Future Combat Air System (FCAS) - France/Germany

randomradio said:
AFAIK, AMCA's TWR will be far superior to Typhoon's. With 6.5T of fuel, 1.5T of internal weapons and 115Kn engines, the TWR is expected to be 1.15. Typhoon's TWR with full fuel and 1.5T of weapons is only 1, and it has inferior fuel fraction to boot.

Fuel fraction of AMCA is superior to MKI also. MKI's TWR is only 0.85 in the same configuration and 0.98 with Su-35's engines.

You can actually say that AMCA and PAK FA's TWR are similar with full fuel and 1.5T weapons, although PAK FA's fuel fraction is superior.

But I agree that the AMCA's internal carriage capabilities are sorely lacking. I do hope that they at least manage to put side bays on it.
Click to expand...
Even formula-1 cars have finely tuned engines for the size and weight of the car. You don't put truck engines in them. High TWR beyond a point has no value. You must achieve a TWR which meets your goals. Like for MSA I chose a TWR based on dry thrust which allows me a 7G capability without engaging reheat. The Sweepback angles and the reynolds number have also been selected accordingly. Having excessive thrust is also a pointer to a poor design.
If you remember my posts about jet engines, about 60% of all energy by jet engine is consumed in just keeping itself running. Only 40 % is used for propulsion. Can you imagine the kind of fuel fraction you will need for such large and over powered engines in an aircraft?
Putting an SUV engine in Maruti Alto will not improve the fuel efficiency of Alto car.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Shekhar Singh
vstol Jockey said:
Even formula-1 cars have finely tuned engines for the size and weight of the car. You don't put truck engines in them. High TWR beyond a point has no value. You must achieve a TWR which meets your goals. Like for MSA I chose a TWR based on dry thrust which allows me a 7G capability without engaging reheat. The Sweepback angles and the reynolds number have also been selected accordingly. Having excessive thrust is also a pointer to a poor design.
If you remember my posts about jet engines, about 60% of all energy by jet engine is consumed in just keeping itself running. Only 40 % is used for propulsion. Can you imagine the kind of fuel fraction you will need for such large and over powered engines in an aircraft?
Putting an SUV engine in Maruti Alto will not improve the fuel efficiency of Alto car.
Click to expand...

They will obviously have catered to all of that. AMCA and Typhoon have roughly the same empty weight, but Typhoon has 5T of fuel and AMCA will have 6.5T. So AMCA has plenty of fuel.

Also there is precedence to the AMCA's design, it's not unique. The F-15C weighs 12.5T, has 6T of fuel and is powered by 110KN class engines.
 
randomradio said:
They will obviously have catered to all of that. AMCA and Typhoon have roughly the same empty weight, but Typhoon has 5T of fuel and AMCA will have 6.5T. So AMCA has plenty of fuel.

Also there is precedence to the AMCA's design, it's not unique. The F-15C weighs 12.5T, has 6T of fuel and is powered by 110KN class engines.
Click to expand...
F-15C is a 30ton machine with 13.5 ton dry thrust. Dont use reheat thrust for preformance in combat. 6.5ton of fuel for AMCA will give it a fuel fraction of just about 0.34 and given the bad calculations regarding weight of designs by ADA, you can very much expect another underpowered HF-24. Somehow these guys just dont seem to get the engine right from HF-24 to LCA to AMCA, story is unending. Even MWF is underpowered if you ask me with F414 engine.
 
vstol Jockey said:
F-15C is a 30ton machine with 13.5 ton dry thrust.
Click to expand...

For the prototypes alone, the F414 only has to be uprated to 67.5KN and I believe the enhanced engines the USN is receiving now have much greater thrust, much more than the F-15C's dry thrust.

One of the EJ2x0 family itself was expected to have 72KN dry with 103KN wet. Whereas the F414 Enhanced Engine is 116KN wet, so it's bound to have more than 72KN dry. Even 72KN will comfortably surpass the F-15C's dry thrust rating. And let's not forget that the ADA is looking for a more advanced engine than the F414 Enhanced or the basic EJ2x0.

Honestly, I don't think engine power is going to be a problem for AMCA. The engine itself may be a problem though.

Even MWF is underpowered if you ask me with F414 engine.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't Gripen E suffer from the same problem then?
 
randomradio said:
Wouldn't Gripen E suffer from the same problem then?
Click to expand...
Gripen-E is a much smaller aircraft and has 45* sweepback on the wing unlike MWF with 62.5* on the outer wing.
randomradio said:
Whereas the F414 Enhanced Engine is 116KN wet, so it's bound to have more than 72KN dry.
Click to expand...
The F-16Blk60 engine has a dry thrust of just 78Kn for a afterburner thrust of 142KN. You can now make your own estimate for F414EPE. I read somewhere that it is supposed to have a dry thrust of just 68KN.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20190618-134736.png
    Screenshot_20190618-134736.png
    245.9 KB · Views: 309
Dassault/Airbus Next-gen Fighter Gets Lift from Spain
by David Donald- June 17, 2019, 8:56 AM


(Photo: David McIntosh)

Amid considerable fanfare, the full-scale mock-up of the Dassault/Airbus New Generation Fighter (NGF) was revealed in front of French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday at the Paris Air Show. Following the unveiling, Florence Parly, Ursula von der Leyen, and Margarita Robles—respectively the defense ministers of France, Germany, and Spain—signed documents that formally welcomed Spain into the program, following on from an announcement of intent in February.

