General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
Post Reply
User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Gabriele »

The biggest change, not yet visible in that image for obvious reasons, is the long wing with more fuel and more payload capacity. Image
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

And that's before we get to the internals, extra power, anit-icing etc.. Lots to changes add up to make it quite a different aircraft.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Gabriele »

Contract incoming for final Protector development. Integration of Brimstone 2 and Paveway IV apparently included. http://www.defensenews.com/articles/uk- ... dator-deal
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2544
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by dmereifield »

Good stuff, but nothing firm on numbers

Jdam
Member
Posts: 480
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Jdam »

That all seems like good news but the word "eventually" before mentioning Brimstone and Paveway kind of sours the whole thing. :shock:

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by bobp »

Yes eventually means yes you can do it but it will cost.

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by RetroSicotte »

Expected 2021.

Having an interest/hobby in military developments and technologies is amazing, but goodness me it sure isn't one with fast developments.

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by bobp »

RetroSicotte wrote:Expected 2021.
Seems like a long time even if development takes two years.

jonas
Member
Posts: 972
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by jonas »

Some nice endurance figures being broken here :-

https://www.defenceonline.co.uk/2017/06 ... ny-record/

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

An excellent capability on the way.

Reaper pilots that come from a fast jet background talk about the benefit of having the time to sit, watch, work out what is an extraordinary situation, and make a sound decision. This is going to extend that principal considerably.

Interested how that can be applied to the maritime domain, something the RAF have expressed an interest in previously.
@LandSharkUK

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by RetroSicotte »

Replacement moving forward.

http://www.janes.com/article/78529/uk-p ... tector-uav

Confirms 16 ordered, 20 "required".

So, 16 it is then these days. ;)

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

USMC today issued a request for information for a tilt rotor MALE UAV.

16 Protector is fine as long as we get 16 of tilt rotor Protectors for QE ....
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1699
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

Image
Image
A small team of RAF personnel are preparing the way for the introduction into service of the UK’s new remotely piloted air system, the MQ-9B Protector.

The Protector Combined Test Team comprises experienced pilots, sensor operators and engineers from the RAF, industry partners and the United States Air Force who are coordinating the testing and evaluation of the Protector system.

The UK is investing in an initial 16 Protector aircraft which will replace the MQ-9 Reaper in RAF service.
Read More: https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/protector-c ... test-team/

Image

That's a lot of Brimstone. :shock:

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by bobp »

Wow that is a lot of Brimstone above
More information here....
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... r-uav.html

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

I've been of the opinion that getting 16 (down from 20) is a waste of money as the old ones were good enough (for the job).

My opinion can be influenced:
- thx for the contribution!
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)

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

more range, more endurance, more electricity, more weapons, more weather conditions, busy environments, the new ones will be even better at the job, and useful outside deserts.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

shark bait wrote:the new ones will be even better at the job
I was trying to single out the limited scope, and the fact that
"good enough"
thinking still does not seem to have grown roots (in the MoD).
- cfr. Lord Jim's inventory of the age of some key items, and the lack of money for them as they are not shine or pointy enough

No doubt technology-wise the new ones are decades ahead (as they should).
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)

sunstersun
Member
Posts: 243
Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 04:00
United States of America

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by sunstersun »

drones are so. so. so. so. so. important. arguably for their intelligence aspect over their combat applications.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

Well said! The RAF's new version is approaching a mission endurance of 2 days, nothing even comes close to matching its on-station time.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Is our next war again going to be surveying mud huts, and firing a Hellfire at anyone who tries to sneak out on a moped?

Not trying to build up a controversy, just testing your assumptions
- fancy gear that is not survivable in a hot war is... just fancy gear

Of course drones are important for intelligence/ targeting, but you need a layered approach. Which would include masses of cheap/ expendable drones that can be operated as swarms if that is what it takes for enough to survive, for long enough
- where are those? Can't see any; not even a budget line for them
- as for the headlined matter, the 16 (not 20 to begin with) probably eat that "lunch"
Ohh! and then we have the 57 minus any write-offs of those that cover a bde's area of ops, but take off from a kilometer of runway. Check out the cumulative spend on those and add on top of "Protector" money
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)

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Is our next war again going to be surveying mud huts, and firing a Hellfire at anyone who tries to sneak out on a moped?
Its not unlikely.

These new Aircraft have are capable of operating in many more environments than the current generation, so we might even be able to use them outside the desert too!
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

shark bait wrote:use them outside the desert too!
North Atlantic?
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)

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6106
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by shark bait »

Its on the cards, Atlas working on a sonobuoy dispenser, the US did a tech demo a while ago, and I've heard its a role the RAF are looking at exploiting. Team it with a P8 and it starts to look good on paper.
@LandSharkUK

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6209
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

A cheaper alternative to the Global Hawk variant the USN is planning, plus the Protector could actually reach out and touch someone, which I don't think the USN plans allow for. Those 18 Brimstone would make a group of low tech FACs like those used by the Iranian Republicans very unhappy.

sunstersun
Member
Posts: 243
Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 04:00
United States of America

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by sunstersun »

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/19 ... r-missiles

wonder if A2A is going to be on the protector?

Post Reply