BAe Tempest and other pre-GCAP studies

[FighterJock]

except for the Replicas tiny radome. what's up with that?

An assumption there's a radar there....or only there.

That was only a model for RCS testing so a radar was not needed hence the small radome.

 

[red admiral]

I wonder if the tail plane is collapsible. It seems it could fold down neatly in line with the wing trailing edge.

Maybe it flaps to generate extra lift?

I wouldn't read too much into any models

 

[BLACK_MAMBA]

I wonder if the tail plane is collapsible. It seems it could fold down neatly in line with the wing trailing edge.

Just a coincidence due to edge alignment. For that particular design at least the tails most probably moved like the YF-23.

 

[zen]

Ahh Replica.
I liked tha

except for the Replicas tiny radome. what's up with that?

An assumption there's a radar there....or only there.

That was only a model for RCS testing so a radar was not needed hence the small radome.

Not my point.
Which is that in this representative design, we don't know what the radar layout was and should not make assumptions.

 

[FighterJock]

we don't know what the radar layout was and should not make assumptions.

True, and we will probably never know the radar layout due to secrecy.

 

[Flyaway]

I wonder if the tail plane is collapsible. It seems it could fold down neatly in line with the wing trailing edge.

Maybe it flaps to generate extra lift?

I wouldn't read too much into any models

I suspect like NGAD the images we see in public are probably deliberately vague for security reasons.

You know I wouldn’t be completely surprised if we don’t see the demonstrator aircraft in public. Ship it off to Australia and you could easily hide it. After all that’s what they did with another concept program Taranis.

 

[helmutkohl]

UK’s Tempest Demonstrator Set To Take Wing

The UK government has confirmed that Team Tempest will build a demonstrator for the aircraft at the center of the Future Combat Air System.

www.ainonline.com

 

[Ares]

Hope that the UK will utilize our rivet-free carbon composite bonding structure technology for its fuselage!

 

[bobbymike]

Tempest Demonstrator Will Ready UK Skills And Industrial Capability | Aviation Week Network

Tempest’s demonstrator will likely test low-observable airframe technologies and supersonic weapon launch from internal bay.

aviationweek.com

 

[Rhinocrates]

A BBC article on the human factors and AI for Tempest. Also some news on the collaboration with Mitsubishi.

A mind-reading combat jet for the future

The Tempest fighter jet will have artificial intelligence tech to monitor and help the pilot.

www.bbc.com

Sensors in the pilot's helmet will monitor brain signals and other medical data. So, over successive flights the AI will amass a huge biometric and psychometric information database.

This library of the pilot's unique characteristics means the on-board AI will be able to step-in and assist if the sensors indicate they may need help.
For example, the AI could take over if the pilot loses consciousness due to high gravity forces.

... the sensors pick up far too much detail for a human brain to assess, which is why AI has become critical in analysing and processing the torrent of data.
In the Tempest, it is hoped AI will act as a kind of gatekeeper, preventing the pilot from becoming overwhelmed by incoming intelligence.

... Rolls-Royce engineers are plotting how to siphon off that heat while generating enough energy to keep Tempest's squadron of digital gadgets humming along.

I guess that last is where Reaction Engines comes in.

 

[steelpillow]

...the on-board AI will be able to step-in and assist if the sensors indicate they may need help.

"Hi, it looks like you're trying to launch a precision attack while evading three incoming missiles in an ECM jammed environment. Can I help you?" >Wiggle, Blink<

 

[Archibald]

So, could a case be make, that Tempest is well underway when SCAF is stalled ? (no intend of starting a flamewar, just those two are heirs to Typhoon and Rafale)

 

[zen]

So, could a case be make, that Tempest is well underway when SCAF is stalled ? (no intend of starting a flamewar, just those two are heirs to Typhoon and Rafale)

Archibald, surely you have a better appreciation of what is happening with SCAF?

 

[Archibald]

Well... no.

 

[Archibald]

Lol. Airbus and Dassault don't want to work together, or are fighting teeth and nail for a slice of the contracting pie. Meanwhile Merkel is gone while Macron has been reelected only to be punished by not having a majority anymore - would need half of 577 that is 289 deputies; only got 245 in a good day.
And so SCAF is stalled.

 

[H_K]

This library of the pilot's unique characteristics means the on-board AI will be able to step-in and assist if the sensors indicate they may need help.
For example, the AI could take over if the pilot loses consciousness due to high gravity forces.

At my company we have a whole team of data scientists and young product managers pushing these kinds of AI-driven ideas. However they rarely bother to check with the end user what these really want/need. So when someone asks them for something simple and actually useful, like “next best action” or “alert me when XY + YZ happens and fix it automatically” (ie. rules based routines, not AI-driven) they complain that that’s not futuristic enough and not their job.

I’m not kidding.

My friend calls it “resume building” ie. looks good on paper for your next job at Google or Meta but actually terrible engineering practice. However AI sells well and the senior management and marketing love it, they always trot it out in front of customers, board members, the press etc… turns out everyone loves a little razzle dazzle.

Anyway here’s hoping that the Tempest team is doing this right.

 

[Rhinocrates]

Many a true word is said in jest. This could be a serious possibility.

Software developers aspire to forecast who will win a battle

Conflict in Ukraine and tension elsewhere means demand is high

www.economist.com

A good example of a probabilistic model is brawler, a simulator of aerial combat produced by ManTech, a defence firm in Herndon, Virginia which is used by America’s navy and air force. brawler crunches hard engineering data on the performance of warplanes, including their numerous subsystems, and also the capabilities of things like ground radar and missile batteries. During a simulation, the virtual representations of this hardware can be controlled either by people or by the software itself. Running the software many times produces probabilities for all manner of outcomes. How much would certain evasive manoeuvres increase an f-16’s chances of dodging a Russian s-400 missile? What about the effects of altitude? Of rain? Of chaff or other countermeasures?

Simulating the physics of all these things is daunting enough. But brawler also includes algorithms that claim to approximate mental and cultural factors. Karen Childers, a retired captain in America’s air force who now works at ManTech, where she is in charge of updating brawler, describes this part of the endeavour as “explicit modelling of the pilot’s brain”.

...

As with commercial metaverses, Pioneer requires serious computing power and is run on cloud servers. It can simulate the actions and fates of a staggering number of entities around the world. These range from soldiers, tanks, ships and aircraft to buildings, cars, mobile-phone towers, hills, vegetation, weapons and even individual rounds of ammunition. For areas of special military importance, Pioneer’s terrain data include details such as the positions of particular trees, as recorded by spy planes and satellites.

The system also employs real-time meteorological data. If a tank entering a field would thereby sink into mud, Pioneer has it do just that. It also “deforms” terrain as virtual battles unfold. If an artillery barrage blocks a street, Pioneer reroutes traffic appropriately. According to Pete Morrison, a former head of bisim who now leads commercial operations there, Pioneer simulates “the flight path of every single bullet, including ricochets”. It also takes account of a fighting force’s training, level of fatigue and “doctrine” (the principles, derived from military handbooks and intelligence assessments, that guide an army’s actions). Run a few hundred simulations of troops crossing a stretch of enemy territory, Mr Morrison says, and casualty estimates will teach you, without bloodshed, how not to do it.

Now install a real-time system as a virtual co-pilot.

A fascinating article, with a lot of detail and well worth reading. The author is cautious, as they should be (GIGO).

As an old saw has it, all models are wrong, but some are useful.

By the way, it was thought that AIs would ruin chess. That hasn't happened. Instead, we've seen the rise of 'centaurs' - human-AI partners competing at grandmaster level. Introduced by Gary Kasparov, no less.

Advanced chess - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I know from a client working in AI and cockpit interface design whom I've been editing for some years now that Human-AI teams are expected and pose unique challenges and advantages. The most important are the appropriate division of labour, explainability of information and decision-making, and engendering 'trust' between the parties (as H_K pointed out).

 

[steelpillow]

Human-AI teams are expected and pose unique challenges and advantages. The most important are the appropriate division of labour, explainability of information and decision-making, and engendering 'trust' between the parties (as H_K pointed out).

The Three Laws of AI Flight Control? (apologies to Isaac Asimov)
1. Never harm your crew or, through inaction, allow them to come to harm.
2. Always obey orders, except where they conflict with the First Law.
3. Protect the aircraft and yourself, except where that conflicts with the Second Law.

One of the things that intrigues me about all this 21st century tech is the extent to which it and its consequences were worked through with sometimes startlingly deep insight (though all too often with stereotyped blindness), back in the heady heydays of pulp SF (ca. 1935-1985). Then video gaming took off and all the best insights (and worst stereotypes) moved to the new medium. BAe (as was) started recruiting game players to their cockpit design teams somewhere around the late 1990s. I am pleased to see that process is not slowing down.

Asimov's later works, where his robot and Foundation worlds came together, also bear revisiting. Or watch the Robbie Williams fillum of hisThe Bicentennial Man. Would his protagonist have been better employed as a fast jet's pilot or AI or both?

