• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Tempest - UK Future fighter programme

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
205
talking of mockup quality...
 

mrmalaya

Consider it done.
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
322
Reaction score
1
Here is an article which attempts to put some context into the programme, both in terms of potential operational requirements and production planning:

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/tempest-a-look-at-what-britains-next-generation-combat-jet-could-be/
 

Attachments

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
484
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
Well , don’t know about how good the design is, and the product if it ends up being actually built will have some changes anyway.
But really, they should learn how to put the roundels correctly on their infographics. Off centered, weird perspective… looks awfully like a very rush job.
 

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
567
Reaction score
79
Oversized cockpit for the mockup?
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
856
Reaction score
42
Notice the oblique break line behind the cockpit section suggesting that the front section is modular (man/unmanned?).
 

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
8
sienar said:
Oversized cockpit for the mockup?
Don't want to make the same mistake the Iranians made . . . ;) ;D



cheers,
Robin.
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,026
Reaction score
25
robunos said:
sienar said:
Oversized cockpit for the mockup?
Don't want to make the same mistake the Iranians made . . . ;) ;D



cheers,
Robin.
I do hope that Tempest does'nt end up looking like that, one badly designed so called Stealth fighter is enough.
 

mrmalaya

Consider it done.
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
322
Reaction score
1
Without for a minute saying the mock-up/artwork is representative of a production standard aircraft, I wonder why people keep referencing the Iranian fiasco-jet?
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,026
Reaction score
25
mrmalaya said:
Without for a minute saying the mock-up/artwork is representative of a production standard aircraft, I wonder why people keep referencing the Iranian fiasco-jet?
Too true mrmalaya, I have grown tired of seeing this plane now, let this be the last time we ever see this monstrosity ever again on this fine forum.
 

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
484
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
Because the Iranians with their mockup have ridiculed the all mockup idea. A mockup is already a fake thing , they managed to make it so bad that every fighter mockup made after the holy Qaher-313 , people immediately think "oh yeah ! Like that iranian stuff" .
Making a fighter mockup now is a bad pr move . It just look "iranian" now…
 

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
8
Well as I was the one who mentioned the Iranians . . .
I was replying, in a tongue-in-cheek fashion, to Sienar's post, that mentioned an 'oversized cockpit'. I immediately thought of the Quaher-313 mockup, with it's obviously 'undersized' cockpit. It was merely an attempt at whimsy . . . :-X


cheers,
Robin.
 

kcran567

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Aug 15, 2009
Messages
663
Reaction score
0
Overall size of the Aircraft looks very smallish, T-38 sized.

Is the mockup 1:1 or 85%
Intakes on the mock-up look very small also, and the exhaust nozzles look very small.

Any indicators of features of nozzle design? looks like just a square opening. Subsonic?? no visible after-burning nozzles.

Looks like subsonic design for greatly reduced IR? Looks IR stealthy.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
856
Reaction score
42
The hand sign interface is remarkably clever. I see it as a breakthrough in this field. As I have somewhat experimented some years ago hand sign recognition to controll a swarm of drones in real time, I still think that their way of doing it is brilliant. Let's hope that they will share more of it soon.


Last but not least, those that want to see this as a fake mockup, a soon to be popular internet jocke or are taking this display as a derision are only delusional to themselves: a lot of work, time and money (across various succeeding administrations obviously) went behind this Tempest fury. A remarkable sign of continuity.
Any UK foreigner should be humble watching this scene of transparency with so much being shared so openly with the British public. We don't see this happening often in Europe lately.
 

Rhinocrates

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Sep 26, 2006
Messages
180
Reaction score
11
Is the mockup 1:1 or 85%
Intakes on the mock-up look very small also, and the exhaust nozzles look very small.

Any indicators of features of nozzle design? looks like just a square opening. Subsonic?? no visible after-burning nozzles


Perspective can be very deceptive and most of the photos of the mockup are close/wide-angle. IIRC it has been described as a large aircraft, comparable to an F-22.

Regarding the intakes, perspective effects are compounded by the stealth angling. A low view in BAE artwork shows that they are actually large - compare views from above and below. Other artworks and infographics show afterburner equipped variable-cycle turbofans, other illustrations show afterburners in use (plus a laser).

Also, as a model of a concept that's in the early stages of development, it will be lacking many details that are as yet unresolved or classified.
 

Attachments

Rhinocrates

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Sep 26, 2006
Messages
180
Reaction score
11
The hand sign interface is remarkably clever.


Since it's a British design, I wonder if it will make use of a very British gesture. :)

Apparently it's origin story is only a myth. http://www.agincourt600.com/2015/06/08/was-the-v-sign-invented-at-the-battle-of-agincourt/
 

Attachments

kcran567

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Aug 15, 2009
Messages
663
Reaction score
0
Will be leveraging this no moving flaps Technology from MAGMA.

