User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/19/2006 3:21:01 PM EDT
So HALO finaly come out of the shadows…
 Aviation Week & Space Technology Tornado GR4 Will Fly With Active E-SCAN Radar By Douglas Barrie 02/19/2006 03:54:26 PM OUT OF THE SHADOWS Britain, working under a blanket of secrecy, has been test-flying an unmanned combat air vehicle demonstrator since late 2003 as part of a broader technology initiative to develop its next-generation of long-range deep-strike platforms. The BAE Systems Raven low-observable unmanned combat air vehicle design first flew on Dec. 17, 2003--100 years to the day after the Wright Brothers--a date selected in part to reflect the significance of the event for the company's future strategy. The import of the British Defense Ministry's clearance for BAE to begin to discuss the Raven also plays into the far wider issue of U.K. collaboration in developing an operational UCAV. Britain had signed up for Washington's now defunct Joint-Unmanned Combat Air System, with a transatlantic acquisition program likely to follow. Continuing--and, some British sources suggest, worsening--problems with British access on the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program also play into this arena. Raven underscores the U.K.'s national capability in UCAV developments--and that it is not beholden to Washington, or for that matter, anywhere--in pursuing such systems. A full-scale UCAV technology demonstration program is due to be launched by London this year, building on Raven, and other, still classified, research and development work. Defense Ministry sources have previously confirmed the U.K. is funding the development of what they dubbed "nugget technologies" that would provide the government "leverage" in any collaborative environment. Examples of such technology include low observables (LO), autonomous operation and sensor integration.   TWO RAVEN AIRFRAMES HAVE BEEN BUILT and test flown using the Woomera Range in Australia. The choice of site reflects the sensitivity surrounding the program, while also providing near-guaranteed acceptable flying weather. The Defense Ministry has been funding BAE's LO research into future air systems since at least the early 1990s. Initially aimed at a manned replacement for the Tornado GR4 strike aircraft, through the Testbed stealth aircraft non-flying demonstrator, the emphasis began to shift to LO UCAV and unmanned recon air vehicle platforms even before the Testbed program was completed in 1999. BAE's Nightjar I and Nightjar II ministry-funded research examined a number of airframe bodies using the company's radar cross-section range at its Warton site. The jet-powered Raven's blended wing-body airframe, with outer wing control surfaces aligned with the trailing edge, reduces radio-frequency scattering. The lack of vertical or horizontal control surfaces also helps reduce the radar cross-section. The vehicle is manufactured from carbon-fiber composite, with the fuselage shell produced at BAE's Samlesbury site in the northwest of England. This facility also produces composite structures for the F-35. Raven fed into BAE's work on the Defense Ministry's Future Offensive Air System (FOAS) program. In 1997, the ministry launched study work into the role a "UAV" might have in meeting the FOAS deep-strike mission. The Strategic UAV (Experiment) (SUAVE) succeeded FOAS in 2005. Rolls-Royce and Smiths Aerospace also are involved in ongoing risk-reduction work for the ministry on SUAVE, building on the Raven. BAE flew a remotely piloted blended-wing demonstrator, the Kestrel, in 2002, Andy Wilson, BAE director of sales, autonomous airborne systems, says. Raven, however, was intended to explore autonomous flight operation using a "highly aerodynamically unstable" airframe. The UCAV demonstrator has a duplex digital flight control system. BAE is exploring modularity in its approach to UCAV/URAV and UAVs. Raven shares the same central fuselage