An unmanned helicopter demonstrator aircraft will be designed and developed in a £60 million contract awarded to Leonardo.

The image above is a file image showing an American equivalent, the MQ-8C.

The Ministry of Defence say the purpose is to test the viability of larger uncrewed aircraft for the Royal Navy, the three-tonne demonstrator – less than a fifth of the weight of a Merlin helicopter – is expected to provide an alternative to existing aircraft for tracking adversary submarines.

“Trials will test the capability of the aircraft to drop “sonobuoys” – small tube-shaped buoys that track and communicate submarine activity – enabling the aircraft to alert a crewed helicopter and call for support if a submarine is located. Designed to operate at lower cost than crewed aircraft, capabilities derived from the demonstrator could also reduce the exposure of Royal Navy personnel to hostile threats.”

The move will free up existing Merlin helicoters.

“If successful, the new aircraft would provide a platform capable of delivering improved surveillance and intelligence, enabling crewed Royal Navy helicopters to re-deploy on alternative missions if required and bolstering UK defence capability.

Capable of carrying a large payload, combined with the ability to operate in harsh environmental conditions, the aircraft could also demonstrate its utility across a range of requirements. Beyond Anti-Submarine Warfare, the project will address other potential uses including ship to ship resupply and casualty evacuation.”

Minister for Defence Procurement, Jeremy Quin, said:

“The global threat is changing, and it is crucial we remain at the forefront of defence innovation. Exploring cutting-edge, new defence capabilities through programmes with key British manufacturers, will help to ensure our Armed Forces are equipped to deal with the latest threats.”

Director Develop Royal Navy, Rear Admiral James Parkin, said:

“Proving the benefits of larger uncrewed aircraft (rotary and fixed wing) will be key to understanding whether such aircraft can effectively contribute to future Royal Navy capabilities, particularly for Anti-Submarine Warfare.”

Sir Simon Bollom, DE&S CEO, said:

Our team were able to make use of a novel and agile delivery approach to ensure that we can accelerate potential new technologies through to the demonstration phase so that they can be delivered into the hands of the UK Armed Forces at the earliest opportunity if required.

The uncrewed helicopter is due to undertake its first flight in 2025.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

119 COMMENTS

  1. “a novel and agile delivery approach to ensure that we can accelerate potential new technologies”
    Does this word salad annoy anyone else or is it just me?

    • I don’t know why they user jargon like this…I can promise you it’s never the engineers that come up with this toss…always some useless arts graduate employee of the MoD who obtains a management role. Sounds like something a civil servant would say. It’s a bit like “Yes minister”…

      • I know bud. Done enough “Strateigic Management” quals myself to know where it comes from. Nonsense language to obfuscate to the underlings/plebs and sound like you’re working on a different level – when you’re not. Glad it’s not just me.

        I’ll try and focus on the positive though: It was otherwise a good article with more good news. 👍

      • Its software industry terms that are now getting used for hardware. Agile has its uses but is not always suited for every project. They be using the phrase Minimum Viable Product(MVP) next 🙂

          • Thank god for that imagine what would result if you did, expectations of a Starship resulting in a Sopwith Camel no doubt. 😱

          • Well you are doing it wrong then. I am a software engineer and no software developer worth their salt would not be doing Agile if they have a choice. The only thing that prevents it working is incompetent senior management and unfortunately that is common…

            With regard to physical engineering, Rolls Royce just announced that they developed a new hybrid generator in half the time and cost than normal development by using agile methods. SpaceX use agile to produce their rockets and have moved faster with less costs than the more traditional approach used by the SLS, which has cost truly crazy amounts and is a decade late and still not ready…

      • Must admit reading through all the RR press releases this week (and others) my brain has definitely become spaghetti. It’s rather like reading legal documents or doctors prescriptions meaningless to anyone beyond those who write them. I was a part-time freelance lecturer back in the day when Btecs were introduced. My course leader showed me the introduction document he had to read and asked if any of it made any sense to me. The only sense I could make of it as I told him was that it could mean anything to anyone one presumes to specifically allow those on high to put whatever interpretation on it they required specifically in that case to hold people such as him responsible for anything that went wrong. In this case I presume it’s so that it allows almost endless re-definition of whatever project it is over time while sounding important in a press release. Pure Yes Minister.

