• 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
8,806
Reaction score
262
Sure. BAE will upload full set of NX drawings to their media site soon.
 

harrier

BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
1,014
Reaction score
50
If Tom Enders does realise his dream then hopefully something will have been learned from the A400M:

The European defense industry ...is besieged by
“too many national interests, too much overlap
and certainly too much waste,”
as well as the tendency for parochially driven
demands on industrial involvement.

EADS CEO, Tom Enders, in AviationWeek.com blog
'Things with Wings' May 2, 2014
http://aviationweek.com/blog/a400m-horror-horror
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
220
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Source:
http://boards.4chan.org/k/thread/38578906/team-tempest
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/tempest-a-look-at-what-britains-next-generation-combat-jet-could-be/
 

Attachments

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,529
Reaction score
369
Saab CEO Says Warplane Maker Could Join U.K.-Led Fighter Program

While Saab is also evaluating a rival Franco-German fighter plan, the Tempest program funded by Britain’s Ministry of Defence and including BAE Systems Plc and Rolls-Royce Holdings Plc has more appeal for the Swedish company, Chief Executive Officer Hakan Buskhe said Friday.

“We’re much more intensive in discussion with the Brits than the other consortium,” Buskhe said in a phone briefing. “It looks very promising, and I think we jointly can do good things together.” BAE once held a 35 percent stake in Saab and the pair cooperated in a venture to help market the Gripen.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-20/saab-ceo-says-warplane-maker-could-join-u-k-led-fighter-program
 

red admiral

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
563
Reaction score
16
Harrier said:
If Tom Enders does realise his dream then hopefully something will have been learned from the A400M:

The European defense industry ...is besieged by
“too many national interests, too much overlap
and certainly too much waste,”
as well as the tendency for parochially driven
demands on industrial involvement.

EADS CEO, Tom Enders, in AviationWeek.com blog
'Things with Wings' May 2, 2014
http://aviationweek.com/blog/a400m-horror-horror
Just look at MBDA. Consolidation into a single company achieves little because national security restrictions mean that you still have to have independent, firewalled, nationally-based companies to work on national eyes only projects. What you actually end up with are separate companies which share some business services. Not a massive saving.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,032
Reaction score
205
Also, Enders has probably well and truly burnt his bridges with his recent ill-advised attempts to influence government policy and public opinion with regards as to Brexit. Calling his efforts cack handed is a probably a polite way of putting it.
 

kaiserd

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
753
Reaction score
89
Grey Havoc said:
Also, Enders has probably well and truly burnt his bridges with his recent ill-advised attempts to influence government policy and public opinion with regards as to Brexit. Calling his efforts cack handed is a probably a polite way of putting it.
I think you will find that perception is very much in the eye of the beholder.
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
926
Reaction score
18
RR was bumped from AETD follow-on program in 2012. Did they continue with their own adaptive-cycle, three-stream engine development?

Eurofighter production to end by 2023.

£2B invested by 2025

Final investment decisions by 2025. IoC 2035.

I get they really don't have a choice but is it me or does that seem like a long time? Based on existing current German and French fighter MCR's it seems they like to purchase planes but not fly or maintain them. Perhaps the UK has an opportunity to move quickly and garner sales ahead of Airbus but these timelines don't project much confidence.
 

RavenOne

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
193
Reaction score
59
There are photos of the mock up RIAT previous weekend, probably eyes only to RAF and MoD diginitaries ....laughignly I was at RIAT..

Wondered if it was in the BAe hospitality chalet by the flightline..

cheers
 

harrier

BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
1,014
Reaction score
50
The PR exercise at Farnborough, with Team Tempest conflated with the mock-up in the BAE display area, seems to have led people to miss what the Combat Air Strategy says:

26....The delivery of the Future Combat Air System
Technology Initiative is being managed
through a pilot project called ‘Team Tempest’.
This innovative Government-Industry
partnership is being used as a catalyst and
test bed for these changes.

27. The performance of Team Tempest and
wider industry is key to demonstrating that
Government and industry can achieve the
necessary capability and behavioural change.
Our assessment of this performance will be
fundamental to programme decisions in 2020.
Success will prove that the UK is in a strong
position to lead in delivering affordable next
generation capability. Alternative options and
greater flexibility in our national requirements
will have to be considered if performance does
not meet expectations.

Clearly, the mock-up will not lead to a flying aircraft by 2020, if ever.
 

mrmalaya

Consider it done.
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
322
Reaction score
1
In that, by 2020 they hope to have an industrial team (with partners) that has a proposal that is affordable- which is not going to look like the mock up.

That said, the mock-up is channelling lots of design cues from other BAE studies over the years and an affordable project is unlikely to be a risky uber-stealth design.

