analysis of the capabilities, costs, and operational requirements of potential replacements. Additionally, they should seek input from military experts and consider the perspectives of ground forces who rely on close air support.

The discussions regarding the A-10's replacement highlight the need for a balanced approach to modernizing the military's fleet. While the A-10 has been a workhorse in the CAS role, technology has evolved, and new threats have emerged. Congress should prioritize the development of aircraft that can effectively address current and future challenges while maintaining a commitment to supporting troops on the ground.

Congressional consideration of replacing the A-10 should include a thorough examination of the economic implications. The costs associated with developing, procuring, and maintaining new aircraft should be weighed against the potential benefits in terms of increased capabilities and mission flexibility. A well-informed decision-making process is essential to ensure responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars.

The A-10 replacement debate highlights the need for a holistic approach to military modernization. Congress should focus not only on the aircraft itself but also on training, logistics, and support infrastructure to ensure a seamless transition. Additionally, they should consider the potential impact on the industrial base and the defense workforce when making decisions about replacing legacy platforms.

As Congress evaluates potential replacements for the A-10, it's crucial to maintain a long-term perspective. The chosen aircraft should not only meet current operational requirements but also have the flexibility to adapt to evolving threats and technologies. A thoughtful and strategic approach to modernization will ensure that the military remains prepared for the challenges of the future.

https://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/news/defense-aviation-news/2023-news-aviation-aerospace/november/9355-what-future-for-the-formidable-a-10-thurderbolt-ii-in-its-close-air-support-role.html

[Harald]

Colombia Selects Rafale, May Sign Contract This Week  (     , zeker een Franse deal    )

The Rafale has been selected by Colombia as its next superiority fighter, having beaten the F-16V, Eurofighter and Gripen in a protracted competition. Rafale was selected because it "is the best option for the country in terms of price, efficiency and operability," according to the Colombian President.

Having announced on Dec. 22 that it had selected the Dassault Rafale combat aircraft to replace its elderly Kfirs, Colombia may this week sign an initial contract worth about $680 million covering the first three or four aircraft, according to South American media reports.

Colombia plans to order a total of 16 aircraft: 12 single-seaters and four two-seaters, at a cost of $3.2 billion, for which the French will extend a 20-year loan with a grace period of five years, several media reported. Initial deliveries are planned for 2025, which implies that at least part of the order will consist of second-hand aircraft taken from the French Air and Space Force.

In a post on his Twitter account, the Colombian President's Office said that "the Rafale aircraft proposal is the best option for the country in terms of price, efficiency and operability," adding that "One flight hour of a Rafale plane is approx. 30% cheaper than that of a Kfir (estimated at 89 million pesos)," or approximately $16,900.

Various South American media report that this initial contract will also cover the integration of Colombia's systems and weapons, simulators for crew training, training of technical personnel and assistance from the French Air Force and Space. It will be signed by Colombian President Gustavo Petro and a senior executive from the French company, accompanied by diplomatic personnel from the French embassy. Petro, in a series of tweets posted Dec. 22, cautioned that "There are no signed contracts, it is a pre-negotiation! The offer that the Government will study has an estimated cost of up to $15 billion pesos (approx $3.15 billion) and not $26 billion, as has been said erroneously."

Colombia has been mulling the replacement of its Kfirs for several years, and had earlier this year short-listed three aircraft in addition to the Rafale: the Lockheed Martin F-16V Block 70 Viper, which was initially favored by the Colombian Air Force, the Saab Gripen, and second-hand Eurofighter Tranche 1.

F-16V offer too inflexible

While the F-16V initially led the field, it was eliminated during the selection process because the Colombian Air Force concluded that its electronic warfare system is inferior to that of the Israeli-made Kfirs now in service, and Lockheed was not willing to change it. Colombia also considers that its Python 5 air-to-air missiles are better than the versions of Sidewinder offered with the F-16V, but Lockheed refused to integrate the Python and Derby missiles and the Spice laser-guided bombs that the FAC now operates. The US government offered the F-16V with only Sidewinder and AMRAAM air-to-air missiles.

Gripen "second-best at everything"

The FAC also considered that the Gripen did not lead in any capability area, but "came second in everything," according to a Colombian official quoted by the Argentinian website Pucara. Gripen "is having major integration problems in Brazil with its air-to-air and air-to-surface systems, which are not fully operational, they are in a kind of Beta version," the official said. Furthermore, because production for Brazil and Sweden has priority, delivery times are very long.

