With the death of the FCAS project Germany is looking to develop a 6th gen fighter by itself. My question is how?They have not made a fighter by themselves since 1940s and have key technological gaps. While they are going to receive a large amount of money with rising defence budget, this isn't a solution that money can solve, these missing gaps will take decades to develop.Their most recent experience with the Typhoon, was a British led project where Germany industry once again fell into its support role. I can't see them being able to do this alone. To me their ideal partners seem to be the British but that ship has long sailed.So how can Germany industry built a 6th gen fighter?
as far as i know germany doesn't have authorization to build its own fighter planes. They need to get approval from UK, France, US and Russia.
>>65247295I don’t think there is anyone really. We’ve already seen how it goes with France. The Swedes have vastly different doctrine and requirements. The middle eastern nations only really bring money. India guarantees a disaster. GCAP gathered up the “best” crowd for a multinational project, but I still see the potential success of it as very tenuous. I know media reporting on it is generally positive, but all they’ve really done at this point is sign contracts. They’re not at the difficult stage and we haven’t seen their results. I’m just not sold that a properly multinational program will actually work.
Euro trannies can't make good hardware. You will buy superior American stuff like you always do.
> So how can Germany industry built a 6th gen fighter?They can't.The only option would be to spend 10's of billions of dollars and 20-30 years developing an engine core from scratch, which they can't afford to do. It would still take another paralell program for the airframe/sensors/etc that would also take 10+ years and tens of billions of dollars.Germany doesn't have ~30 years and ~$50-100B to spend. They need 6th gen fighters by ~2040-50, that's 15-25 years.
>Who can Germany develop a 6th gen fighter?What did the ESL mean by this?
>>65247295Germany can build a 6th gen on their own.
>>65247366>You will buy superior American stuff like you always do.Nah these are the new Make Israel Great Again times. Most EU leaders are anti US now. They won't buy American until you get those Israel slaves out.
>>65247384They could buy the hot parts of the Tempest engine from RR.
I am team GCAP but I dream of a single engine navalizable fighter built with SAAB & Embraer
>>65247384Why do they need 6th gen fighters by then? Who are their potential geopolitical enemies that will also be fielding 6th gen aircraft?>the USEven if they could boot strap one it'd be irrelevant because nobody is out stripping the US MIC for cutting edge kit for the next 50 years at least.>chinaLol. Lmao. Maybe they'll have a working 5th gen by then.>russiaCan't even build 4th gens at anything above artisinal production numbers now, will not be building anything but 4th gens at artisinal production numbers in 25 years.>PolandKurwa motherfuckers, they won't get got again.>FranceThe French can't even figure out how to stop fucking up every project they touch through sheer arrogance, they'll be using Rafaeles for decades.
>>65247472RR doesn't make the hot parts of the tempest engine, and there is zero chance in hell they'd sell it to them even if they did.>>65247478You're right, might as well not even have a military.
>>65247452poland just ordered another batch of f35s
>>65247489>RR doesn't make the hot parts of the tempest engine, and there is zero chance in hell they'd sell it to them even if they did.>Rolls-Royce has the lead on the combustor, high-pressure turbine and exhaust nozzles.MTU could easily do the rest, they specialise on compressors.
>>65247489It's more the idea they need a 6th gen in 15-25 years. 5th gen aircraft will work just fine for everyone not trying to keep up with the US for the better part of the century. Inexpensive cruise missiles, (as much as this hurts to say) drones and counterdrones, highly mobile artillery and MLRS systems, and spammable common production AD are where European nations really need to be focusing their efforts until the EU actually unfucks itself and unifies the continents. Trying to play power projection against super powers isn't going to work, trying to sell Fabrik en Deustchland is a fucking struggle with how autistic the German government is regarding their MIC, and the odds of the EU breaking up into warring nation states again is pretty fucking low. Even if the EU dissolved tomorrow Germany is still one of the largest, most advanced economies in terms of industrial and military output. The idea that they don't have the time to develop a 6th gen simply because of some arbitrary date when the US is probably fielding them as a primary aircraft is ridiculous.>but they'll always be 40-50 years behind the USBarring a complete collapse of the US everyone will always be 40-50 years behind because nobody else has the combination of money, industrial base, geographic position, and lack of face culture.
>>65247528So what core is RR using?What single crystal superalloy?Sorry, but this shit is getting old, RR isn't doing the GCAP engine core because it's based on the IHI XF9.It HAS to be based on the IHI XF9, rolls royce doesn't have an engine core that fits the known XFP30 (the GCAP engine) details, and they basically line up exactly with the IHI XF9.And once again, RR engineers flew to the UK to see the XF9 core up close and within a few months RR and IHI had a joint engine development deal and within 2 years Tempest and GCAP would join together, and then 2 years later the GCAP engine baseline was selected.RR at the time was working on the XG240 core as a digital design.So with 2 competing cores on the table, the RR XG240 which was a digital design that never got built AND was a 3-stream VCE.The IHI XF9-1 was running on a testbench in 2018 and isn't a 3-stream VCE.We also know from RR themselves that GCAP isn't using a VCE engine.> Mark Tivey, business development director for future programs at Rolls, tells Aviation Week... “We understand the adaptive engine, and we have looked at that technology for the mission set this aircraft will face, and we do not believe it earns its way onto the aircraft,” Tivey explains. “You will get benefits from such an engine—an economy mode and a warfighting mode—but the trade-off between the cost and the capability is a pretty fine one, and we do not think it is justified in the mission set for GCAP.”And once again, RR isn't selling shit even if they DID make the core, which they don't since it uses japanese single crystal superalloys that japan sure as fuck didn't share with RR.
