bzn20 Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 3 hours ago, Max Headroom said: Wot’ll be the 2080 candidate? Light Breeze 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corsairfoxfouruncle Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 (edited) Mistake Edited July 16, 2018 by Corsairfoxfouruncle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzz Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 Do they mean first flight in 2035 or operational?! Regardless, going by looks alone it will surely be obsolete by then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaddad Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 (edited) looks completely unbuildable to me, canopy looks 1/2mm too low plus the intakes are 1/4 mm too wide etc. etc. Edited July 17, 2018 by spaddad 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaddad Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 1 hour ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said: Mistake What, by you or the MOD? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lasermonkey Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 6 minutes ago, spaddad said: looks completely unbuildable to me, canopy looks 1/2mm to low plus the intakes are 1/4 mm too wide etc. etc. I'm waiting for the first red lines! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Bradley Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 Wow, that's ugly. Uglier than the F-35 even. They should bring back the Harrier..... 😜 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaddad Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 (edited) 10 hours ago, JohnT said: 15 Till someone says bring back the harrier/ Buccaneer/ Tornado/ Lightning (delete as applicable) See post 28, you were only out by about 9.25 hours. Edited July 17, 2018 by spaddad 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Procopius Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 7 hours ago, Sabrejet said: By 2035 this will look very old and outdated: if the Spitfire had been developed to the same schedule it would have been too late even for the Korean War! Did the F-15, first proposed in 1965, look outdated in 1982? No, it looked cool as hell. Marvellous as the Spitfire was and is, it's insane to think the development cycle of a simple prop-driven fighter armed (initially) with a bunch of machine guns should be some kind of gold standard for complex multirole jet aircraft of exponentially greater sophistication and expense. And for what it's worth, the Spitfire's development was considered so tortuous in its day that it was almost cancelled in favour of building more Whirlwinds. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaddad Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 7 hours ago, Sabrejet said: By 2035 this will look very old and outdated: if the Spitfire had been developed to the same schedule it would have been too late even for the Korean War! It's pure daftness but it should grab headlines, even if it doesn't look particularly inspiring. orsum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhaselden Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, bzn20 said: Yes the Red Drones and...………………… Well, they can already do the first bit. Have you ever heard them in a bar? Sheesh...they can bore for NATO, "There I was, nothing on the clock but the maker's name...blah, blah, blah!" Edited July 17, 2018 by mhaselden 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enzo the Magnificent Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 35 minutes ago, mhaselden said: Well, they can already do the first bit. Have you ever heard them in a bar? Sheesh...they can bore for NATO, "There I was, nothing on the clock but the maker's name...blah, blah, blah!" And the groundcrew are even worse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enzo the Magnificent Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 3 hours ago, spaddad said: looks completely unbuildable to me, canopy looks 1/2mm to low plus the intakes are 1/4 mm too wide etc. etc. Parts are bound to be short shot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnT Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 6 hours ago, spaddad said: looks completely unbuildable to me, canopy looks 1/2mm to low plus the intakes are 1/4 mm too wide etc. etc. And not your or my scale anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Britman Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 If it is service entry in 2035 , they will need some hardware in the air within the next five years I would suggest. It must be commended that such a project is being seriously proposed although I doubt if we can do this without international partners and therefore the possibility of another committee aircraft. Generally I like the look of it considering stealth seems to have settled on a recognisable shape and form. Its a bit like airliners I suppose ( barring the first 787 concept). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 24 minutes ago, Britman said: It must be commended that such a project is being seriously proposed …. The question is whether it is being seriously proposed. Cynical me says this is a silly season news story designed to capture some headlines before being conveniently consigned to the overflowing dustbin of politicians' promises.. And where has the £2bn suddenly been found? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noelh Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 (edited) If history is anything to go by it will eventually be dropped and the UK will join either the Franco-German project, which contrary to reports, the UK was not excluded from, because it was a bi-lateral agreement between the two with the door open to others. Or as usual the UK will join the sixth generation US project, possibly the F51 Mustang II? Going it alone is not an option anymore unless anyone has forgotten the TSR2. Edited July 17, 2018 by noelh 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kallisti Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 ...and in any case £2bn is small change when designing a next gen fighter aircraft... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisL Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 The Swedes seem to build the fighters that they want, then see if anyone else wants to buy them, as have France from time to time. Elsewhere in Europe more commonly a group of countries decide to collaborate then spend years arguing in an attempt to get everyone to agree what they want. This may be part of why Saab and the French firms seem to have managed quicker developments than groups like Panavia and the Eurofighter consortium. Maybe the UK plans to nail down the basic requirements and then see if they are suitable for any potential partner nations. That may result in a reasonable development time. However if there's an attempt to align Tempest to the Franco-German project then it could well get bogged down in development hell. There's also the risk that each time Lockheed, Sukhoi or MiG announces a new theoretical innovation that'll induce a new round of requirement changes too. As for its looks, it's just another stealthy fighter shape in my eyes. Nothing glaringly interesting nor offensive. I still dream that some forward swept design will become a reality (the Su-47 came closest) but we'll probably be stuck with blobby-yet-angular stealth jets for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 An investment of £2 billion? As others have said.....Not going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Britman Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 A little optimism now and again is good for the mind, however I have been around long enough and read so much as not to be surprised if this should all go pear shaped. Keith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Bradley Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 11 hours ago, spaddad said: See post 28, you were only out by about 9.25 hours. Well, I was at work at the time. 🤣 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: An investment of £2 billion? As others have said.....Not going to happen. Anyone remember HOTOL? Trevor 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 1 hour ago, ChrisL said: The Swedes seem to build the fighters that they want, then see if anyone else wants to buy them, as have France from time to time. Elsewhere in Europe more commonly a group of countries decide to collaborate then spend years arguing in an attempt to get everyone to agree what they want. This may be part of why Saab and the French firms seem to have managed quicker developments than groups like Panavia and the Eurofighter consortium. Things have not really been that way in the past... True about Sweden as they sure always design aircrafts to fulfill their specifications only. This means that it's not been easy for Sweden to export their types as these were often too strictly tailored to their needs. This was not much of a problem in the past as Swedish legislation meant that exporting fighter aircrafts would have been very difficult anyway for SAAB. The French approach however is completely different and every French fighter since the Mirage III has been designed with an eye to the export potential. This was one of the reasons why the French abandoned all their late '60s studies for a heavy fighter and selected the much lighter and cheaper Mirage F-1. Interestingly the RAF approach in the past was very simlar to the Swedish one and it's no surprise that types like the Lightning saw very limited export. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon382 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 Is it me or does the front end resemble the Mig31 from Firefox? Could just be me needing stronger glasses of course 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now