European UCAVs/UAVs

https://www.armyrecognition.com/new...copter-to-enhance-anti-submarine-capabilities
DSEI_2025_Leonardo_presents_Proteus_unmanned_helicopter_designed_for_modular_maritime_missions-26388706.webp
 
Thanks @GTX. I fully expect CA-1 to fail, though I'd love to be proven wrong. Has all the signs of vaporware & fancy marketing backed by no real aviation experience. Helsing is a software firm with no track-record and apparently even less engineering know-how.

An early sign of the challenges they're facing is that their HX-2 drones have been a failure, with Helsing failing to deliver the promised AI capabilities and the drones exhibiting fundamental engineering flaws making them unreliable (according to reports). Now scale that up to a CCA operating at Mach 0.9 with much more complex systems... they seem to think that buying Grob (propeller trainers) suddenly makes them qualified to build jet-powered combat drones!

You have to have worked with tech founders and software engineers who think they're smarter than everyone else to understand the likely mindset here... but in fact they often don't even know what they don't know. And rarely do they listen to outside expertise. I'd prefer to see these projects led by serious European players like Leonardo, Saab or Dassault.
 
Last edited:
EmoBirb said:
YFQ-42 with a german accent
Click to expand...
I'm very curious about which engine Airbus DS are planning for this Ravenstorm UCAV.

At 6t take-off weight you'd expect a 2.5t+ thrust engine in order to have a reasonable 0.4+ thrust-to-weight ratio (for a high subsonic aircraft). Most of the early CCA designs until now are underpowered due to being limited to the 3,600lbf FJ44-4, with everyone looking for higher-powered engines as CCA designs get larger.
 
H_K said:
I'm very curious about which engine Airbus DS are planning for this Ravenstorm UCAV.

At 6t take-off weight you'd expect a 2.5-3t thrust engine in order to have a reasonable 0.4-0.5 thrust-to-weight ratio (for a high subsonic aircraft). Most of the early CCA designs until now are underpowered due to being limited to the 3,600lbf FJ44-4, with everyone looking for higher-powered engines as CCA designs get larger.
Click to expand...
Maybe Orpheus? Or Adour?

Edit: something like the Adour Mk 951 or AE 3007 engine?
 
Last edited:

Got the brief at ILA Berlin couple days ago with the mock up here are my photos


cheers
 

Attachments

  • ILA_Berlin_2026_Airbus-U145_1.jpg
    ILA_Berlin_2026_Airbus-U145_1.jpg
    509.7 KB · Views: 260
  • ILA_Berlin_2026_Airbus-U145_3.jpg
    ILA_Berlin_2026_Airbus-U145_3.jpg
    496 KB · Views: 268
  • ILA_Berlin_2026_Airbus-U145_4.jpg
    ILA_Berlin_2026_Airbus-U145_4.jpg
    556 KB · Views: 264
  • ILA_Berlin_2026_Airbus-U145.jpg
    ILA_Berlin_2026_Airbus-U145.jpg
    498.4 KB · Views: 246
Last edited by a moderator:
Funny that they kept the forward side doors (the ones for pilot access). This forces them to rely on very small hinges for the front cargo shell doors, accentuating the risk of mechanical failure given their size.
 

German UAV firm Helsing picks West Virginia for first US manufacturing​

https://breakingdefense.com/2026/07...cks-west-virginia-for-first-us-manufacturing/
The company will invest $50 million to open the facility, with an initial focus on manufacturing the HX-2 strike drone, according to Gov. Patrick Morrisey.
Click to expand...
The HX-2 is a loitering munition powered by company software that can hit targets like armored vehicles and structures as far as 100 km (62 miles) away, according to the firm. The drone has been used in combat in Ukraine.
Click to expand...
 
Helsing s CA-1 to get some systems from Helsing after they announced there cooperation with one being CAIRAS (Compact Infrared Reconnaissance and Alert System) a new missile warning system. They also provide the jammer for the electronic warfare version.
https://www.hartpunkt.de/helsing-und-hensoldt-integrieren-neues-flugkoerperwarnsystem-sowie-escort-support-jammer-in-autonomes-kampfflugzeug-ca-1-europa

Edit: almost forgot the core other details:
Helsing announced that development of the CA-1 Europa autonomous combat aircraft is fully on schedule. The manufacturing of the V-tail fin is complete and all main wing components have been produced in preparation for final wing assembly. Additionally, the fuselage molds are finished with lamination set to begin shortly and the Fly-by-Wire system has successfully passed its Preliminary Design Review.
 
