Does the reality of the PAK-FA justify a european "5th Generation" fighter?

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

14 years 2 months

Posts: 4,619

Will aircraft like Typhoon Tranche 3 be able to cut it, or is it time for another 20 year development saga i wonder?

Original post

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 4,202

No, because Russia is no enemy to the Western Europe. And honestly the Europeans could not afford a real 5th generation fighter either.

Member for

14 years 2 months

Posts: 4,619

I don't think that "Russia is no enemy to the west" is a good enough arguement though:

Potential enemies are hard to predict and this aircraft is a symbol of what sort of technology will be available to Russian customers in the next 2 decades.

You can argue that the F35 gives Europe a 5th generation capability, but within 10 years Rafale and Typhoon will be about as well developed as possible and the PAK-FA will be exportable in various forms....

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 4,202

And Europe won´t have the money to fight outside Europe either. So it is of no importance for them.

Member for

20 years 4 months

Posts: 6,186

It highly doubtful PAK-FA will be exported beyond Russia and India for decades to come , their domestic requirement is quite high about ~ 500 aircraft between the two

Europe has neither the will nor resources to fund and develop a 5th Gen fighter, and there are many way to deal with an aircraft threat than fund yet another aircraft program.

Russia for eg dealt with US Stealth supremacy by developing capable SAM variants like S-300/400 , VHF/Metric Radar and IADS.

Rafale and Typhoon will be competing with Su-35 in the coming decade on the export market.

Member for

14 years 2 months

Posts: 4,619

ok,

i can see that some people think that Europe is now bankrupt and that there will be no new airframe development for decades (which is how long it would take to field a new system by the way, I'm not expecting a pan-european agreement to be signed tomorrow!!!).

Essentially you are saying that the swedish, french and Eurofighter nations will stop producing aircraft at the cutting edge and make do with system upgrades...?

I think Typhoon and Rafale in their ultimate forms will be very competitive but not in 12-15 years time, when the F35B will be ubiquitous and PAK-FA technology fielded by Russian, China (if they haven't got their own programme up and running yet) and India. Not to mention potential Korean or Japanese systems.

In your world Europe will not be able to compete?

Member for

14 years 9 months

Posts: 421

Another question for europe is Are typhoons and Rafales going to be good enough to take on F-35's and PAK-FA's? I sometimes wonder if in the UK's case whether we should just get 100 Typhoons and cut our losses and develop a new or serious Typhoon upgrade? Put it down to an expensive lesson in how not to do procurement. If the Typhoon had been developed and was in service within 10 years it would have been the correct aircraft flying in the correct environment. When was typhoon project started in the 80's or even earlier in the 70's!! If it had of been flying in service from 1985 onwards and was purchased at a decent rate we would not be building now an aircarft was 20 years to late for the job it's good at.
The uk if doing an other european development needs to have water tight development ensuring that development is proceeded at top speed and flying in service occurs no less than 10 years after first design. This was the UK might actually get the aircraft it needs for current roles.
The drawn out progress of procurement in the UK has really messed things up and has cost loads more than the systems should of. Take Type 45 this should of been in service 10-15 years ago. Typhoon needed in 1988. Nimrod expected 10-15 years ago. CVF asked for in 1998. Type 22-23 replacement. Is this anywhere? Astute submarines deplayed and costing much more than expected becuase of slow build rate and skills gap etc. I could go on all day.

If the UK is going to develop a new fighter to be better than PAK-FA and 5th generation i hope the UK goes with Sweeden for a speedy program. In reality i don't see europe buying or making any 5th generation except for F-35. What a shame. If a 5th generation was to be developed to face PAK-FA etc it will need to be better than PAK-FA becuase of the small numbers of aircarft europe buys. maybe we are in the 6th generation then? extreme stealth, all round radar's, super cruise of mach 2 and 2 seats for battlespace management etc

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 11,742

ok,

i can see that some people think that Europe is now bankrupt and that there will be no new airframe development for decades (which is how long it would take to field a new system by the way, I'm not expecting a pan-european agreement to be signed tomorrow!!!).

