U.K. UAV's/Drones

Contains threads on Joint Service equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
hovematlot
Member
Posts: 268
Joined: 27 May 2015, 17:46
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by hovematlot »

I think the smart money is on the up-graded Reapers with bigger wings, enhanced sensors. Maybe weapon upgrade to include Brimstone

downsizer
Member
Posts: 893
Joined: 02 May 2015, 08:03

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by downsizer »

Knowing our luck it'll probably be more watchkeeper [POUTING FACE][FACE WITH STUCK-OUT TONGUE AND WINKING EYE]

Jdam
Member
Posts: 922
Joined: 09 May 2015, 22:26
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by Jdam »

hovematlot wrote:I think the smart money is on the up-graded Reapers with bigger wings, enhanced sensors. Maybe weapon upgrade to include Brimstone
Can our Reapers carry Paveway IV yet?

Edit: I remember the reapers have already been tested with Brimstone, I'm surprised we haven't already upgraded our reapers yet.


User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by shark bait »

Jdam wrote:Can our Reapers carry Paveway IV yet?
Yep, brimstone has also hit a moving target fired from a reaper in the past too so I imagine a chunk of that work is already done.

Perhaps the mmon weapon launcher for Typhoon will also make its way to this future "protector" for brimstone and paveway . that would be some nice commonality!
@LandSharkUK

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

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by Gabriele »

I've written this summary of the situation and of the possible contenders: http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot ... ector.html

But Reaper Block 5, perhaps with the ER wings, sure does look like the most likely candidate.

Although developing Mantis would be nice, also from an industry point of view.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

~UNiOnJaCk~
Member
Posts: 780
Joined: 03 May 2015, 16:19
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by ~UNiOnJaCk~ »

The Armchair Soldier wrote:This Sky News article claims the drones will be bought from the US, so that might narrow it down just a bit. :P

Definitely welcome news, though. It's not often we hear news about our assets increasing, nevermind doubling.
Can i be the spoil-sport and ask the question 'at the cost of what else?'. If this is to be paid for by a brand new injection of uncommitted funding - a budget increase in essence if you will - then brilliant but i have a sneaking suspicion the PM intends it to be funded from within the current budget in which case it is not so good.

I did notice, however, his comments in regards to being open to calls from the defence staff for 'extra recruitment' if they needed it. This line is particularly interesting and it got me thinking. It followed on from comments about additional spending to go towards the UKSF equipment budget so at first hunch you would think the that it too was in reference to our SF - but the full comment said 'the forces would get extra recruitment if they needed it'.

That potentially changes things. Are we still talking about UKSF only at this stage or are we now looking at the British Armed Forces as a whole??? Of course it could always be a further qualification in regards to the RAF likely now needing extra manpower to cater for a much enlarged drone fleet.

I just don't know what to make of it. It may be reading too much in to it, and it is certainly too early to tell, but what if it is perhaps a shift in the Cabinet's position over force structure and an acknowledgement that perhaps they now accede they are asking the MoD to do too much with too little in the way of manpower???

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

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by Gabriele »

There supposedly was a 1 billion funding line for the SCAVENGER requirement in the 10 years equipment programme.

So it is possible (not sure, but certainly possible) that it is not a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul, for once. Or not entirely, at least.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

~UNiOnJaCk~
Member
Posts: 780
Joined: 03 May 2015, 16:19
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by ~UNiOnJaCk~ »

I hope you are right, though i am not a fan of the name already. 'Protector' just sounds a bit politically comical - like a feeble attempt to win public opinion over about the nature of drones. Might as well have called it 'Buddy' :D

But hey, if it really does come from a seperate funding strain they can name it whatever the hell they want - call it 'Petal' for that matter ;)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Gabriele wrote:There supposedly was a 1 billion funding line for the SCAVENGER requirement in the 10 years equipment programme.
Hilarious, history repeats itself. Didn't half of the 2 bn that went towards the Tier1 partner status with F35 come from deleting the FOAS as a buedget line item?
... OK, now we are not talking about deleting, but rather getting an accelerated "bang for the buck" so I am all for it.

Even more so when several EP (Eq. 10-yr Plan) budget lines can be tapped, so just little adjustments in the margins:
- Combat Air (CAS & Strike)
- ISR (covers much more than planes, but in this case: 1. wide-area over ground surveillance, still a bit of a soda straw view but peppered with capability to strike at targets of opportunity, and 2. re-roling into maritime, to do the detect part for P8s (that can also persecute... and happen to fall into that EP expenditure category)
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: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by shark bait »

~UNiOnJaCk~ wrote: Can i be the spoil-sport and ask the question 'at the cost of what else?
If this were to come from uncommitted funding then it would still be a great use of those valuable funds. In my opinion drones are something the RAF needs to build up rapidly.

However if as Gabriele suggests their is a billion already that is a huge commitment. In that case 20 system's then looks like a reduction in that stream, if indeed it is a reaper. A reduction from a billion would be sensible considering how much strain new F35's and P8 will put on the budget.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

shark bait wrote:20 system's then looks like a reduction in that stream, if indeed it is a reaper. A reduction from a billion would be sensible considering how much strain new F35's and P8 will put on the budget.
Hear, hear!
- fewer number of P8s required, while still being effective (not just a token force)
- more F35s can be ordered when software maturity (whatever block it is to be, for UK relevant weapons carriage and release) is assured... not to be just a token force (by merely meeting the 12 on a carrier IOC by Year X that had been previously indicated/ committed to)
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
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 1998
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Contact:
Italy

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by Gabriele »

There seems to be an erroneous belief here about Reaper being very cheap. It actually isn't. I've linked to it in another thread already, but this is the FMS for the 16 Reapers (and related equipment) that France has sought. The price is an healthy 1.5 billion USD. http://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/fr ... -9-reapers
The 2008 FMS for 10 Reaper for the UK, was 1 billion.