      • Utterly pisses me off to be honest. What irritates me is when I write papers in plain English, I end up having to change them to language like this as it’s more opaque and less definitive, because apparently it’s not OK to say, actual we have no idea what we need next year and will decide at the time or when we know what’s going to happen and how far up the creek we are.

      • Ironically if you listen /very/ carefully to one of Sir Humphrey’s monologues they do actually make logical sense; the comedy came from the minutiae being needlessly expounded upon at great length.
        e.g:

        “Well Minister, if you ask me for a straight answer, then I shall say that, as far as we can see, looking at it by and large, taking one thing with another in terms of the average of departments, then in the final analysis it is probably true to say, that at the end of the day, in general terms, you would probably find that, not to put too fine a point on it, there probably wasn’t very much in it one way or the other. As far as one can see, at this stage.”

    • I quite like a salad this time of the year so no I have no problem with the word salad, it’s a very appetising word to me.

    • It’s not a very good example of the genre if I may say so:

      ‘Risk managing responsive innovative scoping of real time functionality, maximising potentialities in the warfighter’s realm that going forward optimise the scenario envelope dynamically as it exhibits in multi-level analysis.’

      (‘If we want to make money this bloody thing better work’.)

    • Agile in modern software development means…

      Well, that plan was a load of *****, anyone got any ideas? Whose turn for getting the cakes in?

      😂

      • In which case it is not an agile project because that is not how agile development works at all… I think too many managers here “Agile” as a buzzword and have no idea how to implement it or how to manage it. Then when it goes wrong they blame agile rather than their own ignorance…

        • I think you hit the nail squarely on the head there. It’s a shame project managers tend to use the Agile buzzword to keep the senior managers and accounts off there back. I seem to spend most of my sprint reviews feeding stats back to them. Doesn’t help the job get done. Total abuse of the Agile intentions. Bah humbug.

        • If they’re too ignorant to save shed loads of time & confusion by communicating concisely & directly, or take reponsability when they get it wrong, I think they’re unfit for the job.

    • Management Nu-speak that came out of the USA in the late seventies/early eighties and has since taken over completely. Utterly meaningless, particularly when linked to pseudo-psycho-babble…….

    • I agree Stu. Rather it’s a “novel and agile” way of obscuring & deafeating the intent & plain language description. Too much of this non-communication gobbledegook about.

  2. I appreciate that developing this doesn’t really involve any novel technology but i think the statement

    ‘The move will free up existing Merlin helicopters’

    is another one of those MOD soundbites that suggests that this will be in service anytime soon.

      • Will it really as the Merlin is the Kill machine for ASW or will these unmanned units also carry weapons on them and the go/no go decision will be undertaken in the respective Ships Ops room. Then it will free them up to go on large vessels. Happy if it can be used by T26’s, T31’s and T32’s to provide ASW seek and destroy otherwise it’ will not really help the small Merlin Fleet which is so over worked and never around when needed.

          • I don’t think it’s ever been on the cards to purchase more Merlins. It’s been in service since June 2000.

          • Sorry Robert, that was a tad tongue in cheek on my part.
            On a more serious note, I often wonder if we are trying to do things on the ‘cheap’ with the proliferation of drones that we seem to be associated with. Appreciate that they are a useful tool to supplement the real thing, but still makes me wonder…..

          • Sorry pal, missed that one 😄 Yes, I see what you mean, but technology marches on, and I can see how they can bring advantages in capability. And if they are on the cheaper side, then I guess it frees up more of the budget for other things.

          • Merlin out of service date is 2030. 8 years and how much does a Wildcat weigh compared to a Merlin.

        • Cut no, as this capability won’t be in service for years. But it will mean the merlin replacement numbers will be slashed under the normal smoke/mirrors of capability being provided by other assets.

          In theory though if a drone can provide the sub hunting side of the equation, this could be true. Although they would still need something to provide air support for boarding operations, but that could be provided by a much cheaper platform.

    • I would certainly like to know what could be flying by 2025 which one feels is obscured more than anything by such nonsense language. Clearly it’s not going to be visually very novel just a conversion, one hopes the payload is however. Perhaps that’s the whole point give thoughts of something very exciting while hiding the fact that in that timescale it can be anything but and won’t be for many years later, it’s toe in the water stuff. It’s almost like Boris Johnson wrote it, sell big perceptually to hide just how small the delivery will be when it arrives.

      • Its all bows and glitter right? Saying it WILL free up existing Merlins assumes many things…..Will this thing be in service, not flying as a demonstrator but in service any time soon? Will the Merlin’s commitments still be the same when this comes into service? Will the Merlin Fleet still be the same when this comes into service? Does the first quote not say that this thing will alert a crewed helicopter? How is that freeing up Merlins? As usual more Q’s than A’s….

        • It means the Merlin doesn’t have to spend as much time in the air searching for a submarine, and can be called in when we need to start dropping Stingray torpedoes.

          • I would say it means the opposite. Merlin can stay on task longer because it won’t carry weapons so it can have more fuel or a lower all up weight.. The drone will be the pony that carrys the weapons in for the Vectac attack on a target.

      • It’s novel. They said they learned the necessary lessons from work done on an existing airframe — SW4 Solo — and needed a new one.

        From an article last year:

        Cook [VP Ops Leonardo Helicopters UK] says as currently envisaged, the demonstrator will look like “a conventional aircraft”, but will not face the constraints inherent in converting a manned platform. Maximum take-off weight will be in the 2.8-3t range, with a 10-12h endurance. First flight is likely to be in the 2024-2025 timeframe.

        Articles from last May do not include MOD involvement and are written in somthing closer to English.

          • Half the weight of a Wildcat (6-ton MTOW), four times the endurance and around a quarter of the price. Also RAF Wildcats don’t do ASW, and the South Korean ones (which do) are stuffed full and even more expensive.

            Leonardo have two chances to survive in the UK helicopter game, this and the Army replacements. They clearly think it’s worthwhile.

            Or maybe we should forget about UK helicopters and just buy a Eurocopter EC635. Remind me, how would we be better off?

  3. Is the first priority for unmanned platforms not AEW rather than ASW? At the moment we’re using highly sophisticated ASW Merlin’s to carry AEW radars. Wouldn’t the AEW role be better done by a drone?

    • I’ve suggested this myself & agree. No reason we can’t do both though.

      Apparently (just relaying info so forgive me if I’m wrong) with AEW there are significantly higher power requirements than a normal drone requires AND there’s a bandwidth thing to either process the signals recieved and/or relay it to the groundstation. Makes it a harder task than developing something to drop sonobuoys.

      • A lot of what you have posted applies equally to sonobuoys too. On a Merlin the backseaters process the received data and get the pilots into the best attack position. Said unmanned asset will have to relay all that data to a ship for processing.
        Sonobuoys have a short range when transmitting data to the helicopter, so the receiving unit will also need lots of bandwidth and power to pass on the information.

        • I said this too & was told no – It was on Navy Lookout & I’m far from any sort of engineer let alone signals engineer so I took their word for it.

          Apparently the audio relay requires a lot less than radar as radar is more frequencies and more background noise so more data to interpret (or something like that).

          • Wouldn’t like to contradict the experts, it’s not my field, regardless of how much bandwidth is needed, it’s still needed, and the amount of data being sent will be largely dependent on how many buoys or fields of buoys are being monitored. Granted a lot less then radar data, but still requires bandwidth and power to transmit said signals.

          • Yes sir. If I’ve not been told rubbish (& I think, like here, there are guys on Navy Lookout that know what they’re on about), AEW & ASW have similar technical requirements (i.e. power and data transmission/relay), just that ASW is easier to start with as it requires a bit less of both.

            Hopefully this ASW drone will help develop things to make AEW drones practical.

          • Sonar buoys are not necessarily a singular microphone…….maybe they are transmitting a spatial image?

            Maybe?

          • Wouldn’t know bud. You’re over my head now. As mentioned, just relaying what I was told. 🤷‍♂️

    • Surely the new STOL enabled predators should be used for AEW going
      forward, he’ll given the cost of enabling merlin to do it we should have probably just bought more F35s and have them do it, perhaps with a pod.

      anyone know how much crows nest has cost to date?

        • Does that include the cost of the merlins as well?

          its obviously hindsight, but for that cost we could have used a predator and come up with some vehicle based trapping mechanism for the carriers (2 heavy strapped down units) with cable between

          we can still do this and get rid of crowsnest which is clearly sub optimal

          i do wonder why we didn’t pursue Taranis for this and refuelling duties

          • I don’t believe so. Just the development costs & systems to bolt into existing Merlins.

            ‘Sub-optimal’ – nice way to put it. Agreed.

            Cable between – USMC have the very system you require: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/38068/marine-corps-f-35cs-make-first-arrested-landings-at-an-expeditionary-airfield

            Personally I’d go the whole hog & just install EMALS (or similar) on the carriers. We’ve tied ouselves to STOVL only aircraft & as a consequence, to Lockheed & the F35 – so when they take their sweet time integrating weapons (Meteor), we get to kick rocks. STOVL increases complexity & therefore cost; often decreases range, payload and speed too.

            Taranis was never planned for carriers. Not saying it couldn’t be done but it’s doubtless a tricky proposition since it’s only slightly smaller than an F35 so might need cats & traps. Last I heard of it was we shared a load of data with Dassault as part of Neuron & then they said ‘thanks, bye!’ & walked away from a joint programme (though I may have this wrong).

          • thanks for the link, so something like that will work on the carriers and doesn’t need a load of over thinking about it.

            as for Taranis, it’s another missed opportunity. UK has a great aeronautics industry and it is us that should be at the cutting edge of UCAV and loitering munitions.

            whilst I accept we can no longer go it alone on £100m 6th Gen jets. We should have products in all segments below £25m. Yet we don’t and turkey and Israel are the leaders.

            perhaps we should just be more British and stop trying to mimic the US military that we clearly cannot compete with like for like, but can do better than in several key areas.

          • Taranis – I’m not certain it’s done bud. Just we don’t hear what they’re doing with the tech.

            “We should have…” it’s not the UK populace or even UK gov. It’s BAE & private enterprise. BAE seem to have it in mind to only do the ‘big ticket’ items these days & UK Gov don’t seem to invest too much in the smaller guys (and when they do, BAE just seem to buy them up & do nothing with their products). BAE don’t see their future as British defence bud. They want to use the stability UK Gov offer & get the juicy global orders.

            You want to drive youself crazy (as I did), ask youself this – Boeing & Saab leveraged older tech from Grippen (engine, cockpit etc) to make T7 Redhawk for $19M each. They now expect to make 2,700 jets!! Aeralis have come along & designed a trainer. South Korea are selling theirs to Poland (just announced). The market is huge for replacement trainers… so, where is BAE’s offering???

          • the MOD should stop funding or get on with firms that are more agile.

            Hills helicopters may well be a company we should be partnering with on this as if they can build a luxury 5 seat helicopter for £1m how much would it cost to incorporate Schiebel controls etc and get it out there. Probably a lot less than £60m

            leonardo need to come to the table with solutions not concepts, the mod should send them packing in this case, with a flea in their ear.

            as for Taranis, it should be in operation in the RAF and we should have 200, instead we seem to have gone down another route and cancelled that as well.

            time for action, as the Turkish have shown, it’s better to have something in volume than a high end concept..

            The MOD need to look at every country with a lower defence budget and see what products they have developed to offset the lower budgets, we should then start looking to partner or replicate. Israel and the nordics are key examples of doing more with less.

          • Leonardo have the AWHero already certified and with naval search radar and EO but it will need a substantial increase in size. It is too small size for this.

          • That’s fine, but they have had more new out of the MOD before, time to bring a product to market that we can buy and trial.. £60m should get us at least 12 units not a tester.

            we need to stop doing this, it’s a waste of money when there are plenty of companies out there selling a ready to go product.

