Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

st george

Oh look, a Tempest

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Max Headroom said:

Wot’ll be the 2080 candidate?

Light Breeze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do they mean first flight in 2035 or operational?! Regardless, going by looks alone it will surely be obsolete by then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

looks completely unbuildable to me, canopy looks 1/2mm too low plus the intakes are 1/4 mm too wide etc. etc.

Edited by spaddad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

Mistake

What, by you or the MOD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, that's ugly. Uglier than the F-35 even. They should bring back the Harrier.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

😜

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by spaddad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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By 2035 this will look very old and outdated: if the Spitfire had been developed to the same schedule it would have been too late even for the Korean War!

Did the F-15, first proposed in 1965, look outdated in 1982?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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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By 2035 this will look very old and outdated: if the Spitfire had been developed to the same schedule it would have been too late even for the Korean War!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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by mhaselden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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... :lol:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by noelh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and in any case £2bn is small change when designing a next gen fighter aircraft...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An investment of £2 billion?  :lol:

 

As others have said.....Not going to happen.  :mellow:

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

An investment of £2 billion?  :lol:

 

As others have said.....Not going to happen.  :mellow:

 

 

 

 

Anyone remember HOTOL?

 

Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it me or does the front end resemble the Mig31 from Firefox? Could just be me needing stronger glasses of course

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...