Moderadores: Lepanto, poliorcetes, Edu, Orel
A government watchdog has warned over the performance of several UK defence acquisitions, with a trio of programmes – including the Tempest future fighter effort – moved to a list of projects whose delivery or cost targets appear unachievable.
In its latest annual report, published last month but covering the financial year to end-March 2023, the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA) said that the performance of three programmes – the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) and those relating to the MBDA Brimstone and Spear air-to-ground missiles – had worsened during the period under review.
The IPA gives projects a “delivery confidence assessment” rating – grading them as green, amber or red – against schedule and cost targets; it says all three programmes have moved from amber to red.
FCAS, which has since morphed into the Global Combat Air Programme and now involves Italy and Japan, has a target to reach initial operating capability (IOC) by 2035.
But justifying its downgrade, the IPA says the project is being affected by “ongoing dependencies” from other parts of the Ministry of Defence “and a shortage of resources impacting skills and capabilities”. “Remedial action for a route to amber is being implemented but it is expected to take several years to achieve due to the size and complexity of the programme,” the IPA states.
https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/uk ... 04.article
pagano escribió:Los saudíes quieren sumarse al proyecto. Así evitan a Estados Unidos y a Alemania para adquirir aviones y otros sistemas de armas avanzados https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... mpest-gcap
Orel escribió:Aquí también quieren "igualdad de participcación:
"The crucial defence electronics element of the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) between Italy, Japan and the UK will advance under a “spirit of equal partnership”, according to the companies involved."
https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/se ... 14.article
Will harmony continue as GCAP fighter partners discuss workshare terms?
22 September 2023
...There was a distinctly honeymoon-period feel to the raft of announcements made at the show, strengthening agreements between the future fighter’s airframe, avionics and weapons partners. But can the current spirit of harmony persist as harder discussions take place around the programme’s organisational set-up, decision-making processes and industrial workshare?
Now under way, this process will without question pose the sternest test yet for the programme, which seeks to develop and field an advanced fighter in half the time of previous collaborative efforts.
...
All parties seemingly accept that a strict one-third-each workshare allocation is not practical, but conversations will become difficult if any player feels that their contribution is undervalued. Which company with cutting-edge technology and know-how will end up producing the landing-gear doors, or would voluntarily miss out on final assembly work?
...selling the type on the international market will be a key contributor towards driving down costs.
With Japan today unable to export defence equipment as a result of the nation’s constitution, strong agreements around the ability of its partners to make future international sales of the jointly-developed fighter must be hammered out at this early stage.
...
https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-int ... 33.article
Sep. 26, 2023
(Source: Defense-Aerospace.com; posted Sept. 26, 2023)
By Francis Tusa - Defence Analysis
...
First take away? The Flying Technology Demonstrator (FTD) for Tempest – its relationship with the final result is the same as the Experimental Aircraft Programme’s relationship with the resulting Typhoon – is design fixed, parts are in production for it, and some have actually been delivered, and so are being “sub-assembled”.
There’s no question of, “we’re still looking at concepts”. No: the design has been frozen to the extent that the stealth engine intake ducts have been produced; the ejection tests were done using a fully representative cockpit/front section of the FTD aircraft, reinforcing the fact that the physical shape of the aircraft has been frozen as a design.
It is with the FTD aircraft at this stage that the statement that, “we will fly it within four years” (Emphasis added--Ed.) can be seen, if it wasn’t already, to be very credible if not utterly believable. Now, first flight has slipped from the 2020–21-stated date of 2025 to the “within four years”, which could be “as late” as 2027.
...
Eurofighter EJ200 engine tested with stealth intake
The single most important thing to come out from “The Great Reveal” in mid-June? An EJ200 has been extensively tested by Rolls Royce with a stealth intake/duct developed by BAES (using experience from the Mantis UAV programme) in a vast range of flight envelope conditions. To avoid having to work on the EJ200 itself, the aim was to ensure that the airflow to the engine (which is very clean in Typhoon) could be managed with the new indirect duct so that the engine would “believe” that it was still in a Typhoon.
...
Flight control development is advanced, hardware, such as actuators [Ed: at all times, note that this is for the FTD programme – things can, and will change before Tempest] have been selected; the configuration of the cockpit has been frozen (it will have a wide screen display, natch); the engine layout/duct and all ancillary equipment have been chosen/frozen. And behind this is the fact that the data that the four test rigs are producing are already providing extra data to de-risk Tempest. Is the FTD aircraft Tempest? No. But it has to be said that if you’ve tested System X, Airframe Shape Y, and they meet the specification, why would you then go back to the drawing board to do a total re-design?
So, first flight aside, what to consider next? Discussions are underway with both Italy and Japan about both coming into the FTD programme, in an open architecture manner as the whole GCAP programme is being run. Italy has a flying avionics testbed which will inform Tempest, but there seems to be no reason why a) all three can cooperate on the current UK-only FTD, b) that with three involved, there couldn’t be more than one FTD aircraft – the signs are that the spend on the FTD programme (industrial matters, such as investment in new facilities/equipment aside) has been mid-hundreds of millions, not the $8bn taken for NGAD.
To date, Tempest/FTD has taken less than half the time that was taken with Tornado/Typhoon to get to the stage that it is, a stage where safety clearances have been provided for sub-systems. Famous last words, but BAES/Rolls Royce (and all of their supply chain) have shown that things can be done differently.
...
(ibidem)Not that Defence Analysis needed the “confirmation”, but this “team agreed mission statement” shows that the UK is checking out of F-35.
(ibidem)And the common work on Tempest/GCAP is going to start to be a beacon to others interested in F-35: why buy when key partners are leaving?
(ibidem)it is pretty evident that the US DoD/USAF have woken up to the fact that FTD/Tempest is not a paper exercise, but has weight behind it, the weight of three F-35 operators who have decided to spend their money elsewhere.
"La gobernanza será paritaria, del 33% para cada uno...
..."Muchos [países] están interesados, pero no abriremos el proyecto hasta que se complete la fase constituyente a tres bandas. Entonces, con el acuerdo de todos, podremos ampliarlo a otras naciones".
GCAP industry partners ‘70% through negotiations’, BAE official says
The three-nation Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) continues to make solid progress, with Italy, Japan and the UK making considerable strides towards agreeing its industrial construct.
https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/gc ... 82.article
Usuarios navegando por este Foro: No hay usuarios registrados visitando el Foro y 0 invitados