Tempest - UK Future fighter programme

[mrmalaya]

I might be slightly premature, but this appears to be a system that they want flying alongside the F35 and Typhoon by 2035, with DEW, flexible weapons and cockpit and not so challenging as to raise costs or delay entry into service.

Also open to other partners but primarily made for the UK and produced by Team Tempest: RR, Leonardo, MBDA and BAE Systems.

AVM Rochelle is quoted as saying: "Funding is real. We are working at pace."

 

[Mike Pryce]

Rolls engine

 

[Mike Pryce]

UK Combat Air Strategy is out:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/combat-air-strategy-an-ambitious-vision-for-the-future

I can also now say I acted as an Independent Scientific & Technical Advice (ISTA) register member to MOD on this, as well as leading a public project for the Low Cost by Design network already posted on the FCAS thread.

Fascinating stuff. Will appear in the archives in 20 years!

 

[mrmalaya]

But will there be a book in 20 years too?

 

[mrmalaya]

From the government publication:

 

[Mike Pryce]

But will there be a book in 20 years too?

The rate I write at.....! ???

 

[mrmalaya]

I can't help but feel I have seen this design before though. Not recently, but before. Can anyone help?

 

[Flyaway]

Now unveiled.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44848294

 

[Hood]

I'd be wary of reading too much into a plastic mock-up. I must admit, I was expecting an announcement of joining the Franco-German effort rather than an attempt to revive a home-grown design.
The media are jumping all over this as Britain's new fighter, but if you listen to what Gavin Williamson says, its actually only a concept and is a shrewd political move to show willingness to collaborate. The mock-up is a nice PR item but I feel we'll look back on this in 20 years the same as the BAe P.110 mock-up back in the 80s.

Team Tempest was formed back in April to develop a low-cost UCAS demonstrator building previous work which included Taranis. Since then with all the talk of European fighters the emphasis has obviously shifted to something that can be optionally manned. I wonder how much of TF-X is in this design (maybe that's why this mock-up looks so familiar?)
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/team-tempest-pursues-ucas-demonstrator-deal-447301/

 

[Flyaway]

I'd be wary of reading too much into a plastic mock-up. I must admit, I was expecting an announcement of joining the Franco-German effort rather than an attempt to revive a home-grown design.
The media are jumping all over this as Britain's new fighter, but if you listen to what Gavin Williamson says, its actually only a concept and is a shrewd political move to show willingness to collaborate. The mock-up is a nice PR item but I feel we'll look back on this in 20 years the same as the BAe P.110 mock-up back in the 80s.

Team Tempest was formed back in April to develop a low-cost UCAS demonstrator building previous work which included Taranis. Since then with all the talk of European fighters the emphasis has obviously shifted to something that can be optionally manned. I wonder how much of TFX is in this design (maybe that's why this mock-up looks so familiar?)
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/team-tempest-pursues-ucas-demonstrator-deal-447301/

It looks more like the project we are trying to partner with the Swedes on rather than Germany & France.

 

[mrmalaya]

My take on it is that it is funded, with a production decision to be made by 2020 with the finery of R&D being done in the meantime.

2035 IOC is the official line.

 

[Deino]

Interesting... however how likely is this to ever materialise as a pure British project in mind of the Brexit and after France and Germany decided to go ahead with their joint effort?

 

[Deltafan]

Another link :

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-unveils-new-next-generation-fighter-jet-called-tempest/

 

[Mike Pryce]

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-britain-airshow-fighter-bae-systems/uk-looking-to-sweden-japan-in-search-for-partners-on-new-fighter-jet-idUKKBN1K61JI

 

[CJGibson]

But will there be a book in 20 years too?

The rate I write at.....! ???

Beat me to it!

Chris

 

[red admiral]

I can't help but feel I have seen this design before though. Not recently, but before. Can anyone help?

Sort of like a stealthier and uglier version of Rayner's Rockwell ATF design?

Or some FB-22 iterations

 

[litzj]

in the figure of explanation for “flexible payload configuration”

Is that four ucavs in weapon bay of tempest? it seems like that...

so tempest could be carrier of ucav? hu?

 

[Jeb]

I can't help but feel I have seen this design before though. Not recently, but before. Can anyone help?

Sort of like a stealthier and uglier version of Rayner's Rockwell ATF design?

Or some FB-22 iterations

I see F-22/F-35 forebody, X-32 delta from the wingroots back, with the tailpipe section from an old F7U Cutlass. It's like a weird kitbash.

 

[phil gollin]

.

I'm at a bit of a loss how a single (sort of) airframe will be a good choice for both a manned and unmanned aircraft.

The difference in weight and free space in the unmanned version would allow a smaller/ more agile/whatever aircraft.

It would seem to be better to design and build two closely related aircraft, using the same engines, sensors, etc.... Yes, more expensive, but more cost effective when bought for service.

.

 

[mrmalaya]

There are definitely large pods which appear to be designed to bolt on under or on the side of the aircraft, and that is definitely a weapons bay full of UCAVs- which might answer some questions.

As to which other design I am channelling, it's mainly when I see the graphic of the aircraft from above, but the other design was black. I'm definitely thinking American and not a fighter, but no matter.

 

[Flyaway]

This design looks more like a 5.5 generation aircraft than a true 6 generation.