Essentially you are saying that the swedish, french and Eurofighter nations will stop producing aircraft at the cutting edge and make do with system upgrades...?

I think Typhoon and Rafale in their ultimate forms will be very competitive but not in 12-15 years time, when the F35B will be ubiquitous and PAK-FA technology fielded by Russian, China (if they haven't got their own programme up and running yet) and India. Not to mention potential Korean or Japanese systems.

In your world Europe will not be able to compete?

There is no need in the moment and for some years to come. The well-being of the people is more important in Europe than some questionable defense claims.

Member for

20 years 4 months

Posts: 6,186

The well-being of the people is more important in Europe than some questionable defense claims.

Agreed , the well being of people of any nation/s is far more important than pumping billions into defence budget and that too for the game of oneupmanship.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 11,742

Another question for europe is Are typhoons and Rafales going to be good enough to take on F-35's and PAK-FA's? I sometimes wonder if in the UK's case whether we should just get 100 Typhoons and cut our losses and develop a new or serious Typhoon upgrade? Put it down to an expensive lesson in how not to do procurement. If the Typhoon had been developed and was in service within 10 years it would have been the correct aircraft flying in the correct environment. When was typhoon project started in the 80's or even earlier in the 70's!! If it had of been flying in service from 1985 onwards and was purchased at a decent rate we would not be building now an aircarft was 20 years to late for the job it's good at.
The uk if doing an other european development needs to have water tight development ensuring that development is proceeded at top speed and flying in service occurs no less than 10 years after first design. This was the UK might actually get the aircraft it needs for current roles.
The drawn out progress of procurement in the UK has really messed things up and has cost loads more than the systems should of. Take Type 45 this should of been in service 10-15 years ago. Typhoon needed in 1988. Nimrod expected 10-15 years ago. CVF asked for in 1998. Type 22-23 replacement. Is this anywhere? Astute submarines deplayed and costing much more than expected becuase of slow build rate and skills gap etc. I could go on all day.

If the UK is going to develop a new fighter to be better than PAK-FA and 5th generation i hope the UK goes with Sweeden for a speedy program. In reality i don't see europe buying or making any 5th generation except for F-35. What a shame. If a 5th generation was to be developed to face PAK-FA etc it will need to be better than PAK-FA becuase of the small numbers of aircarft europe buys. maybe we are in the 6th generation then? extreme stealth, all round radar's, super cruise of mach 2 and 2 seats for battlespace management etc

A second thought about that is helpful. To create some 5th generation avionics and the related software does take two decades nearly. See the F-22 and F-35 about that. The related hardware is much less time consuming. The Europeans are well advised to stick to their hardware from the 80s and to make good use of the time offered by the end of the Cold War. If in the future the need may arise the Europeans are still capable to add the missing 5th generation hardware in short notice. Whatever the others may produce it will be closer to the F-35 than to the T-50 f.e.

Member for

15 years 3 months

Posts: 6,441

ok,

i can see that some people think that Europe is now bankrupt and that there will be no new airframe development for decades (which is how long it would take to field a new system by the way, I'm not expecting a pan-european agreement to be signed tomorrow!!!).

Essentially you are saying that the swedish, french and Eurofighter nations will stop producing aircraft at the cutting edge and make do with system upgrades...?

In your world Europe will not be able to compete?

Does the reality of the PAK-FA justify a european "5th Generation" fighter?

No i do not see it justified.

Its simple really.
The Eurofighter and Rafale are not developed and designed to stand up against the Pak-Fa.
The biggest reason is the requirements from wich Eurofighter and Rafale was development from.
And the fact that Pak-Fa is pretty much a 2010 design entry, in other words a new design.
But it does not mean that the Euro & Rafale suddenly turned into crap overnight.
They are great aircraft on their own, but i think its more fair to compair them against the Su-35S, wich is much more likely that they will perform against and with on future exercises.
The tought of a conflict between Russia and Europe is just to rich for me anyway..

