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

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2674
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

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

Post by SW1 »


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 »

SW1 wrote:
https://www.ultra-css.com/products-capa ... ission-pod
A very smart solution, and the new RG1s will have a 24 hr endurance. But will they be ably to carry both the detection plus give-chase kit?
... or we send them out in pairs?
Or, a quick 'phone call' to a P-8, loitering in the general area and capable of quick transit, before the contact is lost?
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)

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2674
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

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

Post by SW1 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
SW1 wrote:
https://www.ultra-css.com/products-capa ... ission-pod
A very smart solution, and the new RG1s will have a 24 hr endurance. But will they be ably to carry both the detection plus give-chase kit?
... or we send them out in pairs?
Or, a quick 'phone call' to a P-8, loitering in the general area and capable of quick transit, before the contact is lost?
A systems of systems approach instead of one very expensive platform doing everything you could get a helicopter from a ship in the area assigned, multiple uavs operating in pairs and unmanned surface vessel in the area a submarine or an a/c carrying a torpeado. Pity we didn’t embrace this route fully at sdsr 2015 and back the uk companies developing these systems.

User avatar
Old RN
Member
Posts: 226
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:39
South Africa

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

Post by Old RN »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
SW1 wrote:
https://www.ultra-css.com/products-capa ... ission-pod
A very smart solution, and the new RG1s will have a 24 hr endurance. But will they be ably to carry both the detection plus give-chase kit?
... or we send them out in pairs?
Or, a quick 'phone call' to a P-8, loitering in the general area and capable of quick transit, before the contact is lost?
I think they have total endurance of about 48 hours and can carry 2 x PW-IV and 12 x Brimstone 2. That payload should allow a number of sonobouys and 2 x Stingray (or the high altitude set up for the Mk54)

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 »

Old RN wrote:I think they have total endurance of about 48 hours and can carry 2 x PW-IV and 12 x Brimstone 2. That payload should allow a number of sonobouys and 2 x Stingray (or the high altitude set up for the Mk54)
Much closer than my 24 hrs
"According to GA-ASI, the CPB has a maximum operating altitude of 45,000 ft (compared with 50,000 ft for the Reaper), a maximum endurance of more than 40 hours (compared with 27 hours for the Reaper), and a maximum air speed of 200 kt (compared with 240 kt for the Reaper). The CPB also has nine external stories stations, compared with five for the Reaper."
but unclear how much the stores carried would impact that (max).
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 »

SW1 wrote:The other thing we were assured a UAV could not do.......
Really? GA have been selling this concept for years now, and the US even paid for a trial.

Hope it does go somewhere, it would make a lot of sense working to extend the reach of a P8, and put the idea of a Triton purchase to bed.
@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: put the idea of a Triton purchase to bed.
Agree; how many 'one-trick ponies' can we afford?
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)

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 »

Would the Protector be of any use as a Maritime Patrol and surveillance platform? I can see it being of some use, flying from shore, even in situation such as off the coast of Somalia, where it could identify Pirates and possibly take action if needed. Working with a P-8 it would extent the ability to visually identify objects spotted by the P-8s radar over a far greater range.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2674
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

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

Post by SW1 »

shark bait wrote:
SW1 wrote:The other thing we were assured a UAV could not do.......
Really? GA have been selling this concept for years now, and the US even paid for a trial.

Hope it does go somewhere, it would make a lot of sense working to extend the reach of a P8, and put the idea of a Triton purchase to bed.

Yep really and I’m going back about 8 years!

If they try to buy triton then they deserve to have there budget cut.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2674
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

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

Post by SW1 »

Lord Jim wrote:Would the Protector be of any use as a Maritime Patrol and surveillance platform? I can see it being of some use, flying from shore, even in situation such as off the coast of Somalia, where it could identify Pirates and possibly take action if needed. Working with a P-8 it would extent the ability to visually identify objects spotted by the P-8s radar over a far greater range.
The reaper has been flown with a selex 7500 radar in a pod and it’s excellent for surveillance on sea in particular.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7180
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

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

Post by SKB »


(Forces TV) 22nd October 2019
The Royal Air Force Reaper drones are on the frontline in the fight against terrorism. The crew manning the drones have been involved in targetting so-called Islamic State fighters, monitoring their every move over both Iraq and Syria. The Reaper drones fly from and over the Middle East, but they are controlled by two RAF squadrons thousands of miles away. We spoke to the crews who operate the aircraft from Lincolnshire.


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 »

There were 20 and only ten were kept; was the other half only on lease?

Well, the nxt-gen will soon be with us; even there the numbers have been slightly cut. But will the later batch be for ' over the sea' or has it turned into a mere option?

What's the transition plan? 1 for 1? Or take out a circuit at a time, whatever that migh be (4-6?)?
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)

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 »

I wonder if the new Protector will be used over the UK during counter terrorist operations. Their ability to stay on station far longer than a helicopter and be far higher would have advantages. Obviously I am not suggesting using the platforms in an armed configuration here though I am sure there could be occasions where the thought may cross some peoples minds.


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 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:There were 20 and only ten were kept; was the other half only on lease?
The latest (2019) 7 in use and 3 stored... still going on about the transition plan: Is Watchkeeper going to take some of (the more tactical) roles?
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)

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 »

I am surprised 39 Squadron are not going to be the operators of the Protector as they ran the Reapers, or was 31 Squadron a typo?

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

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

Post by Gabriele »

31 is no typo; but it does not necessarily mean 39 won't also get Protector. 2 squadrons for 10 Reaper (now less than 10), suggest that 31 Sqn won't be alone either.
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
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 »

Last year 7 Reapers were still in use, there is a huge number of Watchkeepers and we will soon be getting Reaper Edition2 (Protector)
- so what's the overlap; how is that reflected in the organisation or chain of command
- is it that the longer ranged ones will relay back via satellite only, whereas for Watckeepers (mobile) groundsations will be deployed, to widen the bandwidth and cut down the cycle time from spotting to action?
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)

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2294
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

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

Post by Timmymagic »

Lord Jim wrote:I wonder if the new Protector will be used over the UK during counter terrorist operations. Their ability to stay on station far longer than a helicopter and be far higher would have advantages. Obviously I am not suggesting using the platforms in an armed configuration here though I am sure there could be occasions where the thought may cross some peoples minds.
In truth the ability for a UAV to operate in controlled airspace safely could lead to the eventual replacement of most of the UK's Police Helicopters. UAV's are dramatically cheaper to run and operate. The Greater Manchester Police operated a Britten Norman Defender instead of a helicopter for a number of years. It was a whole lot easier to crew, available in worse weather conditions, far, far cheaper to run and faster to get on station either from a ground start or transit. In 10 years expect to see Police Forces across the UK using large numbers of UAV's. Which IMHO is a god and bad thing..,

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 »

The police still operate fixed wing aircraft out of Doncaster airport, part of the NPAS (National Police Air Service)
@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 »

Imagine is they were equipped with a non lethal system to disable cars quickly and safely. That would give the TWOCers* food for thought one minute off down the dual carriageway next minute the engine dies :D.

*(Taken Without Owners Consent ers)

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

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

Post by Jdam »




You would think with the amount of hellfires we have went through getting PavewayIV bombs & Brimstone missiles on our drones would have been a higher priority.

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 »

Jdam wrote: getting PavewayIV bombs & Brimstone missiles on our drones would have been a higher priority.
Do you mean not slowing down the overall project... or how?
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)

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

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

Post by Jdam »

Brimstone was test fired from a Reaper 6 years ago and we still continued to use Hellfire.

Post Reply