          • WHY FORD CLASS is still not fully active, and cannot shot F35s or the Super Hornets, due to the stressing of Composite panels. so if they were EMALS as that is what was the design. you would have a 5th generation Carrier shooting 3rd gen aircraft.

            Don’t understand the constant desire for CLAPTRAPS. its 2022 not 1945.

            and the UK Carriers are designed to fit within a capacity gap.

          • I assume you’re asking “why Cats&Traps” – I’ve answered above: STOVL increases complexity & therefore cost; often decreases range, payload and speed too. It’s a proveable fact that F35C is superior to F35B.

            You think anyone is going to make a 6th gen STOVL? You think Crowsnest is the equal of Hawkeye? What are we going to do about air-to-air refuelling? Or COB? The only option for the last 2 is V22. You seen the price tag on those? It’s all compromise & more expense – we save money on the build & spend more in the long run. Have you examined the cost per flying hour of F35B? Have you ever compared this to F18 or navalised Typhoon or Grippen or F35C?

            USS Ford is expected to deploy later this year. Everything is tested & working now. “Cannot shot F35s”… “Composite panels”?? Sorry, what!? Do you have any evidence of this? https://seapowermagazine.org/admiral-on-emals-and-aag-programs-it-works/
            I also said “EMALS (or similar)” – i.e. doesn’t HAVE to be that particular system.

            You’re welcome to have your opinion & I totally respect people saying launch & recovery tempo may be better or ski-jump more reliable or pilot training is easier to maintain etc. but “Claptraps” – You haven’t actually given a reason apart from some nonsense about composite panels. And saying what year it is is an asinine argument. If they’re such a bad idea, why has China just launched their new carrier with cats & traps? Why does France operate one & plan to replace it with another?

          • Merlin’s were from the existing fleet and still suffering from Stress Fractures, within the Composite sections. Due to the load of the Baggie in the airflow and pure fact Composite while very strong, doesn’t like constant flexing.

      • The new STOL-enabled Sky Guardians don’t exist. All we’ve had was an announcement that GA was starting to work on them. We’ve had a similar announcement from IAI about the Heron. If that’s the Eitan, sometimes referred to as Heron TP, it could well be a better fit than the Reaper family, not least in terms of cost.

        I don’t know what Vixen will be now Mosquito has been swatted, but it looks like Leonardo are in the frame for Proteus.

    • Gosh why would we use our incredible top end and highly expensive ASW rotor asset for ASW work when we can strap a radar to it and us it a a less than top end AEW asset, then Spend a load of time and money developing a drone based ASW asset to replace the brilliant ASW rotors we have used as AEW assets.

    • That was already covered in the infographic the RN released some time back. Drones will take that role allowing those Merlin to go back to ASW.

    • The search element of ASW is better done by drones which can remain airborne for many hours – a Merlin / drone team is much more effective than a Merlin alone. Also can work with Wildcat, drone searches and Wildcat delivers the torpedoes. AEW is also being investigated, but a fixed wing drone platform will be better than rotary, as they can have much greater altitude and thus a wider field of vision for the radar. Tethered drones offer a method for making ship’s radars more effective too, by raising the mast height and increasing radar range.

  4. That’s a very big and expensive shopping list the UK armed forces have made up these last few days.

    Not that it isn’t needed; it is. But I do wonder how we’re going to pay for it all. Perhaps this is the MoD seeing the current political weaknesses and sticking in the oar to get some much needed funding out of politicians?

    • I guess raising it in the present risk level is a big motivator though as Govt funds are scarcer than a usable Aj-x presently equally they will need all the pressure they can exert to get it esp if PM Truss insists on cutting taxes. Equally being a cynic I can’t help but feel talking big with all the nebulous language to promote post Brexit Britain to cover whatever, if anything actually results later has some political impetus too.

