Clearly, information has been multiplying in recent days regarding the program. Rafale F5. After the naval version of the new version of the French fighter was recently confirmed, as well as a program to acquire 12 of these aircraft for the French Navy, as part of the 6th Tranche from 2030 to 2034, another crucial piece of information has just emerged.
It comes, once again, from very active deputy of the var Franck Giletti, rapporteur of the Air Force mission and vice-president of the defense commission of the National Assembly. During a question put to the President of Safran Electronics and Defense, Franck Saudo, the latter confirmed that discussions were underway with the DGA to produce a new version of the M88 engine as part of the program Rafale F5.
Called the T-REX program, this should allow it to push up to 9 tons with post-combustion, i.e. a 20% increase in engine thrust, a decisive increase in the M88 engine also welcome for the evolution of the Rafale, as well as for maintaining the skills of complete engine manufacturer for Safran's military aircraft.
In this section:
La Rafale F5, the best time to introduce a major evolution of the M88
The evolution of the M88 engine has been considered for many years. Already, at the end of the 2000s, Safran and Dassault had considered increasing the power of the M88 to 8,5 or 9 tons, to meet the requirements of the United Arab Emirates, Abu Dhabi considering the 5 tons dry, and 7,5 tons with PC of the M88, insufficient for a 25-ton aircraft.
However, if Safran could indeed upgrade the engine's power, it could not do so without changing the engine's dimensions and mass. This would have led to significant variations in the aircraft's centering, and with them, the need to perhaps revise the airframe, which went against the logic of the program. Rafale.
Le Rafale F5, the design of which was launched a few months ago, for entry into service in 2030, involves precisely developments of the cell, to accommodate the new detection, communication and digital processing equipment, as well as the optical fiber cabling of the device.
This is the reason why the Rafale delivered up to version F4.1, will not be able to evolve towards F5, which will create a divergence in the program, with two distinct evolutionary branches.
In any case, even today, it is very unlikely that a supercharged M88 weighing 9 tonnes could meet all the constraints of integrating the turbojet into the current airframe of the Rafale. In fact, the arrival of the F5 version, and this divergence, constitutes a unique opportunity to evolve the M88 into a more powerful version.
The T-REX program, not planned by the LPM 2024-2030, but essential for both the Rafale F5 only for Safran
In addition to the opportunity offered by the evolution of the F5 cell, another factor has recently come to fuel the chances of seeing this 88-ton M9 emerge. We learned, in fact, during the hearings of the National Assembly's defense committee, that the recent postponements announced around the SCAF program have come to threaten the maintenance of the skills of the industrialist Safran in this area.
There are 75% of this article left to read, Subscribe to access it!
The Classic subscriptions provide access to
articles in their full version, and without advertising,
from €1,99. Subscriptions Premium also allow access to archives (articles over two years old)
BLACK FRIDAY : – 20% on new monthly and annual Premium and Classic subscriptions, with the code MetaBF2024, until 03/12/24
In France, we remain locked into a paradigm where major industrial projects depend on orders from the Directorate General of Armaments (DGA) to be initiated. It seems to me that this hinders the proactive innovation capacity of our companies. Let's take as an example Pratt & Whitney, a direct competitor of Safran: this American company illustrates an approach that seems very different to me, where projects often advance in anticipation of the needs of the armed forces, even if it means encountering major technical challenges. For example, the new generation engines that it is developing suffer from overheating and thermal reliability problems. However, these pitfalls, although costly, do not hinder their ambition. They allow them to consolidate a technological lead on concepts such as adaptive cycle engines or systems integrating additional air flows. It is this risk-taking and learning capacity that positions them as world leaders. Some will say that France cannot afford such a strategy, because the order volumes for our aircraft are not comparable to those of the United States. This is true, but this is precisely where industrial thinking is needed. We need to compensate for this gap with an innovative approach, taking full advantage of modern design tools such as digital twins. These technologies can significantly reduce development costs and lead times by simulating each stage of an engine's life cycle, from operating performance to thermal and mechanical constraints. With a strategic initial investment in these tools, Safran could accelerate its ability to produce more advanced engines while limiting financial risks. The Snecma M88 engine remains a major success, it is compact, modular and perfectly suited to the missions of the Rafale. But it shows its limits, notably by a power deficit at high altitude, a critical characteristic for modern missions. In addition, the absence of technologies such as vector propulsion (not used on French aircraft) or the adaptive cycle limits its potential in the context of future developments where modularity and versatility will become essential criteria. The United States, with companies such as Pratt & Whitney and General Electric, are investing massively in these adaptive cycle concepts. The objective is to meet varied needs such as low-consumption cruising, exceptional thrust in combat situations and advanced thermal management for extended high-speed flights. These engines are not without problems. Adaptive cycle prototypes, for example, pose technical challenges such as the increased complexity of air flows or constraints on materials. That said, American manufacturers have integrated these challenges into their process, understanding that disruptive innovation necessarily involves initial errors. This is the heart of the problem: a project that does not succeed in France is a failure, whereas a project that does not succeed in the USA is a valued experience.