 

[TomcatViP]

The Italian perspective:

Dealing with the Tempest/FCAS, Goretti considers the program strategic to the Italian Air Force: “We are investing ahead of other countries, and the response we are having, the international consensus, including that of the United Kingdom and Japan, is proof of this. It means that the country is investing with foresight and attention, looking at the development of assets for the future.”

“We are fully in the program, as a level partner together with the British and the Japanese. The presence of Tokyo, among other things, can certainly bring further added value. Japan, among other things, is a very attentive global player, and if it has decided to invest in it, it means that it certainly considers it an important program. We have been there since the beginning, together with London, and this is also a reason of satisfaction and pride for us”.

Goretti also gave his point of view about the possible future convergence between the Tempest/FCAS and the French, German and Spanish FCAS programs. “The convergence between the two programmes will certainly happen,” the Italian Air Force Chief of Staff commented. “I don’t know when but, in my opinion, we won’t be able to spend significant budgets on a similar product in the future. Therefore, I’m confident that while initially proceeding along a parallel path, technology and wisdom will eventually lead the two projects to merge. Again, I don’t know when, but I’m absolutely confident about this.

Tempest And Future Vertical Lift: Italian Air Force's Top Modernization Priorities

The Italian Air Force Chief of Staff recently talked about the FVL and Tempest/FCAS as the service's two most important projects. Talking to the media on

theaviationist.com

Is "Plan B", Piano T?!

 

[Ares]

The British and Japanese governments seem to have firmly agreed on the requirements and sizes to develop the same next-generation fighter jet.

JASDF's next fighter will be developed as a common aircraft with the UK.
2022/08/14 05:00
The Japanese and British governments made final adjustments in the direction of unifying the development plans of the two sides and jointly developing a common aircraft for the JASDF and the RAF's next fighter. In addition to nearly matching the performance required for the next fighter, it was determined that development costs could be reduced.

This was announced by several government officials. The costs related to development will be included in the defence budget request for fiscal 2023, and the overall picture of the development will be determined within this year.

Britain planned to deploy the Tempest, the successor to its main fighter, the Eurofighter Typhoon, in combat by 2035 and develop it jointly with Italy and Sweden.

In subsequent discussions between the Japanese and British governments, it was agreed that it would be appropriate to standardize the aircraft because the required performance was almost the same and the development period overlapped. It is also expected to reduce development costs, which are said to significantly exceed 1 trillion yen, and improve production efficiency.

Italy is also participating in the joint development. Lockheed Martin's involvement is expected to be limited to ensuring interoperability with U.S. military aircraft.

空自の次期戦闘機、イギリスと共通機体で開発…輸出視野に防衛装備移転３原則の改定検討

【読売新聞】　日英両政府は航空自衛隊と英空軍の次期戦闘機について、双方の開発計画を統合し、共通機体を共同開発する方向で最終調整に入った。次期戦闘機に求める性能がほぼ一致していることに加え、開発費の抑制が図れると判断した。日本政府は完

www.yomiuri.co.jp

 

[Rhinocrates]

I don't suppose the Japanese aircraft will be named after a type of storm. They might have recruitment problems.

 

[Hood]

Shame we chose Tempest, it's denied us "Thunderbolts and Shinden very very frightening! Galileo! Galileo!" as a cool tri-national marketing tagline.

 

[helmutkohl]

I don't suppose the Japanese aircraft will be named after a type of storm. They might have recruitment problems.

modern day Japanese aircraft don't really use names other than their letter-number designations (X-2 Shinshin being an exception)
WW2 era aircraft, had many aircraft named after birds like the Hayabusa and Hien
but there were quite a few named after storms
Ki-84 is the gale (or wind from a hurricane)
J7W was the magnificent Lightning, etc

 

[Ares]

I don't suppose the Japanese aircraft will be named after a type of storm. They might have recruitment problems.

modern day Japanese aircraft don't really use names other than their letter-number designations (X-2 Shinshin being an exception)
WW2 era aircraft, had many aircraft named after birds like the Hayabusa and Hien
but there were quite a few named after storms
Ki-84 is the gale (or wind from a hurricane)
J7W was the magnificent Lightning, etc

Actually, JASDF still using unofficial nick name for some of aircrafts today. Like F-2 for Viper Zero, C-2 for Blue Whale and T-4 for Dolphine. But yeah, very few of them recieving such names. If we names the next-gen fighter, we could call it Hayate(name of Ki-84 fighter from WW2 era), which is similar meaning to Tempest.