      Look what’s happened with Mosquito promoted heavily (even the name chosen oozed pr weight) when it’s deemed useful and then later on in a footnote out of the blue allowed to whither without any real explanation beyond more nebulous language that such capabilities are still at the forefront of planning. We have no idea if it’s cancellation was the correct decision, a change of focus, a delay or cost related and what future work under LANCA to compensate they refer to means though I’m sure we get a new improved concept probably named Hornet eventually. Though I doubt anyone has a plan as to what direction they are now headed. Indeed we hadn’t really got to a point where we knew what Mosquito was going to be, I thought that the project was about defining that requirement indeed. So whatever is said now on projects to a degree seems to be for show certainly on the political side, if rightfully an attempt on the part of the forces at least, to detail something of what they will need ie aspirational as it stands leaving any actual capability nebulous for years to come when their Masters have to make decisions.

    • I think maybe they are betting Rishi Is out. Does he understand defence or the UKs position? He stopped an increase in defence spending. Madness.

    • The previous uplift.

      Go and follow Gabs Twitter feed ) if you don’t already ) he’s highlighting lots of goodies coming up for the Army too with billion plus funding streams.

  5. The RN has well acknowledged expertise hunting subs. Would moving to unmanned platforms as part that diminish these skills? Are a lot of these skills mostly on the ship and thus unaffected? I ask because I have no idea how the whole system works.

    • Think of this as generally improving what’s already there, it’s just adding to the sensor ‘mass’ and producing more information over a larger area than would be possible with a single helo.

      It’s a great step in the right direction.

      • Keep these simple with no onboard processors or dipping sonar and reduce the size and unit/operating cost compared to the merlin. Maybe team 1 or 2 with a single Merlin to increase the area where bouys can be dropped… the unmanned platform(s) act as a comms relay to send the buoy data to the merlin where the processors and asw operators are. If there is a contact the merlin can close and dip then Prosecute. The unmanned can have or get extra torps in case required.

    • The RN has three areas of skilled operators in ASW, SMs, Warships (ASW T23) and Helicopters (ASW Merlin’s). Any data a unmanned platform gains from a sonobuoy will have to be sent to a manned receiving unit for analysis/interpretation. They will not replace crewed assets just yet, but augment them.

  6. Is it just me that thinks this is a waste of money.

    Leonardo either produce a helicopter that meets the requirement and we buy it, or we go for the fire scout and adapt it.

    this £60m could buy 30 Schiebel 100s, which could be used now, especially on the rivers and t23’s.

    Time to have jam today – we should buy ff the shelf unless it’s a truly strategic capability which this isn’t.

  7. Everything is going the way of Nintendo/PS5 etc sit down strapon your VR headset and play with fullsized toys 🙁 the deck foot print of these larger asset is what concerns me. Yes a T-26 with its big mission bay probaly has internal space to store couple plus a Merlin but from my interpruttion of pics you wouldn’t be able to launch without the Merlin being aloft and vice versa. Would make good asset for T 31 fitted with ASROC to provide litteral ASW

  8. MoD has ordered so many prototype aircraft in the last couple of years its starting to feel like the mid 20th century again!

    Mosquito (Cancelled) – Project Vixen
    Fresh competitive flyoff – Project Vixen
    Tempest Demonstrator
    Hypersonic Demonstrator
    Unmanned ASW Helicopter demonstrator
    Drone swarm demonstrators – Project Thor
    Zephyr ultra-long endurance drone (also ordered by US)
    Rail Launched; QinetiQ Banshee Jet 80+ – Project Vampire
    Malloy T-150/T-400 cargo drones
    Malloy T-600/Windracer heavy cargo drones

    All of these within the last couple of years, go back a decade and you had Taranis and that was the first prototype aircraft ordered in decades, followed by the joint Taranis/Neuron successor which after greenlighting the MoD failed to pony up its share of funding for when the invoices started arriving and left the French to carry on with alone.
    About the only aviation sphere up until 2018 where it felt like the UK was pushing the tech boundaries was missiles.

  9. Something like this could be very good if paired with an ASW manned rotor asset, but on its own less so. May be if you could develop a pairing with a wildcat, clearly the wild cat would need some form of ASW station to manage the data from the autonomous vehicles sensors and also launch the attack. As long as all our escorts could take the wildcat + drone package.