It has an interesting look to it.
Wonder what the Advanced Countermeasures could be, a towed decoy in the tail?

Use of Microwave, Quantum or some kind of HAARP array? Side looking Arrays?

The box behind the pilot a fuel tank or part of the energy weapon system?
 

Attachments

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
484
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
Mmh mmh.... And using just the middle finger will launch a fox1 or a fox2, depending if you use both hands.
Brillant indeed B)
 

harrier

BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
47
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-airshow-fighter-boeing/boeing-would-be-thrilled-with-role-on-new-uk-fighter-defence-ceo-idUSKBN1KA13C?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=5b51d5e904d3013004ebf4c6&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,234
Reaction score
294
U.S Air Force Reps Meet to Discuss Britain’s Future Fighter With UK

One day following the announcement of Britain’s future combat air system (FCAS) effort, known as Tempest, U.S. Air Force officials plan to discuss the project this week with UK officials.

Tempest was revealed on the first day of the Farnborough Airshow. The aircraft is described as a twin-engine, low-observable fighter.

Air Force Under Secretary Matthew Donovan told reporters interoperability is the most important feature when any partner is building a platform critical to an allied fight.

“Other folks who are going to develop new technologies, we highly encourage that, because we don’t have the corner on the market for sure,” he said. “But we want to make sure that they are going to fit into the joint coalition warfare fighting system they have in the future, so [that] we can agree on standards moving forward.”

Will Roper, assistant secretary of the air force for acquisition, technology and logistics, told reporters during the same briefing the U.S. must work with its allies, especially the UK, on the next generation of air dominance.

“A lot of what we’re going to have to determine about the future depends on the direction that we think threats are evolving, but not just our threats – it’s also the world of commercial technology,” he said. “Now we live in a world where sensors are increasingly propagating because of commercial investment – we have to weigh the pros and cons.”

Roper is visiting the UK’s Rapid Capabilities Office, which is a mirror of the Pentagon’s, to discuss ways the two entities can work together, he said.

“To achieve the National Defense Strategy we can’t do it alone. We’re going to have to be able to not just fight with our allies – we’re going to have to be able to build things with them,” Roper said.
http://m.aviationweek.com/farnborough-airshow-2018/us-air-force-reps-meet-discuss-britain-s-future-fighter-uk
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
856
Reaction score
42
Boeing, Saab and now the USAF... Is this the aerospace version of the three kings?

 

RavenOne

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
187
Reaction score
56
I am here all week at FIAS 2018, and laughingly only read / saw the news on the second day here. Thus I wondered over to the BAE hall
 

Attachments

TsrJoe

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
336
Reaction score
23
Nice images, thanks for sharing, if you get a chance could you take some detail snaps of the undercarriage, tailfins and rear end, be handy for modelling :) i dont suppose theres any outline drawings of the mockup being handed out ;)
 

euroreplica23

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 13, 2018
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I always liked the Replica and YF23 design obviously. Lambda wings have a weight penalty. This might be overcome, if my observation of the engine and nozzle are correct. It looks like the shape of the nozzle and the 4 pipes running along the engine is a conformal fluidic nozzle system. Apart from offering 3D trust vectoring, it has rather huge weight saving potential (no moving parts). Especially if combined with variable cycle engines.
It also make sense to go for bigger than F35 as this fighter should coexist with the F35. Looks to me that it might be about 17.5m-18m. That's F22 territory and A2A superiority.

Obviously the best chance of any European program is to combine with the French/German program. If for any reason that is not possible and - I can think of plenty - France/Germany should make their fighter smaller and more air defense/strike focused, as they don't have any F35 on order. It also has to be CV capable for the French navy. In order to be remotely affordable, they both should still cooperate under the hood in avionics systems, radar, weapons, counter measures, cockpit, software...
BAE can still cooperate with Saab and maybe Japan and why not Boeing, as well?
Two programs have to have two different fighters and why shouldn't there be two aircraft with different missions. One European "F22" and one "F35" (version A and C only and with 2 engines). The F22 is dead and there is only the F35 with all its well known shortcomings in the market for a continent that will have to be independent in its defense and a lot of further export opportunity.

This is my first post here. Please be kind and forgiving :)
 

CJGibson

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
1,205
Reaction score
87
Are they taking the piss with 'Remove before flight' on the intake blanks?

Chris
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,023
Reaction score
37
CJGibson said:
Are they taking the piss with 'Remove before flight' on the intake blanks?

Chris
Taking the piss? It's pretty standard to "dress up" mockups.
 