In both cases, the purchase eventually felt a lot less expensive because the items were not eventually ordered in one go, but incrementally in a lot of smaller purchases. France is acquiring a 2-drone "system" per year, for example.
But Reaper does have a significant cost nonetheless. It is also not really cheap in manpower terms, although the automatic landing of the Block 5 and other features help in reducing the requirement somewhat.

If new Reaper Block 5 are the answer to the Protector mystery, around one billion will be realistically needed between one thing and another, even assuming that there will be considerable savings in some areas due to the RAF already being a Reaper user and thanks to the continued usefulness of some of the equipment and spares.
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: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by shark bait »

wow, I will admit that is way more than I envisaged.
The Wikipedia american fly away costs are always misleading, but I didn't expect it to be out by a factor of three+.

I suppose the entire watchkeeper system cost 15 million per aircraft that kinda puts it into perspective.
@LandSharkUK

Lugzy
Member
Posts: 158
Joined: 09 Sep 2015, 21:23
Mongolia

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by Lugzy »

I believe the Austrailan Air Force purchased 8 reapers and two ground stations at a cost of around 300m dollars , around 15m dollars per reaper earlier this year .

Lugzy
Member
Posts: 158
Joined: 09 Sep 2015, 21:23
Mongolia

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by Lugzy »

Could Cameron's new US made " Protector " drones be the GA Avenger (Predator C)? Or is that still to classified to be exported outside the US ?

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by marktigger »

If the russians step up support for Syria I wonder how long it'll be before they start disrupting the drones?

User avatar
CR4ZYHOR5E
Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 02 May 2015, 10:57
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by CR4ZYHOR5E »

Lugzy wrote:I believe the Austrailan Air Force purchased 8 reapers and two ground stations at a cost of around 300m dollars , around 15m dollars per reaper earlier this year .
Just need to apply the standard U.K procurement formula (x10 and turn into £).

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Pitcairn Island

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by shark bait »

Lugzy wrote:Could Cameron's new US made " Protector " drones be the GA Avenger (Predator C)? Or is that still to classified to be exported outside the US ?
That did cross my mind, but I believe that was dropped by the Americans so it wouldn't be a smart choice.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
cockneyjock1974
Member
Posts: 537
Joined: 01 May 2015, 09:43
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by cockneyjock1974 »

So basically we're looking at a fattened up Reaper or Mantis. My monies on Reaper XL but obviously I'm not in the know and never will be. :?:

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1747
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

UK Reveals Extent of UAV Losses and Serious Incidents
The United Kingdom has revealed the extent of its losses of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in a response to a Freedom of Information (FoI) request received by IHS Jane's on 2 October.

The response shows that 15 UAVs of different types have been involved in incidents since April 2008, of which, seven were destroyed (Category 5); seven required major repairs before being returned to service or returned to the manufacturer (Category 4); and one was repairable in the field and returned to service (Category 1).

Of the seven Category 5 incidents, five involved the Elbit Systems Hermes 450 tactical UAV operated by the British Army; one was a Thales WK 450 Watchkeeper tactical UAV, again operated by the British Army; and one was an Insitu ScanEagle tactical UAV operated by the Royal Navy.
Read More: http://www.janes.com/article/54992/uk-r ... -incidents

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

US drone losses (mostly weather inflicted?) have also been high in Afghanistan.

Which, until now, has made me doubting how they would fare in the N. (or S.) Atlantic weather dropping sonobuoyos for instance (not flying at the altitudes of BAMS, for which I think the de-icing was a problem, but the solution was proved to be a working one).
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)

Lugzy
Member
Posts: 158
Joined: 09 Sep 2015, 21:23
Mongolia

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by Lugzy »

The UAV fleet as suffered loses , U.K Loses are only a drop in the ocean compared to the US , but one stat which is exactly the same regarding both uk and us drone fleets, is that in all those operations in Afghanistan/Iraq/Syria , cough cough Pakistan etc :? , they have flown 1000s of successful missions hitting the enemy hard and protected our own troops and done this at a fraction of the cost of manned aircraft operations and with 0 pilot loses ,
if a drone is lost the pilot who could be flying the drone from a ground station in a secure location in his own country 1000s of miles away , always walks away from it

Not having to put our own service men in danger because theres is an effective alternative available is why drones in my opinion are worth every penny .

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by bobp »

And if you do lose a UAV its far less costly than losing a Typhoon.

Lugzy
Member
Posts: 158
Joined: 09 Sep 2015, 21:23
Mongolia

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by Lugzy »

shark bait wrote:
Lugzy wrote:Could Cameron's new US made " Protector " drones be the GA Avenger (Predator C)? Or is that still to classified to be exported outside the US ?
That did cross my mind, but I believe that was dropped by the Americans so it wouldn't be a smart choice.
I think your right , the USAF did take a look at the GA Avenger early in its development and passed on it , but TBh I don't think it was due to its capabilities not been good enough , far from it Avenger would be a step up from reaper , but at the time predator b etc was doing the job , good enough so the USAF didn't see the point in investing in it ,

Since then the avenger as been proposed to Canada , USCG , intelligence agencies and in the last few years a sea version of the Avenger as been put to the USN who I've read do seem interested in it , also reports the USAF are looking at it again , doesnt mean anything really but I wouldn't be surprised to see it operational in the future in the US ,

marktigger
Senior Member
Posts: 4640
Joined: 01 May 2015, 10:22
United Kingdom

Re: U.K. UAV's/Drones

Post by marktigger »

but how much higher will drone losses be against Electronic Warfare and Proper Air defence system

Post Reply