>>65247557>Sorry, but this shit is getting old, RR isn't doing the GCAP engine core because it's based on the IHI XF9.It isn't, if it was IHI would be working on the hot section but they are only doing the secondary work on the compressors.
>>65247636Then answer me the basic questionWhat metallurgy are they using, and what engine core design are they using?making an engine from scratch takes 10-15 years, they're already building the XFP30, so they HAVE to be using an existing core design that is already proven, the ONLY engine any of the 3 nations have that is 5th gen+ is the IHI XF9, by sheer process of eliminiation that IS the engine core basis for the XFP30, it has to be. You can't develop a new core in complete secret, or in a short period of time, the laws of physics and our current technology don't allow for it. Especially not an engine that can power a 6th gen fighter.The UK/Rolls Royce doesn't even HAVE the raw metallurgy in a lab for 1800C turbine inlet temps, Japan/IHI corp does. Why the fuck would they be using anything else?
>>65247742Nobody outside people working on the project can answer that question, because it hasn't been released. All we know is who is working on what, and that's only on the demonstrator. From what we can see in the workshare RR owns the hot section, IHI the compressor and AA has the LPT. IHI would have the HPT if what you were stating is true, but they don't. The idea that it is an IHI core and compared to the reality of them not working on the key components of the core is beyond ridiculous.
>>65247802We know because you can't magically invent a core that doesn't exist.Your entire argument relies on a mythical thing that has NEVER HAPPENED IN HISTORY. A fully fledeged secretly developed, total off the books privately funded by RR and never spoken about to their shareholders or the british government.It's an absurd idea that doesn't bare even considering since we KNOW RRs public core development over the last 20 years and we know they were actively working on the XG240 core, which was VCE, and we know it isn't being used for GCAP.There is no other core to use besides the XF9-1.And the name of the GCAP engine itself is a clear extension of that lineage. XF9-1 > XFP30Unlike RR engine naming (XG-40, XG-240) Engine core development takes a decade at a MINIMUM, which means if they're building XFP30 for bench testing in 2027-28, it can't possibly be a brand new core design, it defies basic engineering timelines.
>>65247833RR, GE, and P&W don't develop new hot sections from clean sheets and haven't done so for 40 years. Every new engine is a set of incremental changes from existing designs.
>>65247922Obviously any core is always going to have SOME iterative development from previous core designs, but that's not really the point. You can't build a 6th generation fighter from the XG-40 core, which is the last military core RR developed.RR hasn't done a cleansheet military core since that 1980s core. XG240 was a digital development that handn't been completed by the time GCAP was finalizing the engine selection. And it was a VCE which we know GCAP isn't using.No matter what, your logic doesn't fit. The only engine that fits the current timeline of events, known budget/engineering programs, and performance figures required for a 6th gen engine is the IHI XF9. To pretend they're using some unknown never before heard of engine core that has appeared out of thin air that you can't name is just so absurd there really isn't any more point discussing this.I get it, Rolls Royce was an amazing company for many years and the idea they're co-developing a japanese engine is upsetting to you, but it's the truth and when all the testing ends up happening in japan for the engine you're gonna have to invent some new cope about how RR is just being polite or some other bullshit excuse. it has taken ~20-30 years to go from the F119/F135 to the XA101/103They're the "same core" too using your logic.
>>65247833>We know because you can't magically invent a core that doesn't exist.>You can't make a new engine core it is impossibleAh so I guess the first fell out the starts and we've only been iterating on it. My previous point absolutely dismantles your entire argument, it can not be an IHI core because they are not working on the hot section of the core. What you are arguing has never happen in history. You don't duplicate the core, and have that nation only touch the compressors. For that to even happen would require IHI to give RR all developed technologies they used in the construction, destroying their prized home-built skills. I do not know why you are coping so hard, the core is one being developed by RR and IHI is very much in the backseat due to their limited workshare.
>>65247991No it doesn't, because iterating a 4th gen core into 5th or 6th gen DEMONSTRABLY takes 10-20 years, not 3-4 like GCAP has had. The only logical timeline that makes ANY sense with reality is the IHI XF9 core. Get fucked or give me a real answer.Are you ACTUALLY committing to this being an RR XG-40 derived engine?
>>65248029>IHI is relegated to supporting RR on what will be IHI's greatest aeronautical engine to date>But somehow it is their engine despite being only a supporting elementYou are delusional.
>>65248029The engine in the B-21 is a PW5000 derived engine. It is the closest thing to 6th gen currently flying. The PW5000 and XG-40 are the same age.
>>65248069>>65248047You're a joke, tell me the GCAP engine lineage or shut the fuck up."we don't know" yes we fucking do, engineering doesn't happen in vacuum ESPECIALLY in the UK where there is no such thing as a black budget.There is no sekrit upgraded XG-40 core, we'd have seen it happening, because it takes a decade or more.It costs hundreds of millions of dollars and RR would be shouting about it if they were doing that.Instead they talked their asses off for years about the XG240 instead and now it's silence while they work on the XFP30.
>>65248069>>65248047https://note.com/gijutsu_lab/n/n7729220c6965
>>65248087>You're a joke, tell me the GCAP engine lineage or shut the fuck up.That information hasn't been made available, all we know is that it is not one from IHI, as they have been relegated to working on the compressors while RR is doing the heavy work. So sorry, it is a British engine and Japan is just participating.
