General / Off-Topic French pressident Macron unveils the mockup of the future European fighter!

Today, at the international Paris Air Show that took place at Le Bourget, French President Emmanuel Macron, accompanied by foreign ministers of Spain and Germany, revealed the mock-up of what is destined to become the main European 6th generation jet fighter.

This fighter will be the result of a consortium between France, Germany and Spain. Who will join forces to deliver the jet fighter of the future.

Let me tell you, its a beauty! :)


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsAIroM0BQk
 
Last edited:

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Sure does. I'm surprised that piloted fighters are still considered in new projects. I would think that drones would be cheaper and have superior performance, by the time this thing is ready for service.
.... and use of remote piloted drones ensures that there is no short term or permanent loss of the pilot when the fighter is destroyed - simply switch to controlling another drone....
 
Seems very much like the Tempest unveiled last year https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-unveils-new-next-generation-fighter-jet-called-tempest/ Obviously the main point of such projects is to keep the aerospace industry busy. It is in some ways a form of indirect subsidy. The benefits are maintaining a competitive domestic aerospace industry and not being dependant on other countries for defence equipment. Whether you think that is a worthwhile use of taxpayers' money is another matter.

Drones may be cheaper, better performing and more expendable, but the issue is control. The demand for accountability rules out fully autonomous drones. No one wants to rely on AI to make the "kill or not kill" decision. This leaves a choice of either directly or remotely controlling the aircraft. The issues of remote piloting are a slight control lag, possible limits to situational awareness and the risk of hostile powers jamming or even overriding the control signal. One of the proposals with so called 6th generation fighters is to use the piloted aircraft as a kind of 'pack leader' directing a squadron of drones. The supposed advantages are: keeping a human in the loop, close proximity and using line of sight communication reduces the risks of jamming, and reducing the risk to the pilot when compared against conventional manned missions. Whether this idea works in practice is a big question.
 
Seems very much like the Tempest unveiled last year https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-unveils-new-next-generation-fighter-jet-called-tempest/ Obviously the main point of such projects is to keep the aerospace industry busy. It is in some ways a form of indirect subsidy. The benefits are maintaining a competitive domestic aerospace industry and not being dependant on other countries for defence equipment. Whether you think that is a worthwhile use of taxpayers' money is another matter.

Drones may be cheaper, better performing and more expendable, but the issue is control. The demand for accountability rules out fully autonomous drones. No one wants to rely on AI to make the "kill or not kill" decision. This leaves a choice of either directly or remotely controlling the aircraft. The issues of remote piloting are a slight control lag, possible limits to situational awareness and the risk of hostile powers jamming or even overriding the control signal. One of the proposals with so called 6th generation fighters is to use the piloted aircraft as a kind of 'pack leader' directing a squadron of drones. The supposed advantages are: keeping a human in the loop, close proximity and using line of sight communication reduces the risks of jamming, and reducing the risk to the pilot when compared against conventional manned missions. Whether this idea works in practice is a big question.
This results in a saturated pilot. And, you still have crew risk.

We're hitting the limitations of humans in sixth generation fighters.
 
Top Bottom