 

[GARGEAN]

Rolls engine

Well-well-well, what we have here under number 1? Is that radar blocker?

 

[Mike Pryce]

There are definitely large pods which appear to be designed to bolt on under or on the side of the aircraft, and that is definitely a weapons bay full of UCAVs- which might answer some questions.

As to which other design I am channelling, it's mainly when I see the graphic of the aircraft from above, but the other design was black. I'm definitely thinking American and not a fighter, but no matter.

These?

 

[red admiral]

This design looks more like a 5.5 generation aircraft than a true 6 generation.

Difficult to define either of those. What is 6th generation? 5th gen but tailless and with a laser?

What's needed is something sufficiently ahead of the threat at an affordable cost

 

[GARGEAN]

This design looks more like a 5.5 generation aircraft than a true 6 generation.

Is it even 5+? What makes it that way? We don't know anything about it's LO chars, about its weaponry, its sensors, its software fusion...

 

[FighterJock]

I think that as a design it is back to the CAD computers, a total redesign is needed before the RAF will accept this fighter.

 

[muttbutt]

I don't mean to be a downer but......no bucks, no Buck Rodgers. I'm not sure where the cash for this is supposed to come from.
2 Billion won't come close to cutting it.

 

[Mike Pryce]

https://airforcesmonthly.keypublishing.com/2018/07/16/uk-launches-combat-air-strategy-with-team-tempest/rs79846_it8a5414/

 

[kaiserd]

This appears to be more an attempt to remain credible and sustain some design capacity until the eventual international partnering to actually build something somewhat or completely different.

As mentioned above by other contributors not clear who’s going to paying for this to be much more than an interesting design exercise and a brief entry in a future BSP book.

 

[Flyaway]

This design looks more like a 5.5 generation aircraft than a true 6 generation.

Is it even 5+? What makes it that way? We don't know anything about it's LO chars, about its weaponry, its sensors, its software fusion...

I tend to think of sixth generation fighter designs as being tailess.

 

[Stargazer2006]

"Tempest"? Seriously? After Typhoon, Texan, Black Widow, Avenger and a few others, deciders prove without a doubt their lack of imagination... Or is is something else? Nah... Surely they wouldn't try to play on the sensitive nostalgic patriotic chord to render the public and the politicians sympathetic to highly expensive military acquisitions, would they? : ;D

 

[GARGEAN]

I tend to think of sixth generation fighter designs as being tailess.

Eh... By far not necessary. There are still definitions to be made (and remade, as they are mostly speculations: see old "supermaneuverability" and "supercruise" graphs that magically dissapeared when F-35 came), but being tailess is hardly one that will be included. There probably will be things like "high(Mach 3) speed", "optional pilot or UAV", "energy weapons", "extended survivability due to next gen ECM and DIRCM" and so on. One could only imagine now.

 

[red admiral]

I don't mean to be a downer but......no bucks, no Buck Rodgers. I'm not sure where the cash for this is supposed to come from.
2 Billion won't come close to cutting it.

£2bn isn't meant to though. The bulk of development and production spend will be around 2025-2035, after the Dreadnought peak has passed. But this is still quite a bit of cash in comparison to other projects around the world e.g. UK's contribution to Typhoon development was around £8-10bn in today's money I believe.

 

[red admiral]

I think that as a design it is back to the CAD computers, a total redesign is needed before the RAF will accept this fighter.

Why do you think that? Its obviously an early design iteration and as stated, just a look at what the future could look like.

 

[red admiral]

http://aviationweek.com/farnborough-airshow-2018/uk-future-fighter-hinges-cooperation

A bit of analysis and further details in this Aviation Week article

UK-Japan-Sweden programme 40:40:20?

 

[Mike Pryce]

I don't mean to be a downer but......no bucks, no Buck Rodgers. I'm not sure where the cash for this is supposed to come from.
2 Billion won't come close to cutting it.

£2bn isn't meant to though. The bulk of development and production spend will be around 2025-2035, after the Dreadnought peak has passed. But this is still quite a bit of cash in comparison to other projects around the world e.g. UK's contribution to Typhoon development was around £8-10bn in today's money I believe.

The original UK cost for EFA was to be £3bn in today's money. Even a national programme was to cost only a little more. Much of the increase was due to politics. Avoiding such things can save a lot, and speed things up.

 

[Mike Pryce]

http://aviationweek.com/farnborough-airshow-2018/uk-future-fighter-hinges-cooperation

A bit of analysis and further details in this Aviation Week article

UK-Japan-Sweden programme 40:40:20?

UK carriers are here to stay. Japan has STOVL capable carriers, sorry helicopter, er, destroyers (ahem). Sweden likes to go off road. So maybe...!!!

 

[Mike Pryce]

http://www.janes.com/article/81766/farnborough-2018-saab-open-to-fighter-partnership-if-gripen-e-tech-included

 

[FighterJock]

I think that as a design it is back to the CAD computers, a total redesign is needed before the RAF will accept this fighter.

Why do you think that? Its obviously an early design iteration and as stated, just a look at what the future could look like.

As a design right now it would not survive for very long in the current close in dogfighting against the likes of the Su-57 with the advanced thrust vectored R-74M.

 

[mrmalaya]

Analysis from RUSI's Justin Bronk to add to the pile:
https://rusi.org/publication/rusi-defence-systems/enter-tempest