Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Have I missed something but the article only mentions being air launched? By what? And how can it then be declared independent of the need for runway, where does the platform launching it take off from. The programme seems to have promise but has a very long way to go.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Change the cruise missiles https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... ALCMs.JPEG for these drones... which are not F-16 sized (was underlined in the announcement)
- B-52s to retire at the age of 100! (and I forgot that we don't have any)
- B-52s to retire at the age of 100! (and I forgot that we don't have any)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Lord Jim wrote:Have I missed something but the article only mentions being air launched? By what? And how can it then be declared independent of the need for runway, where does the platform launching it take off from. The programme seems to have promise but has a very long way to go.
Ground launch is via rocket sled like this https://www.robonic.fi/wp-content/uploa ... 00x650.jpg
Recovery is via a steerable parachute deployment so it doesn’t require a runway.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Been following those Robonic (bought by the French Safran) solutions, especially as to how much they can widen the weight envelope for UAVs to be launched by a hydraulic catapult. Now introducing a rocket as additional/ alternative means might change that upper boundarySW1 wrote:Ground launch is via rocket sled like this https://www.robonic.fi/wp-content/uploa ... 00x650.jpg
- the problem with tactical UAVs has been that the momentary g-force at launch gets to be so high that the 'toughening up' of the airframe adds 20-30% weight (and thus eats to the payload)
Are "they" already there or have these initial tests been done with another launch method?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
They have another smaller option Utap-22 that has an export clearance to certain european customers....ArmChairCivvy wrote:Been following those Robonic (bought by the French Safran) solutions, especially as to how much they can widen the weight envelope for UAVs to be launched by a hydraulic catapult. Now introducing a rocket as additional/ alternative means might change that upper boundarySW1 wrote:Ground launch is via rocket sled like this https://www.robonic.fi/wp-content/uploa ... 00x650.jpg
- the problem with tactical UAVs has been that the momentary g-force at launch gets to be so high that the 'toughening up' of the airframe adds 20-30% weight (and thus eats to the payload)
Are "they" already there or have these initial tests been done with another launch method?
https://www.janes.com/article/78604/kra ... nationally
And of course there was recent tests of similar concepts in Europe
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/stories ... s-MUT.html
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
It is going to have to be a lot bogger launcher/rocket sled to get the XQ-58 off the ground as it substantially bigger that that shown in the photograph, with it internal weapons bay and all.
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
It’s about the same size as a v1 so it’s not like it’s never been done before. They will be testing it as part of the trails I’m sure videos will be around when they do. It will be interesting to see how all these systems develop as the potiential is there to quite significantly change capabilities in many domains given the price point it’s aiming for.Lord Jim wrote:It is going to have to be a lot bogger launcher/rocket sled to get the XQ-58 off the ground as it substantially bigger that that shown in the photograph, with it internal weapons bay and all.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
I first misread the Robonic summary of what they call their 4th gen, and thought a carrier fleet would now be within everyman's reach. But it wasn't USVs but SUVs that can tow the launch system:SW1 wrote:quite significantly change capabilities in many domains given the price point it’s aiming for
" Robonic has extended its launch lock system to the OHTO. This system reduces the initial launch shock both to the air frame or payloads on board the air vehicle.
In addition that the OHTO can be transported in a 20ft ISO container it can also be towed by an SUV or sling loaded with an NH-90 helicopter."
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
It poses an interesting question for future combat aircraft and where it fits into the whole system. If it’s a relatively premisive environment do I need a fighter a/c at all to be there, could a few of these with a protector system uav controlled from an istar style a/c sentinel for example be all you need.
In a more contested environment could these controlled from a back seat in a jet use them as the target identifer for standoff weapons launched by the fastjet from further back. Communicating with them in such an environment maybe a challenge but it could change the attributes of a future manned a/c.
In a more contested environment could these controlled from a back seat in a jet use them as the target identifer for standoff weapons launched by the fastjet from further back. Communicating with them in such an environment maybe a challenge but it could change the attributes of a future manned a/c.
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Have you seen the size of the V1 launch ramps. You would need to use almost two third the length of the deck of a QE to fit one on a ship. Air launch seems to be the best option, the USAF used C-130 to launch Firebees during the Vietnam war so maybe using a transport platform would be possible for this nations who do not have a B-52 available.SW1 wrote:It’s about the same size as a v1 so it’s not like it’s never been done before.
Given the Range state though having a number of prefab ramps that could be set up where needed, like the Germans ended up doing for the V1 after the concrete ones were bombed out of existence could also be the way forward. Though aimed at being a "Wingman" there capabilities could have them being used as an alternative to the Protectors in higher threat environments and being deployed at far more austere locations, not on known airfields.
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Sounds like a small electro-magnetic catapult system may be useful. Dust off the Converteam EMCAT?- the problem with tactical UAVs has been that the momentary g-force at launch gets to be so high that the 'toughening up' of the airframe adds 20-30% weight (and thus eats to the payload)
Phil R
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Yeah but rather than compressed air there using rockets now this one is 2/3rds the size of usaf oneLord Jim wrote:Have you seen the size of the V1 launch ramps. You would need to use almost two third the length of the deck of a QE to fit one on a ship. Air launch seems to be the best option, the USAF used C-130 to launch Firebees during the Vietnam war so maybe using a transport platform would be possible for this nations who do not have a B-52 available.SW1 wrote:It’s about the same size as a v1 so it’s not like it’s never been done before.