Last edited:
Wonder how i overlooked this but anyway:
H_K said:
Thanks @GTX. I fully expect CA-1 to fail, though I'd love to be proven wrong. Has all the signs of vaporware & fancy marketing backed by no real aviation experience. Helsing is a software firm with no track-record and apparently even less engineering know-how.
Click to expand...
Thats not really true. They have aviation experience. Well to be faire they bought most of it in (If we exclude the loitering munition space) with the aquisition of Grob Aircraft SE. Yes there knowledge is mostly in turboprop driven training and aerobatic aircraft but they have all the core experience needed.
H_K said:
An early sign of the challenges they're facing is that their HX-2 drones have been a failure, with Helsing failing to deliver the promised AI capabilities and the drones exhibiting fundamental engineering flaws making them unreliable (according to reports).
Click to expand...
Thats not whats actualy the case here.
Yes they had problems with both HF-1 and HX-2. From faulty launchers, problems of staying online in heavy electronic warfare environment and delayed deliveries. But thats the problem almost all new products are facing and even with its comparable high price point the HX-2 is performing very well in Ukraine now. The drone has also shown in the US Flytrap exercise to be a highly effective tool even outside of its original role as loitering munition.
H_K said:
Now scale that up to a CCA operating at Mach 0.9 with much more complex systems... they seem to think that buying Grob (propeller trainers) suddenly makes them qualified to build jet-powered combat drones!
Click to expand...
Oh so you did know about that. So your point about them having and i quote here:
...backed by no real aviation experience.
Click to expand...
Was complete false. Yes the experience they have is for a different segment but it is aviation experience and as real as any other. But we will see how Well there going. Afterall currently they seem to be fully within the timeline they set themself
 
@kqcke for you My point was that Helsing's software teams who will be responsible for the CA-1's flight control and mission systems have no aviation experience. That IMHO is a big risk as they are basically starting from scratch.

Meanwhile Grob have production experience with light aircraft but their recent design experience is limited to a turboprop conversion (Grob 120TP) with some new structural elements. It's unclear if anyone remains from the failed bizjet development program from 20 years ago. While that means that their structural experience with composites is probably fine, their flight sciences experience with high subsonic high performance aircraft (i.e. swept wing aerodynamics, transonic flutter etc) and military experience (i.e. signature reduction, sensor integration etc) appears to be basically zero.
 
H_K said:
@kqcke for you My point was that Helsing's software teams who will be responsible for the CA-1's flight control and mission systems have no aviation experience. That IMHO is a big risk as they are basically starting from scratch.
Click to expand...
Still not true even if we ignore all the experience Grob has. They have the most basic foundation with the loitering munitions like X-2 and Centaur was also flown already. So they have some experience. Im not saying there anywhere close to Airbus or Dassault but they are nowhere at 0 experience.
H_K said:
Meanwhile Grob have production experience with light aircraft but their recent design experience is limited to a turboprop conversion (Grob 120TP) with some new structural elements. It's unclear if anyone remains from the failed bizjet development program from 20 years ago. While that means that their structural experience with composites is probably fine, their flight sciences experience with high subsonic high performance aircraft (i.e. swept wing aerodynamics, transonic flutter etc) and military experience (i.e. signature reduction, sensor integration etc) appears to be basically zero.
Click to expand...
Getting informationy of how to work with a Turbojet/-fan engine seems to be no problem at all for all the dozens of companies developing cruise missiles and drones around the world but even then i doubt it would take long. The core could easily be studied by buying even something as cheap as a SubSonex.

But as i said i guess we will see if they can do it or not
 
Seems to me, a Loyal Wingman ( CCA ) should be able to do the things your main fighter force can't, or shouldn't, do.

If GCAP is meant to 'control' the airspace, somewhat akin to a much more involved, in theater, AWACS, then the CCAs it controls should be able to keep up, and even get in the fight and 'scrap' at close range if their stealth can't keep them out of visual range.

An LBA Kizilelma, with certain modifications, such as improved stealth through the possible removal of the foreplanes and a slightly larger wing, supercruise with the fitting of a non-afterburning EJ-200, and stressed for high maneuverability @ +12/-5 g, along with better 'awareness' using Leonardo Raven ES-05 radar, Pirate IRST, Britestorm EW system, and internal carriage of Meteor, would provide a perfect CCA so GCAP doesn't have to get 'its hands dirty'.
An uncrewed, stealthy Typhoon, if you will.

If the price could be kept to $30-40 Million, as opposed to 150-200 Million for GCAP, it could be a 'cheap' way of increasing numerical strength.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom