Engineers from major UK companies have teamed up to develop cutting-edge technologies for a new generation flying combat air demonstrator, which is expected to take to the skies within the next four years.

Industry experts from BAE Systems, Rolls-Royce, Leonardo UK, MBDA, and the Ministry of Defence (MOD) are working in collaboration with various British small and medium-sized enterprises to develop Tempest, the UK’s next-generation supersonic stealth combat aircraft.

The Flying Technology Demonstrator, which was first unveiled by the UK Government in July 2022, is being developed using a plethora of innovative digital techniques, transformative processes, and the acumen of the UK’s renowned defence industry. A new facility at BAE Systems in Warton, Lancashire has been central to this development. Test pilots from BAE Systems, Rolls-Royce, and the Royal Air Force have already clocked over 150 hours in a bespoke simulator at this facility.

BAE Systems’ say that their engineers employed auto-coding to produce safety-critical systems software in days rather than weeks. This has facilitated rapid evaluations of the flight control systems during complex flight manoeuvres. The simulator captures crucial data on the aircraft’s handling and performance, years before its maiden flight.

Additionally, engineers have been conducting aerodynamic engine testing. They’ve used advanced manufacturing processes to create an engine duct that’s uniquely shaped to decelerate the air from supersonic to subsonic speeds at the engine face. “The intake has fewer moving parts than a traditional fighter jet design, enhancing the aircraft’s stealthy design,” and the tests were performed at Rolls-Royce’s site in Filton, Bristol.

Ejection seat trials have also been conducted in collaboration with UK crew escape specialists, Martin Baker. Engineers from BAE Systems led these trials, utilizing a rocket-propelled sled that reached speeds in excess of 500mph.

Richard Berthon, Director Future Combat Air for the MOD, said, “The Flying Demonstrator programme is a remarkable effort to design and build a supersonic stealth jet that will prove integration and develop our national skills, while providing data and learning in support of Tempest entering service by 2035.”

Neil Strang, Tempest Programme Director at BAE Systems, stated, “It’s now 40 years since our people led the demonstrator aircraft programme which gave birth to Typhoon and the work we’re doing today is another once-in-a-generation opportunity to write the next chapter in aviation history.”

Conrad Banks, Chief Engineer at Rolls-Royce Defence Future Programmes, commented on the aerodynamic testing, saying it “has been invaluable in several ways. Not only has it validated complex digital techniques and models, but it has fostered highly collaborative working practices between the BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce teams.”

These novel technologies and collaborations aim to test key aspects of next-generation combat air design, as well as hone the skills and tools necessary for the development of Tempest through the Global Combat Air Programme, which involves the UK, Italy, and Japan.

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

76 COMMENTS

    • There is 0% chance of it being in front line squadron service in 12 years.

      Typhoon: First flight to in service – 13 years
      F-35: First flight to in service – 12 years

      • I think this may progress much faster. Tech is helping speed things up where in the past it made it over complicated.
        Only time will tell but as the article said things like auto coding have cut what took weeks down to days.

        • I agree.

          Also, Typhoon was deliberately slowed from the BAE2000 demonstrator. And then sent multinational. There was a real sense of ‘what are we buying this for?’ If was end of Cold War etc so there was zero urgency and as far as anyone could see Tornado was just fine.

          F35 got too complex for its own good with massive project teams and three very different variants. Small is beautiful. Small is agile. Small is fast.

          Tech is different now – much more compact electronics and power generation.

          Build it big with huge power and load margins and get it flying.

      • A lot of key technology advancements have been made with those aircraft that can be further developed and implemented in a shorter time. The Typhoon’s new AESA radar is probably also going to be incorporated into the fighter if it is going to be superior to the F-35’s. A lot of options from industry to speed up development, less time needing to actually research and develop those technologies for the aircraft. Of course a lot of R&D is involved still but a lot less time is spent and can be focused on new technology to make the fighter truly 6th Gen.

      • I will not claim you are wrong time will tell but everyone involved in modern jet design is emphasising that new generations of aircraft are being designed far more flexibly in particular as a digital twin and with modularised software which is generations ahead of what was used both for Typhoon and F-35. Indeed F-35 has itself been much of the reason that the way software for new aircraft conceptually changed throughout because of the problems encountered in that programme. One factor that I think tends to illustrate the fundamental changes since the being the whole separation between the software that flies the aircraft from the software that operates weapon systems which seriously simplifies changes to weapon fit and the time taken to incorporate them which presently means all of it has to be re checked and thoroughly tested before being passed safe to re fly.

        So even though one should never make presumptions about complex systems there is great expectation at least that development will be quicker than previous generations of aircraft and the increasing use of Ai will only help in this regard hopefully in the coming years. Equally a lot of the delays in Typhoon were political, rather than technical, while some of the technical hold ups like the single rather than twin tailplane were themselves results of political circumstances and financing being released.

        • The real problems with international joint programmes is that every design decision has to be taken back through the participating Nations and run through their own approval process. It only takes one Nation to come back with a question or suggested change and everything related has to be put on hold whlist the issue is debated in multiple forums and a decision eventually emerges. This is especially true where the issue runs counter to a National policy or objective. All of this takes time, months not weeks to resolve – ask anyone who worked on the Typhoon or Tornado or Atlas programmes. The scale of the problem reduces a little as the organization beds down and partners develop a way of working but on Tempest most of the partners are not used to closely working together and shareing sensitive data. Also the scale of change on Tempest is 100% of the design so given the above, its difficult to see the programme holding its schedule (even when it is baselined). Because of this I think “Typhoon like” development timescales are likely on Tempest.

          Additionally there is the Political factor which cannot be dimissed. Costs will escalate and each nation will go through changes of adminsitartion at some time and in these challanging times where budgets are under very close scrutiny its almost certain that delays will be encountered/introduced by a reshaping of budgets just as it did with Tornado and Typhoon.

          One other observation for the longer term is that with Typhoon, it has been possible, because of its size, to morph it into a passable smart bomb carrier to mitigate in part the the demise of Tornado and distraction of the small number of its replacement the F35B to Carrrier ops. With a highly agile small stealth fighter design it will be very difficult to carryout a similar exercise and its range could be questionable.

  2. AI robot will get ejection seat, I struggle with the hybrid manned / unmanned concept. ability to do both reduces the ability of the aircraft

    • I think it’s true that if you set out to design each option from the outset as a stand alone product technologically there would (at least logically) be less compromises to be made. I would suspect that would be more true of an unmanned system than a manned system however as so much of the technology going into a new manned platform to support the pilot would not dissimilar to that needed in an unmanned platform so while an unmanned platform would indeed be compromised by adding a pilot for obvious reasons adding unmanned capacity to a manned system is almost just an extension of the technology incorporated anyway and mostly exists in software.

      The fact is it’s really too early to build a completely automated system to do the job presently being asked of Tempest (there are political, ethical as well as the technological aspects involved) so it would be a very brave decision to decide to remove the pilot from the equation from the outset even if when it enters service the logic might well be different by then. I think the choice of optionally manned is therefore the right one as the only other logical option of unmanned, seems too high a risk as things stand even if by 2035 views might have changed due to concurrent technology. Just look at self driving cars the hype was ridiculous, some talking of it by early twenties when it was never possible in terms of level 5 by at least the thirties. You can talk about ‘unmanned’ but one has to analyse what is meant by that sort of phrase because with cars and self driving level 2 and 3 is nothing like level 5 which is probably what most people associate with the general term and there is no guarantee that will ever be truly achievable in any foreseeable future despite the promises.

    • Still in early days of cooperation, they only signed it off last December, so there are teams studying all manner of how their proposal and ours can be brought together though there was already some overlap anyway. However I doubt that actually has a lot of effect on the design of the demonstrator as thankfully the engines will be fundamentally the same already and Bae and RR had already been charged by the Japanese last year to design the aerodynamics incorporated into the airframe that relate to those engines ie intakes etc, which is an area mentioned in this article is under test already. How close the two aircraft otherwise become will no doubt be devised over the next year or so and incorporated as it progresses. I’m sure the Japanese will likely produce a demonstrator too at some stage.

  4. Would we not be better to buy off the shelf….
    We will order 150 and end up with 25 really expensive planes… Ajax any one.

    • Nope. This is much more about just having airframes. All the design work, systems, testing etc etc is valuable skills that can be used across other projects.
      Any money spent in the U.K. gets kept in the U.K. through tax, wages spent etc.
      The U.K. gets a system it actually wants that meets its requirements.
      And finally there is no aircraft system that meets the U.K. requirements available now.

      • Well said, people often do not get the implications of decisions like that, certainly Labour Govts in the 60s sadly.

    • It’s also not just the U.K. that is buying the aircraft. Italy and Japan are also in the program. If successful other countries will want some also.

    • The project which shall remain nameless was an attempt to bend an off the shelf hull from ASCOD to meet highly specified bespoke requirements. Tempest is primarily a technology accelerator project that should lead to an initally loosely specified end product. International collaboration means Tempest can’t fall too far into the trap of overspecification.

    • Off the shelf from who? F-35 is hardly cheap or a great example to follow where despite being a level 1 member we are well down the line for incorporating our needs. There is also the bigger picture this in with the Japanese offers massive opportunities for two in many ways similar Countries not only on this but to work together on all manner of technological projects. It means Bae doesn’t go off to become a US headquartered Company any time soon, it keeps RR in the high technology zero engine military market and keeps their suppliers in business and a whole technological sector active and at the forefront of World capabilities. It’s pretty much at the core of the UK high tech sector so much of which has been lost and much of what remains is reliant upon those two Companies leadership role as does the sector itself. It’s no coincidence that F1 companies overlap in technology and indeed as the number 3 in the World in the Ai business presently you can bet much of what they do will be directly or indirectly linked to these companies and sector. So in the end it depends upon what value you put on the wider implications of funding this or buying off the shelf.

      Just as an aside and as an example of just how wide these matters can go, and the vision required, as someone from the creative industry, itself one of the World leading sectors in this Country and why so much film business is done here, much of that success, including cinema/tv graphics, advertising and games, came out of the influence of the 80s Quantel business which itself came out of the military hardware and software produced specifically for training pilots on simulators.

  5. “Richard Berthon, Director Future Combat Air for the MOD, said, “build a supersonic stealth jet that will prove integration and develop our national skills, while providing data and learning in support of Tempest entering service by 2035.”

    A few thoughts spring to mind.

    Now why does no one believe you on that date?

    Where are Labour on this? Helloooo, do you have any position you can state on Tempest and Defence in general?

    Is the MoD budget for “developing our national skills” or is it procuring affordable kit in the numbers needed? To me that reads that, again, the MoD budget is primarily there to keep the UK defence industry ticking over, with the military getting the small numbers of what it comes up with.

    And yes, I know that a sovereign defence industry is vital, jobs, profits, reliable supply chain, knowledge, and so on, and I support it.

    And then we all moan when the end products are so small in number, the MoD is skint, and cuts are made again to balance the books. The never ending cycle.

    There has to be a balance introduced somewhere. All these multi billion uplifts these last few months are primarily going on Tempest and SSNR, so BAES, Warton, Barrow, Raynesway.

    What will the military actually get out of all of this? I’d guess another 7 SSN to replace Astutes, or even 6. Still way short of what is needed. And before anyone suggests they will be a dozen or more for the RN and says I’m pessimistic, I just need to look at every program over the last 30 years when numbers proposed slowly but surely drop due to finances, ideology, and politics.
    This expansion is due to politics and also to provide for the Australians as part of AUKUS.

    Tempest? Maybe, at a guess, 50? Considering what has been spent to get to 48 F35B so far? Serving alongside drones and the F35 fleet. So RAF jet numbers around 100-120 plus drones.

    Not really any different to today numbers wise, just more modern. So, if we are alive in 2035, we can still be here lamenting the low numbers.

    • Procuring only 50 seems horrifically low considering it’s a national programme with only one other partner. Yes Italy is participating but I’m not optimistic on their purchase number after they splash on 90 F-35s. I would presume the high R&D costs would lead to 100 being not much more expensive than 50, so I am slightly more optimistic than you on that front.

        • DM, it depends on the politics, security situation & money. That means 50 to 150 & all stops inbetween.

        • I think he is writing off Italy as a partner, so Japan is left as one of the two. Personally I see others joining or buying, S Arabia have already shown interest but a bit iffy politically at present to progress presently. Who knows, Poland might want in eventually and Sweden is still hovering.

    • Labour have said they support Tempest and AUKUS (at the parliamentary level), but in the same presentation heralded strong defence ties with Europe. It came to light just a couple of weeks back that data is being shared with the European project. Like you say we need to save money and political parties like to oppose and change direction irrespective of the merits, I won’t be surprise to see GCAP and FCAS merge especially if there’s money to save. Its good to watch the TSR2 documentary from time to time to remind us how dumb politicians are 🙂

      Looking at what been said by Healey I think the next government will do a big shakeup and refocus on Europe. The Tories are showing commitment to these projects and capabilities because they will be able criticise the cuts once in opposition.

      • Exactly. “At the parliamentary level” is always the elephant in the room isn’t it.

        We await the answers.

      • This nonsense about merging is constantly repeated by people who seem to be living in some fantasy world where the French work with everyone else and are happy to share!

        • I’ll be clear I’m not promoting the merger, I want UK to have sovereign capability. I just don’t believe the political appetite will remain.

          Remember it was the French not us who ended the last cooperation on 6th gen fighter. We were part of the initial project.

          The FCAS concept was developed in the frame of the ETAP European Technology Acquisition Programme that was started in 2001 as a co-operation between Germany, France, Great Britain, Italy, Sweden and Spain.

          summary for 2010.
          https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/742833/UKFR_EquipmentCooperationA5.pdf

          The reality cooperation with the French is happening.

          • So two salient points. Firstly, with the Japanese on board why would we need the French? Secondly, chances are the German/French deal will come to grief. The Germans will come over to us and the French will go it alone.
            People seem to forget that the U.K. holds all the cards. We have 5th gen airframe experience, they do not. We have 5th gen engine tech, they do not. BAE is the only tier1 defence contractor in Europe. So I ask again why would we defer to Desault. Commentators need to put on their logical analysis hats and take off their emotional little England hats. The facts are what they are.

          • Nothing to do with hats or logic but everything to do with politics, where logic is irrelevant and immaterial what our capabilities are.

            Even if the Germans come over to us that’s still a merger and their requirements,, workshare and transfer technology requests must be accommodated, then the Spanish will need to decide where they want to be.

            You have you opinion, lets see well know in around 2 years which way this will go.

            Quoting the UK oppositions position.

            Our highest priority is the UK’s security in Europe, the North Atlantic and the high North – the NATO area. 

            The gung-ho promotion of ‘Global Britain’– which all too often means ‘anywhere but Europe’ – must end. 

            Which is why Labour will seek a defence and security pact with the EU, and new defence agreements with leading European allies like Germany. 

            The IR update must secure Britain as NATO’s leading European nation – which will be a Labour mission in Government.

            The first priority for Britain’s Armed Forces must be where the threats are greatest, not where the business opportunities lie. 

            Italy has muted on 2 occasions the programmes could logically merge for financial reasons.

            Italian Air Force Chief of Staff General Luca Goretti said on Tuesday that the United Kingdom-led Tempest program would eventually merge with the Franco-German Future Combat Air Systems program. Both programs intend to create a “system of systems” of manned and unmanned tactical aircraft, with a manned stealth aircraft at the heart of the systems.

            Speaking to parliamentary defence committees, Goretti said that Italy joined Tempest because it was felt that it could play a bigger role there than in the FCAS program. According to him, all countries involved in both programs were assessing technology options, as both Tempest and FCAS are currently in their conceptual phase. He continued:

            “But it is natural that these two realities will merge into one, because investing huge financial resources in two equivalent programmes is unthinkable.”

          • Two or three points. As Watcherzero has so cogently stated below, no points of intersection, because they are both called 6th gen doesn’t mean they have the same objective!
            Secondly, never ever known a General to speak nonsense based on their emotional preference, of course not!
            Thirdly, only France has a carrier landing requirement and only Dessault have an absolute need for project primacy (otherwise they become irrelevant in the fighter jet market), you do the math. The chances of a project merger are between 1% and 0%.

          • The other reason may be found with Safran. I don’t think that leaving the développent of new engines would make any sens. Regarding Dassault, well we all saw how went competition between Rafales and Eurofighter. It would not make much sens to let UK engineer make the airframe. The Tornado… a good way to convert air fuel into noise, but beyond that, let’s be honest, nobody can serioulsy say it was a fighter. In the bomber role, slightly better, but nowhere near the mirage. I hope engineers from UK will do better this time, since it is a last chance after 2 not very sucessfull aircraft (in house and in export markets). Wish you the best!

          • Not really sure of your point. But the French have generally proved that they don’t play well with others in the European defence fighter market. The Rafale has proved to be a competitive generalist fighter. The Typhoon is second on to the F22 in air superiority. The Tornado, according to professionals an excellent low level bomber, for which it was designed.

      • No crossover for merging, FCAS is developing a carrier capable short range interceptor. Tempest/GCAP are going for a long range air dominance fighter carrying a large payload of long range missiles.

        • At this stage there no reason why the requirements can’t change. TSR2 was vastly different to what we ended up with. Only time (around 2 years) will tell.

      • From John Healeys RUSI speech below. So Labour does have a position and most certainly its tilts toward Europe with more defence cooperation. There’s some good and some bad in that. With the Tories doing such poor job its more or less a certainty well have a labour government and a new priorities.

        ‘Which is why Labour will seek a defence and security pact with the EU, and new defence agreements with leading European allies like Germany. ‘

  6. Good to see some progress on Tempest. At all costs, the MoD must be kept away from this project. They will cause cost over-runs as they attempt to gold-plate the design, or delay it for years trying to prevent a gun from being included – or indeed, a new Blue Circle radar.