Eurofighter most expensive, complex maintenance

Colombia's selection board found that the Eurofighter is a very capable aircraft, better than Rafale in some respects, but is very expensive and complex to maintain. The Colombian Air Force wanted to buy Tranche 3 aircraft, but it was offered only Tranche 1 and 2 for immediate delivery. Tranche 3 aircraft had very long delivery times, and financing costs were also higher than for the other competitors.

Rafale unrestricted, shortest delivery times

While Colombia was faced with an American refusal to adapt the F-16V, the high costs of the Eurofighter and the limitations of Gripen, the French marketing team in mid-2022 decided to improve its offer, Pucara reported, and removed end-user restrictions, which also existed on the Gripen and the Eurofighter. In addition, France agreed not only to provide Meteor air-to-air missiles, but also to integrate the Israeli-made Derby and Python 5 missiles and Spice bombs, "making it the most capable of all" the competitors, according to the Infodefensa website.

France also promised it could deliver the first aircraft one year after contract signature -- the shortest delivery time of all the competitors. This is essential because Kfir will be retired at the end of 2023, when they wll be 42 years old and will have served for 30 years in the Colombian Air Force. Their replacement is mandatory as the manufacturer no longer provides support, and spare parts are difficult to obtain.

In fact, the improved Rafale offer solved several of Colombia's problems. Its electronic warfare capability is customizable, and France will give Colombia access to the software source codes needed to modify it on its own. Rafale will also integrate Colombia's stock of Israeli-supplied weapons, reducing the need to replace them. Another advantage is that, since it was designed to operate from aircraft carriers, it can operate from short runways, a capability that the Typhoon and the F-16 cannot match. This allows them to operate in places like Tres Esquinas, Grupo Aéreo del Oriente and San Andrés airfields.

Rafale also requires less logistical support and is more versatile to operate. It is also more maneuverable, with a better thrust-to-weight ratio, and in addition has an AESA radar with better coverage than its competitors, according to local media reports.

https://www.defense-aerospace.com/colombia-selects-rafale-may-sign-contract-this-week/

[Benji87]

Dit is voor de Swedish Space Force   

Zie ook dat je het zelf in mekaar moet zetten. Dus kan je nu al op papier meegeven dat die planning nooit gehaald gaat worden 

[Sparkplug]

https://twitter.com/GarethJennings3/status/1721920139761754363/photo/1

De eerste beelden van de Next Generation Fighter voor Zweden !   
Er wordt gezien de afbeeldingen samenwerking gezocht o.a. met Denemarken, Lego Group Billund en ook de Interstellair Sienar Fleet Group (Dark Site)

Dit is voor de Swedish Space Force   

[Harald]

https://twitter.com/GarethJennings3/status/1721920139761754363/photo/1

De eerste beelden van de Next Generation Fighter voor Zweden !   
Er wordt gezien de afbeeldingen samenwerking gezocht o.a. met Denemarken, Lego Group Billund en ook de Interstellair Sienar Fleet Group (Dark Site)

[Benji87]

Als het MUM-T concept met een type met de grootte van een F-35 kan, dan zou Saab ook in staat moeten zijn om zoiets te ontwikkelen. Het is de vraag hoeveel de Zweedse overheid hierin wil investeren.

Ik vind het daar nog wat te vroeg voor om te zeggen. Bij de F35 zit het ook allemaal nog maar in de concept fase en is de rol van de loyal wingman nog vrij beperkt. De concepten voor de huidige 6th gen fighters gaan veel verder dan dat. Daar willen ze de loyal wingman echt voorzien van air to ground en air to air capaciteit. Dat vereist grotere drones en zeer waarschijnlijk ook een groter toestel die ze kan lanceren en besturen. Maar tijd zal dat uit moeten wijzen.

[Harald]

Sweden commits to future fighter procurement decision in 2031: Official

A decision has not been made so far on an Initial Operating Capability (IOC) date for a future fighter, but a wide range of planning activities will inform the 2031 procurement decision, an official said.

After joining and then leaving the UK-led Future Combat Air System (FCAS), the Swedish military is now holding off on deciding its path to a next-generation fighter jet until 2031, after it can assess the "risks and possibilities" with different approaches, an official said today.

Three options are on the table for Stockholm: Either "build a system, develop a system with someone, or... acquire a system," said the official, speaking under Chatham House Rules at the International Fighter Conference here in Madrid. "It's an open question."

"We did have both bilateral and trilateral cooperation with Britain and also with Italy on the FCAS program," said the official. "We walked away from that about a year ago and started some national studies... connecting to what capabilities are needed for the future." The official declined to comment on the reason behind Sweden ending collaboration with the UK and Italy.