shell as the Corax strategic reconnaissance URAV design, with a common flight control system. Corax, however, has a high-aspect ratio wing optimized for high-altitude long-endurance flight. Such a wing also lends itself to being fitted with a conformal array radar antenna, if blending and flexing issues can be resolved. As with Raven, the airframe was aerodynamically unstable, and part of the program was to look at autonomous control of such a design. Similar schemes, such as the U.S. Darkstar, have suffered controllability issues. Both Raven and Corax are sub-scale airframes--and although the company is unable yet to release size data on either air vehicle, Corax has a 30-ft.-plus wingspan. A Corax-style URAV could form a part of the Dabinett requirement. This program is looking at the U.K.'s future intelligence surveillance target acquisition and reconnaissance (Istar) needs. Part of this covers what is sometimes referred to as the Long-Range Long-Endurance or global surveillance capability that could be fulfilled by a strategic low-observable UAV. Research into space-based radar is also ongoing. SUAVE cuts across two of the Defense Ministry's Equipment Capability Directorates, Deep Target Attack and Istar. The Deep Target Attack directorate has asked that industry examine a number of UCAV-related areas, both in terms of design and development, and operations. While Raven and Corax are sub-scale airframes, industry and ministry officials are discussing whether the next-technology demonstrator should be a full-scale airframe. This program would include an internal weapons carriage and deployment. One point under review is whether a full-size UCAV airframe is actually necessary to achieve this. The government's Defense Industrial Strategy policy document, published in December 2005, notes: "Building on the success of these programs [Raven] we intend to move forward . . . with a more substantial TDP designed to give us and industry a better understanding of key technologies of [broader] relevance to UAVs and UCAVs." BAE is not only focusing on UCAV and URAV development. Its Herti family of air vehicles is intended to provide a medium-altitude long-endurance surveillance capability. The Herti 1A design has endurance well in excess of 25 hr., and an operational radius of more than 540 naut. mi., says Wilson. This version of Herti has a wingspan of 41 ft., with a glass-fiber fuselage. The system becomes autonomous on the runway. HERTI HAS BEEN TEST FLOWN with an electro-optical payload in a chin-mounted turret, and flight trials using lightweight synthetic aperture radar will likely be carried out later this year, Wilson adds. Rail-launch trials of the vehicle are also being considered. The system uses image-processing algorithms to automatically identify areas, or objects, of interest, as part of its imagery collection and exploitation system. The company believes Herti, which has been flying from Machrihanish in southwest Scotland, has clear applications for military and civil surveillance roles. http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/022006p2.xml |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2006 3:25:55 PM EDT
[#1]
Looks cool
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2006 3:27:04 PM EDT
[#2]
Awesome.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2006 3:31:58 PM EDT
[#3]
"leverage"
God I hate that word. ***** I wonder, if this project turns out to be a turkey, if Andy will come out and admit it. He hates our planes. V-22, F-35, none of our stuff is good enough for him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2006 3:38:10 PM EDT
[#4]
Excellent.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2006 3:51:18 PM EDT
[#5]
Triangular shaped aircraft that don't show up on radar have been scaring the crap out of civilian pilots for years in the north of England… BAe has it's 'Black' facility at Warton. If you use Google Earth it's on the SE side of the airfield.
