What do /k/ think about the German/Airbus concept for a FCAS

File: Airbus DS FCAS -2-web.jpg (79KB, 425x299px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 425x299px

>>33810355
>Though it is still early days and the concept is still notional, it did reveal some of the company’s thinking around its FCAS. Interestingly the twin-engine, twin-tail stealth design would be a twin-seat design, according to Alberto Gutierrez, Head of Eurofighter Programme, Airbus DS. The second crewmember may be especially important for the FCAS concept of operations, which would see it operate in a wider battle network, potentially as a command and control asset or UCAV/UAV mission commander.

>Another presentation on UAVs during TMB16, also shed light on the FCAS concept of operations. AirbusDS foresee it is not a strike aircraft in itself - but rather part of a 'system of systems' – with this manned strike platform networked with Eurofighters, unmanned bomb or missile 'mules' and even UAV swarms. FCAS, says AirbuDS, is conceptualised to be a platform able to slot into a scalable system.

Happy I correctly predicted the next generation of jets would be 2-seaters.

File: TOPHUE.jpg (6KB, 222x251px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 222x251px

>>33810355
>for the 2040's

>>33810373
Well, the trend goes to larger aircraft again.

The F-35 is pretty much the exception of the rule. The Japanese stealth fighter concept is right now significant larger than the F-22.

File: NGAD 2.jpg (2MB, 3600x2400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3600x2400px

>>33810355
>>33810374
we'll be in 6th gen fighters by 2040 in burgerland. try to keep up muhammed.

>>33810402
What do you think FCAS is?

>>33810408
A 5th generation mock up with a fancy computer and communication system.

>>33810416
>I have no idea about anything

>>33810360
Pretty much all new aircraft are supposed to be system of systems.

Though I think the Airbus concept is the only one with a two seater.

>>33810418
A pretty good description of Airbus and their experience on producing 5th gen+ platforms

>>33810402
>picture
>who needs weapons anyway

>>33810441
You must be a fan of drag coefficient and limited stealth.

>>33810418
I bet you think the Eurofighter is hot shit.

>>33810437
I think I have the NGAD concept pictures with two seaters as well

>>33810464

From the perspective of someone else, the Typhoon did turn out great, but that was entirely due to having nations like the UK and Italy working on it, who actually have aircraft design experience and pedigree. They made pretty much all the critical parts between them, handing off some of the simpler stuff to Germany for their "share". (And even then they had to give up some of that to the UK after Germany proved to be hopeless at it.)

This FCAS by Germany is going to be very amusing to watch them completely fuck up on. The UK and France are busy with their own FCAS, F-35 and ongoing Rafale development. Italy went with F-35. Sweden is continuing with Gripen. Spain can't afford shit and all the others don't have any real experience either. Turkey's already asked the UK to help them make an aircraft, so they won't help even if Germany was desperate enough to ask them.

Might be good to help Germany start making planes on their own again, but don't expect it to be cheap, on time or particularly special.

>>33810492
Eurofighter is a German concept by MBB.

>>33810494
https://www.slideshare.net/robbinlaird/airbus-defence-and-space-on-uas-systems-june-2016

>>33810492
>doesn't know that British Aerospace and Aeritalia joined Germany with the Taktisches Kampfflugzeug 90 concept.

File: airbus-defence-and-space-on-uas-systems-june-2016-10-638.jpg (72KB, 638x452px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 638x452px

>>33810494

>>33810498

>Initial prototype made in the UK
>Largest share mMajority (37.5%) of plane manufactured in UK
>Engines designed and made by UK, with simpler parts given to Germany to make them feel helpful
>Cockpit design by UK
>Radars and IRST by UK/Italy
>Most munitions by UK/France/US
>Pilot seat by UK
>Helmet made in UK
>ECM by Italy/Spain
>Lead aerodynamics and integration testing done by UK/Italy
>Most advanced versions using UK or Italian centric designs/munitions
>Only successful markets for Typhoon were ones led by BAE or Leonardo
>Germany uses shit tier downgraded versions of the plane they claim to "own"

B-but Germany makes some inert metal bits, fits together some bits others designed and made and installs a gun so its totally a German aircraft g-guys!

>>33810608
Do some research about TKF-90 concept before greentexting

>>33810608
germans are litteraly riding on their dead and raped ancestors coattails at this point. leo's are trash this thing is going to be unmitigated garbage, but retarded euro's will praise it.

>>33810619
>concept

File: British Aerospace AP at the Farnborough Air Show, 1986.jpg (235KB, 1120x700px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 1120x700px

>>33810619

Kindly link me to the TKF-90 flying then.

Oh wait, it didn't. It was nothing more than a paper design that never actually became anything functioning, and only ran concurrently to BA's own designs, along with France's one before they left.

But I'll sure link the actual prototype, designed and built in the UK (with some input by Italy), and the one that actually became the Typhoon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Aerospace_EAP

>>33810695
>BA joined Messerschmitt for the TKF-90
>suddenly the design is purely British

oh boy

isn't all of this shit baked into the F-35 and F-22 already?

>>33811007
No

>>33810906

Except the TKF-90, EAP and Italian concepts were all separate ideas.

And yes, the EAP is purely British. It was BAe's concept and proposal that had been in development for years before anyone came together, and the only one of the three that actually made it to the prototyping phase for development into the Typhoon. And this "BA joined Masserschmitt" is wonderful rhetoric for several countries coming together and trying to reword it as "Everyone joined superior Germany!"

tl;dr - Germany did some paper concepts and are trying to somehow claim that makes the Typhoon more their aircraft than the countries who actually made real, flying prototypes and then went on to design all the most major components.

>>33810906
He sounds like a typical Britfag.

>>33810906

Again. TKF-90 is nothing more than a dropped paper concept. EAP was based on BAe's own research.

This is like Wehraboos trying to claim the Abrams is a German tank because the gun has a couple of bits that look a bit like a German one.

>>33810906
The joke is that BAe had an own concept in the 70s which was a rather conservative F-18 like twintail design.

Meanwhile the MBB design became the later Eurofighter within a multinational developement process.

BAe also did another design which later became the Gripen.

File: BYY0s.jpg (45KB, 609x343px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 609x343px

>>33811070
>MBB from the 70s

>>33810402
>fighters
>not using drones or large quick gunships
Gee, it's a lot of ballet faggotry here!

What's the deal with the muh British nonsense...

Airbus is a multinational company anyway.

>>33811007
F-22 doesn't even have a two way communication.

EAP was also already a multinational programme.

I'm not sure why that one Britfag is trying so hard to deny that the TKF-90 concept was the choosen one for the fighter.

>>33811007

No. The F-22 and F-35 dont have twin seat versions for a dedicated drone commander to manage the fleet of drones a 6th gen fighter can command. Even if you managed to come up with an AI system that makes a twin seat version unecessary, the F-22 and F-35 simply dont have the computational power to pull off something like that. There is also the problem of if such a system doesnt do all the things a dedicated drone commander does, then the remaining things will give the existing pilot a bigger workload and you'll get a KA-50'esque problem of the pilot having to do too much at the same time (probably one of the reasons why the twin seat MI-28 was chosen over single seat KA-50).

>>33811232

>EAP ordered by British MoD funding the majority of the program to be made by a British company
>Was developed as a private venture by BAe to gain that funding
>Was manufactured in UK
>By Brits
>Using British materials and components
>Ended up becoming the prototype for the Typhoon itself

It looking like the NFK-90 does not mean it's a German design. "Looking like" is not grounds to define something as wholly owned by that country, elsewise you'd be calling the Rafale and Gripen the same, which they patently aren't. The point is not to say it's a British only aircraft as many people here are trying to strawman as.

The point is to show that the Eurofighter really is not a "German" aircraft, as they haven't done anything close to the amount of work on it that at least two of the other nations have to claim such a thing, as was implied above.

>Implying airbus can build military planes that work
>Implying the german air force can order systems that make sense
>Implying germany can maintain military equipment
>Implying germany will still exist when this programme would, hypothetically, bear fruit

We planned our post-war colonial empire until november 1918, we planned the world capital germania until april 1945 and we're gonna waste billions on a plane that will never be used until the designers get their heads cut off for being infidels. Because german is as german does.

File: ATD-X F3.jpg (30KB, 500x416px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x416px

>>33810384
Source? All the pictures I've seen of the 5th Gen Japanese jet have shown a relatively small aircraft.

File: PowerPoint Presentation - DickUrban.pdf.png (296KB, 927x692px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 927x692px

>>33811007
Still a darpa program.

>>33811700
http://aviationweek.com/combat-aircraft/proposed-japanese-combat-aircraft-bigger-f-22

"kraut spess magic" is just a meme. In reality, German engineering is quite mediocre. They do superficial things well enough they get a reputation for quality which important in the consumer market, but their actual experience at complex engineering work like aircraft engines is actually neglible. Where is actually matters, British engineering is completely superior to German engineering.

>>33812193
pretty low tier

>>33812193
>
lmao

>>33812193
Wrong. English engineering is a joke in Germany

>>33812193
>muh spandau

>>33812193
>British Engineering

No one likes people with invisible friends.

>>33812193
Your grunts sure thought it mattered when the germans fixed your service rifles.

>>33812204
>>33812252
>>33812278
>>33812279
>>33812321
>>33812511
It's like the entire German army has come out defend German honour
.50 euros have been desposited in your accounts, brave anons.

Germans can't go alone, they simply don't have any experience of designing military aviation alone since WW2. I can maybe see them doing it as a joint effort with France & Italy, handling powerplant (Snecma) and avionics (Leonardo) respectively. Germany taking care of airframe and integration.

Oh whatever happens, it definitely won't be by Airbus.

>>33812579
If nothing else, we must at least appreciate british bait.

>>33810355
>oh maird, our airplane is hopelessly out of date
>wait I know, lets copy a more competent developer and military and we'll be the top cheese
>but we don't have the technical ability to copy them
>then just copy the parts we can figure out

>>33812895
It's a running gag on /k/.

The joke is that UK is even a potential development partner for that project, when all the various European FCAS developements merge.
It's also highly unlikely that we will see something like three European delta-canard designs again.

>>33810408
internal propaganda for muhammads. Just like Iran, you need fake military projects that will never be funded to stroke your majority Muslims populatoin into thinking their country is strong.

File: pertur.jpg (116KB, 600x355px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 600x355px

>>33810355
So you are telling all that time playing starcraft

or

League of Legends

is finally going to

pay
off?

File: 04cfe78856095ea137728394094f1a78.jpg (228KB, 475x308px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 475x308px

i thought future is drones?

>>33813170
It is.

You still need to control them.

>it has two seats for networking
This is great, everyone's catching on to one of the F-35s biggest failures.

but will it have LASERS?

>>33813483
Does the f-35 only have one seat?

>>33811138
MADL?

>>33814172
F-22 has only a datalink for two ways communication with other F-22.

It can only receive information.

>>33814212
That's not an issue with the F-22, that's just a shortcoming of legacy aircraft.

It still has Link 16 for interoperability with older jets.

>>33810355
>designing a larger f-35 years after its introduction

y tho

>>33814370
It's both; we do need something like MADL to proliferate across the platforms that are going to be operating alongside the F-22 and F-35, but the F-22 does also shoot itself in the foot if it's meant to be protecting others and can't effectively communicate threats to others.

>>33814172
The F-22 has 2-way IFDL (a separate predecessor to MADL) and receive-only Link 16 (as well as VHF / UHF voice).

>>33814146
Yep, the jet is kinda hard to crash and it's highly automated, so there's not that much interest in having it a twin-seater. By the time that it's controlling drones, etc it's only going to be more automated as well.