> Put simply, the funding committed or even hinted at publicly so far by participating countries falls well short.
> The UK Combat Air budget as it exists currently also offers no capacity to fund a credible ‘sixth’ or even fifth generation fighter programme.
> The public refusal to acknowledge the likely costs of developing a competitive fighter risks becoming another example of the chronic MoD and defence industry habit of using overly optimistic cost estimates to lock in politically binding commitments on major projects.
> However, the fighter ambition poses significant challenges for affordability and practicality, especially given that Tempest is now directly competing for funding with the requirement to regenerate frontline RAF combat capability to deter Russia and meet NATO commitments over the coming decade.
GCAP will end up being a 4.75gen fighter sometime in 2035 with probably less than 50 units produced
https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/global-combat-air-programme-writing-cheques-defence-cant-cash
GCAP has about the same likelihood as FCAS, possibly even less since the UK, Italy and Japan are all F35 customers
The UK in particular simply can't fund a proper fighter jet program given competing more pressing requirements. During the Gulf War the UK had 51 destroyers and frigates + 36 fighter jet squadrons, today the total is 18 + 7 fighter jet squadrons. Even if the UK/Italy/Japan had the technical know-how to build a 6th gen, which is highly unlikely without US support, the UK can barely maintain its current fleet and air force with its current budget let alone fund a project that could exceed $100+ billion.
Keep in mind, the Typhoon cost the UK/Germany/Italy/Spain $150+ billion, to date the UK has committed $3 billion to GCAP and Italy only $2 billion, Japan probably a similar figure.
No way anything GCAP related becomes operational before 2040 and if anything does get completed it will be 1.5+ gens behind whatever the US has in the skies
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/defence-committee-chair-warns-over-british-military-decline/
FCAS started development.
those budget figures are all wrong
>F35 customers
GCAP has nothing to do with F35, dipshit
This is like saying NGAD will fail because of F35
>During the Gulf War
Lol moron
Only US and South Korea have advanced fighter jet programs that are real
vatnik shills, israelite shills, asiatic shills...what's next
>asiaticshill reveals himself
AH. So that's why you made this thread. good luck on your 4.5 gen stealth larp, maybe it'll pass as 5th by 2040.
> troony weeb like clockwork
ROK will be at 6th gen by 2035 and achieve 7th gen by the time Japan gets to 4.5 gen
I'm a different troony weeb.
I like SK stuff and hope they do well. I know SK software dev is fricking remarkable, and I also believe that's going to be a huge part of warfare going forward. I don't know what state SK materials science is in, though.
K-2 won my heart on aesthetics alone.
You can't even build a 5th gen whilst having your hand held by the leading aerospace company in the world lmao. SK is a fricking joke when it comes to aircraft.
> You can't even build a 5th gen whilst having your hand held by the leading aerospace company in the world lmao. SK is a fricking joke when it comes to aircraft.
Lmfao
>ROK will be at 6th gen by 2035
With what program and what funding? You'll be lucky if KF-21 even has IWBs by then, let alone another project entirely achieving the lofty ambitions of 6th gen capabilities.
> GCAP partners: UK, Italy, Japan (lol)
> FCAS partners: France, Belgium (lolol)
> ROK partner: US
Other than the US, ROK is easily the most advanced in terms of actual real development of next gen fighters
Even China is getting nervous and trying to hire both US and SK high tech employees to again steal/copy but the US/ROK are already on to them
In Asia, ROK is known to be the strongest military and every move they make is widely covered by Chinese, Japanese and other asian nations media
They are also known for their glorious performances big penises and superiority too the filthy japanese, also I heard South Koreans have the most powerful army
These are all true, but South Korean businessmen are notorious throughout Asia from Mongolia to Indonesia for this probably even worse than US Marines in Japan
>the US and ROK are partnering for a 6th gen fighter program
>not only is this happening, it will be operational in 2035
Yep, that’s a asiaticshill filename
> troony weeb like clockwork
Lmfao
Lmfao
You mixed up total procurement cost with development cost. The development cost of Typhoon was 18 billion euros ($32 billion for F-22 for comparison). For GCAP, Japan has spent $3 billion on F-X that is now GCAP, and $2 billion on preliminary R&D, totaling $5 billion, which already produced fruit in the form of a prototype engine, new materials and such. Combined with UK and Italy figures, it works out to some $10 billion, and GCAP is still in the early conceptual design stage, with Japan alone slated to provide another 0.77 trillion yen or $5-6 billion for next 5 years, and the total development cost would be $30-40 billion or more. Which can be easily financed, as Japan alone is doubling defense budget to 2% GDP, which translates to $40-50 billion increase in annual spending and they put great value on air dominance fighter even though not all extra budgets will be allocated to it.
KF-21 is 4.5th generation, not an advanced fighter comparable to GCAP or other 6th generation programs.