tinypic.com/view/?pic=rtg495 |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2006 3:53:19 PM EDT
[#6]
It's funny you mentioned that. I just downloaded an Art Bell to listen to. His guest? A Brit that is going to talk about UFO sightings over the UK. I wonder if they'll mention this or something that fits the description. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2006 4:09:12 PM EDT
[#7]
BA Flight 5061… If you are flying from BAE Warton down to the the DERA 'Secret Squirrel' airbase at Boscombe Down you would be on that route… en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boscombe_Down |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2006 1:07:23 PM EDT
[#8]
A potential Aussie F-111 replacement? I hope so. It would suck to be stuck with the F-35 for "deep strike". It would also satisfy the DoD's apparent fascination for non-American weapons systems, without having to buy French crap...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2006 6:23:22 PM EDT
[#9]
Nice.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2006 6:25:55 PM EDT
[#10]
Where do you get this info?  DOD still spends almost all of it's cash on US weapons systems and contractors. Oops, my bad. you're talking about Aussy defense not US. Doh!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2006 6:30:21 PM EDT
[#11]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2006 6:31:36 PM EDT
[#12]
Hell, I'd like to see a US replacement for the F-111, we need to new bombers, medium, heavy, and bigger then that, in the worst way. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2006 6:34:37 PM EDT
[#13]
Why would AUS want non-American weapon systems? Are they on the "Let's do everything we can to screw USA economically" bandwagon like the entire EU? Did the EU tell the AUS government that our planes put too many pollutants into the atmosphere? Does the EU make hydrogen powered, environmentally friendly fighter jets or something? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2006 6:58:45 PM EDT
[#14]
Bump for cool stuff  and why is it that the Brits use cool names for things that move (such as planes and ships) but not the U.S.? Cities and peoples names work well for real estate and buildings but I want to read about the new CVN "USS Intrepid" or the new LHD "USS Cyclone"! on a sidenote/minor thread hijack, I DO think Reagan should be put on our currency, but have it be the new $500 bill [/minor hijack] edit: Seawolf is a good program name, now lets get the ship names in line with that! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2006 8:13:56 PM EDT
[#15]
I get the impression that there is a "lets not put all of eggs in one basket" mindset in parts of the DOD. This means that we bought MEKO frigates from Germany (built here), Swedish designed subs (built here), Tiger attack helicopters (assembled here), NH-101 troop lift choppers, French or Spanish LSTs (not decided yet, to be built here), Austrian battle rifles (built here) Mind you, we have US frigates, US AEGIS destroyers (construction to start soon), US fighters and bombers, US Maritime patrol aircraft, buying US M1A1s to replace the German Leopard 1s, US transport planes, US maritime choppers, US weapons, alot of US electronic stuff, etc. As you can imagine, this complicates the supply situation, but, then again, I'm not making the procurement decisions. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2006 11:15:05 PM EDT
[#16]
Australia just shops around and picks what's best for the job… a very smart move. Example… Instead of AIM-9X they bought ASRAAM… mucho longer range. Ditto AMRAAM, the AUS DoD is looking on with interest at METOER. AMRAAM = Up close and personal; METEOR = Reach out and kill someone at 100nm, specifically SU-27s! Historically UK/AUS are pretty tight with each other on 'Black' research. ANdy |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/22/2006 4:51:49 PM EDT
[#17]
OTOH... AMRAAM = Proven, In Service, Effective METEOR = Unproven, not In Service, Wait a long time and hope England doesn't cancel it. Don't get me wrong, I like the concept of the METEOR... But no way in hell would I wait for it when I could have AMRAAM's today. ASRAAM, I don't agree with. AIM-9X is a better missile. Range doesn't matter, it's a short range missile. If you are out of range for a -9X, it's time for an AMRAAM. Some of their procurement is obviously in an effort to have multiple sources. Not all, by any means, but some. They don't want to be totally beholden to the US. Likewise, sometimes they buy on Price. On the whole, though, they have very good equipment. I just don't always think they make the right choices. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/22/2006 4:58:55 PM EDT
[#18]
Hmm, my information says the exact opposite. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/23/2006 3:05:09 AM EDT
[#19]
As far as I know, we have Slammers too. I hadn't heard about the meteor. I don't think that it's not that we don't want to be beholden to the US. Its more likely that we don't want to be beholden to Boeing and LockMart. We would have zero leveage in negotiations if just bought all of our gear from the same source all the time. This does, however, lead to infrastructure issues, and it does leave us at the whim of the Europeans, who I trust less than the whim of the Americans. Mind you, the French will sell weapons to both sides in a war, so its probably not that much of a problem 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/23/2006 3:23:10 AM EDT
[#20]
Britain already has AMRAAM and Sidewinder… AMRAAM is too short a range in the upcoming world. METEOR is based on the seeker head of the proven French MICA RF BVRAAM, live aircraft test firings begin about now. ASRAAM uses the AIM-9X seeker head. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 3/23/2006 3:10:04 PM EDT
[#21]
French missiles, huh? |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