In the mean time, everyone has money to go away and get their design teams working on future stuff...
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,806
Reaction score
262
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogAtFy3q3xk
 

harrier

BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
1,014
Reaction score
50
http://aviationweek.com/defense/opinion-why-time-may-be-ripe-uk-tempest
 

Trident

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
850
Reaction score
32
While a Franco-German alliance would be problematic due to France’s insistence on a dominant role, it does reflect Brexit’s grim political reality. Airbus CEO Tom Enders’ recent comments about being open to a BAE/Airbus fighter unit merger depend on resolution of Brexit and other difficult political obstacles.
Given that Airbus/Germany has already (and most sensibly) ceded the leadership role to France/Dassault, I'm not sure I follow Aboulafia's logic that a Franco-British alliance would necessarily be a more natural match. In terms of technical resources and military requirements it arguably is, but the UK joining reintroduces the thorny issue of leadership - one that proved override all other concerns in the past. BAE's airframe branches joining Airbus Military as proposed by Enders could be an elegant way of solving it, but the uncertainties of Brexit make that a difficult proposition in its own right, as noted.
 

kaiserd

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
753
Reaction score
89
Trident said:
While a Franco-German alliance would be problematic due to France’s insistence on a dominant role, it does reflect Brexit’s grim political reality. Airbus CEO Tom Enders’ recent comments about being open to a BAE/Airbus fighter unit merger depend on resolution of Brexit and other difficult political obstacles.
Given that Airbus/Germany has already (and most sensibly) ceded the leadership role to France/Dassault, I'm not sure I follow Aboulafia's logic that a Franco-British alliance would necessarily be a more natural match. In terms of technical resources and military requirements it arguably is, but the UK joining reintroduces the thorny issue of leadership - one that proved override all other concerns in the past. BAE's airframe branches joining Airbus Military as proposed by Enders could be an elegant way of solving it, but the uncertainties of Brexit make that a difficult proposition in its own right, as noted.
Not to drag the discussion off topic but some may remember some contributors arguing that Brexit would have absolutely no short, medium or long term negative consequences for the UK aviation industry, and were spitting bile at anyone who dared suggest otherwise.
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,529
Reaction score
369
Tempest unveiling is clear statement of intent

The UK’s leading industry players and Ministry of Defence played a great hand at the Farnborough air show, with a clear statement of intent that they will not be left behind as their French and German counterparts strive to create a future combat air system.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/opinion-tempest-unveiling-is-clear-statement-of-int-450576/
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,638
Reaction score
49
Flyaway said:
Tempest unveiling is clear statement of intent

The UK’s leading industry players and Ministry of Defence played a great hand at the Farnborough air show, with a clear statement of intent that they will not be left behind as their French and German counterparts strive to create a future combat air system.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/opinion-tempest-unveiling-is-clear-statement-of-int-450576/
Intent is easy. Monetary support is wholly something else. We'll see.
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
112
1. Why should being in or out of the EU change cooperation on defence projects? Apart from childish mentality I cannot see a single reason. The defence industries of the nations mentioned have collaborated many times and I see no reason this should change.

2. demonstrating a 'model' or 'toy' which is all those things are, does not guarantee it will be funded or even proceed as a concept. This is seen many times in the aviation and automotive industries and this is unlikely to change. The demonstration of intent can drum up cooperation/funding which is the real reason for them, that and giving the media something to talk about.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,032
Reaction score
205
Foo Fighter said:
1. Why should being in or out of the EU change cooperation on defence projects? Apart from childish mentality I cannot see a single reason. The defence industries of the nations mentioned have collaborated many times and I see no reason this should change.
Unfortunately Brussels does not agree with that logical point of view. Scorched earth seems to be the official order of the day so far as the EU Commission is concerned.
 

galgot

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
559
Reaction score
253
Website
galgot.com
Maybe in a world where defence cooperation projects are not driven by national policies. Don’t underestimate the "childish mentality", or just pi$$ed-off sentiment , whatever you choose to call it, toward England policy from Fr and Germany decision makers since brexit. this both in the industry and in politics.
Brexit as broken a lot of the already small confidence that was there…
 

kaiserd

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
753
Reaction score
89
It’s not productive to make this into a pro and anti- Brexit argument, doubt anything said here would change minds on that score.

However the whole Tempest “thing” smells of a PR exercise that won’t long survive contact with reality.

Comparisons with early 80’s (immediately after the Falklands War) proposals for a new UK only “Spitfire” are potentially apt, coming to relatively little until overtaken by what became Eurofighter (built and paid for in partnership with European allies and friends).
 

mrmalaya

Consider it done.
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
322
Reaction score
1
It is worth repeating that there is a lot of money and effort already going into this programme and it's associated demonstrators- both at a corporate and national level. It is not just a mock up with nothing going on behind it.