So there is not need for europe to engage in a overcostly 5th generation fighter program.

Thanks

Member for

20 years 7 months

Posts: 1,842

Please, if we are talking only about the airframe, designing a new one is much less expensive that doing a technological leap in avionics.

A stealth european fighter is possible while keeping lots of systems from Rafale or Typhoon.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 11,742

Please, if we are talking only about the airframe, designing a new one is much less expensive that doing a technological leap in avionics.

A stealth european fighter is possible while keeping lots of systems from Rafale or Typhoon.

Exactly.

Member for

18 years 1 month

Posts: 254

There is not any need for the 5th generation fighter in Europe. Eurofighter and Rafale are alerady equipped with the latest technologies and when they receive TVC engines, the only area where they will be in the disadvantage will be stealth. And even this feature can be done in the mid-life update (see stealthified Rafale and Gripen with external stealthy bomb bays here: http://www.hitechweb.genezis.eu/stealth4f.htm), not to mention active stealth technology, developed by Dassault and flight tested already in 1999!

Both planes, that are true multirole fighters, are the best choice for the Europe for the current battlefields. F-35 has the potential to be one of them, if the LM will be able to keep the costs on the reasonable level. It has better stealth, but lower usefull weapons load. And after the 20 years we will have nEUROn derived operational service UCAVs for the high risk threats, so this is where the current investments go.

Member for

19 years 8 months

Posts: 1,838

Please, if we are talking only about the airframe, designing a new one is much less expensive that doing a technological leap in avionics

Exactly.

Both of you are so wrong...

the main headaches for aircraft programs were always in this order

1) Engine
2) Structural design
3) Aerodynamics
4) Avionics

Member for

18 years 11 months

Posts: 9,683

Will aircraft like Typhoon Tranche 3 be able to cut it, or is it time for another 20 year development saga i wonder?

It's called "F-35". ;)

Member for

15 years 8 months

Posts: 314

ok,

i can see that some people think that Europe is now bankrupt and that there will be no new airframe development for decades (which is how long it would take to field a new system by the way, I'm not expecting a pan-european agreement to be signed tomorrow!!!).

Essentially you are saying that the swedish, french and Eurofighter nations will stop producing aircraft at the cutting edge and make do with system upgrades...?

I think Typhoon and Rafale in their ultimate forms will be very competitive but not in 12-15 years time, when the F35B will be ubiquitous and PAK-FA technology fielded by Russian, China (if they haven't got their own programme up and running yet) and India. Not to mention potential Korean or Japanese systems.

In your world Europe will not be able to compete?

europe will likely skip the manned 5-gen development cycle and jumo to stealthy unmanned ones.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 11,742

Both of you are so wrong...

the main headaches for aircraft programs were always in this order

1) Engine
2) Structural design
3) Aerodynamics
4) Avionics

Someone still in the 50s of the last century to stay polite.
Today the avionics and software are 2/3 of total cost for a weapon-system.
That change took place in the 70s of last century already.

Member for

19 years 8 months

Posts: 1,838

The main cost for the development is still the engine

The main headaches in middle program are still structural issues

If you think the F-35 is threated because some bytes you are wrong, what can kill it is it structure or it engine, not some cool terabytes.

Someone still in the 50s

You are living in a scifi novel

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 4,202

The technology is not the problem. Money is the problem. Why waste billions on a plane that is not needed. Europe should reduce its armed forces to have more money for the social welfare systems and not buy a 5th generation plane it will never need.

And is some countries feel the need to be able to join the US in their proxy wars, then F-35 is available.

Member for

19 years 6 months

Posts: 1,518

And Europe won´t have the money to fight outside Europe either. So it is of no importance for them.

The EU has a considerably higher GDP then the United States, if it were a nation it would be the richest in the world. 'Not having the money' is different from not being willing to spend it on certain things.