Tempest - UK Future fighter programme

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
348
Reaction score
32
Website
galgot.com
Ah yes, even more visible from that pict thanks. with smooth flat transition from the side to the canopy, missed that.
Looks like a pelican head...
 

Attachments

TsrJoe

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
321
Reaction score
6
brilliant work Jens, there are a few nuances on the mockup which I was having trouble with visualising, your drawing provides a basis to enable making a model of the design, most appreciated, many thanks indeed :)

cheers, joe
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,727
Reaction score
79
litzj said:
I have estimated UK's mock up using simple math.
I wonder why you went through a complicated and less accurate way of measuring overall lenght using tire size when you have Meteor lenght that approximately fits distance from NLG to MLG wheel axes...
And I wouldn't trust top view/weapons bay size schematics on placard too much.
 

red admiral

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
549
Reaction score
1
The Meteor was 2-3m away from the centreline so with perspective won't give a good measurement. Better to scale from that RIAT sideview in post 150, e.g. from the main landing gear wheel diameter.

There's definitely a bump intake. The lips are more swept than F-35 so more of the bulk of the bump is covered by the lips.

Good effort on the drawing
 

litzj

BLOG : http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
205
Reaction score
0
Website
jaesan-aero.blogspot.com
flateric said:
litzj said:
I have estimated UK's mock up using simple math.
I wonder why you went through a complicated and less accurate way of measuring overall lenght using tire size when you have Meteor lenght that approximately fits distance from NLG to MLG wheel axes...
And I wouldn't trust top view/weapons bay size schematics on placard too much.
yes, ur idea looks better. If I have any time for doing this again, I'll do this way.
 

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
348
Reaction score
32
Website
galgot.com
Deino said:
Not sure if helpful
Nice but i think Jemiba's drawing is much better shape wise. Specially the nose part.
Looks like they took a F-22 nose for that one.
 

TsrJoe

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
321
Reaction score
6
http://picbear.online/curvature_group
 

harrier

BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
975
Reaction score
10
Tempest presentation from BAE at this:

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,30663.msg334549/topicseen.html
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,727
Reaction score
79

Jackonicko

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
On the first page of this thread, Hood said:

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.
It's a concept representing where Team Tempest's thinking was at long enough ago for them to have been able to build a couple of fibreglass mock-ups. One week before Farnborough, BAE Systems showed a group of journalists a slide showing a quartet of FCAS concepts, and AFM have made a pretty good stab at showing these on page 96 of the issue that came out yesterday (the September issue). Might one of these be more likely to become FCAS? Who knows - we're still a way from defining the eventual vehicle.
 

mrmalaya

Consider it done.
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
322
Reaction score
0
...which I'm sure will be better than the notepad sketches I was after anyway!

Taken in the round, the handful of designs might be more informative.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
7,965
Reaction score
37
I've added the panel lines visible in the CGI and the colour scheme from post #69
(Thank you Flateric, thank you Paul !). The latter certainly not for number crunchers ... ;)
 

Attachments

Jackonicko

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Jemiba said:
I've added the panel lines visible in the CGI and the colour scheme from post #69
(Thank you Flateric, thank you Paul !). The latter certainly not for number crunchers ... ;)
I’ve been admiring your drawings, Jembiba. Great work!

However, I think that you’ve fallen into the trap of improving on reality, and of making the Tempest look as though it had been designed with an eye to aesthetics, and because of that I think that you have missed some of the odd proportions of the aircraft. I hope you’ll take the following observations in the spirit in which they are intended.


Front view:

The canopy seems too wide or the forward fuselage is too narrow. There’s more distance between the edge of the LERX/Chine and the edge of the canopy, and it ‘bulges’ downwards more with heftier ‘shoulders’.

The intakes slope inwards less steeply.

I think that the main wheels should be thinner/narrower, and the wheel track seems narrower than you have drawn.

The lower forward fuselage is narrower than the upper part, and is more U-shaped than you seem to have shown. From below the aircraft has a really pronounced LERX.

The nose gear doors are further apart and ‘toe’ inwards when open.

I think the whole fuselage should be broader and ‘flatter’ over more of its surface.

The tailfins seem too canted, and too close together at the roots.

The nosewheels seem too small. This is a Tornado undercarriage, so the nosewheels should not be that much smaller than the main wheels.

Comparing the drawing with a good Tornado drawing would be interesting – I wonder if the wheelbase/track is the same? I wonder whether it would give a different impression of the aircraft’s overall size?


Side view:

The nose gear doors are more sharply pointed than your drawing shows, I think.

The main gear doors look a little small.

I think that the tail sting looks a little ‘fat’ and ‘droopy’?


Plan view:

I think that the fuselage is too narrow and perhaps too ‘small’. If you look at how far apart the engines are, and then look at how much ‘fatter’ the exhausts are than the engines themselves, it starts to explain how there could be a significant weapons bay between them, and why the top of the fuselage looks so much like a tennis court!

I’m not sure about the six ‘staggered’ square panels on the drawing – I can only see four on most of the released artwork.
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,103
Reaction score
26
flateric said:
This is a sketch from BAE Warton media day that was much earlier.
Probably these top down views of these studies are based on sketches from that BAE Warton media day.

Source: Air Force Monthly, Issue September 2018, page 96
 

Attachments

mrmalaya

Consider it done.
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
322
Reaction score
0
That certainly adds some context.

