Just take a look at the history of Eurofighter………

1971: The UK had identified a requirement for a new fighter.

1972: AST 403 requirement／ P.96　concept.
　
1979: European Collaborative Fighter／P.106 and P.110 concept.

1982: Agile Combat Aircraft (ACA) programme.

1983: Future European Fighter Aircraft (FEFA) programme／Experimental Aircraft Program (EAP).

1985: The EAP was towed out of the assembly hall at BAe Warton.

1986: First flight of EAP.

1988: Development of EFA project began.

1994: Maiden flight of DA1.

1998: Production contract signed.

2003: RAF accept the first Typhoon (18 years after EAP had been towed out of the assembly hall at BAe Warton).

2006: First operational RAF Typhoon sqn (21 years after EAP had been towed out of the assembly hall at BAe Warton).

The Taranis today is at best at the stage of EAP for Typhoon project between 1985 and 1986. It should not be surprising that it needs at least another 20 years (if not longer) to enter the service formally.

Royal Airforce Yearbook 2011

The anticipation of Air Commodore Mark Roberts, Head of Capability, Deep Target Attack, at the Ministry of Defense, for the future of RAF’s RPA / UAV / UCAV plan and schedule:

* Today: Reaper RPA.

* The next generation UAV originated from Scavenger project might deliver an operational capability in 2018.

* The RAF does not expect to field a Taranis-like UCAV until about 2030.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=6723008&c=FEA&s=INT

Lt. Gen. Giuseppe Bernardis, deputy chief of staff of the Italian Air Force:

“…….I was one of the first to say e-scan radar is a must for Eurofighter, but you cannot ask me to scrap a state-of-the-art mechanically scanned radar that I am obliged to receive until 2016. You cannot ask me to throw away good equipment in order to receive better equipment, especially if we have financial constraints.“

That is the reason why I think the idea of “Replacing the MSA/PESA with GaAs AESA after 2015 and then replacing GaAs AESA with GaN AESA after 2020~2025” for the fighters today is impractical ~ The GaAs AESA is several times more expensive than the conventional radar antenna / PESA, and will the customers of F-35/EF-2000/Rafale/Gripen NG be glad to replace their GaAs AESA with an even more expensive antenna within just 5 to 10 years after the GaAs AESA has entered the service ?? I don’t think so.

However, I won’t be surprised if the GaN radar can be directly introduced into the newly built manned fighters or UCAVs at the time of around 2025~2030……

The GaAs versus GaN “War” Debunked

By Anthony Balistreri, Defense & Aerospace Marketing Director, TriQuint Semiconductor

http://www.mpdigest.com/issue/Articles/2010/sept/Opinion/Default.asp

GaN is not now and will not soon become a replacement for silicon or GaAs in the majority of applications. Cellular handsets, for example, are not readily able to take advantage of GaN’s benefits due to their low operating voltage. A GaN RF power transistor currently costs substantially more than a similarly sized GaAs device, although this is mitigated by the fact that fewer of them are needed to achieve a specific power level. Nevertheless, pure-play GaN-based companies are actively promoting the technology for use in commercial applications currently served by GaAs and even silicon, such as base station transceivers and hybrid amplifiers used by the millions in hybrid-fiber coax cable systems. GaN offers obvious benefits in both cases, but from the perspective of a company that offers both technologies, it seems that GaN will in the short term be a difficult sell in many commercial applications where there isn’t a strong need for significantly higher power levels. Further, competing technologies in the cellular frequency range such as LDMOS, high-voltage pHEMT, and high-voltage HBT offer high power density at competitive costs.

That’s why the first application of GaN RF power technology was in defense systems where cost was not as prominent a factor as performance. In commercial applications, acceptable performance is assumed and cost becomes the driver, which currently makes GaN less competitive than GaAs for many applications, regardless of the latter’s technical merits. GaAs benefits from decades of refinement and mass production; its performance and cost are well suited for most applications while the width and breadth of GaAs device and MMIC portfolios is immense. For these reasons, we believe that GaN and GaAs will coexist (although perhaps not peacefully from a marketing perspective) for years to come. However, as its cost decreases, GaN will be chosen more for high-power and higher frequency applications where its attributes overwhelm those of GaAs. This will increasingly occur in defense systems and eventually in many commercial applications. For functions other than power amplifiers and for low-voltage systems, GaAs will continue to dominate thanks to its long record of reliability, lower cost, wide availability, and excellent overall performance.

Chief engineer of NGB: “Ladies and gentlemen, after years of head-scratching and brainstroming, now I’ll proudly show you the revolutional future stealth bomber design created by my genius teammates with the price of just 100 million USD!!”

http://fullygeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/paperplane.jpg

The first failure may be due to the problem of propulsion system ~ The missile’s trajectory was abnormal and it flew into the sea before hitting the target, which was at the height of 3,000fts and less than 5 nm away from the Mirage when the MICA was shot……

The second failure may be due to the problem of seeker or proximity fuse ~ The missile passed the target without explosion.

Now ROCAF (Taiwanese Airforce) has two new jokes for MICA’s amazing performance in the recent two exercises:

1. “The MICA has become a Jellyfish” (PS)

PS: In chinese word, MICA = 雲母（Mother of cloud）; Jellyfish = 水母（Mother of water）.

2. “The Frenchmen declared that they had successfully combined three functions into one missile (BVR engagement, WVR dogfight, and Self-defence), but we have successfully discovered the fourth new function of that missile: Anti-submarine……:D”

The MICA EM have had troubles in Taiwan, no?

The recent two MICA test in Taiwan against low level flight target with no evasive maneuver and no ECM in the WVR range failed ~ A missile that had cost us more than 1 million USD per unit gave us such kind of AIM-4 performance. You tell me how big the trouble is…… :dev2:

Well, IAF requires around 900 fighters for 45 squadrons, and it has only “less than 800 fighters” right now, with around 25% of them are MIG-21s that are needed to be phased out between 2012 and 2018, which makes IAF much more urgent than UAE and Brazil AFs for introducing the new fighters.