A decision has not been made by authorities so far on an Initial Operating Capability (IOC) date for whatever it chooses for a next-gen fighter, but a wide range of planning activities will inform the 2031 procurement decision.

Indicating some desired level of control by Sweden over a next-gen timeline, the official said Phase 1 will cover concept exploration between 2023 to 2025 with Phase 2 to address concept and technology development from 2026 to 2030. Operational analysis, system concepts and aircraft demonstrators are among the main lines of effort that are included across the two phases. Technology development activities will span from 2023 beyond 2030, while demonstrator planning will commence in 2026.

Disclosure of the long-term program planning comes after Sweden's defense material agency (FMV) confirmed in September that it was prioritizing future fighter studies and "fact finding," while Saab has also said it wants to be a "player" in the program, which would ideally include a role as a "systems of systems" integrator.

The French, German and Spanish Future Combat Air System (FCAS) program also known as SCAF and the Italian, Japanese and UK-led Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), previously known as FCAS also, have both committed to a system-of-systems approach, where development of a next-generation fighter will allow them to control adjunct aircraft, effectors and sensors in ways previous combat jets have not been capable.

GCAP is expected to be in service from 2035, with FCAS five years later.

"One thing that has not been decided in Sweden is IOC for the next generation fighter, so therefore that is quite a challenge because we need to be agnostic. ... We can't just look into one technology level and align that [development] to an IOC time," said the official. He added that "risks" and "possibilities" must be weighed so a procurement decision can be reached, including what role Swedish government and industry would play in development.

"What has happened is that we have had a decision to go fully into a concept phase for the next-generation system, that [approval] happened the week after midsummer this year," explained the official. "So what we will do is, we will need to deliver concepts, both on the system [a new fighter] and also on a system-of-system level. We need to do technology development and integration activities. We need to build up the national competence both on the government side, but also on the industry side."

Sweden has time on its side to deliberate about which path to take for a future fighter procurement as Saab's Gripen E, the backbone of the Swedish Air Force, is meant to be operated until 2060. Older Gripen C/D aircraft are expected to be retired between 2035 and 2040, or beyond, because of the war in Ukraine, according to the official.

But holding off until the end of the decade to make a firm future fighter procurement commitment risks losing industrial influence over design requirements on GCAP or FCAS, if Stockholm so decides to join one or the other, though officials from each program have often stressed they continue to be open to new partners.

On that front, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia continues to express interest in joining GCAP, though the UK has said there is "no definitive timeline" associated with making a decision on Riyadh's potential involvement. Elsewhere, French President Emmanuel Macron announced in June that Belgium would join FCAS.

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/11/sweden-commits-to-future-fighter-procurement-decision-in-2031/

[Harald]

Saab wilde de FS2020, de Zweedse overheid zag dit om budgettaire reden niet zitten, het alternatief kennen we in de vorm van de Gripen E/F, waarbij ik vermoed dat dit het laatste 'autonome' gevechtsvliegtuig uit Zweden zal zijn. (al laat ik me graag verrassen).

Mijn gevoel zegt dat we misschien wel verbaasd zullen worden door de Zweden.
Misschien dat de samenwerking met Boeing ook wel een optie zal zijn, zie ook de ontwikkeling van de T-7A Red Hawk trainer 

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Het is de vraag hoeveel de Zweedse overheid hierin wil investeren.

Saab wilde de FS2020, de Zweedse overheid zag dit om budgettaire reden niet zitten, het alternatief kennen we in de vorm van de Gripen E/F, waarbij ik vermoed dat dit het laatste 'autonome' gevechtsvliegtuig uit Zweden zal zijn. (al laat ik me graag verrassen).

[Sparkplug]

Nee dat klopt en daarom is het ook wel interessant om te zien naar hoe de Zweden hier over denken. De partijen die nu een 6e generatie fighter ontwikkelen gaan nu namelijk allemaal voor een stealth vliegtuig wat als moeder schip moet gaan functioneren voor drones. En dat zal dus sowieso uitlopen op een toestel van behoorlijke proporties. Dus hoe ziet Zweden dat voor zich? Kunnen zij ook zo'n concept ontwikkelen met een eenmotorig toestel of gaat Zweden voor 5th gen + ontwikkeling?

Als het MUM-T concept met een type met de grootte van een F-35 kan, dan zou Saab ook in staat moeten zijn om zoiets te ontwikkelen. Het is de vraag hoeveel de Zweedse overheid hierin wil investeren.