 

[Flyaway]

The British and Japanese governments seem to have firmly agreed on the requirements and sizes to develop the same next-generation fighter jet.

JASDF's next fighter will be developed as a common aircraft with the UK.
2022/08/14 05:00
The Japanese and British governments made final adjustments in the direction of unifying the development plans of the two sides and jointly developing a common aircraft for the JASDF and the RAF's next fighter. In addition to nearly matching the performance required for the next fighter, it was determined that development costs could be reduced.

This was announced by several government officials. The costs related to development will be included in the defence budget request for fiscal 2023, and the overall picture of the development will be determined within this year.

Britain planned to deploy the Tempest, the successor to its main fighter, the Eurofighter Typhoon, in combat by 2035 and develop it jointly with Italy and Sweden.

In subsequent discussions between the Japanese and British governments, it was agreed that it would be appropriate to standardize the aircraft because the required performance was almost the same and the development period overlapped. It is also expected to reduce development costs, which are said to significantly exceed 1 trillion yen, and improve production efficiency.

Italy is also participating in the joint development. Lockheed Martin's involvement is expected to be limited to ensuring interoperability with U.S. military aircraft.

空自の次期戦闘機、イギリスと共通機体で開発…輸出視野に防衛装備移転３原則の改定検討

【読売新聞】　日英両政府は航空自衛隊と英空軍の次期戦闘機について、双方の開発計画を統合し、共通機体を共同開発する方向で最終調整に入った。次期戦闘機に求める性能がほぼ一致していることに加え、開発費の抑制が図れると判断した。日本政府は完

www.yomiuri.co.jp

Didn’t we have a poster on here recently with some kind of knowledge of these things who was adamant this wouldn’t happen?

 

[zen]

When it comes to the UK doing anything, there are always those who are adamant that the UK cannot, will not and must not.

 

[Jackonicko]

The British and Japanese governments seem to have firmly agreed on the requirements and sizes to develop the same next-generation fighter jet.

JASDF's next fighter will be developed as a common aircraft with the UK.
2022/08/14 05:00
The Japanese and British governments made final adjustments in the direction of unifying the development plans of the two sides and jointly developing a common aircraft for the JASDF and the RAF's next fighter. In addition to nearly matching the performance required for the next fighter, it was determined that development costs could be reduced.

This was announced by several government officials. The costs related to development will be included in the defence budget request for fiscal 2023, and the overall picture of the development will be determined within this year.

Britain planned to deploy the Tempest, the successor to its main fighter, the Eurofighter Typhoon, in combat by 2035 and develop it jointly with Italy and Sweden.

In subsequent discussions between the Japanese and British governments, it was agreed that it would be appropriate to standardize the aircraft because the required performance was almost the same and the development period overlapped. It is also expected to reduce development costs, which are said to significantly exceed 1 trillion yen, and improve production efficiency.

Italy is also participating in the joint development. Lockheed Martin's involvement is expected to be limited to ensuring interoperability with U.S. military aircraft.

空自の次期戦闘機、イギリスと共通機体で開発…輸出視野に防衛装備移転３原則の改定検討

【読売新聞】　日英両政府は航空自衛隊と英空軍の次期戦闘機について、双方の開発計画を統合し、共通機体を共同開発する方向で最終調整に入った。次期戦闘機に求める性能がほぼ一致していることに加え、開発費の抑制が図れると判断した。日本政府は完

www.yomiuri.co.jp

Didn’t we have a poster on here recently with some kind of knowledge of these things who was adamant this wouldn’t happen?

When the FT and Reuters report something, it will be picked up and repeated, ad nauseam. Even when wrong. The official line is still that what is going to happen is co-operation between two programmes that remain separate, though there my be some systems commonality, and some sharing of particular equipment items based on JAGUAR, etc. This commonality could include the powerplant, though reports of airframe commonality around the intakes have been ruled out.

The two programmes could still come closer, or could diverge. Anglo-Japanese co-operation on FCAS and Tempest has begun, but we're still in the preface of what could be a very long book. They haven't decided the content of the actual chapters yet.

I express (and have expressed) no personal opinion as to what Britain can or can not, will or will not, should or should not, or must or must not do. Only the views of those close to the programme are useful or interesting.

My job is to report what people tell me, assess the reliability of those reports where I can, and explain their significance.

 

[Deltafan]

Interesting to compare with the SCAF mock-up of Le Bourget in 2019

 

[Jackonicko]

The tail configuration is similar, the wing planform, intakes, and jet pipes rather less so.

 

[TomcatViP]

Tempest has a tail that can, at least geometrically speaking, fold in line with the wing trailing edge.
FCAS has more room b/w the tail and wings.