>>65248105Again, it doesn't NEED to be made available.Did anyone tell you the XA101 and 103 were based on the F119 and F135? No, it's self evident because those are P&W's 5th gen cores so of course they're the basis for their 6th gen cores.I can tell you right now the GCAP core IS based on the XF9-1 core, I am so fucking confident i would HAPPILY wager my entire retirement savings on that bet.
It’s crazy how much you guys argue about what’s just going to be a 5th generation F-111
>>65248118It's ITAR freeThat's really the biggest reason it gets attention.Also the XFP30 engine is targeting ~200-300kW (XF9-1 did 180kW) which would put GCAP at ~3-5x the electrical power of an F-35.
>>65248110>Again, it doesn't NEED to be made available.It does if you want to claim that is it a Japanese engine when they are not working on the hot section.>>65248101Why are you linking a public blog? How desperate are you? If I write one will you accept it? Embarrassing honestly.
>>65248129They don't need to work on the hot section, they already finished the hot section, they're letting RR work on coatings and the ALM cooling tiles for the combustor that they pioneered from the Pearl10X.They're also integrating the E2SG which requires them to work on the high pressure turbine.THAT'S what RR is working on when they're doing the "high pressure turbine and combustor", they're not doing the core development, they're agumenting an existing japanese core design.Because again, the engineering timelines literally make ZERO sense otherwise.
>>65248137>They don't need to work on the hot section, they already finished the hot sectionNo, they haven't, because RR is developing the hot section. IHI only has design authority over the compressors.For the initial engine demonstrator:>IHI Corporation is developing the compressor>Avio Aero the low-pressure turbine>Rolls-Royce has the lead on the combustor, high-pressure turbine and exhaust nozzles
>>65248152Lmao again, based on what core?you can't answer because RR doesn't have one, they can't invent a new one from scratch in the timeline we've seen. That only leaves the XF9-1.I've asked you a least 2 dozen times over the last 2 years to name a fucking RR engine that it's based on and you god damn can't, you never can, you still haven't, you hide behind the fact for PR reasons everyone calls it a "clean sheet" design beacuse RR can't stand in front of parliment and admit they're a subcontractor on a japanese engine.But it's all just face saving bullshit, engineering doesn't care about your politics or nationality.Who has 5th and 6th gen metallurgy? JapanWho has run a high thrust slimline modern core? JapanWho has run an engine and actually achieved 1800C turbine inlet temps? JapanBut no, it's RR leading despite the fact they don't have a modern single crystal superalloy, they don't have any ground testing for a modern core, they've never run a core above ~1600C, even on the ground, etc, etc.It's absurd that you still think it's a RR derived engine .
>>65248162>Lmao again, based on what core?We don't know, but we know it isn't IHI because they aren't working on the core.
>>65248165Seriously, I think you might be genuinely retarded.We know for 100% certitainty it is based on one of two cores.The XG-40, or the IHI XF9-1.Those are the only two military cores either RR or IHI owns the IP of and has completed ground testing.XG-40 was designed in the late 1970s and early 1980s.XF9-1 was designed between ~2005-2018.XG-40 caps out at ~1550C turbine inlet tempXF9-1 caps out at ~1800C turbine inlet tempAnd we already know from XFP30 testing that they've already done component testing for 2000C temps.So do you think RR has magically dusted off and advanced the XG-40 core over the last ~3 years since they dropped the XG240 idea AND managed to squeeze another ~450C from it?Or did they just use the existing japanese design that was running less than a decade ago at 1800C already. Genuinely, I wish I knew you in real life, i'd fucking steal allllll your god damn money on this bet.
>>65248183>Seriously, I think you might be genuinely retarded.You are the one claiming that IHI developed, past tense now apparently, the core yet they are not working on it. It can't be done, or they are giving away all their IP to RR. So either they are not developing it as everything points to, or they have given RR all their technological developments. Do you not see how insane your claims are?
>>65248126And if everything goes perfectly for GCAP you’ll still be able to buy at least twice the number of F-35s for the same price. Probably closer to three times as many if you aren’t one of the countries building it.
>>65248209The XF9-1 already exists moron.Yes they developed (past tense) the core.It's being augmented for the XFP30 and GCAP.You're the only one choosing to interpret workshare splits with DEVELOPMENT ownership. I already explained WHY RR has workshare on those components, you're the one who insists it means more than that.I've laid out a clear timeline for the XFP30 development that goes back to ~2005 with the XF9. You've constantly relied on some mythical core that has no engineering lineage that has sprung up out of nowhere, with no budget trail or idea of where it came from. Sorry, but from my perspective, you're clearly retarded or insane. >>652482449 women can't make a baby in 1 month
>>65248253>nine women babyI’m afraid I don’t follow
>>65248267Having 3 F-35s that can do ~150kW each doesn't matter if you need a single airframe that can output 400kW+Implying a lower tier airframe can simply replace a higher tier one with MORE lower tier airframes is illogical.There are simply certain problems that need the more capable platform.
