It’s not ripped off ( which in common English usage, means a cheap or poor copy) of FCAS if the UK (and their future partners) decide to use the technology they put into the programme.

I also think that Dassault are getting ahead of themselves though, because FCAS/SCAF is a purely UK/France project and not for Dassault to offer access too unilaterally.

Unless it’s dead. In which case all bets are off.

As to equipping both carriers with F35s, that is a Chimera. The plan is one in service at any one time, so 138 is too many. If we say 60-90 is what is needed, then a reduction in numbers with an increase in Typhoon (actually likely not much more than reinstating the T3B order numbers) is not that momentous a shift is it?

It just reflects the reality of 2020 instead of the late 90s. It’s not a slight to the US (dear god, how much UK procurement actually comes from the US after all).

The UK aerospace sector will benefit from more development and orders of an updated Typhoon. More so than the F35 (the UK share is overstated to some degree, although it is significant).

Besides which, I dont say that we should just buy 48 (i dont think that was even in the article). We dont need 138 unless it is to replace the early Typhoon with an aircraft that has worse performance and can carry fewer weapons. If we opt to replace Typhoon with F35, that is a very slippery slope for UK fast jet procurement to go down, when it really needs interim support for projects that will feed into a 6th generation Typhoon replacement.

BAE et al are just building parts for the F35 now, there is no UK design/development happening there and it is entirely right that The UK and other partners should look at how they can develop their own products now and into the future.

The bizarre suggestion that the UK should be punished is the same sentiment that says Germany should be punished for not choosing the F35. Adds fuel to the suggestion that the F35 is a tool to dominate European defence procurement (not my view).

I think the point of the recent rumours is that T1 might be replaced by Typhoon rather than F35. If this is the case, the F35 fleet might number 60+ rather than 100+.

All conjecture at this stage of course, but I would prefer F35B for the carriers in decent numbers but F35 should go nowhere near the Typhoon or Tornado replacement.

Reports starting to circulate that the UK MOD is considering a Super Typhoon instead of further F35 purchases beyond the 48 F35Bs….

https://twitter.com/RAeSTimR/status/997013532964253698

Vnomad, I have removed the comment about the US not supplying F35 customers with the same standard aircraft, in order that my comments not be seen as inflammatory :angel:

Just look at what happened on the Eurofighter thread a couple of days ago. 4 members (who are very capable of valuable, adult contributions) started a discussion about US v French FAC techniques which continued despite my repeated efforts to stop it. Nothing to do with Typhoon, everything to do with F35 v Rafale and one member v another.

They knew better, but continued.

Sure enough the “Russia against the rest of the World” situation hasn’t helped things and there are very much divergent views on Syria etc (I live in Salisbury, so I had to keep my mouth shut for a few weeks), but I put it down to laziness/lack of self-discipline rather than a total disregard for forum rules.

Many members flit from one forum to another, but I can think of at least one other forum which is rigorously policed and generally full of fantastic input.

This is a big community and there are lots of personalities and agendas on display, but surely most of the problem is for the members to police?