> doubling defense budget
Japan is not doubling their defense budget. The official Japan defense budget for 2023 to 2027 is 4.3 trillion yen or about $60 billion per year. Most of the new weapons budget is allocated to acquisition of tomahawk missiles and F35s, the focus on development is a hypersonic surface-to-surface missile system to eventually replace the tomahawks
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2023/05/22/no-japan-is-not-planning-to-double-its-defense-budget/#:~:text=At%20approximately%206.8%20trillion%20yen,of%20the%20past%2030%20years.
> typhoon development cost 18 billion euro
This here guarantees that the gcap will end up being a 4.75gen fighter, maybe 5 gen if the GCAP countries have enough time to reverse engineer the F35s (all of the GCAP countries have F35s now). The UK defense budget is around $65 billion, the US defense budget had $2+ trillion distributed to the six sub-components of the DOD last year let alone other non-DOD related defense entities. The UK, Japan and Italy combined simply don't have the budget or the national resolve to allocate these levels to military technologies in the air, let alone anything in the seas or land. The 2030s will have UK, Italy, Japan buying upgraded versions of the F35.
>let alone anything in the seas
Please remind me who is building the US Constellation-class frigates
Fincantieri is building the Constellation class, so the US is spending the capital, this has absolutely nothing to do with the Italian defense budget or development budget, they are simply workers paid to build US ships
Considering the Constellation class is based on an existing design
(FREMM) which is currently in use, I'd say they have the budget to allocate to naval R&D and construction. Naval and Aerospace R&D is generally somewhat comparable in cost.
The Italian defense budget is about $30 billion, there are efforts to increase to $38/$39 billion by 2030 but nothing offical yet
So if we use the most optimistic estimates for 2030:
UK $90 billion + Italy $40 billion + Japan $70 billion = $200 billion
A more realistic estimate:
UK $80 billion + Italy $35 billion + Japan $60 billion = $175 billion
Compared to the US for DOD related budgets only (excludes non-DOD related defense spending): $2 trillion
If all of Europe + China + Japan + Russia got together and tried to develop a competing air fighter maybe its possible to have a comparable jet, but these notions of UK/Italy/Japan/maybe Sweden or France/maybe Belgium may be able to get close by the mid-2030s to what an F35 is today but even that is a stretch
China shits out hundreds of fighters better than F-35s by itself right now
>Japan is not doubling their defense budget. The official Japan defense budget for 2023 to 2027 is 4.3 trillion yen or about $60 billion per year.
Yes it is. Their annual budget will reach 11 trillion yen in 2027, including some 2 trillion yen for defense-related expenses like R&D, infrastructure, coast guard (220 billion yen in 2022) and stuff, in yellow on the chart, which will be the baseline from 2028. That's like $90-100 billion at 10 year average exchange rate of USD/JPY = 115, or $80 billion even if the current very weak yen continued. Even before the budget boost their F-X program cost (for development and acquisition of 100 aircraft) had been estimated to be at least 5 trillion yen, and with the doubled budget they can commit much more.
> including r&d, infrastructure, coast guard budgets
If you included that for the US would be another $2+ trillion
Japan is going to get to $65 billion by 2027 less than Saudi Arabia…today…the exchange rate is projected to get worse not better due to the demographic time bomb + unsustainable debt levels, currency analyst futures have the yen stabilizing around 150, besides who the frick pays for shit on the spot market based on historical exchange rates?
Real world is different from your delusion, asiaticshill.
Japan has spent around 50 billion for decades under 1% gdp policy, and the cap will be doubled.
Do the simple math.
>UK announcing things it has no funds for just to see everything collapse because of moronic procurement choices
Say it ain't so.
>UK announcing things it has no funds for just to see everything collapse because of moronic procurement choices
This is not english. This whole thread reeks of poo.
OP is the asiaticshill.
He always shits on GCAP because it's too much for him to deal with the fact that not only does Japan mog Korea in 5th gen fleet (147 F-35 vs 60), their next fighter match will be a total annihilation of the entire KF-21 fleet by one GCAP with a k/d ratio of 1000:0. And the fact that GCAP is the second most promising 6th generation program after NGAD complicates his butthurt further.
OP is warriortard
>x sisters
The unfailing mark of a garbage thread. Why can't any of you fricking zoomer filth put forward your own opinions forthrightly?
GCAP is dead NOCAP frfr
I can't into 5th Gen
I'll just go straight to 6th Gen instead
weird flex but okay
6th generation is looking like an information sharing and drone tech slapped on 5th gen, same as 5th gen was stealth coatings on 4th gen fighters.
5th gen is just as much about advanced sensors, sensor fusion and data processing as it is about stealth. I don't think the whole hype about 6th gen is really appropriate since so far it's been everything F-35 is already meant to do minus the long range and the unmanned optionality which aren't really that generation defining.
