Germany Wants Potentially Optionally Manned Pan European Tornado Replacement

Germany plans to develop a new fighter jet to replace Tornado jets in the long term and it aims to hold initial talks with European partners in 2016 about what features they want in the aircraft, according to a document seen by Reuters on Sunday.

A draft document from the Defence Ministry on 'military aviation strategy' said it was still unclear whether the new jet would be manned or unmanned. It said it was also possible that the jet would be designed for both options and then be flown with or without a pilot depending on the type of deployment.

As it would be a European project, it is likely that one or more European companies would be chosen to develop the jet. The Tornado jet, which Germany has been using since 1981 - although it now also has the newer Eurofighter jet - was also made in an international consortium called Panavia.

link.

a reply to: anzha

The can do that to normal aircraft can't they? seem to remember that f-4's and other craft being remotely controlled for use as live fire targets but they still have to be human flyable to get them to where they're going to get blown up.

Fighter Jet is an interesting term, so multi role combat aircraft is sooo '70's.

I wonder if UK is interested? We are working with the French on a future UCAV, have F-35 but our Tonka fleet doesn't have a replacement.

I would go LRS-B if the Americans would let us.

Do they want a bomber?

Panavia, Germany UK and Italy - the Tornado

NETMA, NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency, Italy, Spain, Germany and UK, the Typhoon.

and Sepecat, Societe Europeeene de Production de l'Avion d'Ecole de Combat et d'Appui Tactique, UK and France, the Jaguar.

Just a little history on pan European aircraft :-)

Wow sorry to thread hog, just to confirm that is the Tornado silhouette as the forum badge?

In anything but F3 the Tonka is my favourite bomber.

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com...:ANd9GcRTN0vR9ZVRJlR_eXsixLAqqPUw3yRB_RNUq6FYhkKlqRi2d2itS1beiCay

Wonder if BAE is smiling right now?

Interesting development to say the least, and at least 5 years too late. By the time they actually field a Tornado replacement the remaining Luftwaffe aircraft will be flying anachronisms and incapable of operating in anything other than a passive environment. And it will have been so long since the other operators had retired theirs that they will have forgotten what they are for!

If the aircraft is not being co developed from day one with a family of long range (1000-1500 nm+) supersonic/hypersonic missiles, smart low cost long range swarming weapons and detachable drones for either payload delivery or ISR/EW/SIGINT duties, then in my opinion whether there is a pilot on board or not in a post 2030 medium to high intensity environment it will be deader than Elvis. The reason is simple, over the next few years rapid uptake of multi-layered air defence systems and strategic weapons like S-400 and later as well as an explosion in DEWS coupled with vast quantities of cheap high accuracy surveillance systems, land, sea and air based will make combat aircraft survival extremely difficult for all but the most sophisticated air forces that have the ability to roll back these complex defence and surveillance networks like peeling layers off an onion. In fact because of the total mismanagement of USAF/US DoD recapitalization I doubt the US in its present form would be able to do it convincingly in a high end war either. Its not that the Germans or Europeans are not capable of building first order combat aircraft , they are, but unless the operation philosophy, doctrine and supporting systems are in place it simply wont work in the world we will be living in. Its analogous to building a super car that can reach 500km/h but only on a special test track, yet you dont bother to plan or build said track. In the end you just end up with an expensive and pretty machine that gets wrecked if you take it out into the real world.

I hope the Eurpoeans DO pull this off and come up with a system that is survivable and effective, I just hope they dont fall into the trap the US has of turning such a program into state sponsored financial help for its defence sector rather than developing what will be needed in the future.

LEE.

a reply to: anzha

interesting, i wonder who's SAT's they will be using for the unmanned version.

i didn't think there high speed data comms was up to the task unless they are just going to be flying around with A.I(doubt that)

originally posted by: penroc3
a reply to: anzha

interesting, i wonder who's SAT's they will be using for the unmanned version.

i didn't think there high speed data comms was up to the task unless they are just going to be flying around with A.I(doubt that)

There might be in the timeframe hence optionally manned?

I would have thought by 2030 you would want full autonomy so no need for a data link, that said, my plant managers cannot handle the computer automatically ordering their inventory on min/max levels they set, but 2030 will have 2 new generations passing through.

a reply to: Forensick
If you follow Moore's law(ish), chip architecture will first see parity with the human brain as early as 2035 based on current trends with 2040 highly probable if we hit any real development snags and 2045 at the absolute latest. Whether the A.I. software can mature reliably and in sufficient complexity to allow fully antonymous operation is another matter (I suspect not), and military and Government officials being open to such ideas being put to real world use I doubt by then. For evidence of this conservatism you only need to read the thoughts of the US Army No drones for you! on what it currently thinks about using unmanned helicopters to deliver troops into combat zones or even high priority cargo, they just cant yet quite wrap their heads around the idea, and to an extent you cannot blame them for at least once taking the "technology is not a panacea" approach. However there will be generational change in leadership by then that will be replaced by a younger generation at the top that are far more tech savvy and comfortable with the idea, further the people below them in the middle commissioned ranks who will be the ones charged with managing and researching this technology as well as the operational doctrine that goes with it will be today's 5-15yr olds, brought up on a diet of internet and iPads. To them seamlessly integrating with A.I. and even allowing it to make decisions will (pardon the pun) be child's play. So maybe around 2035-40 we will be ready to hand over the reins for a future European Tornado replacement aircraft system to a machine when needed or even altogether?

LEE.

A very good idea keep the skills in design, build and systems alive. Hope this happens and hope the the UK and France play a part.

RAB

a reply to: RAB

Given the development costs the only way Europe can have a homegrown 6th gen plane will be to work together. Given the recent history of the countries though I'm struggling to see how it'd be a success. France pulled out of the Eurofighter because of work share issues and went it alone with the Rafale. The UK pulled out of the FREMM and went it alone with the Type 45. Getting everyone to agree to a common design, who will be the lead contractor and where the work will be carried out will be a monumental task.

We have this air armament called a GAU18 .
We built a plane on it ,it DOES seem to be doing well for a ground air craft.
All Germany should do is make a better airframe.

a reply to: cavtrooper7
I assume you meant GAU-8? As in the 30mm main armament on the A-10.

Yeah sure its great, but in the modern sphere and definitely in the future, it needs to quadruple or more its range and greatly increase it muzzle velocity if you want the carrying airframe to survive as more than the proverbial one shot wonder. It would also help if you could slave the aircraft controls to the boresight or vice versa so that you end up with "what you point at, you hit" scenario's, rather than spray and pray. Of course it might help to ditch the 30mm entirely and replace it with a DEWS instead that has horizon to horizon coverage and fast second shot followup ability. Such a system would have applications beyond battlefield interdiction and tank plinking and be very useful as a forward edge sanitizer for any threat. If Germany and the other Europeans could deliver this then they have a real winner on their hands. Particularly if they can make it unmanned and cheap.

LEE.

a reply to: thebozeian

So long as said system has an effective self destruct granted,but the DEWS tech is locked up in mostly 2 countries who guard their secrets jealously.
The GAU is a good bridge to the time european sciences can produce their own ,but then again we are already hearing about missile defensive lasers coming online.
Maybe they will export THAT since we already know of it's existance
Perhaps that coupled with armor it would work.