NGF is the major manned element of the Système de Combat Aerien du Futur (SCAF) program that seeks to develop a "system of systems" that meets European airpower needs from around 2040. Intended to produce a sixth-generation capability to replace the current Typhoon and Rafale fleets, the SCAF project—also termed Future Combat Air System (FCAS)—was first agreed as a Franco-German program in July 2017. To answer French needs, the NGF will be carrier-capable.

During the same ceremony at the show, Dassault Aviation chairman and CEO Eric Trappier and Airbus Defence and Space CEO Dirk Hoke formally submitted a joint industrial proposal for the first demonstration phase of SCAF. This covers the period from this year to mid-2021.

5dwm5691.jpg


The New Generation Fighter’s cockpit will explore unique new display configurations. (Photo: David McIntosh)
In addition to the NGF, the SCAF program includes unmanned remote carrier platforms that act as “loyal wingman” force-multipliers, and an air combat cloud network. The integration of legacy assets is also included as part of the overall SCAF program. A contract is expected in the fourth quarter and demonstrators are planned to fly by 2026.

Dassault and Airbus will design and build the NGF, with Dassault acting as design lead, while Airbus is heading the remote carrier and air combat cloud efforts. Other industry partners, such as Thales and MBDA, are playing a key part in the development effort. MBDA, for instance, is studying a range of weapons and small remote carriers for SCAF applications, one of which is being displayed alongside the NGF mockup. Airbus also unveiled a larger remote carrier design alongside the NGF.

Go beyond the headlines with AIN’s free weekly digest of the most important news across the aero defense industry.
In parallel, engine makers Safran and MTU are developing an engine for the NGF. A model being displayed this week by Safran shows a thrust-vectoring design. A notional future fighter cockpit screen and head-worn system are also being demonstrated at Le Bourget as part of the French defense ministry’s display.

Following on from the two-year, €65 million joint concept study contract awarded to Dassault and Airbus in January, the submitted industrial proposal covers various teaming agreements and a defined plan for the demonstration phase. Working processes and commercial agreements are also outlined, as is the transparent and fair handling of intellectual property rights. France’s Direction Générale de l’Armaments is the contracting agency.

Dassault/Airbus Next-gen Fighter Gets Lift from Spain
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Parthu and GuardianRED
vstol Jockey said:
Gripen-E is a much smaller aircraft and has 45* sweepback on the wing unlike MWF with 62.5* on the outer wing.
Click to expand...

How much thrust do you think is necessary to compensate for the wing design? 105KN? 115KN?

The F-16Blk60 engine has a dry thrust of just 78Kn for a afterburner thrust of 142KN. You can now make your own estimate for F414EPE. I read somewhere that it is supposed to have a dry thrust of just 68KN.
Click to expand...

I suppose the new materials on F414 will make a huge difference. Even the 117S provides 86KN dry thrust, with the same 142KN wet thrust.

Anyway, even 68KN gives it more thrust than the F-15C, especially if you consider AMCA will be 1T lighter than F-15C.
 
Picdelamirand-oil said:
Dassault/Airbus Next-gen Fighter Gets Lift from Spain
by David Donald- June 17, 2019, 8:56 AM


(Photo: David McIntosh)

Amid considerable fanfare, the full-scale mock-up of the Dassault/Airbus New Generation Fighter (NGF) was revealed in front of French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday at the Paris Air Show. Following the unveiling, Florence Parly, Ursula von der Leyen, and Margarita Robles—respectively the defense ministers of France, Germany, and Spain—signed documents that formally welcomed Spain into the program, following on from an announcement of intent in February.

NGF is the major manned element of the Système de Combat Aerien du Futur (SCAF) program that seeks to develop a "system of systems" that meets European airpower needs from around 2040. Intended to produce a sixth-generation capability to replace the current Typhoon and Rafale fleets, the SCAF project—also termed Future Combat Air System (FCAS)—was first agreed as a Franco-German program in July 2017. To answer French needs, the NGF will be carrier-capable.

During the same ceremony at the show, Dassault Aviation chairman and CEO Eric Trappier and Airbus Defence and Space CEO Dirk Hoke formally submitted a joint industrial proposal for the first demonstration phase of SCAF. This covers the period from this year to mid-2021.

5dwm5691.jpg


The New Generation Fighter’s cockpit will explore unique new display configurations. (Photo: David McIntosh)
In addition to the NGF, the SCAF program includes unmanned remote carrier platforms that act as “loyal wingman” force-multipliers, and an air combat cloud network. The integration of legacy assets is also included as part of the overall SCAF program. A contract is expected in the fourth quarter and demonstrators are planned to fly by 2026.