>>65248253Don't worry you can stop guessing I have found the answer to the core question. Checkmate.>For the demonstrator engine, Italy’s Avio Aero is developing the low-pressure turbine, Japan’s IHI Corporation is developing the compressor and Rolls-Royce is leading on the combustor, the high-pressure turbine and exhaust nozzles. The engine’s core design has been informed by Rolls-Royce’s Advance1 military powerplant demonstrator and the Pearl 10X business jet engine, a medium bypass powerplant based on the company’s Advance 2 demonstrator.https://web.archive.org/web/20250909202053/https://aviationweek.com/defense/aircraft-propulsion/gcap-engine-team-makes-progress-demonstrator
>>65248269I’m saying it will die on the export market on cost grounds. Look at how many F-16s were sold vs the F-15. And you absolutely can replace more higher end airframes with a bunch of lower ones. In fact the heavy lifting in every recent war has been done by cheaper workhorses rather than insanely expensive silver bullets. At a price of let’s say $300 million per airframe most potential customers are going struggle to buy enough to afford keeping more than a dozen mission ready at any one time, assuming the available par to current generation stealth aircraft, and not worse when it is every involved nations’ first crack at fielding a domestic stealth fighter.
>>65248276Again, put up your fucking money, i'll gladly clean you out faggot.You're quoting an RR exec who has to lie to save face because if it got out that RR is working on a a japanese engine the old cunts in the UK would shit themselves because british aviation is the best in the world. You're also not quoting anything I don't already know, I literally quoted that article earlier >>65247557>> Mark Tivey, business development director for future programs at Rolls, tells Aviation Week... “We understand the adaptive engine, and we have looked at that technology for the mission set this aircraft will face, and we do not believe it earns its way onto the aircraft,” Tivey explains. “You will get benefits from such an engine—an economy mode and a warfighting mode—but the trade-off between the cost and the capability is a pretty fine one, and we do not think it is justified in the mission set for GCAP.”He straight up admits they're not using the XG240 core they'd spent the last 5+ years and a few hundred million pounds on.And then to save face brings up the Pearl10X ALM cooling tiles and tries to imply it's the core basis.If you HONESTLY think they're basing the GCAP engine core on a fucking small business jet core, please tell me how to get in contact with you, I would happily take your money.
>>65248316And i'm saying it will succeed on the export market because of the fact no 6th gen fighter will get exported by the US and any nation that wants a 6th gen fighter will have to buy GCAP.It wont be on the scale of F-35 or F-16 or anything, but GCAP could still see 200-300 airframes globally in the first decade or two.
>>65248318It comes from Aviation Week, unless you can find IHI, RR or AA using counter claims it is the highest authority we have on the matter, much better than your blogs. So as I said, checkmate.>he engine’s core design has been informed by Rolls-Royce’s Advance1 military powerplant demonstrator and the Pearl 10X business jet engine, a medium bypass powerplant based on the company’s Advance 2 demonstrator.
>>65248342No one cares besides RR because they're the ones who are getting embarrassed and have to lie in the media to cope about it.IHI doesn't need to put out anything in english because they don't give a fuck what the english press says.They're gonna be building every XFP30 in japan anyway. The UK is going to end up importing engines AND airframes since they're not even retooling BAE warton to build airframes.At BEST RR will assemble the final engines and then you'll import airframe components from Italy before doing final assembly at warton just so the UK can sit there and claim with a straight face to the british public that they're "building 6th gen fighters" in the UK when they're gonna be importing 90% and bolting it together.
>>65248353>No one cares besides RRYou do because you've been asking for it all thread, and now have been proven, undeniably, wrong.
>>65248326The countries that need them are trying to build them right now. There is not a market for 300 airframes at $300 million each in the next decade outside the countries with active development programs. America and China have themselves covered. France will fly the Rafale to the death of the sun before killing Dassault. Germany is the only real maybe among countries that can afford a decent number of airframes. Australia probably can’t afford it and is investing heavily in a burgeoning air and sea drone industry. Beyond that you could maybe squeeze 100 out of the Arab oil states who bought Eurofighter, but nobody else can afford it.
>>65248362Lmao, as in why the fuck would IHI or AA care about calling RR out?It doesn't benefit them, anyone who knows egineering can work out for themselves it's based on the XF9.It would just piss RR off and cause needless friction. Japanese domestic audience aren't reading the english defense press, so why would IHI care if RR is LARPing in the media to save face?>>65248381Writing off australia is retarded, they wouldn't buy a massive fleet, but they could easily buy a dozen or two GCAPs + CCAs to replace their F/A-18 fleet in the 2040s.Also Canada is joining GCAP as an observer and could likely buy ~24-36 airframes in the 2040s as well.Germany would likely be ~50-80 airframesMiddle east as you said could be another 100 or so. Add to that italy with ~36-48, and the UK with ~36-48, and Japan with ~80-110 and you've got 300+ airframes.
>>65248401>Why would IHI or AA care about PR statements on their biggest project ever?Stop being retarded, youve asked for the engine core and weve got undeniable proof.
>>65248412Lmao no the fuck you don't.You STILL can't even tell me what core it's based on.If you actually think it's based on the Advance commerical jet cores like the Avation week quote implies, I've got a bridge in central london i'm sure you'd love to make an offer on. You CANNOT scale a commercial jetliner core into a fighter jet core within a handful of years, and generally you wouldn't even try with a decade+ since they're two different ends of the egineering spectrum when it comes to core designs.
>>65248435>Lmao no the fuck you don't.Yes, we do.>The engine’s core design has been informed by Rolls-Royce’s Advance1 military powerplant demonstrator and the Pearl 10X business jet engine, a medium bypass powerplant based on the company’s Advance 2 demonstrator. - Aviation Week.There is your undeniable proof. To trump it you need a statement from one of the three companies. So checkmate.