The programme is not UK only and they are actively courting partners, but at the same time serious money is being spent on making some progress across the board.
 

red admiral

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
563
Reaction score
16
mrmalaya said:
It is worth repeating that there is a lot of money and effort already going into this programme and it's associated demonstrators- both at a corporate and national level. It is not just a mock up with nothing going on behind it.
The UK is putting in a similar amount of money as that spent on YF-22 / YF-23 dem val when you adjust for inflation. Its not peanuts, and not just paper and pr.
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
926
Reaction score
18
red admiral said:
mrmalaya said:
It is worth repeating that there is a lot of money and effort already going into this programme and it's associated demonstrators- both at a corporate and national level. It is not just a mock up with nothing going on behind it.
The UK is putting in a similar amount of money as that spent on YF-22 / YF-23 dem val when you adjust for inflation. Its not peanuts, and not just paper and pr.
Perhaps that type of money doesn't purchase what it did then. Even when adjusting for inflation.

USAF is planning significant investments in NGAD.

https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2018/02/15/air-force-wants-invest-heavily-next-gen-technologies.html

"And it plans to start investing heavily in that goal soon, its new budget request for Fiscal 2019 shows. The service asked for $504 million next year for its next-generation air dominance research, development, test and evaluation program.

And that's not all: In its future years defense program [FYDP], showing the next five years of planned spending, the Air Force shows a planned investment of roughly $11 billion over the course of five years for RTD&E on next-gen air dominance.
"
And that doesn't include the "other" money that's being invested in engine tech, etc.

That being said, I applaud the UK for committing the $2.6Billion over the next 7 years to make something happen. If I understand this correctly, it's seed money to see a new airframe come to fruition. Has it been reported what the 2019 and 2020 budget numbers will be?

I know they are talking about industry partners but have they specifically spoken about other nations as partners? e.g. Are they expecting to design a new airframe for 2.6B or are they hoping to get out in front of a Germany/France solution in hopes of getting others to jump on board for a new Eurofighter-type program?
 

Flyaway

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
2,529
Reaction score
369
Grey Havoc said:
Foo Fighter said:
1. Why should being in or out of the EU change cooperation on defence projects? Apart from childish mentality I cannot see a single reason. The defence industries of the nations mentioned have collaborated many times and I see no reason this should change.
Unfortunately Brussels does not agree with that logical point of view. Scorched earth seems to be the official order of the day so far as the EU Commission is concerned.
Keep your politics out of this thread.
 

kcran567

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Aug 15, 2009
Messages
664
Reaction score
1
Nice pictures Flateric. It looks like a pretty compact aircraft, fairly small?
 

icyplanetnhc

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
101
Reaction score
6
Website
aiaa.seas.ucla.edu
Good pictures. The placement of the nose landing gear looks rather whacky, as the model isn't restricted by a chin inlet. Goes without saying that the final product probably won't look like this. Hell, I bet the design as it currently is doesn't look like this.
 

litzj

BLOG : http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
228
Reaction score
9
Website
jaesan-aero.blogspot.com
http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/2018/08/more-information-for-uks-tempest.html

I have estimated UK's mock up using simple math.

Although its physical size is about that of MiG-29 or Hornet.

Its reference wing area is about that of F-22.

More interestingly, we could figure out size of UCAV for swarm tactics.

<Estimated Specification of Tempest>

Length : 17.5m

Span : 12.8m

Height : 3.7m

Reference Wing Area : 86m^2 (926ft^2)

Size of Internal Weapon Bay : 8.7 X 1.9m

Length of Fuselage : 11.5m


<Estimated Specification of UCAV inside of Tempest>

Length : 1.56m

Span : 1.9m
 

Attachments

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,076
Reaction score
34
Is there no sign of side internal bays for ASRAAM carriage? As far as I can tell there is no side bays at this moment, perhaps they might be included in a future redesign.
 

mrmalaya

Consider it done.
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
322
Reaction score
1
Whilst I think it's too speculative to read too much into the mock-up, bolt on bays are included in the artwork.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,023
Reaction score
215
First attempt for a 3-view, the raw svg-drawing is attached, too, so feel free to modify it.
The shape of the inlets is still dubious to me, thought I used a pleated and cut piece of paper
as a 3--model ... :-\
 

Attachments

galgot

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
559
Reaction score
253
Website
galgot.com
Nice ! (your drawing i mean :p)
One thing I noticed is that the front fuselage has kind of a angular concave section on the lower sides, but then when you see the section at the intakes level, the intakes don’t fit inside that concave space. instead there is an added volume to fit the fuselage section to the intake inner sides.
I suppose that concave area is to have some near vertical front fuselage sides to fit antennas while keeping the frontal area/structural weight down as they want ? Dunno…
Edit: or that added volume is a Dsi ?!
 

Attachments

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,806
Reaction score
262
Tempest intakes probably miss any kind of diverters at all like Taranis to save weight and be less complex - as RR next gen engines should have "distortion tolerant fan systems" as mentioned at Tempest presentation slides.

UPD Well, at close inspection it's not as simple design as it looks at first sight...
 

Attachments

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,806
Reaction score
262
Two more photos of Tempest mockup being towed to BAE tent at RIAT'18/RAF Cosford
via t.me/infantmilitario
 

Attachments

Top