Visibility from the cockpit looks also rather good on Tempest when FCAS mockup has doubtfully been designed with much pilots inputs.

Tempest and FCAS have now different wing sets.

 

[Jackonicko]

Tempest has a tail that can, at least geometrically speaking, fold in line with the wing trailing edge.
FCAS has more room b/w the tail and wings.

Visibility from the cockpit looks also rather good on Tempest when FCAS mockup has doubtfully been designed with much pilots inputs.

Tempest and FCAS have now different wing sets.

For clarity, we should perhaps call the Franco-German project 'SCAF' and the UK programme FCAS?

 

[Grey Havoc]

Re. the ECRS Mk2 (European Common Radar System Mk2):

Inside the £2.4bn effort to hand British stealth fighter pilots the advantage in future wars

Behind 30-foot metal doors, Leonardo is testing the next generation in enemy detection

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[flateric]

We’re pioneering for a better future. For programmes such as #Tempest, #DigitalTwins will help us deliver more power at record speed, improve customer forecasting, increase availability, optimise performance and reduce through life costs.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1580113638912045057

View: https://twitter.com/RollsRoyce/status/1580113638912045057

 

[flateric]

FCAS/SCAF and Tempest marketing/PR remain mystery for me - while I somewhat can understand Airbus Defense still promoting their New Fighter images, I just can't understand why BAE/Team Tempest/RAF keep promoting initial Tempest concept on web and mass media months after unveiling a new one.

 

[timmymagic]

FCAS/SCAF and Tempest marketing/PR remain mystery for me - while I somewhat can understand Airbus Defense still promoting their New Fighter images, I just can't understand why BAE/Team Tempest/RAF keep promoting initial Tempest concept on web and mass media months after unveiling a new one.

Perhaps the teams know that...that all of the images seen to date are not that close to real thing so does it really matter? Just a placeholder ultimately.

 

[Hood]

Hood's Rule #1
Never get steamed up about CGI art. Most of the time it's just cool looking graphics and is often replaced by newer cooler looking graphics.

 

[flateric]

Should you really put your "placeholder image" in a wind tunnel and make a lead paper on these works for RAeS Applied Aerodynamics Conference?
For those who insist that early Tempest looks weirdo - just look at Taranis or other FCAS concepts at famous Warton press-briefing slides.

 

[Jackonicko]

FCAS/SCAF and Tempest marketing/PR remain mystery for me - while I somewhat can understand Airbus Defense still promoting their New Fighter images, I just can't understand why BAE/Team Tempest/RAF keep promoting initial Tempest concept on web and mass media months after unveiling a new one.

It's NOT a NEW concept, it's a DIFFERENT concept.

This 'new' concept is NOT the result of a linear, chronological or iterative process. There are parallel, simultaneous workstreams in Team Tempest, several of which have probably been wind tunnel tested, and many of which have undergone extensive testing using super-computing and computational fluid dynamics.

Team Tempest is looking at a range of concepts, each with very different degrees of emphasis on different characteristics and capabilities. These are just two of those.

You might infer that the 'original' design (P189) is perhaps optimised for LO, while the new design (let's just call it CC5, for now) is perhaps optimised for speed and agility. Other designs have different 'optimisation priorities'.

The demonstrator will not look the same as either of these concepts, while the production version is similarly unlikely to look anything like the demonstrator and will probably also look unlike these concepts

The FCAS team boss, Air Commodore Moreton, explained this to us recently, and one of the team has written it up for the next 'ADS Advance' magazine.

 

[red admiral]

Its a pretty standard process of exploring alternatives and downselecting. F-22 example is below. Tempest / FCAS AP is still in the first or second columns rather than at the end point.

 

[Jackonicko]

Its a pretty standard process of exploring alternatives and downselecting. F-22 example is below. Tempest / FCAS AP is still in the first or second columns rather than at the end point.

To some extent that's true - but all of the digital engineering means that you can keep the development of the requirement and the concepting going much longer into the process, because the design/build/test phase can be significantly telescoped and compressed.

Older programmes had to be frozen and locked in much earlier, so even if Tempest is in your 'second column', it's much further along than that would normally suggest. We're ten years or so from IOC.

Also I'm not sure it is 'standard' - most previous UK programmes have seen a more chronological and iterative process in developing a configuration - eg Typhoon.

This is much more looking at everything, looking at all options, taking lessons, simultaneously developing the requirement, and finally picking the features to meet the eventual requirement - at the last moment. I'm not sure I've ever seen it done quite like this.