>>65248401One dozen gives you probably five mission ready airframes at any given time. Two dozen might push that to ten. Ten available airframes at a cost of ~$6.5 billion is going to be a very hard sell in 2040 when fully autonomous drone fighters have proliferated at a ~$30 million price point. Canada is not doing a larger order than Australia, if they’re ever willing to spend anywhere near that much, which is again unlikely. Germany is very very very far from a sure thing, even their multinational rank program looks poised to break down. I expect them to buy something Airbus led at this point. Middle East could eventually buy a lot, but that depends on what all is on offer and how big drones have gotten. Don’t count F/A-XX out of the export conversation. It’s explicitly using less expensive/sensitive technologies and just on the basis of carrier airframe size limitations is likely to be much cheaper. GCAP is going to be the size of a regional bomber and that makes it very expensive. Scale efficiencies are far from amazing on a 200 bird or less total production run when they are done in a single country. Split it between three and I’m not sure they exist.
>>65248449Lmaoalright man, at least you've finally settled on it being a business jet engine that runs below the temps GCAPs engine will be running at and at a thrust range that is drastically different, with a totally different physical footprint and cycle design.But yeah, keep thinking that.
>>65247295They will somehow get in on GCAP or else they will buy more F-35s until they can switch over to GCAP.If GCAP fails then America will never let the rest of the world live it down.
>So how can Germany industry built a 6th gen fighter?More successfully than GCAP
>When Germany becomes the leading nation for loitering ammunition, CCAs and manned aircraft in Europe within years!
>>65247306Lol wut. You think it's still 1945? Germany can make anything it likes nowadays.>>65247295Korea or Japan. I prefer Japan, for old times sake.
>>65249535Thing is GCAP has multiple nations that have the experience and technological base to go it alone, France can go it alone, Germany can't which is the entire question of the thread.
>>65247295Best they can do is to to use the procurement funds to buy GCAP as a stopgap (+ negotiate whatever workshare they can get) and spend the development funds they would have spent on FCAS to develop new technologies for the next generation of fighters. Basically what Japan did when they realized the US was going to keep screwing them over with crappy defense deals.
>>65247295Throw in with the koreans and reboot Messerschmidt and Fokker
>>65247833This is one of the weaker points.The fact that:XF9-1 XFP30looks similar,while:XG-40 XG-240looks different,doesn't prove lineage.Engine designations are often marketing, project-management, or program identifiers rather than strict genealogies.
Rolls made the Panavia Tornado in secret
>>65250733Korea's aerospace industry is even less developed than Germany's. All they have is a trainer and a baby F22 that was co-developed with Lockheed.
>>65247295For what purpose? It's cheaper to just let America patrol the skies. What nation in the world needs an air superiority fighter besides China?
>>65250817Russia.
>>65250823Russia can't even afford to replace the planes they lost. If North Korea had an aviation industry, hohols would be flying kamikaze planes into Ukrainian buildings right now.
>>65250830>Russia can't even afford to replace the planes they lost.
>>65247295KYS ESL
>>65247295They'll have to do it themselves, take the long slow road, and rely on older designs or US Airframes in the interim. The multinational thing is never going to work for the same reason the US didn't properly work before it was federalized. When you have different states with different interests, nobody can cooperate on things like a military or a navy or logistics, because their interests are different.If the EU were to federalize and just become 'The United States of Europe' they could probably cooperate on things like this because the over-arching Fed could simply order the various states to do what it wants under penalty of prosecution if they refuse. But that's not the case with the EU - every nation thinks it is entitled to its own small voice, so like the States in the US before federalization, they're going to fight and bitch and undermine over every little thing. That leaves Germany needing to work on this shit entirely by itself if they want a serious contender. Yes, its expensive, yes, it takes a long time. Alternatively they could stop LARPing as an anti-US power and just collaborate with the US, with the understanding that the US is a better mono-polar power than Russia or China, and with the EU not having its own oil (Norway is not in the EU), they're never going to be a polar power no matter how much they might want to.
>>65250837There's an idea that I've been kicking around in my head that the current EU is akin to the Articles of Confederation. Maybe someday, we'll see a European Constitution promulgated.
>>65247384>They can't.Eh, they just have to lay out enough cash to reverse engineer the engines and systems they bought from the US, then make them fit with the way the Germans build stuff. They had a stealth project the US told them to stop dicking around with and they have the documentations from multiple VSTOL projects, so they can play catch-up based on local solutions there as well. It should be doable.The French or Italians will probably build the the airframe though.
>>65250859>just reverse engineer one of the crown jewel technologies that the US and others treat on a similar level as nuclear scerets.Yeah you're retarded.
>>65247295There will never be another 6th generation fighter. I think what we'll see instead are 2nd generation drones: They'll cost between $8-$20 million apiece. Germany's strategy will be to launch millions of them in a time of war and overwhelm any opposition fighter force by just carpeting their airfields with drones, and win that way. Why would you need fighters if the enemy has no planes?
>>65250925The ultimate problem with drones is the same problem with manned fighters.Once you make them fit all the sensors/computers/munitions/etc you need, it's by necessity large, heavy, requires expensive engines to fly and power all the computers and sensors.By which point you've just built a modern 5th/6th gen fighter but you've saved ~5-10% of the weight by removing the human pilot, but now instead of being optionally manned (like the F-47 and GCAP), it's entirely unmanned and can never take advantage of real-time human-in-the-loop decision making that the F-47 or GCAP will be able to.And your 6th gen equivalent drone will still cost $200m+. Sorry, but you can't just shit out 1 million "dumb" uavs and expect them to actually compare to a 6th gen system of systems.If your ENTIRE war strategy relies on them not knowing about your 1+ million UAV swarm preemptively attacking before they can take off, you've already lost.