    • Have they even finished adding the tactical data links to the Wildcats yet?

      This statement in DE&S’s magazine in May this year suggests not. (Yes, they have a magazine.)

      … [Wildcat’s] capability will be significantly increased over the next few years with the addition of a secure Tactical Data Link, further enhancing connectivity across the battlefield.

      As for an ASW station, I think you are dreaming.

  11. This is something that has been mentioned by myself and a few people on here and Navy Lookout before, so glad to see we weren’t completely crazy thinking it was a good idea!
    Assuming this is a Leonardo analogue to the MQ-8C, which small utility chopper are we expecting to be modified into a drone? Going for similar size to the base Bell used for the Firescout, I’m guessing at an AW109? Makes for a much cheaper and easier route to a capability- which I imagine shoudl be atainable for £60M.
    For me, ASW plus Martlet are key offensive capabilities for it. As has been discussed further down, AEW might be a step too far for a smaller unmanned platform, and I’d like to see a tilt rotor in that role to take advantage of the greater operational ceiling and endurance.

  12. Excellent news, assets like this we need in the hundreds. In the event of a large scale conflict we need to own the north Atlantic

    • I would like to see a production HUAV with composite construction, folding rotors and tail, able to be reconfigured to carry various sensor/ combat loads and enough endurance to stay aloft for 8 hours.

      It needs to strike the right balance and be affordable, mission capable and as small as possible when folded.

  14. Press releases | Rolls-Royce – Rolls-Royce and Safran partner on propulsion for next generation future combat programme

    Rolls Royce and Safran have signed a joint partnership to jointly produce a new subsonic engine for MBDA for use on the subsonic stealth variant of the FC/ASW (described in the press release as cruise/heavy anti-ship). My bet is this would be based on the recently announced Orpheus jet engine to give an extreme long range compared to traditional rocket motors as RR unlike Safran dont really do rocket motors. The article also refers to the bi-lateral approval in Feb for the development of two FC/ASW weapons. (see below)

    Future Cruise and Anti-Ship Weapon FC/ASW Program Reaches New Milestone – Naval News

  15. Way back in 2011 QuinetiQ and Northrop proposed a Gazelle conversion based on MQ-8 systems. Surely this would be a cheaper option?

  16. Off topic, according to Navy Lookout it seems that RFA Argus is to be converted to fulfill the LSS role. She’ll be 50 by the time she pays off it seems..!

    Cheers CR

  17. Would not n airship such as projected by Hybrid Airship Vehicles be a more practical option for long duration submarine tracking?

    • Yes for endurance and carrying capacity but a Speed of 80 knots (with no headwind) means it wouldnt really be able to reposition/cover ground any faster than a ship and would be highly vulnerable to bad weather.

      Also Russian submarines always carry a dozen shoulder launched SAM’s for air defence and it would be very vulnerable nevermind if submarine launched anti-air missiles become the norm in future.

      • Tracking a foreign nation’s submarine is not a hostile action tan[amount to an act of war, but firing a missile at a flying vehicle would be. If a foreign power’s submarine did attack, it would then be a legitimate target for reprisal. As for the speed of an airship versus a submarine, it is likely an airship could keep pace unless hampered by adverse high speed wind. A fleet of airships could effectively track subs for longer periods than a drone and could call for a unmanned drone only when unable to keep in contact. A greater number of airships with a smaller number of drones woul probably be a cheaper and more effective solution.

        • Look up how much an airship costs then get back to me, I believe the prototype back in 2013 was $30m but they are quoting today $50-100m, you then have the cost of constructing the storage hangers.

          And its not so much the keeping pace as scrambling to reach a search area, the airline that has bought 10 to fly Barcelona to Palma Majorca (distance 126 miles) is quoting journey times of 4.5 hours.

      • In a war situation yes, but so would any air vehicle be vunerable. However to launch shoulder launched missiles, the sub first needs to surface and that gives the other side time to take it out. Its the same for any sub hunting, if the sub gets into range of a ASW frigate before the frigate spots it, then the sub can sink it using torpedoes and same in reverse.