    Leave it to the private sector and it might come in on time and to budget

    • I had thought the Blue Circle radar was, if over budget and late, a successful programme that added a useful capability to the tornadoes? Then again, that time period is not really when I was of a reasonable age so I’d love to know more.

      • Blue Circle was the informal name of the concrete ballast that was fitted into the nose of the early ADV Tornados because the actual radar, the AI.24 Foxhunter, wasn’t ready yet. It was a play on the rainbow codes used for projects during the Cold War and the Blue Circle branded cement.

      • You may be mis-remembering some of the Ferranti ‘blue’ radars the famous one being Blue Vixen of course. Indeed I suspect ‘Blue Circle’ combined that traditional naming regime with the cement link to jokingly come up with that Blue Circle name for what was the vapourware at the time..

      • Blue circle was definately a thing. I was at Coningsby on 228 OCU working MCS when we got shifted up to Leuchars to make way for 5 sqn at foxtrot HAS site ( hope you guys appreciated the 3 weeks of HAS bull nights in prep for your arrival 😘😘. 229 OCU by that time had been hauling concrete for a good 18 months by then.

      • Sorry your comment is soo funny having said that it did add significant c of g calibration to what was other quite an expensive process of adding lead to the nose of a fighter by substituting much cheaper concrete in its place 👍👍

  7. Just a thought… why don’t they make the ‘chute canopy orange? It would show up in the water. I remember, in the original Top Gun (yes, I’m that old), when Maverick ejected, an orange dye was released as soon as they hit the water. Don’t tell Trump – he’ll want some…

  8. I believe the engine for the Tempest is based on the work by Reacion Engines in the UK. If so you can hang on to your hats because we are talking Mach 7 plus ^.^

    • No evidence for that statement. Some of the “pre-cooler” tech from Reaction Engines will be used (BAE/RR are shareholders), but the RE project is completely separate. So no it won’t and no it will not.

      • The ‘pre-cooler tech’ IS the Reaction Engines’ crucial factor, RE have said all along that it can be added to existing engines to transform their performance. You will note that I said “based on the work by Reaction Engines”.

  9. I was an engineer on the EAP and ACA projects which were early stages of what was to become Typhoon. The early vision was of a relatively cheap fighter but it inevitably became more complex with changes and added roles. Changes increase costs.The long lead time meant issues..ie obsolete electronics. Still great aircraft though. Would be good if latest project could-
    1. Design for world sales
    2. Agree spec with mod and mod stick to it. No changes allowed till after 1st flight. More like a rapid development of software. Drive down dev time. Make time to market a driver, like automotive industry
    3 design for upgrade later
    4 design to keep cost down with simplified design for manufacture.
    Best wishes to the current engineers. A great challenge.

    • A very interesting post.

      I agree – it should a large twin engine plane (RAF want that) with space to fit in the sovereign systems we gave in Typhoon and other under development.

      As you say it should be fast tracked and the multinational Gold Plate / Pork Barrel Committee kept at arms length.

      Perfection is the enemy of good enough – perfection eating budget and therefore frame numbers.

  10. The problem here is we’re looking at a technical Marvel Marvel but And trying to cut back on money I’m too cut back on money we’ve done this with the The tornado F3 and then and then it had to fly for 2 years because they couldn’t get the Fox hunter system to work so it flew with concrete in its nose. Now the Typhoon a very advanced a very advanced plane but we still didn’t give it the radar it needs to do needs to do yes we’re doing it but that’s probably because we didn’t build the McLaren it didn’t build the McLaren yes there was 100 and fifthere was 100 and 50 of these to be built that was going to Fitting between the Tempest. We seem to know how to suck money out of things people in charge Greece in charge Greece their palms and their bank accounts we should just do it looks like we’ve got another aircraft Carrier coming aircraft Carrier coming because how are you gonna launch the Tempest from the role navy I’m sorry I might not be up to the be up to the As some people in academically But that is lthere are plenty of bastards Who feel this country is run their way run they’re white we should get rid of them we should get rid of them and use our excellence remember we decided not to bear we decided not to build this mighty submarine and resources to the and we sobbed it to the Americans what was it called One of the perfect things going the Virginia class Virginia class we seem to sell everything but not keep nothing thank you

    • I mean literally WT actual F…… 😂 😂 😂 Who is doing this terrible trolling????? You should suffer capital punishment on the basis you have committed 1st degree murder of the English language 😂😂

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here