>>65247295Realistically we can’t. Best case scenario is either we join GCAP, get the American 6th gen or some Russian/Chinese wildcard.
>be Germany>form a German-Spain-Swedish alliance for a new 6th gen fighter>see how GCAP and SCAF collapse because of the lack of funding>become the sole aerospace player in Europe
>>65249535GCAP is literally a dead horse.
>>65251315>Be America>Sell more F-35s>Profit>Sell more F-35s>Profit >Sell more F-35s >Profit
>>65251315Germany/spain/sweden can't make an engine.Also, GCAP is literally ~2 weeks away from a multi-year full development contract. With canada set to formally announce their participation as an observing member in late june or july.
>>65251315This is unironically the most realistic outcome to date. There is a reason why the French and British are suddenly concerned about German spending on Defence and German willingness to support their own industry and taking advantage of the many German start ups
>>65251339HAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHYou're serious aren't you as well?AHAHHAHAHAAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAThanks for that anon, i needed a good laugh for this afternoon.
>>65251328>canada[sic]Those fuckers better not import French as a language into the GCAP program.
>>65251339Yes and no. Germany and Japan are doing some high level deals right now. I wouldn’t surprise me if Japan is looking for a partner as committed as them vs UK and Italy.
>>65251349English is the universal international language of military aviation. It has been for Canada since the RCAF was created. There have never been french cockpit/software translations made available in the canadian airforce. There ARE specific Francophone units (such as 3e Escadre at CFB Bagotville in Quebec) where the "language of work" on the ground (maintenance huddles, administrative paperwork, and daily base life) is French. However, the technical manuals for the aircraft they fix and the cockpits they fly are in English.
>>65251359I just fucking hate Quebec so much. That fag J.J. McCullough radicalized me.
>>65251361Just take solace knowing any french speaking pilots are forced to learn english.
>>65251364
>>65247306The restriction only applies to aircraft designed to be capable of carrying nuclear weapons, IIRC. A pure fighter should be fine.
>>65247306>>65251443Is this in the 2+4 treaty or something?
>>65251454Yeah the nuke restriction is. They're also not allowed to base nuclear-capable aircraft in former East Germany I think?
>>65251454It’s nonsense
>>65251466Those are two different things. The nuke restriction is true for the former-GDR. However, I've never seen anything that says that German warplanes can't be based in the former-GDR. Also, couldn't the Germans just build or lease an airbase in far-western Poland if that was true?
>>65251476>No foreign armed forces, nuclear weapons, or the carriers for nuclear weapons would be stationed or deployed in six states (the area of Berlin and the former East Germany)From the wikipedia summary of the treaty. I am not a lawyer or expert on international law, however.
>>65251489I might spend tn after work skimming an English translation of the treaty. t. lawyerfag
>>65251489>>65251504(me)Kek. The talk page for that Wikipedia article is a clusterfuck.
Sounds like the whole "no foreign troops in the former-GDR" thing is a moot point in practice.
>>65251454>>65251466Don't be retarded. The 2+4 contract only stipulates that Germany cannot own nuclear weapons. Germany already own f-35 which are nuclear capable but the bombs are owned by the US>>65251489This only means Germany can station them in Büchel (Rhineland-Palatinate) but not in former eastern Germany. This obviously has the massive loophole of in-flight refueling and FCAS range.Not sure what this thread is about. Germany/Spain can do everything except the hot part of the engine. But they can contract it out to someone else. Williams Canada, Safran, Rolls Royce, etc. Even US Core could be possible when Trump has left the white house in two years.Question is whether this is even sensible. There won't be a gen 7 due to drones, so dumping a lot of money in a manned gen 6 is essentially a dead end. Maybe Germany should rather focus on an army where interceptor drones outnumber Russia 10:1. Would be cheaper and more future proof.
The 2+4 Treaty is actually really short. I encourage any interested Anons to read it. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Final_Settlement_with_Respect_to_GermanyHere's the crux of the matter. See picrel. (1/2)
>>65251662Then see picrel. How the fuck is this supposed to be interpreted? Not a rhetorical question.(2/2)
>>65251662What crux? It just mean US bases in eastern Germany cannot store nuclear weapons.
>>65251723Is that "and" inclusive or non-inclusive?
>>65251733it's:1. Foreign forces2. nuclear weapons3. nuclear weapon carriers (F-35)...are not allowed in eastern Germany. And to this date these are not stationed in eastern Germany. Which is ironic considering F-35s are stationed in Poland. But it also makes you understand why Germany wants a long range fighter-bomber FCAS.
>>65251773I'm not sure that's quite it. One: Germany is explicitly able to have nuclear-capable systems in the former-GDR so long as they are only there in a conventional capacity. Two: Is it foreign nuclear-armed forces aren't allowed? Or foreign forces and/or foreign nukes aren't allowed? Three: Due to the minute added, foreign forces can definitely transit eastern Germany. But at what point does transit become deployment? My current conclusion is that there are debatable questions arising from the text of the treaty. You touched on the funny part: That USAG Poland exists. WIth USAG Poland and USAG Bavaria, I'm not sure the US needs to station troops in eastern Germany. My opinion is that they could.
>>65251805let's be honest herethe treaty that imposes those terms isn't the paper it's written on anymorethe western signatories don't care and the russians well they are stuck waging a war of aggression against a country they offered security guarantees by treatythe only ones that care are autist Germans that can't think past "but it's the law"
>>65251850Fair enough. Time to get drunk.