Hood

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,271
Reaction score
147
Trying not to be cynical here, but I wonder if the Americans are trying to nix a potential competitor by offering BAE a way into the PCA programme?
I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing, a joint US-UK-Japanese PCA programme could provide some viable returns.
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,026
Reaction score
25
Hood said:
Trying not to be cynical here, but I wonder if the Americans are trying to nix a potential competitor by offering BAE a way into the PCA programme?
I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing, a joint US-UK-Japanese PCA programme could provide some viable returns.
A great idea Hood. Getting a three nation PCA program up and running could in theory make the PCA much more cost effective than either the F-22/F-35 programs.
 

kitnut617

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
285
Reaction score
21
FighterJock said:
Hood said:
Trying not to be cynical here, but I wonder if the Americans are trying to nix a potential competitor by offering BAE a way into the PCA programme?
I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing, a joint US-UK-Japanese PCA programme could provide some viable returns.
A great idea Hood. Getting a three nation PCA program up and running could in theory make the PCA much more cost effective than either the F-22/F-35 programs.
I don't know, but the timing of the presentation, would seem to me be aimed right at the USA not being involved. What with the present President' stance on isolationism, it would seem to be showing, here's what we can do --
 

CJGibson

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
1,205
Reaction score
87
No problem with dressing up a mock-up, I was more concerned about a ground crew that would need a reminder to remove the intake covers.

Chris
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,234
Reaction score
294
Hood said:
Trying not to be cynical here, but I wonder if the Americans are trying to nix a potential competitor by offering BAE a way into the PCA programme?
I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing, a joint US-UK-Japanese PCA programme could provide some viable returns.
I don’t think that will happen as I thought the PCA like the F-22 would not be up for export due to the technology involved.

Anyway I’d rather partner on this project with nations like Japan than the US who probably have rather different requirements to us.
 

Hood

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,271
Reaction score
147
BAE Systems has big presence in the US so its not beyond the realms of possibility.

From my perspective at present BAE Systems only really has a market in the Middle East, how long that will hold in the face of growing US competition is open to question. SAAB have done very well with the Gripen with second and third-tier nations with generous financing and offsets. SAAB's ideas seem to still be in the cheaper single-engine category that might suit nations with small pockets who can't afford to build their own TF-X or KF-X F-35 look-alikes, hence their insistence on including Gripen E technology. The Tempest is a rather more larger and expensive beast (the Swedes have never operated a twin-jet fighter) more suited to nations with deep pockets and technically competent ground crews to keep them running). Will those competing commercial interests ultimately prevent a BAE/SAAB deal and is each firm's key market actually sustainable for a sixth generation fighter?
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,600
Reaction score
27
The reason the U.S.A.F. visited is to reinforce the idea of force integration; i.e. that they use systems that can communicate with each other for coordinated operations. Britain isn't going to get in on PCA anymore than they got in on the F-22.
 

TsrJoe

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
336
Reaction score
23
Airbus interest ... https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/airbus-boss-tom-enders-eyes-bae-fighter-merger-cnfp6d2c0
 

Hood

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,271
Reaction score
147
Interesting, there are a couple of non-paywall stories, but all quoting the original Times story it seems. This is the best onehttp://www.cityam.com/289555/airbus-ceo-eyes-pan-european-military-merger-form-us-rival

Enders dream seems to be the unification of the defence arms of Airbus, BAE Systems, Dassault, SAAB and Leonardo into one giant defence aerospace company. Whether he wants it under the Airbus banner or separate is not clear, though I suspect the former.

Not sure what to make of this, if anything. Airbus doesn't have a fighter company, it has a 46% stake in Eurofighter Jagdflugzeug GmbH via Airbus Defence and Space. Airbus Defence and Space is not a 'fighter' company, its military aircraft products are all transport-related (A400M, MRTT and C295). Perhaps its a tacit admission that Airbus is not qualified to undertake a leading role on a military fast jet programme, especially given their eagerness to follow Dassault's lead.

Still more questions than answers, a few of my ponderings are; is Enders proposing to sell Airbus's stake in Eurofighter to BAE Systems? Is he proposing to dump his troubled Airbus Defence sector so Airbus can concentrate on its airliners? Or does he think BAE Systems will go fully down the systems route and divest itself of Warton to Airbus? Where does Dassault fit into all this and could they survive just as a business jet producer? Would the UK and Sweden as non-EU nations be happy to hand their defence aerospace capabilities to Airbus? In the helicopter field, Airbus and Leonardo are direct competitors, it would be hard to disentangle those competing designs into a rational family of helicopters.
 

TsrJoe

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
336
Reaction score
23
Have any ga drawings, dimensional data or even cad images appeared as yet in public of the Tempest design ? Be fun to create the mockup in model form :)

cheers Joe
 

Attachments

Top