In France, the question is not to copy these super-powerful engines, which would not necessarily meet our needs. On the other hand, it is essential to develop a more powerful and technologically advanced engine than the M88, designed to adapt to a new-generation aircraft and its future developments. This requires a clear industrial ambition, where Safran would not limit itself to meeting specifications imposed by the General Directorate of Armament, but would take the initiative to innovate and become a world leader in the field of engines. A competitive and innovative engine could not only meet the needs of French aviation but also strengthen our position on the global market. Examples of the Mirage III, the Mirage 2000 or the Rafale show that France has been able, in the past, to produce aircraft capable of conquering significant market shares. Today, with modern tools such as digital twins and a bold industrial strategy, we have the means to repeat these successes for engines, provided we accept the risk inherent in any innovation. This may already be the case and that is what we want to know.
Thank you for enlightening Safran engineers on the existence of digital twin technology.
Without you they would never have thought of it.
In 2009 the UAE had expressed the wish for an M88 increased to 9 tons of thrust with PC, in order to be better adapted to hot climates. At the time, there was talk of the need to increase the air intakes.
The Emirates eventually abandoned the idea.
In 2016, Philippe Peticolin, at the time CEO of SAFRAN, declared himself in favor of increasing the thrust of the M88. He specified that the increase in power (we were talking about 8 to 9 tons with PC) depended on France's willingness to increase or not the size of the air intakes.
It holds up. More thrust requires more oxidant, therefore more air in the engine.
It is difficult to understand why a company like SAFRAN with nearly 4 billion net income cannot launch an internal program to develop a new engine, like the developments that German groups like Rheinmetall have been able to conduct. There is also the club solution Rafale who could commit to financing this development with a contribution to the specifications, knowing that we see an evolution of the Rafale 5 which moves further and further away from the cell Rafale that we have known.
If the power of the engines increases, the cell will probably have to be lengthened to take full advantage of it. It seems to me that it is the nose of the plane that plays the role of mouse.
Increasing power does not necessarily mean increasing speed. It is possible that it is simply a matter of maintaining an optimal power-to-weight ratio, and reaching, for example, supercruise. That said, if the engine gains mass (probable), it will be necessary to review the centering, especially if, at the same time, we add conformal tanks, or if we want to carry more fuel internally. In my opinion, increasing the top speed is one of the least necessary aspects today for the F5.
The aerodynamics of the nose of a fighter plane always influence the air intake, but it cannot be said that the nose of the Rafale plays the role of a mouse
For example on the Rafale It has a longer nose, while it initially operated with two F404-GE-400 engines, slightly less powerful than the M-88, but also later with an M88 on one side for the latter's first flight tests.
We have our Super Rafale : )
maybe safran will manage to keep its evolution more or less in the current size of the m88. otherwise it will completely change the plane and it seems obvious that the f4.1 will stop there.
I don't see how this would be possible. The only solution would be to increase the temperature in the hot part considerably, but the materials have not made such progress that we can hope for a gain of 20 to 25% in efficiency.
Classes available every day from Nine AM to Twelve midday.
If this new reactor requires a modification of the cell of the Rafale F5, the F4.2 models that we want to “retrofit” to the F5 level, will therefore have to undergo a cell modification?
good question, well we are at F4.1
wait and see
It is not yet clearly explained, but it seems to me that the F4.2 cell will already be partly modified. But with a new reactor, it is possible that this retrocompatibility will actually be undermined.