The Ministry of Defence has released detailed new information on Project NYX, a flagship Army programme to test autonomous aircraft designed to work alongside Apache AH-64E attack helicopters.
Published on 4 November, the Prior Information Notice from Defence Equipment and Support describes Project NYX as “a flagship opportunity for industry to partner with Defence and shape the next generation of autonomous systems.”
The project will deliver a Capability Concept Demonstrator (CCD) for the Land Autonomous Collaborative Platform (ACP), a key step toward developing uncrewed aircraft that can operate in complex, contested environments.
According to the notice, “the Army is seeking to develop an Uncrewed Air System (UAS) to pair with the Apache AH-64E attack helicopter as an ACP.” The aircraft will operate “in a highly autonomous, ‘commanded not controlled’ manner” to perform multi-mission tasks such as reconnaissance, target acquisition, strike, countermeasure defeat, and integration with launched effects.
The MOD says the ACP will “enhance the lethality and survivability of the crewed platform and do so with a smaller logistic footprint and lower maintenance burden.”
The document sets out an ambitious two-year schedule from March 2026 to March 2028. The first phase will focus on a rapid prototype, integrating autonomy software and uncrewed systems hardware with existing MOD platforms for testing.
The MOD says that the concept demonstrator will “prove the Land ACP concept” through collaboration with up to four suppliers in the early stages, followed by down-selection to one or more final contractors. The programme will use a “3-2-1” competitive model with multiple rounds of evaluation and demonstration events.
A key part of the notice focuses on autonomy development and system integration. The MOD expects suppliers to contribute to:
• “integration and interoperability considerations with existing MOD communications networks and hardware”
• “specification, development, assurance and management of autonomous behaviours”
• “support to MOD development of autonomy standards” and “certifications and regulatory approvals with both civilian and military regulators”
• the use of “methodologies such as Mission Engineering, Digital Engineering, Digital Twins, Modelling and Simulation, Scenario-Based Testing, Operational Design Domains, and System Models”
Human-machine teaming, modular open systems architecture, and cyber resilience are also identified as priorities. The MOD stresses that this phase “covers research and development activity only and the purchase at scale of hardware and software is not within scope.”
Reflecting the government’s wider Defence Industrial Strategy published in September, the notice says the Land ACP project “seeks to develop a UK sovereign capability, in particular for critical elements such as the design and development of autonomous elements.”
It adds that “the Authority may limit participation for Land ACP to UK companies (including Crown Dependencies and British Overseas Territories, and those companies who have a firm UK on-shore presence).”
Indicative milestones include:
• release of participation and procurement documents in late 2025
• contract award to up to four suppliers in early 2026
• a major capability demonstration in 2027
• completion of the concept phase in early 2028
The MOD describes Project NYX as “a flagship opportunity for industry to partner with Defence” that will help define the Army’s future approach to crewed-uncrewed teaming.
This follows an earlier stage of the Land Autonomous Collaborative Platform programme announced in August, when the Army held an industry event to discuss its initial concept for pairing uncrewed aircraft with Apaches. The new notice marks the transition from consultation to funded development, signalling that the Army is now ready to move into active prototyping and flight testing.
Oh good another concept demonstrator program that will cost millions and result in no new platforms
R&D does cost lots of money but if it ends up with something which can be quickly mass produced – i’m not complaining.
Trouble with uk is it usually spends the cash and results in nothing except jobs for the boys
But we must have jobs for the boys, how else will we attract the best high school graduates from Eton 😀
Well, this is one way of offsetting the miserably low number of Apaches we have. I assume the drones (one per gunship?) will be commanded not controlled from the Apache by the Co-pilot Gunner – will this task distract him from his current workload?
I’d imagine that the runner’s job will change largely from direct engagement with the Apache’s guns and rockets to drone command, with direct weapons use for either self defence or targets of opportunity at close range.
Gunner’s job, sorry.
Stupid autocorrect!
I agree, it’s clearly becoming marginal that helicopters of this nature can operate as originally envisaged. So at the very least they will need a drone(s) to reconnoiter ahead and ensure a level of safety and to gain target information prior to making itself visible. An ability to use the drone itself as an offensive weapon is thereafter desirable no doubt. So I suspect the gunner will increasingly take on that task over purely being a gunner. Might extend the usefulness of such platforms, (after all they can hardly be junked after such recent investment), whether it keeps them practical beyond that is up for debate.
Headline after headline in UKDJ of the UK trialling or ‘concepting’ (is that a word?), or planning, various pieces of equipment, while the rest of the world seems to actually produce them, buy them for their military, and use them. Two years recently for example for the RN to trial an existing, kit carrying drone! Frustratingly slow progress.
It’s quite intentional – avoids spending any real money and the powerpoints are fun to look at
Is it coincidental that so many of these programmes seem to have significant dates around the time of the next Presidential Election? Depending on how events there go (as well as Ukraine, though I fear less so) many of these programmes will move ahead and gain new investment or quietly be forgotten. To be honest this is not dissimilar to more general economic commitments from Countries World wide who are ludicrously commuting ridiculous, unsustainable and frankly often delusional sums to keep the King in the White House Palace happy for now so he can save face and look strong as he builds his image upon short term sand.
Headline after headline in UKDJ of the UK trialling or ‘concepting’ (is that a word?), or planning, various pieces of equipment, while the rest of the world seems to actually produce them, buy them for their military, and use them.
OK, serious question for Helicoptor hexpurts, so this headline, Is it a Ship, a Helicoptor or a Gunship.
Looks like a Helicoptor Gunship to me or are they actually called Ships ?
Confused from Cambridge.
One of those niggling questions, minor but nags at your mind, was that deliberate (to fit the space) or simply in error.
Now more boringly the question goes back a few hundred years to ‘ships’ becoming associated with cargo and movement including humans and thus focused on a ‘large vessel’ (not always ‘big’ in English mind adding to confusion) of some nature controlled by humans (there’s a new change incoming here no doubt) and thus much more generalised when new modes of transport came along to which it became adopted, and where the general offshoot of ‘shipping’ things comes from. So yes as you say what derivative do helicopter pilots view their specific charge. Probably various I suspect as all apply generally.
Only learned the above when the question came up about the etymology of boat and ship, which is pretty obscure and nuanced in itself.
Good in theory, a big budget too compared to RN and RAF Drone programs.
Well it is Army isn’t it?
We seem to be on a roundabout of endless trials and development drone programs that is literally just spin from governments so they don’t have to order anything that costs real money!