>programme
>cheques
honestly, how do brits live with themselves
>everyone hamstrings themselves making their own Rafale/Eurofighter/Gripen
>the result being that you get a plane that's a peer to the F-16, twenty years later, for twice the price, and build 1/10th as many of them, during which time the Moroccan, Romanian and Indonesian Air Forces enjoy air superiority over you
>the entire civilized world realizes this frickup and goes all-in together on the F-35, making it both the most advanced and most successful new plane design this century
>emboldened by this success, every country has decided to... go their separate ways and repeat the fourth gen debacle, all over again
It's sort of neat that Taiwan managed to make their own fourth gen fighter though
That's gotta be the smallest, poorest such program
Good thing GCAP is a multinational project then, isn't it?
>RUSI
LEL.
>please don't make more advance fighters.
Why wasn't the F-22 used as a base to add all the advanced sensor shit they put into the F-35 instead of designing a whole new airframe?
F35 has a new generation of baked in stealth material that isn't compatible, would basically need to redesign from scratch anyway
Military budgets in 2027 based on announced/estimated spending plans:
US: $2.5+ trillion
China: $500+ billion
Russia: $100 billion
Germany: $100 billion
India: $80 billion
UK: $70 billion
France: $65 billion
South Korea: $65 billion
Japan: $65 billion
Saudi Arabia: $65 billion
Australia: $45 billion
Italy: $40 billion
US > next 11 countries combined
How the frick do you even manage a budget like that?
Absolutely unholy volumes of paperwork. Unironically a big reason why dictatorships can't hold a candle to western trust based societies. You need societal cohesion and trust to be able to manage these sort of budgets without it just dissapearing into some byzantine corruption-hole like it does with arab militaries.
Also a big reason why a lot of online shilling is focused on implying the military industrial complex is nothing but kickbacks for rich folks, the reality is it's the biggest welfare programme on the planet, putting money into poor communities via the GI bill, soldier pay and manufacturing economic activity. The fact that it has a colossal stabilising effect on the world economy via the pax americana is the main benefit, but the economic stimulus is absolutely a happy byproduct.
I appreciate this post, anon, though I was after an outline on the practical reality of managing such a massive, inter-governmental project. Maybe I should take a business management course.
The specific skill is project management, and there's elements of art/science/politics to the whole thing. Conceptually it's not really that different a skillset from doing group projects in school - just a lot more people involved. There's certainly quite a bit of math and accounting involved, but the social aspects of managing people and having a sense of what a realistic timeline is for a given result is a matter of intuitive experience as well.
Neat. I'm probably overthinking it; the notion of managing a project with multiple funding sources, from multiple countries, at different times, and subject to political whims, while also having to come up with timelines for research, tech, and materials development sounds daunting af.
>daunting af
Nah, you're not overthinking it. You might even have nailed the difficulty spot on. It IS fricking difficult, which just makes western success even more impressive.
Once you grasp it, thirdie potemkin programs actually become much easier to spot because you can see the cracks in the economic arguments very easily; sometimes literally. REmember that SU57 which had bubbles in it's canopy during an airshow? The wood screws used in construction? they get memed on a lot, but it's absolutely indicative of deeper problems which aren't as visible. i.e. poor project management.
Thanks for good posts.
I'm also reminded of the XKCD page about research-to-market timelines. I'd have posted it but couldn't find it.
Why do I have a sudden desire to pursue project management?
6th gen will have drone wingmen
Britain really should try an AUKUS-like play to try and piggyback bong/wop/Jap efforts off the US 6th gen programs. Bring America's greatest ally (Australia) into it and the State department will probably go for it.
Lol if you think the US will think the UK or Australia adds anything to the development effort or think UK/Italy/Japan is more than a chuckle effort let alone let support a country develop a competing product anything more than an F16
> Falkland War that the US strongly opposed to include heated protests by the US in front of the UN
> Limited relatively small military budget used to maintain carriers + nuclear subs instead of airframes, destroyers, conventional subs in numbers that are useable even though the UK knows the nukes can only be used in a mad scenario where by definition the UK will be sunk into the Atlantic
> Gets all pissy because the US doesn't fully trust the UK enough to bring them into the inner circle of F35 or NGAD so goes off and assembles a minor league team of players in a futile impossible attempt to keep up technologically with the US further resulting in more distrust
UK should be a closer ally to the US then they are but can't completely grasp that its not an equal peer relationship so they keep fricking it up by pathetic flexes that simply ends up degrading the UK's military capabilities
That said, at least you bongs followed through on brexit, but you knew that under the EU the UK would eventually end up a German de facto colony like the other EU nations
>pathetic flexes
Like what?
Falklands, nukes, multiple carriers, nuclear subs, gcap, the list goes on
The truth is that nukes can provide some degree of security but only the hegemons really want to the world to have them, it used to be the US and Soviets, but after the fall of the USSR, the US should really be the only country that possesses nukes
>Falklands
Defending their sovereign territory was a pathetic flex against the US? The US Isn't even a part of that equation. You think the bongs should have just let a hostile foreign power seize their territory by force?
>nukes
I'd love to see you even try to justify this one.
>multiple carriers
If you're going to have ANY carriers you ought to have multiple, such that if one ever needs repairs you maintain at least some operational capacity.
>nuclear subs
Again, with far flung territories and a difficult recruiting pitch having fewer but better subs just makes sense.
>gcap
America won't export NGAD. Which is why everyone who has need for 6th gen is developing their own. If you think the US feels slighted by that then pin the blame on them, if they won't export people will build their own.
And again I don't see how any of these things should sour the relationship between the US and the UK nor do I see how any of it degrades the UK's capabilities.
> Falklands
Monroe Doctrine
> Nukes
There is a reason why France is not completely within the US security umbrella, North Korea has nukes too, but from a purely economic standpoint many defense insiders in the UK feel the UK would be better off as part of the US security umbrella while allocating their budget to say 50+ destroyers/frigates and 100+ F35s
> Carriers are useless for the UK, the only point of having a carrier is to defend or wage wars overseas, UK would be better off trading in the carriers for say 50 destroyers and 50 conventional subs, literally the only thing the carriers give the UK is the ability to defend territories like the Falklands
> nuclear subs
Who is going to invade BVI or Bermuda? All of the UK territories combined are about 5,000 sq miles excluding the Falklands and then another 5,000 sq miles for the Falklands, total population 270,000 people
> GCAP
Correct, but GCAP won't even be a proper 5th gen and by the mid-2030s the US will probably have upgraded F35s that are 5.5 gen
The point is that the UK should have 50 modern subs + 50 modern destroyers/frigates + 100 to 200 F35s and squarely in the US security umbrella - today none of these are a reality
>just don't defend your territories bro
>just disarm yourselves bro
>just cripple your operational range bro
>just never advance on your own bro
If this is what your "ally" wants for you then you shouldn't be aligned with them.
>50 modern subs
Diesel subs with dog shit range which entirely negates the purpose of having them as there are zero regional threats to counter in the British isles. Not that you'd be able to man them anyway with the ongoing recruitment crisis the world over.
US nuclear umbrella would get the UK a real nuclear deterrent, but yeah if UK wants flexibility to go its own way would be disastrous to commit to a US controlled nuclear strategy, but still stands that the UK defense budget is barely a rounding error in the US defense budget so the UK trades being able to field a proper military able to engage a peer adversary for the ability to protect territories that combined are the size of Connecticut with less people than Iceland
>US nuclear umbrella would get the UK a real nuclear deterrent
The UK has a real nuclear deterrent. Nuclear weapons are the ultimate trump card, any serious nation should maintain their own nuclear arsenal such that they're never ultimately at the whims of another. If placed under the US umbrella, any political instability in the US could have disastrous effects for those who depend on them for their security. Not a situation you want to be in if you can avoid it.
>the UK trades being able to field a proper military able to engage a peer adversary for the ability to protect territories that combined are the size of Connecticut with less people than Iceland
Because the needs of the UK are fundamentally expeditionary, the distant British territories a la the Falklands are just the easiest way to demonstrate that. Sure if you stripped back operational range, niche capabilities and a nuclear weapons program the UK could hypothetically field a larger conventional force (which you wouldn't even be able to man but you've conveniently ignored that). The problem with this is it has absolutely zero use case. The only event in which you'd need (or in fact be able) to field such a force would be a direct confrontation on the doorstep of the UK, which would have terminated in a nuclear exchange long before that, making it a moot point.
> Nuclear weapons are the ultimate trump card, any serious nation should maintain their own nuclear arsenal such that they're never ultimately at the whims of another
This is precisely North Korea's strategy
After you guys elected Trump its clear you can't be trusted, he'd remove us from your nuclear umbrella on a whim
Id rather pay more and be poorer to continue keeping our nuclear programme independent, its not like we need to do much other than defend some small shitty islands in the middle of nowhere; we aren't ever going to need a massive fleet or land army to recolonise things
jesus christ you're moronic.
>US strongly opposed
lmao, I regret reading that far
There's a reason why every Sudaca nation is closer to China over the US today and Argentina in particular has joined the Chinese belt and road initiative
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/02/26/the-united-states-has-never-recovered-from-the-falklands-war/
BRB, pulling up my screenshot of calling out the F3/F-X program as vaporware
God I hope Pakistan nukes India into shitstorm of glass one day.
Stop responding to jealous thirdies.