Given the Range state though having a number of prefab ramps that could be set up where needed, like the Germans ended up doing for the V1 after the concrete ones were bombed out of existence could also be the way forward. Though aimed at being a "Wingman" there capabilities could have them being used as an alternative to the Protectors in higher threat environments and being deployed at far more austere locations, not on known airfields.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Thx, that Harrier experiment was just what I wanted to see (but was too lazy to search for)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
That is quite impressive. Are there any artists renderings of the full sized version with its internal weapons bay yet?
- shark bait
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6427
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Plan is to parachute land in the sea and recover by helicopter. Although the manufacturer class it as reusable, I'm assuming it is only usable once and then needs returning to the factory. (sounds like a good business)Ron5 wrote:So at least the Kratos could be launched from a carrier. Recovery might be more challenging.
@LandSharkUK
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Our pocket carriers would have been useful, after all! Fire these things off an accompanying container ship, recover to carrier, and have those three taking turns and plying between "action stations" and the refurb facility onshoreshark bait wrote:Plan is to parachute land in the sea and recover by helicopter. Although the manufacturer class it as reusable, I'm assuming it is only usable once and then needs returning to the factory. (sounds like a good business)Ron5 wrote:So at least the Kratos could be launched from a carrier. Recovery might be more challenging.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
The one in the video is available for export, the Valkyrie is first flight if the larger one for usaf.Lord Jim wrote:That is quite impressive. Are there any artists renderings of the full sized version with its internal weapons bay yet?
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ht-456692/
Leonardo is hopeful that Italy can join the UK's Tempest sixth-generation fighter programme, building on the involvement of its defence electronics division in the effort.
Although the company is headquartered in Rome, it has a large presence in the UK, including the former Selex operation.
Norman Bone, managing director of Leonardo's electronics division, said during a financial results briefing on 14 March: "We are very clear as a company that it would be our preference for a collaboration that included Italy in the long term on Tempest."
Leonardo is hopeful that Italy can join the UK's Tempest sixth-generation fighter programme, building on the involvement of its defence electronics division in the effort.
Although the company is headquartered in Rome, it has a large presence in the UK, including the former Selex operation.
Norman Bone, managing director of Leonardo's electronics division, said during a financial results briefing on 14 March: "We are very clear as a company that it would be our preference for a collaboration that included Italy in the long term on Tempest."
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Not surprising as (as a company) they are already 'in'.SW1 wrote: as a company that it would be our preference for a collaboration that included Italy in the long term on Tempest
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Moreover it is obvious that with France calling the shots in the other programme it is Thales that will do all the work that Leonardo and Elettronica are good at.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3236
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Looks like the initial industry engagement is going rather well, if we're not careful this will start to gain momentum all of its own...
Come on Italy...you know it makes sense...Gabriele wrote:Moreover it is obvious that with France calling the shots in the other programme it is Thales that will do all the work that Leonardo and Elettronica are good at.
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
We could also try to get Finns and Swedes on board and anyone else who haven't bought into the F-35, maybe even Canada if they decide to make do with the F-18 in some form or other. The Franco/German project is going to be very expensive if the one platform has to be Carrier capable, and the overall number produced are only able to match Rafale levels covering all participants. I cannot see France, Germany, and Spain replacing all their forth and fifth generation platforms on a one for one basis.
- Tempest414
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
I for one would like to see SAAB and the Saudi's come on board
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
For me best set up would be the UK, Italy, Sweden, Japan and Canada.
The core 3 of the UK Italy and Sweden just makes complet sence as the later 2 won’t want to be part of the Franco German project and already have close relations with our selves in these areas.
Japan could bring some good expertise with them as well as giving us a foot hold in the Far East market all at a time when we’re trying to build closer military cooperation with them.
Canada would give us a foot hold in North America while giving them a way to move on to a new generation of aircraft with out having to have the political embaricment of backing down on the F35 stance.
I wouldnt go for any more partners as I believe having too many nations wanting their own ideas incorporated could make things messy very quick as there wouldn’t be one big overriding nation laying down the rules as with the F35 project
The core 3 of the UK Italy and Sweden just makes complet sence as the later 2 won’t want to be part of the Franco German project and already have close relations with our selves in these areas.
Japan could bring some good expertise with them as well as giving us a foot hold in the Far East market all at a time when we’re trying to build closer military cooperation with them.
Canada would give us a foot hold in North America while giving them a way to move on to a new generation of aircraft with out having to have the political embaricment of backing down on the F35 stance.
I wouldnt go for any more partners as I believe having too many nations wanting their own ideas incorporated could make things messy very quick as there wouldn’t be one big overriding nation laying down the rules as with the F35 project
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)
Sweden, yes.Lord Jim wrote:We could also try to get Finns and Swedes on board and anyone else who haven't bought into the F-35, maybe even Canada if they decide to make do with the F-18 in some form or other.
Finland and Canada's requirements come long before Tempest is likely to be due though.
Saab of course, Saudis though, hell no.Tempest414 wrote:I for one would like to see SAAB and the Saudi's come on board
Sales to them? Maybe.
Actually involved in production? HELL no. Too much opportunity to screw it all up via politics.
As above, Canada's time to require is off schedule.Jake1992 wrote:For me best set up would be the UK, Italy, Sweden, Japan and Canada
The rest though? Thats defo the "main four". All good respectable supporters in aviation too.