UK Defence Forum

So not only is Mosquito kaput, but apparently the swarming drone squadron has never had any swarming drones? Or even much in the way of staff?

Not sure where to put this...

Some details on performance...

This ones a little depressing really...

Look at what we could have had...

Fury...
Mantis...
Taranis...

Hopefully Zephyr (or Phasa 35) and these UAS concepts will make it rather than be reliant on US supplies...

Must admit I'm a bit stumped on the stealthy one between Phasa-35 and Taranis...any ideas?

Timmymagic wrote: ↑16 Jul 2022, 00:41 Must admit I'm a bit stumped on the stealthy one between Phasa-35 and Taranis...any ideas?

I share your curiosity!

At first I though maybe a developed Demon, but the wing shape is completely different and obviously far larger if to scale with the other aircraft.

There was some speculation, back in the Anglo-French FCAS era, that a production Taranis derivative might be supersonic, I wonder if this might be it?

I can see a B-2 there (on the human evolution scale, the 'man' who walked on his knuckles)
- but clearly, the one emerging at the top of this graph ... is a 'Vulcan'

Interesting after Mosquito and B-21 Raider Loyal Wingman cancellation....seems like the RAF and USAF might have finally done their homework and realised that there might be an issue with the concept of Loyal Wingmen at present....

This is the same issue as XLUUV's or any unmanned option.....if you want the speed, range and most of the capabilities of a manned submarine you end up with something not far from the cost and size of a manned submarine...same with UGV's....want a heavily armed UGV working at the front line? Then it will likely end up like a small/medium tank as that is what is required to survive up there...

It seems the reason RAF talks about that they discovered a better options when developing the Mosquito is the BAE UAV

The decision was informed by parallel analysis and capability experimentation conducted by the RAF and the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl). The accumulation of analysis concluded that more beneficial capability and cost-effectiveness appears achievable through exploration of smaller, less costly, but still highly capable additive capabilities.”

Timmymagic wrote: ↑19 Jul 2022, 14:14 Interesting after Mosquito and B-21 Raider Loyal Wingman cancellation....seems like the RAF and USAF might have finally done their homework and realised that there might be an issue with the concept of Loyal Wingmen at present....

This is the same issue as XLUUV's or any unmanned option.....if you want the speed, range and most of the capabilities of a manned submarine you end up with something not far from the cost and size of a manned submarine...same with UGV's....want a heavily armed UGV working at the front line? Then it will likely end up like a small/medium tank as that is what is required to survive up there...

Sounds like Boeing talking up the concept of operations for the MQ-28A Ghost Bat it's developing with the RAAF.

LANCA Follow-On (or.. 'Child of Mosquito'..)

https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/ ... esults&p=1

Following the lessons learned from Project MOSQUITO, Project ALVINA, and wider Uncrewed Air Systems (UAS) experimentation, the Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO) and Air Capability are considering how to best exploit Low-Cost UAS to support the Combat Air Force Mix as part of follow on LANCA activity and wider Uncrewed System Development.

The Authority will be holding an engagement day on Tuesday 29th November 2022 to inform Industry of Air’s intent for additive/adjunct capability in the Combat Air Force Mix, and to provide Industry Partners with the opportunity to consider how they could best contribute to Air’s intent within a subsequent R&D portfolio.

I hope this is not reinventing the wheel, maybe just join up with the Australian program, who knows it may help ease themm into Tempest

SD67 wrote: ↑01 Nov 2022, 10:04 I hope this is not reinventing the wheel, maybe just join up with the Australian program, who knows it may help ease themm into Tempest

Joining the Australian program would perfectly sum up the stupidity of MoD procurement. If it does needs its budget cut!

SW1 wrote: ↑01 Nov 2022, 10:13

SD67 wrote: ↑01 Nov 2022, 10:04 I hope this is not reinventing the wheel, maybe just join up with the Australian program, who knows it may help ease themm into Tempest

Joining the Australian program would perfectly sum up the stupidity of MoD procurement. If it does needs its budget cut!

Not sure why the negativity, as the USAF has already acquired an undisclosed number. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/a ... or-testing

As its design incorporates swap-in swap-out nose modules, it offers a comparatively easy and inexpensive way to field a range of capabilities.

SouthernOne wrote: ↑02 Nov 2022, 07:00

SW1 wrote: ↑01 Nov 2022, 10:13

SD67 wrote: ↑01 Nov 2022, 10:04 I hope this is not reinventing the wheel, maybe just join up with the Australian program, who knows it may help ease themm into Tempest

Joining the Australian program would perfectly sum up the stupidity of MoD procurement. If it does needs its budget cut!