>>65251805>Germany is explicitly able to have nuclear-capable systems in the former-GDR so long as they are only there in a conventional capacity.which one are those? The one in Holzdorf is helicopters the other one German airbases in eastern Germany are transporters like the A400 and AWACS. The one in Buechel is the only one officially with nuclear weapons. No tornados or F-35s in eastern Germany afaik>Is it foreign nuclear-armed forces aren't allowed? Or foreign forces and/or foreign nukes aren't allowed? Nuclear weapons. (period) That includes domestic and foreign ones. The 2+4 contract makes it clear that Germany cannot decide on its own to have its own nuclear weapons so domestic weapons is a moot point to begin with.>Due to the minute added, foreign forces can definitely transit eastern Germany. But at what point does transit become deployment? Who gives a shit this is just a contract to make the cold war hot again and so that Russia can save face. Probably as soon as the weapons get unloaded from its carrier they are "stationed".
>>65251354>I wouldn’t surprise me if Japan is looking for a partner as committed as them vs UK and ItalySo not Germany who can't make up their minds about anything except wanting to spend the money on their own industry which is exactly what they won't be able to do with GCAP.
>>65250970>Once you make them fit all the sensors/computers/munitions/etc you need, it's by necessity large, heavy, requires expensive engines to fly and power all the computers and sensors.You really don't though. You build and outfit drones in the same way a V1 or a Volkjager: cheap, low-quality, relying on mass of numbers to inflict the damage a fighter never can. A 6th gen fighter cannot intercept and shoot down the 50 drones you can build for the same price.
>>65252671Then you have nowhere near the same capability and a true 6th gen system of system totally out classes your drones.Dumb raw mass is simply not the answer and most military planners agree, the only ones saying otherwise are just coping because they don't have the budget to do otherwise.It's not like a nation with 6 gen manned fighters wont ALSO have those same cheap low quality drones TOO, they'll just also have a 6th gen system of system that you wont
>>65248449NTA, but the last scale model design shown at an expo for the GCAP propulsion was literally a 1:1 scale model of the IHI XF9-1 btw.
>>65253092XF9-1 specific model for comparison.
>>65253092>>65253094They're the same, but clearly also not identical, so that means someone had to sit down, program, and fabricate an entirely new physical model from scratch, yet still retained the exact stage counts, architecture, and core layout of the XF9-1.Pretty much confirms it. Why would they bother making an almost identical copy to the existing XF9 model for the GCAP scale model if the GCAP scale model was using a different core layout? If you just wanted a marketing filler model, you'd have just reused the older XF9 model already shown off, not built an entierly new one for GCAP.
>>65251454>2+4East Germany no longer exists, Soviet Union no longer existsBoothh hGermanies signed whihilel technically not sovereign and under occupation.Since then:US pivoted away to China or Iran or somethingUK brexited themselves into a slight brownoid epidemicFrance offered to share nukes with GermanyYeah I don't think that is still relevant today.
>>65253147Are you drunk or something?
>>65251668This is pretty much a legalese way for Germany to say 'not to worry, I have a permit'And the permit is that paragraph there that comes down to 'I can do whatever I want whenever I want by stating that everything is reasonably and responsibly and takes into account the security interests of everyone'
>>65253165No, my keyboard is shitting itself, double letters half the time, delayed inputs the other half
>>65253180>poor fag or lazy retardyeesh, opinion discarded.
>>65251860>>65251850>the only ones that care are autist Germans that can't think past "but it's the law"If you want to get technical about this, Germany has a law that prohibits setting off nuclear weapons and building nuclear weapons.But yeah, upholding the law is important in German culture.
>>65253182Hey it's almost new I only bought it in . . .2019.Fuck.
>>65253188>upholding the law is important in German cultureit is everywhere in the Western world. but in the rest of it the spirit of the law is most important, reaching the intended goal. in Germany they cling a lot more to the letter of the law, as it was worded.the law stops being seen as a tool but more akin to the laws of nature. general liability might as well be the conservation of momentum.the reason behind the law gets forgotten, it's goal ignored and it's letter repeated as a prayer
>>65252928The US' defeat by Iran shows that no Western military, even the best resourced in the world, has come up with a solution to asymmetric techno jihadism. even with massively superior firepower and technology, Western militaries will always come up short against an opponent fighting asymmetrically, because they are unable to fully leverage this firepower indiscriminately like they were able to against the civilian populations of enemy combatants in World War II.Drones have made it impossible for large and powerful conventional militaries to achieve decisive battlefield success even with overwhelming firepower. In the recent cases where it has (such as Azerbaijan vs Armenia and Israel vs Gaza/Lebanon), this was entirely due to the complete and total lack of support for the defender by other countries.This means that any thirdie country, no matter how large, incoherent and dysfunctional as Ukraine and the IRI, are basically unbeatable. Western style conventional militaries are unable to succeed, leverage their expensive airpower assets, and must blow millions on interceptors against drones and missiles that cost thousands, all the while their armored vehicles and infantrymen are killed by FPV drones with hand grenades. It means that no superpower can compel a thirdie shithole to do anything even with the threat of direct military invasion unless it agrees or was pre-arranged to capitulate first like Venezuela.
>>65253314Anon I fucking well know, I am Gerrman. I just happenned to live half my life outside Germany, so I am aware of the idiocy.And I have learrnned to channel my autism into vidya gaems and disccussing yak-butter making on this Tibetan BBS.
>>65253338You will never be German, Achmed.