The mock-up we have been shown is perhaps the design which is most eye-catching and yet balances impact with lower risk (I can't imagine what the manned Taranis would have done to the "internet").

The 3rd design with the big wing, puts me in mind of this big wing F35 study:
 

Attachments

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
957
Reaction score
4
mrmalaya said:
That certainly adds some context.

The mock-up we have been shown is perhaps the design which is most eye-catching and yet balances impact with lower risk (I can't imagine what the manned Taranis would have done to the "internet").

The 3rd design with the big wing, puts me in mind of this big wing F35 study:
Nice find mrmalaya, It makes me wonder why Lockheed never went with a big delta wing for the F-35 in the first place, it would have helped with the range issue.
 

red admiral

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
549
Reaction score
1
FighterJock said:
Nice find mrmalaya, It makes me wonder why Lockheed never went with a big delta wing for the F-35 in the first place, it would have helped with the range issue.
Big wing equals lots of mass, which is bad for STOVL.

Interesting range of shapes in that AFM picture.
 

Jackonicko

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
mrmalaya said:
the manned Taranis
This was described by Michael Christie (BAE Systems Strategy Director for Air) as a single-engined lightweight fighter optimised to operate in the air policing role in lower-threat environments.
 

mrmalaya

Consider it done.
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
322
Reaction score
0
Jackonicko- thanks for the added detail. So did they conclude the Taranis type design would be best suited for air policing and does that mean it would be capable of flying fast enough to intercept other aircraft (with or without a pilot on board)?

Certainly a project that left plenty of questions in its wake.
 

Jackonicko

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
I think the similarity to Taranis in planform was largely coincidental. It seemed to incorporate a single vertical tail and would, I'm sure, have an afterburning engine, so I suspect it would be both fast and agile. Its small size would, however, mean limited endurance, and possibly limited combat persistance.
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,158
Reaction score
7
Quite the range of concepts. A bit like the pre-ATF studies that ranged from 12,000 lb to ~100,000 lb. Presumably a consideration of balancing mass and platform capability, with a super-LO concept for good measure.

The little one on the left looks like a neo-Gnat for air policing and light attack - think of an O/A-X that's actually useful for something else.
 

XP67_Moonbat

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
2,154
Reaction score
1
Funny how Tempest's planform reminds me of an old AVPRO concept. Give or take a few small differences.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1492.0.html
 

Attachments

mrmalaya

Consider it done.
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
322
Reaction score
0
Good memory!

I still can't find the image I was thinking Tempest reminded me of, when this all kicked off. It was definitely a big fast US concept rather than something from AVPRO or BAE.
 

Jackonicko

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
May I draw your attention to:

https://www.facebook.com/aerospaceanalysis/posts/981650792041079
 

RavenOne

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
171
Reaction score
25
flateric said:
Good starting point for sizing

Thats around BAE Chalet area at RAF Fairford for RIAT 2018 weekend before Farnborough not Cosford. Recognise Fairford's control tower in the background and the building next to it. Ive been attending the show for the last 21 years..

cheers
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,727
Reaction score
79
RavenOne, bunch of thanks for clarification.
 

Jackonicko

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
I think the confusion arose because Cosford personnel erected it, moved it and possibly guarded it at Fairford
 

RavenOne

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
171
Reaction score
25
Jackonicko said:
I think the confusion arose because Cosford personnel erected it, moved it and possibly guarded it at Fairford
Huh ? They’re RAF Personnel how can you tell what unit or basing ? They be RAFP - Provost or RAF Regiment so can be from any unit in the UK. They be augmented with help from MoD police
Cheers
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,727
Reaction score
79
RavenOne said:
how can you tell what unit or basing ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1zXOXAZKe0&t=16s
 

Attachments

Jackonicko

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
RavenOne said:
Jackonicko said:
I think the confusion arose because Cosford personnel erected it, moved it and possibly guarded it at Fairford
Huh ? They’re RAF Personnel how can you tell what unit or basing ? They be RAFP - Provost or RAF Regiment so can be from any unit in the UK. They be augmented with help from MoD police
Cheers
I think that they wore passes/name badges that had Cosford on them, and some of them said they were from Cosford.

Thus the more literate could tell where they were from....
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,727
Reaction score
79
Any ideas of Tempest inlet aerodynamics? It seems to be a mix of DSI and something else as there's some angled horizontal slat under the intake
 

Attachments

Rhinocrates

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Sep 26, 2006
Messages
167
Reaction score
0
To me, from above it appears that the swept-forward section meets the chine and this is mirrored at the bottom, but the nose fuselage area under the chine is concave is cross-section, meaning that the inlet is wider immediately under and at the bottom. The lower inlet lip gains its width by having a W-shaped plan when you look at them as a pair. I think that this view shows it - notice the shadow under the chine. The ramp or bump within the inlet seems similar to that in the F-35 and the area shielded by the red panel is actually considerable smaller that the inlet area and is at an angle that further reduces its apparent size (your third image shows how it is at an angle).
 

Attachments

harrier

BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
975
Reaction score
10
Article from the Financial Times:

https://www.ft.com/content/5d3bff26-ac55-11e8-94bd-cba20d67390c

There is a pay wall, but by going via the FT's tweet about it @FinancialTimes I could get access.
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,727
Reaction score
79
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/what-is-the-purpose-of-tempest/
 
Top