6th Generation Fighter Meta Thread

theaviationist.com...

a reply to: anzha
Ummm what is Roper on about?
Digital trinities and all the technobabble just makes him look like a W@nker...

a reply to: Blackfinger

I like the concept behind the so called e- series, but trying to figure out what they're talking about will give you a headache.

a reply to: Blackfinger

The problem is Roper is trying to mash together the technical terms of the military, virtual prototyping and the agile software world. It's really maddening to read and makes you want to pound your head into the ground. However, it's pretty straight forward:


All components are parts to be put together modularly.
You test equipment and components to make a model.
You build models based on those equipment and components you have tested.
You test some of the aggregates of the equipment to verify the model (aka demonstrators)
You build the final aircraft from the model rather than from prototypes.

It's really a spin on the virtual prototyping effort 20 years ago with new lingo, mixed with the 'build a little, test a little mindframe of the X series birds,' and adding the same principles to the avionics as well.

This could work. Maybe.

It requires a lot of incredibly high fidelity models and the interaction of those models to be higher fidelity. It was the dream of what was going to happen 20 years ago. But...didn't go where it ought.

However, it has a weakness that if someone fudges the data for the model of their part, you're gonna get seriously screwed.

Unless there's a rigorous verification effort (X planes and demonstrators), it will fail.

a reply to: anzha
Are you trying to say that the actual process is the good process ? 15 years before having something flying is realy good ?
Don't you think it is the time to change of paradigm ?

a reply to: darksidius

Even with the E series you're looking at years to get something new flying. The difference is that it is going to cut down on development time, and let you go to production standard faster than previous methods. The T-7A was awarded in 2018, and is considered an e series aircraft, and is still looking at IOC in 2024, and FOC in 2034. The whole e series concept will actually drive up development costs by 25%, and production by 18%, but modernization costs will drop significantly, as will life cycle costs.

a reply to: darksidius

I have no problem with the concept.

However, there have been multiple attempts at various very good concepts and they don't always work out well.

I am also saying the only way this works is if the data is good. If someone fudges something - oh like say Boeing on a few things recently? Or the folks welding missile tubes for the Columbia class? or.... I can go on - then the e series concept melts down bad.


Do I think we need to do 15 years for a fighter? Nope. Not at all. However, I am not going to automatically embrace something. Skepticism is how you make things work, not stop them cold.

FWIW, the original planned IOC for the F-22 was...1995. Congress and the administrations decided to delay it. No E series there.

Are we going to see this thing anytime soon? Any ideas if it's actually tailless or traditional? These things kill me.

a reply to: E92M3

TBH, IDK when we will see anything. I'd speculate that it will be in 2023 or 2024 we see something.

Rostec announced - again - that it was starting development of the MiG-41 as a replacement for the MiG-31. Keep in mind, this was announced back in 2015 or so when I was a n00b on the forum, too. The 41 may not be really a 6th generation bird, either.

www.defensenews.com...

Whether or not the Russians have the capacity to take on the project is also an issue.

PAK-DP/MiG-41 again and a new light fighter, supposedly. This is Russia after all.

aviationweek.com...

a reply to: anzha
So they might be playing more with composites?

a reply to: Blackfinger

They may be, but composites at scale require nontrivial qc I am not sure the russians have.

a reply to: anzha

Hmm wasn't it NASA's nontrivial qc that let musk dump voc's into ISS because they failed to bake their dragon capsule off in the kiln before deployment.

Seems the russian deliveries were voc free. Funny that.

Mmm new car smell any one?

Ok apples and oranges you say.....I'll bite.

How about the s4 vs patriot aegis combo, or even iron dome. The worlds market has spoken and s4 is king.

Before we consider making some simple two liner post about Russia's lacking qc making them unable to handle advanced composites Americans should pull the plank from our own eye maybe?

Jmtc

German Unions are concerned about the work share of the FCAS:

www.flightglobal.com...

Bodes well for the project.

originally posted by: anzha
German Unions are concerned about the work share of the FCAS:

www.flightglobal.com...

Bodes well for the project.

It does make you wonder in what mindset do you put forward options that your partners have to negotiate to get a fair deal. As you say, doesn’t bode well.

a reply to: anzha

They actually do a lot now, the il-76/78 has a 1 piece composite wing, Mi-28 from memory now has an entirely rear section from composites/rotors etc.

They seem to have taken a weird turn of building old stuff with new tech.

originally posted by: anzha
German Unions are concerned about the work share of the FCAS

Was this ever unexpected? The French are difficult bedfellows when it comes to "joint" projects. Not only do they expect the final say on the requirements, they also expect all the industrial benefits, while everyone else to pays. There are several past "joint" projects which have been compromised because of French exceptionalism. The Germans can make the wing mirrors and the Spanish can design the seat cushions - what more do they expect?

Interestingly, the UK-led Tempest programme has a different "partnership" model which seems designed to prevent work-share antagonism.

US General worried the US will not build the NGAD fast enough:

www.defensenews.com...

South Korea insists Indonesia is still participating in the KFX:

www.flightglobal.com...

The head of BAe is very upbeat on Tempest:

www.flightglobal.com...

www.defensenews.com...