    • HAV have gone green to the point that I doubt they can get the required speed for military applications any more, and as WatcherZero pointed out above, the price is too high to get “some”.

      Perhaps it’s worth incubating airship technologies for miltary use: both hybrid and variable, but we are some years off a viable solution.

  19. Will pilots be required to “drive” the unmanned units. If so, then nothing is freed up but a helicopter without a pilot. The unmanned helicopter ides has been hanging around for years. Look up “DASH” a U.S. Navy version in the 60s.

  20. Is it just me or are we starting to over extend regarding numbers of ‘new’ projects. I think there needs to be a more realistic approach regarding the balance between ‘off the shelf’ and bespoke options – or we could become like Russia.Develop loads but can’t afford to produce them all.

  21. Anyone remember the old US QH50 DASH helicopter drone that carried two AS torpedoes? Not exactly a success, but then drone technology has really come on since then……

  22. I think this is for the Proteus requirement. Just to keep things clear in my own mind, I think there are requirements for between eight and ten ship-operated UAV drones to identify between now and 2030.

    Fixed wing (FWUAS):

    Puma – lightweight recon, no radar, EO/IR only. Hand launched. In operation.

    Vampire – threat simulation/training, command node and ISR. Ramp launched. Banshees currently in test. IOC ? Unknown AEW radar (could carry 50kg class but I’d expect 25-30kg class, I-Master, Gabbiano TS20 or single-antenna Osprey 30).

    Vixen – Loyal wingman. Was to be a development of the cancelled Mosquito programme, now uncertain, Target IOC 2030. 

    Rotary Wing (RWUAS):

    Sky Mantis – lightweight recon, no radar, EO/IR only. Small quadcopter. In test. IOC?
    FTUAS – find and track Fast Inshore Attack Craft (FIAC). UCR for the Gulf put out in 2020 (urgent, so it’ll only take two years to decide which drone). Probably in the 200kg class (Camcopter, AWHero, Skeldar). IOC 2024?
    Proteus – medium/heavy rotary for ASW and surface find (not attack).

    Other capabilities:

    Maritime Intra-theatre lift (MITL) – entry payload 100kg; MVP 200kg; Stretch 300kg; range entry 5nM; MVP 10nM; Stretch 50nM. 
    Maritime Inter-theatre lift – entry payload 50kg; MVP 75kg; Stretch 125kg; range entry 150nM; MVP 300nM; Stretch 550nM 
    AEW – Crowsnest replacement IOC 2030ish
    Organic Tanker – not a stated priority, although MQ25 Stingray and tiltrotors have been discussed.
    Swarmers – I have no idea about these. If anyone’s been following their progress, it’d be nice to hear about them. Land-based ones are coming along, so perhaps the navy will adapt them.

    [entry is not viable but could be developed, MVP is minimum viable product, stretch is ideal.]

    Although Proteus was originally earmarked for MITL, the Navy has been grooming a couple of other contenders as part of it’s heavy lift challenge,. Malloy T-600 has carried 250kg, and there’s been a T-650 under discussion that would be able to take 300kg about 15nM, fulfilling the MITL MVP. There will be others.

    The other UAS being groomed is the Windracers Ultra, which has carried 100kg for nearly 550nM under good conditions, getting it nicely into the inter-theatre lift category.

    Vixen was supposed to handle AEW, but Navy Lookout has suggested Proteus might evolve to do that. I’m not sure that the 3-ton Leonardo vehicle will have the oomph for a better quality high-powered radar. The Merlin’s engines develop nearly ten times the power of a Fire Scout’s.

  24. In the article but subtlety missed by most, the PC phrase ‘Uncrewed’ as opposed to ‘Unmanned’. The future term according to an email last week.

  25. Makes me wonder if it was possible to give some AS capability such as dipping sonar and sonar boys. Maybe all the Wildcats could be RN and the army get something more suited.

    Or would the RN be better with Seahawk instead if Wildcat and the Puma replacement could be Blackhawk.

    I think UAVs are useful, but how do they really cope in non permissive airspace.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here