Not sure why the negativity, as the USAF has already acquired an undisclosed number. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/a ... or-testing

As its design incorporates swap-in swap-out nose modules, it offers a comparatively easy and inexpensive way to field a range of capabilities.

It’s essentially a Boeing product so I can see why the US has an interest. It also won’t be the only US aircraft of this type.

Given the last 8 month demonstration in Ukraine I could guarantee over the coming decade these type of aircraft will be the go to for many countries looking to enhance their security.

The U.K. has a large aerospace base and should be making it is own, it will be a critical area going fwd to get out the business before is barely begun is the height on incompetence.

I that case we should take the Team Complex Weapons approach an build a portfolio of drones with chosen strategic partners

SD67 wrote: ↑02 Nov 2022, 09:41 I that case we should take the Team Complex Weapons approach an build a portfolio of drones with chosen strategic partners

It would but that strategic partnership should be nowhere near the ghost bat. If you want a long term thinking strategic partner and strategy in this space it should be with general atomics and bringing full assembly mro footprint into the Uk in the same way Raytheon has in broughton and with other uav manufacturers like Malloy who are already here.

Chinese clone of Ghost bat............

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/c ... d-by-china

SW1 wrote: ↑02 Nov 2022, 08:02 Given the last 8 month demonstration in Ukraine I could guarantee over the coming decade these type of aircraft will be the go to for many countries looking to enhance their security.

The U.K. has a large aerospace base and should be making it is own, it will be a critical area going fwd to get out the business before is barely begun is the height on incompetence.

But these are high value drones, which are nothing like what has been seen in Ukraine. It's like saying a Tucano is proof of concept that you need F35.

And I think that's why Mosquito has been taken back to LANCA. The affordability to deploy at scale is how drones are showing their benefit in the battle space.

RunningStrong wrote: ↑04 Nov 2022, 09:25

SW1 wrote: ↑02 Nov 2022, 08:02 Given the last 8 month demonstration in Ukraine I could guarantee over the coming decade these type of aircraft will be the go to for many countries looking to enhance their security.

The U.K. has a large aerospace base and should be making it is own, it will be a critical area going fwd to get out the business before is barely begun is the height on incompetence.

But these are high value drones, which are nothing like what has been seen in Ukraine. It's like saying a Tucano is proof of concept that you need F35.

And I think that's why Mosquito has been taken back to LANCA. The affordability to deploy at scale is how drones are showing their benefit in the battle space.

Not really, the demonstration is you’re not putting extremely expensive and very limited numbers of manned platforms into a strike mission because in days you’ll have nothing left. There will be a range of different type of drones/missiles but they’ll be doing the striking not manned a/c.

SW1 wrote: ↑04 Nov 2022, 09:31 Not really, the demonstration is you’re not putting extremely expensive and very limited numbers of manned platforms into a strike mission because in days you’ll have nothing left. There will be a range of different type of drones/missiles but they’ll be doing the striking not manned a/c.

Agreed. You need a range of stuff, from the level of "guided hand grenade", all the way up to something capable of defending 4th/5th gen fighters or conducting independent strike missions in contested airspace

The low end should be relatively simple and cheap - we should already be looking at adapting designs that can be produced in their thousands by multiple manufacturers, using COTS/MOTS components, to carry anything from a mortar round up to (say) Brimstone (see Malloy's recent mock-up). Exploit existing designs in novel ways.

It's the top end where the real money needs to be spent, to protect and assist the very expensive hardware that that it will operate alongside, but the low end should already relatively straightforward to implement.

SomeoneAh wrote: ↑19 Jul 2022, 22:59 It seems the reason RAF talks about that they discovered a better options when developing the Mosquito is the BAE UAV

The decision was informed by parallel analysis and capability experimentation conducted by the RAF and the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl). The accumulation of analysis concluded that more beneficial capability and cost-effectiveness appears achievable through exploration of smaller, less costly, but still highly capable additive capabilities.”

Thankyou for translating MOD-speak into English I thought I was stuck in an episode of Yes Minister there

https://www.ga-asi.com/ga-asi-poised-to ... ting-phase

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) is poised to begin the flight-testing phase on the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) LongShot program. Begun in 2020, General Atomics was competitively awarded a contract to develop DARPA’s concept for disruptive air combat operations through demonstration of an air-to-air weapons capable air vehicle. The concept seeks to significantly increase engagement range and mission effectiveness of current 4th gen fighters and air-to-air missiles.