6th Generation Fighters Projects

koxinga

Well-Known Member
While this notion of generations is misleading, KAAN was never positioned as a 6th gen platform and would question if it is any better that a F-35, which Germany already operates. That includes any MUM-T/CCA capabilities.

There is another tough, joint with Turkiye on their KAAN project. At least KAAN already in prototype level.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
KAAN was never positioned as a 6th gen platform and would question if it is any better that a F-35, which Germany already operates.
The possibilities that I thought more on using KAAN as base and then develop further. Just putting some short cut on RnD. Question will still be on the time line scope that German want to develop on.

Add:

Either way seems it is clearer that Airbus want SAAB more as partners.


While altough now seems German/Airbus and French/Dasault want to go on their own. I suspect German try to approach Swede as junior partner as French also try to attract Spain as one.
 
Last edited:

koxinga

Well-Known Member
The possibilities that I thought more on using KAAN as base and then develop further. Just putting some short cut on RnD. Question will still be on the time line scope that German want to develop on.
Airbus is a 158 billion euro dollar company. I mean, Airbus was working on 6th generation technology, and why would an unproven 5th generation platform be worth their time, and from a relative small company making their first combat aircraft, even if it is flying?
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
why would an unproven 5th generation platform be worth their time, and from a relative small company making their first combat aircraft, even if it is flying?
The business calculation as not as simple size alone. If partnering can reduce RnD costs, then why not it is being approach. This is why on Reuters article on my previous post, it is also potential that Airbus looking for SAAB as partner.

It can be argue why giant Airbus want with smaller SAAB. It can be argue SAAB has more track record on fighters then TAI. However in the end business calculation will going to goes to which potential partner going to provide better cost efficiencies.

Anyway it is always back to what is 6th gen ? Is it really provide generational gap against 5th gen like F-35, Su-57, J-35 and J-20 ? Or is it more Gen 5.5 as now most recent iteration of Gen 4 being classified as Gen 4.5.

Frankly speaking if new actual Gen 6 coming, I still see it will come from US and China. Simply is because both of them already have Gen 5 working, and have money to spend on RnD on that Gen 6 (which doubt Russia have). Euro have no experience yet to developed their own Gen 5. Don't believe Euro consortium can just leap frog from Gen 4.5 to Gen 6. Which is why I do believe what they are developing is more Gen 5.5.
 

Antipode

Member
Re Spain

Government maintains FCAS related research and development contracts (€700M) with both Indra and Airbus, presumably to introduce that technology on whichever fighter is chosen at the end.

Remote carrier/wingman technology already on trials by SATNUS group will also be used on other projects.

More affected is ITP Aero, leader of the engine part for Spain.

There were already government to government conversations about the KAAN before the FCAS cancellation, but this aims at the substitution of the Spanish F-18s, not the Typhoons. Given the recent agreement for the Hürjet, it may be more than curiosity.


Cheers
 

swerve

Super Moderator
The business calculation as not as simple size alone. If partnering can reduce RnD costs, then why not it is being approach. This is why on Reuters article on my previous post, it is also potential that Airbus looking for SAAB as partner.

It can be argue why giant Airbus want with smaller SAAB. It can be argue SAAB has more track record on fighters then TAI
SAAB involvement would probably be jointly with the Swedish government, & would come with the expectation of a Swedish order. SAAB also has more than just airframe expertise. The Luftwaffe's currently buying SAAB EW equipment, for example.

The timeframe's better, too. Germany's looking for something to follow its Typhoons. It doesn't have a large fleet of F-16s to replace, unlike Turkey. Its remaining Tornados are being replaced by more Typhoons & some F-35s.
 

koxinga

Well-Known Member

Well, they (Germany and Spain) started their own program. But this comment goes to the heart of it. Capability aside, their domestic needs isn't sufficient and Swede participation seems to be anticipated.

Putting the German and Spanish future fighter requirements together, the two countries might, at best, need to build 300 new combat jets, with a figure of 250 more likely, Barrie contended. Team Gen 6 would then face a real struggle to break even
 

SolarisKenzo

Well-Known Member
Germany and Spain as governments have nothing to do with this.

This is Airbus doing what they want.
They decide the requirement, they announce partnerships, they unveil programs.
The Airbus union made the FCAS fail.

Let's be clear, please.
 

koxinga

Well-Known Member
Germany and Spain as governments have nothing to do with this.

This is Airbus doing what they want.
They decide the requirement, they announce partnerships, they unveil programs.
The Airbus union made the FCAS fail.

Let's be clear, please.
Don't understand. We use countries loosely, but these are sovereign programs, no? Is the disagreement at company level or at national level that let to failure? If it is not what the governments wants, why can't they just tell Airbus to STFU?
 

SolarisKenzo

Well-Known Member
Don't understand. We use countries loosely, but these are sovereign programs, no? Is the disagreement at company level or at national level that let to failure? If it is not what the governments wants, why can't they just tell Airbus to STFU?
The governments of Germany and Spain are not involved in this new coalition unveiled by Airbus.