>>65253338Entschuldigung, ich habe es nicht gewussenI've had the opposite experience living in Germany for a few yearsthe shit I got for asking a neighbor if I could borrow his ID to buy some cigs from the machine right in front of his house because it wouldn't take my ID card (if you are going to lock cigs behind an ID reader at least make it read other EU ID's) was crazy.it was like I was asking him to commit identity fraud in order to plunder someone's bank account. and it's not that he has a problem with smoking he and his wife where chain smokersjust pure autism einem gutes Wochenende
>>65253419I'm just German. Well, my grandma was Polish. I spent half my life in Austria, which is sort of more easygoing Germany with a morbid sense of humor and a hearty dose of I-don't-give-a-fuck from the Balkans.But I was born in Berlin and had my cultural enrichment there. I am very tolerannt and not prejudiced at all, which is why I do not hate all muslims.>>65253429Yeah, the whole Perso thing also feels weird to me. In Austria, you can just use your driver's license. Both are issued by the state, both have your photo on it, what is the big deal?And to be clear, technically you must have that thing on you as soon as you leave your house, and givinig it to someone else techhnically is ID fraud.Just don't smoke, m8. It fucks you up.
>>65251361You'd sing a different tune if Hispanics mass immigrated into your state and made Spanish the default language everywhere.
>>65247295Germany can't even build functioning roads or bridges
>>65247295>They have not made a fighter by themselves since 1940s and have key technological gaps.nothing they can't R&D their way out ofas long...as Airbus+MTU still do the engine togetherit'll be ~11t of thrustfrance puts one in their plane, Germany two in theirseverything else is possible domestically with reasonable cost and timethe other "problem" that remains is total numberGermany + Spain will order 250-300 planeswhich is too littlerealistically they need to get to 400-500 for the plane to make sensetwo main candidatesBelgium might replace their 44 F-16, which would bring it closer to the targetDutch Air Force has 52 F-35 and they might replace them in the 2050s or 2060sPortugal is a wild card, because they work very closely with Spain and have oldish F-16 as well, although just 24, but generally might not be able to afford new onesso numbers are not a roadblock per sebut lots of political lobbying needed to get more countries to commitall that with hard competition with GCAP and even a "good enough" F-35
>>65251315>German-Spain-Swedish alliance for a new 6th gen fighterSweden is really unlikely to jointheir Flysystem 2020 still plans a very light, inexpensive, single engine fighterit's not like they really NEED this anymore, as they are in the EU and NATO nowbut they want to for export reasonswhile Germany and Spain both want a heavy, twin engine, long range, air superiority fightermuch more likely they collaborate with France more closelySaab will buy the engine anyway, which they might get from Safran/MTU (if they continue together, which it looks like they do)
>>65250910>just reverse engineer one of the crown jewel technologies that the US and others treat on a similar level as nuclear scerets.that's only the engine (hot section) thoughmaybe stealth (on an extreme level)rest of the planes are more regular engineering challengesand also where Germany/Spain have plenty domestic companies that are doing wellStealth is something that is solvable within less than a decadethe engine collaboration between Safran and MTU is still ongoingand the companies actually want to continue together intrinsically (complementary experience and skill sets)
>>65247295Same as everyone else who wants to be a great power does. Steal tech, then lock it down as a state secret. But you missed the point. Now you have no R&D of your own, forever playing catch up to private industry. NASA much?
>>65253833>the engine collaboration between Safran and MTU is still ongoingThat actually hasn't been confirmed.And the NGFE was just funneling cash towards the Rafale F5's M88 TREX engine. Only AFTER Germany pays for France to build a new rafale engine was Safran going to bother doing the work of developing a new engine.If M88 TREX takes 10 years, well Germany has to wait 10 years before they even start on a new engine.And Safran has ALSO promised to build a new engine for India in the next 10 years.So Safran needs to upgrade M88 TREX, then build India a new engine for AMCA, then and only then will they begin 6th gen VCE engine development.Does Germany really want to pay for France to upgrade the M88 for rafale (which Germany doesn't fly), then watch Safran work on another engine program for a decade or two, all before actually starting on a new engine Germany would care about?
>>65254017>That actually hasn't been confirmed.one C-level from MTU confirmed they want to continue (i think Pfänder), CEO only said collabartion went well but nothing elseAirbus CEO Faury mentioned in February (so before collapse) that they'll support a 2 fighter 1 engine project as welland a German official said that the engine is a separate issue after FCAS end was announcedit's not an actual confirmationbut really close (and enough for me to believe it'll continue)>And the NGFE was just funneling cash towards the Rafale F5's M88 TREX enginewhy would you think that?the M88 is a testbed for SOME new technologies (mainly material science hot section improvements)and would be stupid to not use itsome other components, like the HPC on the MTU side have already started R&D independentlya new research center for of the variable cycle part is also planned to start in 2027and the new TCF is completely useless for the M88 so developed independently as wellactual planning for NGFE had already startedand all R&D was to start 2027/28 at the latestyour statement is just a complete lie>promised to build a new engine for India in the next 10 yearswhich will literally just be the M88 with minor modifications afaik
>>65254205>which will literally just be the M88 with minor modifications afaikCan't be, it's a "cleansheet" design promissing 110-130kN.TREX barely goes to 90kN and that's pushing M88 to the limits
>>65254205Also you're just repeating PR bullshit that is almost certainly not the whole truth. All of the physical testing has been for M88 is far nothing is doing VCE testing.
>>65247491>poles>europeanLmao
