The UK reveals F22 knock off

XanderCrews · by **XanderCrews** » 18 Jul 2018, 21:44

No buck, no Buck Rogers.

Not gonna happen

marsavian · by **marsavian** » 18 Jul 2018, 22:54

The UK will make it happen for industrial/technology reasons alone so the politicians will make the investment and the announcement went well in the UK Parliament with all parties expressing approval as they can see the job dividend from it. Initially it will be a stealthy aircraft with Typhoon innards to save time but one interesting detail is they plan to eventually have directed energy weapons which would be a first. Without waiting for the French/Germans/Italians/Spaniards to all agree by committee development could actually be quite rapid by Eurofighter standards.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/brit ... r-strategy
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... the-future
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/22 ... challenges

XanderCrews · by **XanderCrews** » 19 Jul 2018, 00:53

marsavian wrote:The UK will make it happen for industrial/technology reasons alone so the politicians will make the investment and the announcement went well in the UK Parliament with all parties expressing approval as they can see the job dividend from it. Initially it will be a stealthy aircraft with Typhoon innards to save time but one interesting detail is they plan to eventually have directed energy weapons which would be a first. Without waiting for the French/Germans/Italians/Spaniards to all agree by committee development could actually be quite rapid by Eurofighter standards.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/brit ... r-strategy
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... the-future
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/22 ... challenges

The UK has proven many many times, that there is such a thing as too high a price on defense. Its the honey moon phase.

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 19 Jul 2018, 04:09

The current UK Government can't adequately fund the Armed Forces today. So, why should we believe they could with such an ambitious 6th Generation Fighter Project??? (i.e. Tempest)

marsavian · by **marsavian** » 19 Jul 2018, 10:59

I could be wrong but I think the private companies involved will build a prototype for this project like the EAP and leave the actual procurement for the government at a time of its choosing. Basically about 130+ Typhoons will have to be replaced from 2040+ and it does not currently appear that it is the UK's wish to do this with F-35A. By that time all the current 138 F-35B proposed order should have been filled so there will be money available then for the Typhoon replacement.

mixelflick · by **mixelflick** » 19 Jul 2018, 18:17

Long, long way to go for this tempest thing. Futuristic shape, but we've seen it before..

As for the Mirage 4000, I always liked that one. No idea how much more capable it was vs. the 2000, but looked the part. Looking at its demo though it appears sluggish, vs. the recent F-35 RIAT demo. Whoa.

Impressive

madrat · by **madrat** » 19 Jul 2018, 21:56

I'm thinking if Mirage 4000 looked like Rafale it might have inspired sales.

mixelflick · by **mixelflick** » 20 Jul 2018, 12:14

madrat wrote:I'm thinking if Mirage 4000 looked like Rafale it might have inspired sales.

How so?

Rafale strikes me as much smaller, and it's not really fair to compare avionics giving the Mirage 4000 was 25 years ago. IMO, the 4000 looked very capable, although flying with 6 IR missiles made me wonder about its BVR capabilities. It looked big, with excellent range and lots of room for growth in that nose. Give her a big radar, BVR missiles and powerful motors and it had potential IMO. I'd imagine Saudi Arabia, perhaps even Israel and others (Australia) would have given it a serious look.

End of the day though it would have to represent around a 25% improvement in combat capability vs. the Mirage 2000, while only being marginally more expensive. Perhaps that's where they fell down on the matter...?

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 21 Jul 2018, 10:47

I love the Raptor but one of the few things I don't like about it is the fact that it is so darn hard to upgrade. It's as if the F-15 and F-16 are more up-gradable than the F-22, Why is that?

Sometimes I think its a victim of it's own prowess, its so good that you can afford to keep it as plain as it was in 2009 and it would beat fighters in 2030, it made the Aim-9M a real threat and the gun a real option again.

But It looks like the Brits will take a page off from that learning curve and make the Tempest with modular MCC, maybe even sensor packages. I wonder if even the airframe will be modular. One can carry more weapons internally, one has nore fuel, one can perform better etc.

geforcerfx · by **geforcerfx** » 22 Jul 2018, 19:14

zero-one wrote:I love the Raptor but one of the few things I don't like about it is the fact that it is so darn hard to upgrade. It's as if the F-15 and F-16 are more up-gradable than the F-22, Why is that?

Software

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 30 Jul 2018, 07:49

lrrpf52 wrote:That's a new one on me.

I understand the opposite to be true due to open architecture designed into the aircraft from the start.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-b ... cant-19420

While the Raptor is the most advanced operational warplane in the Air Force’s inventory, its computer architecture dates back to the early 1990s. The core processors run at 25MHz–since it took so long to get the jet from the design phase to production. Moreover, the Raptor’s software is particularly obtuse and difficult to upgrade–which is partly why integrating the AIM-9X and AIM-120D missiles onto the aircraft has been so problematic. The jet’s avionics would have to be completely revamped for a production restart, not just because they’re obsolete, but also because the jet’s antique processors and other components haven’t been made in decades.

This is difficult to understand for me, they upgraded F-15s with new avionics, computer boxes and all the wiz bang tech hardware, but why is it so hard for the Raptor.

will it cost them billions to create new computer boxes for the Raptor derived from the F-35's.

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 30 Jul 2018, 15:49

That would require them rewriting and re-certifying a vast majority of the software that runs the F-22. Then, you would need to re-certify all of the new hardware throughout the F-22's envelope. That is a lot of flight testing and money.

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 30 Jul 2018, 16:38

SpudmanWP wrote:That would require them rewriting and re-certifying a vast majority of the software that runs the F-22. Then, you would need to re-certify all of the new hardware throughout the F-22's envelope. That is a lot of flight testing and money.

For $1.4B they're doing that for the F-16V.
The sensors, avionics and computer hardware that runs on that bird is in the same league as the F-35.
they're smaller and less powerful but the same generation.
You could argue that its 4th gen platform with 5th gen avionics and sensors.

They also did it for the F-15SA,QA,SG and others

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 30 Jul 2018, 17:26

Not really. For the F-16V, F-15E+, etc there has been a long line of upgrades that came in earlier batches. That, and they do not depend on a tightly controlled & fused core processor like the F-22 does. On top of all of that, the economies of scale are higher with 4th gen updates.

marsavian · by **marsavian** » 30 Jul 2018, 21:55

For its 2025-2030 MLU reports say F-22 will get a thorough computer/sensor/network overhaul with probably bringing all 187 jets up to the same standard. I expect at least an upgrade to EODAS type functionality on the IR side even if ultimately there is no space for EOTS functionality.