This is a fully private initiative, led by Airbus (and its workers union, by far one of the most influential in the defence sector in Europe).

Berlin didnt want to leave the FCAS, nor did Paris.

Dassault and Airbus, private companies, did the negotiations. And they did bring the program to failure. If you read all of the governments announcements and documents, they tried till the last second to save the program.

Airbus is now simply too big of a company and is effectively able to dictate the priorities.
Sovereign states have nothing to do at all with the FCAS failure, that's well known.

To sum up what actually happened:

#1: Airbus, not Mertz, decide (the Luftwaffe is nowhere to be found).

#2: Airbus sank the FCAS because it didn't want to recognize Dassault's primary role.

#3: Consequently, it's extremely unlikely they'll accept an even more secondary role compared to the United Kingdom, Italy, and Japan.

#4: I'd bet an euro that they'll force a program with Sweden, with Saab having to accept a subordinate role because the bulk of the money will come from Berlin.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
The governments of Germany and Spain are not involved in this new coalition unveiled by Airbus.

This is a fully private initiative, led by Airbus (and its workers union, by far one of the most influential in the defence sector in Europe).

Berlin didnt want to leave the FCAS, nor did Paris.

Dassault and Airbus, private companies, did the negotiations. And they did bring the program to failure. If you read all of the governments announcements and documents, they tried till the last second to save the program.

Airbus is now simply too big of a company and is effectively able to dictate the priorities.
Sovereign states have nothing to do at all with the FCAS failure, that's well known.

To sum up what actually happened:

#1: Airbus, not Mertz, decide (the Luftwaffe is nowhere to be found).

#2: Airbus sank the FCAS because it didn't want to recognize Dassault's primary role.

#3: Consequently, it's extremely unlikely they'll accept an even more secondary role compared to the United Kingdom, Italy, and Japan.

#4: I'd bet an euro that they'll force a program with Sweden, with Saab having to accept a subordinate role because the bulk of the money will come from Berlin.
Don't you mean Sweden & Spain?

SAAB would automatically be a junior partner. Sweden wouldn't want as many aircraft as Germany & Spain, & Airbus has far more resources.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Dasault and Thales now have flushed of money from Rafale exports. The trend of Dasault exports now potentialy available up to 2040. The F4 industrial coop for India Good news for 'Make in India' as France plans tech transfer for 114 Rafale jets to India ahead of PM Modi's visit seems increasingly open (soon with 114 more order will become largest Rafale users outside France). While France also tounting F5 upgrade will become available to all users to make it the fighters updated toward 2040+ environment.

Thus is shown export is very important factor for both France and its MIC to survive, especially to key market in Middle East and rest of Asia. France and Spain are more depandable export suppliers to the region compare to Germany and Sweden. Thus I sense both team up Dasault/Thales/SNECMA and Indra/ITP Aero could more probable joint in FCAS succesor program, while Airbus/MTU and SAAB more probable joint up in another team up.

I don't sense GCAP partners really want to embrace Germany, considering Germany record on blocking Eurojet exports. Whatever the program, Euro need exports to Asia/Middle East. Japan already stated that their GCAP version already must open on exports, while KF-21 Block 3, Turkiye KAAN and India AMCA can provide potential alternative toward Euro Gen 5.5 or 6 in the region. It is already crowded export market, let alone facing already available F-35, J-35 and Su-57.
 

SolarisKenzo

Well-Known Member
Don't you mean Sweden & Spain?

SAAB would automatically be a junior partner. Sweden wouldn't want as many aircraft as Germany & Spain, & Airbus has far more resources.
I mean exactly Germany and Spain, the two shareholders of Airbus (together with France).
They have nothing to do with the new "gen 6th coalition" launched a couple of days ago.

It is a purely industrial initiative. The german government wanted to pursue FCAS with Paris. Airbus didn't let them do it.

Airbus and its governmental shareholders are very different entities. They have different strategies.
 

koxinga

Well-Known Member
The german government wanted to pursue FCAS with Paris. Airbus didn't let them do it.

Airbus and its governmental shareholders are very different entities. They have different strategies.
I guess this is the part I / we don't understand.

Who is paying the bills for FCAS? If Airbus is running this entirely on their own funds, sure, they can decide the commercial strategies and who they want to work with.

But the German taxpayers/government are footing the bills since the start. How can Airbus tell the German government what to do? They can disagree but I presume the German gov holds the financial purse strings.
 

SolarisKenzo

Well-Known Member
I guess this is the part I / we don't understand.

Who is paying the bills for FCAS? If Airbus is running this entirely on their own funds, sure, they can decide the commercial strategies and who they want to work with.

But the German taxpayers/government are footing the bills since the start. How can Airbus tell the German government what to do? They can disagree but I presume the German gov holds the financial purse strings.
I'm afraid you presume wrong.

The german government is being held hostage by the airbus workers union, both a major political lobby and voters group.
Berlin and the the taxpayers holds the financial purse strings, but the union holds them.

This is absolutely crystal clear if you read both governments statements and compare them to statements from IG METALL, Defence and Space branch of Airbus and politically placed people within the company (like Schoellhorn).

You can find a press release from some months ago by BDLI (Bundesverband der Deutschen Luft- und Raumfahrtindustrie) and IG METALL where the two unions openly argue that Germany should move ahead on its own and take the lead in developing a fighter jet, sinking the FCAS.
 

koxinga

Well-Known Member
Perun has well researched and grounded videos and he did a piece on this topic:


A summary (AI generated)

This video from defense analyst Perun breaks down the dramatic collapse of the Future Combat Air System (FCAS / SCAF)—Europe's only solely continental 6th-generation fighter program—and analyzes the wider implications for the global stealth fighter race [01:20].

Here is a summary of the key takeaways from the video:

1. Why the FCAS Program Collapsed
Launched in 2017 by France and Germany (with Spain joining in 2019), the program officially dissolved its manned fighter component after nearly a decade of effort [00:32, 01:20]. It stepped on two fatal landmines:
  • Irreconcilable Requirements: France absolutely required a nuclear-capable, relatively lightweight aircraft that could launch from aircraft carriers [16:02]. Germany wanted a heavy, land-based continental air superiority fighter [16:25]. A proposed "two-fighter solution" failed to gain traction [18:26].
  • Industrial Trench Warfare: The corporate primes (Dassault for France, Airbus for Germany) treated workshares and intellectual property as a zero-sum game [19:55]. Dassault insisted on absolute managerial control to avoid "design by committee," while Airbus argued that German and Spanish taxpayers were footing most of the bill and deserved an equal say [22:18, 23:01].
Other elements of FCAS, such as the "combat cloud" network and drone platforms, are still planned to move forward [27:50].

2. France's Next Moves
France has already announced it will push forward with its own domestic 6th-generation fighter slated for 2040 [29:52]. However, this path poses steep hurdles:
  • The Export Trap: France requires cutting-edge aircraft to sustain its robust defense export economy [30:43]. But building a 6th-gen fighter entirely alone is highly expensive.
  • Fiscal Strain: France's public finances are heavily strained (carrying a 5% GDP deficit and a 115% debt-to-GDP ratio) [35:32]. It may have to court outside financial partners like India or the UAE, though past tech-sharing disputes make those partnerships difficult [31:44, 32:21].
  • The Engine Challenge: Developing high-performance 6th-gen jet engines is incredibly difficult [33:33]. France may be forced to rely on a multinational engine block, compromising full industrial sovereignty [34:09].
3. Germany & Spain's Path Forward
Unlike France, Germany does not have to worry about sustaining a sovereign fighter export market and has vastly better financial health [37:21, 40:28]. Germany has three primary choices:
  • Abandon the Jet entirely: Focus purely on drones and expand its current mixed fleet of Eurofighters and American F-35s [37:35].
  • Build a German-Led Coalition: Partner with Spain and potentially Sweden to develop a land-based fighter, keeping the program's requirements strictly tailored to what the Luftwaffe actually needs [39:10, 39:42].
  • Join the Tempest (GCAP): This is the most strategically and militarily viable path [41:45].
4. The Massive Opportunity for "Tempest" (GCAP)
The other major partly European 6th-gen program is Tempest—a coalition between the UK, Italy, and Japan aiming for a 2035 entry into service [10:36, 42:13].

The requirements of the UK, Italy, Japan, and Germany match up perfectly: they all want a heavy, long-range, land-based air superiority fighter [42:02, 42:33]. If Germany and Spain join Tempest, it guarantees massive scale and lowers overall development costs [46:23]. Furthermore, with FCAS dead, Tempest could completely capture the non-US, non-Chinese global market for 6th-generation hardware [48:42].
The Catch: The biggest threat to Tempest is the British Treasury [01:36]. Rumors hint that the UK's upcoming defense investment plan may seek to delay Tempest funding into the late 2030s or 2040s to save short-term cash [51:36]. Perun warns that a delay is the "worst of both worlds"—it alienates partners like Japan, damages the industrial base, delays military capability, and still forces the government to pay the money later [55:50].
5. The Rest of the Global Field
  • United States: Pushing ahead with two programs—the Air Force's F-47 (all ahead flank) and the Navy's FA/XX (facing some budget and timeline pushback) [06:20]. The stealthy B-21 Raider bomber is also on track to enter service as early as next year [07:38].
  • China: Making highly steady progress [08:02]. It has enormous financial and industrial capacity, has flown futuristic airframes, and is arguably ahead in fielding stealth combat drones [08:19].
  • Russia: Essentially stuck at the starting line [58:30]. Kinetic sanctions and the extreme economic and resource drain from the war in Ukraine mean its 6th-gen projects are hilariously delayed [00:20, 09:15].
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Haven't really got an understanding of how FCAS was to work. Was it to be two jets, land and naval or just one jet for land and naval? How many jets for each of the partners? Will the joint Germany-France future tank program fare any better than FCAS?
 
Top