Dassault and Airbus will design and build the NGF, with Dassault acting as design lead, while Airbus is heading the remote carrier and air combat cloud efforts. Other industry partners, such as Thales and MBDA, are playing a key part in the development effort. MBDA, for instance, is studying a range of weapons and small remote carriers for SCAF applications, one of which is being displayed alongside the NGF mockup. Airbus also unveiled a larger remote carrier design alongside the NGF.

Go beyond the headlines with AIN’s free weekly digest of the most important news across the aero defense industry.
In parallel, engine makers Safran and MTU are developing an engine for the NGF. A model being displayed this week by Safran shows a thrust-vectoring design. A notional future fighter cockpit screen and head-worn system are also being demonstrated at Le Bourget as part of the French defense ministry’s display.

Following on from the two-year, €65 million joint concept study contract awarded to Dassault and Airbus in January, the submitted industrial proposal covers various teaming agreements and a defined plan for the demonstration phase. Working processes and commercial agreements are also outlined, as is the transparent and fair handling of intellectual property rights. France’s Direction Générale de l’Armaments is the contracting agency.

Dassault/Airbus Next-gen Fighter Gets Lift from Spain
Click to expand...

I hope Germany and Spain don't ruin it. When do you think the first flight of the prototype will be (not the TD)?
 
randomradio said:
I hope Germany and Spain don't ruin it. When do you think the first flight of the prototype will be (not the TD)?
Click to expand...
3 partners! It's ruined already, mark my words, mark them well.:LOL:

If I was France I would budget to be doing all the R&D myself post-ISD but you will still have to share the profits.
 
BMD said:
3 partners! It's ruined already, mark my words, mark them well.:LOL:

If I was France I would budget to be doing all the R&D myself post-ISD but you will still have to share the profits.
Click to expand...

I think the R&D will be led by France, with partner nations having less actual work.

As for profits, I suppose they will share it based on financial contribution, so it's going to be fair. But I guess production will be shared and there will be 3 assembly lines, like it was the case with Typhoon.

But how goes Britain's work on the Tempest? It doesn't look like the Tempest will be as radical as the FCAS.
 
randomradio said:
I think the R&D will be led by France, with partner nations having less actual work.

As for profits, I suppose they will share it based on financial contribution, so it's going to be fair. But I guess production will be shared and there will be 3 assembly lines, like it was the case with Typhoon.

But how goes Britain's work on the Tempest? It doesn't look like the Tempest will be as radical as the FCAS.
Click to expand...
You can forget the partner nations actually funding any R&D post-ISD though.

Usually profits are based on % share which is agreed from the start. However, some nations are unwilling to fund R&D post-ISD and this is what screwed Eurofighter. The UK wanted to push on but the other partners wouldn't put in their share, and the UK didn't want to fund it alone knowing that the others would contractually get the same share of any sales benefits thereafter without having done jack.

Bit early to say that, at the moment you just have mock-ups and you're making an assessment based on the fact one has a tail+fin arrangement and the other has just a tail-fin. Aside from the fact that that is just aero stuff and takes no account of avionics and EW, it might well change yet. It's already gained a tail relative to an earlier model. I mean, was this version even more advanced?

Future Combat Air System (FCAS) - France/Germany

1560866791237.png


Look, no canopy, even more advanced right?

1560866926800.png


This isn't even really 'work' at this stage, it's brainstorming/art. The 'work' part is many years down the road.
 
BMD said:
You can forget the partner nations actually funding any R&D post-ISD though.

Usually profits are based on % share which is agreed from the start. However, some nations are unwilling to fund R&D post-ISD and this is what screwed Eurofighter. The UK wanted to push on but the other partners wouldn't put in their share, and the UK didn't want to fund it alone knowing that the others would contractually get the same share of any sales benefits thereafter without having done jack.

Bit early to say that, at the moment you just have mock-ups and you're making an assessment based on the fact one has a tail+fin arrangement and the other has just a tail-fin. Aside from the fact that that is just aero stuff and takes no account of avionics and EW, it might well change yet. It's already gained a tail relative to an earlier model. I mean, was this version even more advanced?

Future Combat Air System (FCAS) - France/Germany

View attachment 7528

Look, no canopy, even more advanced right?

View attachment 7529

This isn't even really 'work' at this stage, it's brainstorming/art. The 'work' part is many years down the road.
Click to expand...

Models change throughout the course of feasibility studies. You look up how many times AMCA has changed since 2013. There was once even a tailless MCA.

But only definitive models were unveiled with a lot of fanfare, as both FCAS and Tempest went through.
 
randomradio said:
Models change throughout the course of feasibility studies. You look up how many times AMCA has changed since 2013. There was once even a tailless MCA.

But only definitive models were unveiled with a lot of fanfare, as both FCAS and Tempest went through.
Click to expand...
Not so, there were several unveiling of various European fighters in the early '80s. We will see in time what emerges.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom