The new project comes after Project Mosquito and Project Alvina were cancelled and is a follow on to the LANCA programme.

According to a Prior Information Notice published by the Ministry of Defence:

“Following the lessons learned from Project MOSQUITO, Project ALVINA, and wider Uncrewed Air Systems (UAS) experimentation, the Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO) and Air Capability are considering how to best exploit Low-Cost UAS to support the Combat Air Force Mix as part of follow on LANCA activity and wider Uncrewed System Development.

The Authority will be holding an engagement day on Tuesday 29th November 2022 to inform Industry of Air’s intent for additive/adjunct capability in the Combat Air Force Mix, and to provide Industry Partners with the opportunity to consider how they could best contribute to Air’s intent within a subsequent R&D portfolio.

This engagement will likely be of interest to Industry Partners who specialise in any of the following: UAS design and manufacture, propulsion, systems integration, navigation, communication, Electronic Warfare (EW) payloads (active and passive), autonomy, command and control, airworthiness and certification.”

Back in June, the RAF Rapid Capabilities Office announced the cancellation of Mosquito, confirming it would not proceed beyond the design phase. The project was aiming to design of “loyal wingman” for crewed British combat aircraft.

Mosquito drone project swatted

The drone was due to fly next year.

Air Commodore Jez Holmes, head of the Rapid Capabilities Office, stated at the time:

“Through Project Mosquito and other experimentation activities the Royal Air Force has made substantial progress and gained significant value in understanding and harnessing a range of future uncrewed capabilities. Deciding to not proceed with the specific manufacturing technology demonstrator will not impact on the wider intent to build the most capable and cost-effective force mix possible, or the ‘Loyal Wingman’ concepts under investigation within the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) enterprise.

The programme remains focused on the post-2035 capability space, where integration through a system-of-systems approach has been a key requirement from the outset,” he continued.”

As Breaking Defence reported at the time, Holmes suggested the air service would “quickly launch activities to aggressively pursue the RAF’s unchanged [and] firm commitment to integrate advanced uncrewed capabilities into the near-term force mix with more immediate beneficial value.”

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

168 COMMENTS

  1. The west must learn how to deal with cheap drones in quantity & of variable quality – it is a problem in Ukraine already. All R&D is valuable. Set aggressive time limits in months not years or decades & create modular designs which can be quickly adapted. This seems to be where the UK are weak – we take too long to do anything. I am aware that there is probably stuff going on behind the scenes however there is a danger that smaller players might get the impression they might be nimble enough to out pace the lumbering giants.

    • Is this a cheap drone or a top end one? Large scale orders of cheap ones should be the priority, as we already have protector for the top end range.

      • Totally agree. It’s horses for courses really. To deal with the Iranian drones, for example, you probably only need an engine capable of propelling the drone to a speed of a few hundred MPH with fuel to loitter around and a machine gun. A sort of micro spitfire would do it😀

        • We built it 10 years ago, MBDA Fireshadow but David Cameron thought it was a good idea to cancel it while punching above our weight and something about a tail and teeth, also very clearly we would not be having another war.

          Another great one for SDSR 2010.

          • Yes well Cameron was not really in the real world. In my view MBDA should be blowing the dust off it. Drones are going to be a massive market for the big guys down to the one man and his dog outfits (slight exageration). Someone is going to make a shed load of money combating the Iranian drones with something based on a stripped down cessna, machine gun and some sticky back plastic.

          • Yep saving countless lives & protecting infrastructure. Another avenue of Russian attack closed off. I hope we learn the lesson.

          • It was a great classic.

            Cannot foresee a war we would be involved in in the next decade that would require an aircraft carrier….

            It made strategic foresight as much of an oxymoron as military intelligence…..

          • It occurred to me a long time ago that defence reviews are expensive wastes of time. If we wrote another and did the exact opposite, we would be in better shape.

      • Protector will be great but I can also see a role for bigger drones which can hang around on station to refuel aircraft, protect a carrier strike group etc. The key here is to design a range of kit which can lurk around, carry a range of loads etc. it would just be a matter of adapting the kit to meet the need.

      • I don’t think protector would survive at the top end for 30 seconds. It’s fine for counter insurgence work or maritime surveillance in a permissive environment but not much else.

          • That’s a complex equation as the Ukrainians have just said this is a game of chess. A protector would not be able to operate generally in a non permissive environment. But with liberal use of HARM type missiles and counter measures it might for a while but you only find out how long when you start losing them.

            Generally I reckon you need lots of varied cheap drones that will have a high mortality rate (lots of light arm developments/sights etc to counter these which the Ukrainians are claiming already are helping to kill 80%+ of them) and very sophisticated ones that you use very sparingly. In between ideally you need very modular and flexible types that can be quickly updated and modernised to counter, counter drone technologies. A very difficult balance methinks that will likely change quite quickly.

        • We do, but with limited budget and 2 failed projects (wasted money), we can’t really afford both. We should start with what we need most of and my view Ukraine war has demonstrated cheap light drones with explosives are a massive force multiplier, as just can’t reliably stop them with current tech.

          • Any proof of that, outside vague statements from the mod? If the projects were vaguely succeful they would have continued and morfed into a final solution, instead they were cancelled, indicating they weren’t viable.

          • That’s not the way it works! These were not prototype solutions but explorations of concepts. Technology demonstrators and research projects do not generally roll straight into production solutions. Think of these as modern day equivalents of the American “X” planes from the 1940s and 50’s rather than the Spitfire and Hurricane prototypes of the 1930s

          • I get what your saying but it doesn’t quiet add up to me. Its not like they were pure expermental, there was detailed info on what capability they would provide and when released, prior to them getting canned. If it was along the lines of the X planes, it would just have been discussed as purely that experimental to find what the tech could deliver.

    • Mark, when you say ‘deal with’ I assume you mean how to defeat drones?

      I read about anti-drone systems a few years ago when a rogue drone was buzzing Gatwick airport. Gatwick installed a system in Nov 2019 and Heathrow in Jan 2020. I googled anti-drone systems and came on a website listing the Top 10 systems – reference is: https://autojournalism.com/top-10-best-anti-drone-system-in-the-world/
      Previous to this were any number of conventional, non-specialised weapons that could be aimed against drones, but probably with a lower chance of success.

      The West is not in the R&D phase for anti-drone systems here. There are plenty of systems on the market.

      • If the west is not in the R&D phase it perhaps should be. A drone arms race is breaking out and we need to be at the forefront of that tech. I’m not convinced that the tech Gatwick bought would protect it against the Iranian drones in use today in Ukraine. Development in this area is moving at a pace and private sector companies will be part of the solution given encouragement from ther Government.

      • Mahlzeit,
        Regards anti drone tech, it is been reported that Moscow launched 3 Kh-59 cruise missiles at Odesa this morning lauched from a SU 30 over the black sea . Kyiv is claiming they were shot down over the water by Gepards.

        Nothing on video for the above, but there is this from a few days ago showing them having a go at what they claim were Iranian drones

        To be frank, I personally feel that the Ukraine with the weapons it has received is not doing so badly when it comes to taking out drones, yes some will always get through, but if the reports are to be believed (and I have no reason not to, in regards to many videos of shoot downs) then they are doing a lot better than Armenia did the other year. , of course the NATO supplied weaponary has helped.

        On that note on the 31st of Oct Moscow launched:
        55x Kh-101
         1x Kh-59
         22x S-300
         4x Shahid-136
         1x Lancet-3 UAV

        The interesting thing here is the 22x S300 missiles which is a lot

      • There is a fundamental flaw with the anti-drone measures taken up by both Gatwick and Heathrow. In that they are presuming the drone is radio controlled either through a mobile phone or a dedicated digital controller. With either of these it is relatively easy to jam the control signal with a higher powered one and take control of the drone.

        The problem comes with drones that a pre-programmed via GPS waypoints or use a satellite data-link. A pre-programed drone will ignore a RF jammer and the satellite data-link is encrypted. Unless you use a very highly directional RF jammer, you might be abkle to confuse the drone using pre-programmed coordinates, as it might loose the GPS signal. Similarly with the satellite data-link, you will have to use a highly directional jammer, unless you don’t mind the litigation side of things when you blank out the satellite comms link.

        A kinetic kill or capture is the surest way of disabling a drone.

        • Thanks for this. My point was that the civil sector is beyond the R&D phase and has fielded systems that now just need tweaking. There are militarised anti-drone systems in service too.

    • Too slow I think a snail would think so. I’m a cynic but are we sure this is not someone or people in the MOD getting a kick back from defence manufacturers to pursue another project that will go nowhere ? I hope I am horribly wrong !

      • Perhaps this should be a chance to inject some competition into the market. I doubt it is anything like a kick back far more likely to be as simple as it is easier to use established suppliers with existing contracts for work in that area. Exactly what you don’t want if you need value for money.

      • I was in the army for 34 years then worked at Abbey Wood for 2 years as a civvy contractor. The amount of corruption at MoD is little to none. I can only think of the Gordon Foxley case of 1981-84.

        • Well Mr Moore, I bow to your experience, I hope you are right. It’s frustrating that the MOD seem to waste a lot of money on projects that seem to come to nothing frontline. The problem is of course the MOD is probably going to have to make 2 -3 billion cuts. It will not be the nuke subs so the next big ticket item is Tempest ! Hope I am wrong again.

          • The waste in procurement is due to ineptitude in MoD and by contractors, changing concepts & threats, insufficient grip, interference by Treasury and politicians, short time in post of key players, etc etc.

          • Couldn’t agree more, the scrutiny on MoD/Industry contracts is tight, its requirement creep and poor specifications that drive the cost creep – not to mention some people who think that building a delay into a programme makes it cheaper, rather than the opposite. Experienced from both sides of the fence and a memorable but frustrating few years sitting on it!

          • Not insisting that a VSTOL VERSION OF THE TEMPEST was to be part of the program WILL COME TO HAUNT US LATER. The QE’s will be obsolete before the F 35 replacement is available

    • I agree with your statement ,that the uk take way too long to get things done from start to finishing products, they have two many things going on behind the scenes that are unnecessary and two much red tape and decision making men/woman who agrees not to agree which also leads to added expenses,

      • Look at the fitting out time for ships before they ever get near the fleet god only knows how much money is lost in this phase much of the job could be done as the Hull itself was be built

  2. Given that the Mosquito demonstrator was expected to fly at the end of next year, and was cancelled ostensibly to produce something with more immediate value, I’d hope any contracts that flow from this engagement won’t just be for another demonstrator, and that the intention to move ahead will see something more functional delivered, capable of being put into production.

    • No chance, we can’t put something in to the air without a proper design study and sufficient numbers of four letter abbreviations.

      You can’t just go out and buy something off the market, don’t be crazy. 😀

    • Good point. Amazing that we still only have about 20 x F-35Bs in service, and fewer than 20 pilots, if press report that I read is correct.

        • “It’s a shambles,” a former Royal Air Force officer said.
          Speaking to a committee of Peers, the defence secretary described the situation as “quite a challenge“, claiming that the deficit in pilots was also because the F-35 Lightning aircraft is new.

          With the first Brit flying one 12 years ago, not like it was unknown we were getting them…

          And WTF, Pilot training now taking up to 8 years!!
          What are the MOD and RAF playing at!

          • It’s been a very obvious smoke and mirror trick for years, spend on expensive hardware that is visible and cut everything else beyond the bone. When we were bombing libya the holes (lack of pilots, bombs, jets, etc) became public and quickly got forgotten about. The lack of training staff and gear doesn’t surprise me in the slightest.

          • Not a truer word said in jest…

            The severe shortage of trained personnel able to train others has been ignored for far too long…

        • I’ve been banging on about how slow the F35 programme is for the last two years and I invariably get shot down here by being told everything is alright. Twenty years is not a problem when your dealing with new technology!!!! Welcome to the fight.

          • The programme is slow but unfortunately it’s been set up that way and now we know the time it takes to train pilots and the problems with scaling that up it really shows the Forces aren’t going to get out of trouble anytime soon.
            Even if they recruit 100 pilots and maintainers etc today and could somehow train them all straight away it would be 6+ years before any of them could fly combat jets. How many would actually come out the end of training from the 100 is another part.

          • I agree with what you say btu the original set up if the problem don’t you think. It needed to be re assessed and speeded up but now…?

          • Everything and I mean everything is too slow getting from a dusty office at the MOD TO GET INTO SERVICE IS A JOKE lot of other nations have a clear picture of what they want, our. Whole approach to defence and equipment is done and hoc with both sides working against each other

          • I think it could be speeded up.

            There are a substantial number partly trained flying desks who would be delighted to do the flying jobs they wanted to do, applied to do and were accepted to do.

          • The MOD is not fit for purpose it should have the curtains drawn, the lights turned out, the doors locked and everyone in it sent home to ponder their futures.

          • MOD = Main Building or Bristol or SDA or…..I’m unsure what you are attacking.

            That it has been poorly funded – yes.

            That it was viewed as the go to department to balance budgets – yes

            That it has been asked to do a ridiculous amount of war with a declining amount of resources – yes.

            That it has had little clear direction as to the task – yes.

            That it has been lead, with the exception of BW, by buffoons with zero defence understanding – yes.

            The the services have all had various periods of terrible leadership in the equipment domains – yes.

            I could go on and on…..none of those make MOD bods useless just their jobs impossible…..when you take that lot together it us quite heartwarming that anything is ever achieved.

          • Again, do we need a fully qualified pilot to monitor the automatic release of a weapon from an aircraft they are not sat in?

            I say this because many of the actual release of air to ground weapon system is / can be fully controlled by the aircraft systems.

          • From a science / tech perspective you don’t need a fully qualified pilot.

            From the legal perspective you probably do because RAF are still a pilot centric organisation.

          • ”pilot centric organisation.”

            Perhaps, therein lies the issue…

            Nothing against the Pilots, but, it is almost 2023…
            With the tech we have, perhaps it’s time for the RAF to stop being pilot centric and move their focus!, evolve, for want of a better word…

            The Azerbaijan / Armenian conflict and now the Ukraine are showing that Smaller unmanned aircraft / drones are the safest aircraft for their crews over a defended battlespace.

        • HI Darren,

          Piloting any aircraft requires a lot of training, especially if it armed as SB points out.

          You also have to remember that the drones will be sharing airspace with civilian aircraft when on transit flights. That means the drone pilots will need to understand air law and ATC proceedures, even if they are not directly under the control of ATC themselves, as aircraft around the drone will be so controlled… I would also note any drones flying in UK or European airspace will be controlled by RAF / NATO military controllers I should think.

          You also have to consider that the drone pilot probably doesn’t have the same level of situational awareness as a pilot actually on the spot. That means they will have to have their own proceedures to keep other safe.

          All of which is a long way of saying drones pilot need a lot of triaining. It will be different, however, and as such potentially much shorter than an aircraft pilot.

          I would also such that the training courses for RAF pilot take so long because gap between courses. From what I have read over the years I suspect that much of the time taken in training aircrew if down to them having to sit around waiting for the next course to start..! Could be wrong, but…

          Cheers CR

          • I do see your point about piloting of drones, but let us not forget, we have Drones that are AI controlled (to a point) and are looking at complete AI controlled warfighting (loyal wingman) drones for the future…

            I understand what you are saying about gaps between the courses, however, allowing these gaps to grow to a point where students are facing 8 years to become effective in their chosen career is criminal.

            In my previous life as a DS in the RAF, these ‘inter-training gaps’ were monitored and reported on to ensure the students training was not adversely affected.

            It seems that the RAF has become too concerned about changing RAF rank titles to be all inclusive at the expense of their primary role as the airborne element of the UKs defence!!!

    • There are legions of spotty faced teenagers out there who. Spend hours a day flying computer games. That.might save money on training operators

  4. There’s a treasure trove of working drones being capture in Ukraine. The airframes obviously work, they get the payload from A to B. Get some of the these airframe to smaller manufactures so they don’t need to start from square 1.

    China has built its entire defence strategy on stealing tech, thus removing the need to decades of RnD and in some cases get ahead. We need to far less precious about how we move development forward.

  5. I’m always cynical that so much of this spending years on a project is just private contractors milking an extensive defence budget.

    2035?? Really? Can someone explain to me what exactly was wrong with Taranis?

    • Mate,

      Yes that 2035 date is way, way, way down the road.

      I think the ‘Loyal Wingman’ market will be pretty crowded by then.

      Maybe you Poms should join our MQ-28A Ghost Bat program here in Oz, hey?

      Cheers,

    • The main problem with Taranis is that it was world leading and the Americans did not have one.

      You will be well aware that MOD policy since the 70’s is to not have anything that may be considered revolutionary especially if the USA does not have some first.

      Also if we had just gone ahead and bought a Taranis derived drone we would not have had anything for the design studies to do. As you will be well aware we need those studies to make staff positions for officers to train in the RAF as we don’t have enough pilot training places. 😀

      • Taranis was a technology demonstration program, not a weapons system. The US developed, deployed and made operational its RQ-180. It didn’t need Taranis. Once again, you just don’t know what you are talking about.

        • You are spot on they were/are well ahead of us (efforts since the late 90s) yet still not operating such a vehicle even if efforts are still heading towards such a capacity eventually. Presently refuelling is the priority as other capabilities are not deemed quite ready or affordable and I don’t think Taranis is really a good use of funds just for refuelling.

          • Yes they have the same issue as us, pilots running the show who constantly find a need for pilots to keep flying the planes.

        • RQ180 is a spy drone, Taranis was a bomber and UCAV. If your going to try and be nasty to people atleast get your facts right.

          Taranis was a tech demonstrator but it could easily have been a prototype for a production system.

          • Correct, and with a greater wingspan than Taranis. They also developed Dark Star and Sentinel before it, and probably others.
            There is a good article on The Drive, War Zone, about the missing US UCAV. They have probably already been deployed Jim.

          • The work going in to MQ25 suggest to me they have nothing beyond tech demonstrators in the UCAV field. They certainly do have recon drones that are flying wings.

      • Hang on Northrop Grumman were winning AI awards for their similar drones over a decade ago so I don’t think Taranis was likely word leading as good as it and Baes similar efforts have looked. By the way Northrop Grumman are pretty pissed off that so much of their effort has still not been put into service.

        • I think you are confusing AI with pattern recognition and low level machine learning, as commentators on Chinese tech seem to. If you look up the no.1 AI company on the planet you will see that they are based in the UK.

          • Are they…is that the Oxford one…the one that was breaking the genome Deep Think or something?I thought that had been sold a couple of years ago…to Google?

          • Deepmind and yes they were sold to Google, but anyone in the industry knows they are still top of the pile and based in the UK. Nobody’s close. The difference between AI and pattern recognition/machine learning is that in AI you code the rules of the game and the AI works out the best solution, just like evolution, after millions of iterations. Machine learning, you give thousands of examples and the ML algorithm figures out the pattern of similarity. One is like chess and the other is like checkers. The Chinese are good at checkers, but call it chess and people believe them.

      • “The main problem with Taranis is that it was world leading and the Americans did not have one.”

        Do you sincerely believe that? Do you really believe that the US hasn’t had several classified operational (not tech demonstrators) flying around for at least a few decades now, that are years ahead of anybody else in terms of capabilities? Look up the still unacknowledged RQ-180 and that’s just one that they’ve allowed the public to glimpse. As the late Ash Carter famously said “The US never shows it’s best toys”

        • Yes but we all know about RQ 180 even though it’s super secret. The US may have a few systems kicking round but nothing in numbers and nothing that can be described as a UCAV.

          • Keep in the mind that the F-117 was operational, meaning flying missions for over a decade before it was unclassified. If history is any guide, whenever a program is unclassified, it’s because they have found something even more advanced to replace it.

      • Steady on Jim! Have a look at what is/ might be in the US Black Budget. RQ180 for starters.

        The BAE SPS at Warton which develop this stuff work closely with DARPA and other US aviation companies. Aviation tech is one of the areas we have a close liaison with them.

        They will have as good if not far better already. Otherwise, just what is flying out of Tonopah and Groom Lake?

        • Agreed and many times programs that seems to have hit a dead end and publicly cancelled are moved to the classified realm if they tech is promising enough.

          • ATA as a possible example.
            The Northrop YF23 was also said to have gone black, and a possible variant of it has an accident at Boscombe. ASTRA.

        • I don’t think you can assume that US always has better tech than UK.

          That was the case through the 80’s and 90’s when it was all about bespoke chips.

          Now it is more about software and it is easier to turn knowledge into physical prototypes quite fast with 3D printing a composites…….

          The trick will be to actually manufacture whole drones by batches in a spiral manner by doing this.

          Yes, it is seemingly a bit down-the-airfield-at-dawn-to-try-it but if you can fearlessly experiment things will move super fast.

      • The main problem is that it was a tech development platform, so was never going to be manufactured and deployed in the field.

      • How was it world leading? The US openly had programs like the x-47b landing on aircraft carriers years ago and has multiple stealth drones in service (rq-180 for example). Is blaming the Americans just a way for your politicians to avoid the blame?

      • And why we agree with buying the F 35 at a rip off price.th the same politicians that gave. The U.s 72 harriers for your marines at less than 22mill each

  6. Thank god they are doing a follow on program to LANCA, I’m not sure how they UK would get on without another program to follow on the follow on after the ……. Follow on program. But hopefully we can get some new Four Letter abbreviations and a couple of CGI images.

    Honestly I don’t know how people can serve in the upper ranks of the military when your faced with this level of nonsense.

    Do you think anyone involved in the follow on actually thinks there work might translate in to something or are they all in in the game.

  7. Rapid capabilities office. Lmao. Meanwhile the Turks fast becoming a drone superpower knock out cheap capable drones using off the shelf components while we dither and gold plate everything into eventual cancellation. 2035 what a joke.

    • Yep then buy foreign and lose out on a worldwide market, happened so often. Indeed we only ever seem to outdo others when directly in a wartime scenario and even Ukraine seems not to be that. Otherwise we would not have destroyed all our Rapier systems end of last year when it was already building and we hear we still haven’t moved to replace everything we have sent to Ukraine though contracts are in progress it seems, geez we would lose a bloody war in the time it takes for us to agree a contract.

  8. How long before this one gets canned too with nothing to show for the expense?

    We just can’t seem to make up our mind what we want.

    Perhaps that’s because the tech just isn’t there yet for the ideal option, which is an unmanned wingman.

    Perhaps we’d be better off focusing on cheaper more disposable systems that can be deployed in numbers.

    As things stand all we are doing is spending money with nothing to show for it.

    • I agree delays on wingman is understandable if it’s for tactical or technology reasons but no excuse whatsoever for cheap types we are seeing in Ukraine and beyond.

  9. Confused, is this a higher end replacement for mosquito or have they just learned how to cheapen it so we can actually get something up in the air?

    • The cancelled Spirit Mosquito was a demonstrator. That means it was never meant to be put into production, just prove the technology and hopefully boost the capability of the company. If we’re lucky this might mean they want to jump an unnecessary step and produce a prototype. Getting something in the air shouldn’t be an issue. Producing operational drones is where we stumble, especially to a price.

      LANCA was always supposed “affordable”.

      • Thanks, It looks bad when other nations seem to have no issues with this sort of thing and the US and Soviets were making prototypes in the 70s. Makes you wonder why aren’t we further along with this sort of thing as gets pointed out in Ukraine, we just look impotent in comparison.

    • There is an expensive programme in progress to find an algorithm to turn MoD gooblygook into plain English. This should be completed sometime in the post 2035 period by which time English won’t be plain as we know it now no doubt.

  10. OT slightly (though still in the realms of UAVs)it appears that Iran is sending more drones to Russia, a couple of hundred Arash 1 and 2. Still old, still piston engines but a slightly heavier payload! But it won’t last long as US int has stated Iran may be looking at attacking Saudi with drones etc to try to divert attention away from its current internal protests and its ongoing cluster fuck of a Government. That won’t last long however as Saudi and the US will take Iran apart! Interesting times with the Nazi and Jihadi crazies increasingly overstepped the mark and signing cheques their 80s reverse engineered military cannot cash.

    • The best thing the US/Israel or even Ukraine could do is hack Iran’s systems and provide protesters with names and addresses of the Basij members, this the grass roots power base in Iran and informants to the security services once they’re routed the regime will crumble.

    • If Benny is re-elected I would expect an Israeli attack on a few Iranian “facilities” soon. The approaches to the Lebanese for a peace treaty would allow Hamas to be dealt with on Lebanese soil. And the current civil unrest in Iran has a lot of western writing on it. My two pennorth.

      • No the unrest in Iran is all home grown, even though the Iranians want to try and pass it off as the work of foreign infidels. There’s unrest on a periodic basis in Iran, this is just the latest one. The long length of these is baked into the culture due to the practice of revisiting a grave 40 days later, something which helped to kick off the original ‘79 revolution.

  11. Sounds a bit like my dad when he told me when going back on fags “well I’ve proved that I can give them up so can do so when I have to”. We have proved we can design and build something so will do so sometime down the line when we have to. Like dad this seems to have happened multiple times without actual end product. Probably because they still can’t agree on what they want or can afford so push it down the line in a seemingly ever changing environment.

    I agree with others if this is a refocus on immediate simplicity it’s probably sensible but eventually we will need more complex wingmen to take risks that even f35s dare not take on or simply can’t due to range so as to extend that range. Let’s see if that more difficult decision ever gets made or we let others do it then simply buy off the shelf disadvantaging uk industry.

      • I remember when this first came out, we used to sit up and watch it over and over. I mean, until then no one had really been able to connect marvelvanes (regardless of copiticity) to a lunar waneshaft (ambifacient or otherwise) without causing at least some degree of sidefumbling. Even afterwards it always existed in the 0.1 percentile, but it effectively revolutionised the synchronisation process of cardinal grammeters. It basically revolutionised the whole industry overnight.
        😉 😉
        Thank god for copy and paste.

  13. Just steal the tech, we’re probably a decade behind in the drone field so just do what our enemies do hack the manufacturers and provide the data to UK companies.

  14. Oh great another drone programme. Just what we need. Loyal Wingman still hasn’t delivered any additional combat air to the RAF despite large sums of money spent on it. I know. I know R+D is costly and we learn from each programme but could someone please explain to me why we dont seem to deliver the frontline firepower and effect off the back of the large sums of money spent?

    • You do have to wonder given how quickly Ghost Bat has become a reality and the US are even casting an eye over its capabilities.

      • According to the drive.com, there is already at least one Ghost Bat in the US. The modular nose cone system allows different ideas to be trialed without affecting the base systems. Other countries will likely follow. Some may use the system but design their own nose cone payloads, or just buy a couple to play with & use that experience to build a better “Loyal Wingman”.

        It appears Boeing pulled out of the US Skyborg program to concentrate on the Australian cooperative ATS program. They obviously think they are onto something.

  15. Interesting to see Sky News report that the RAF is so short of pilots that they have insufficient to provide for the small number of F35s in service.

    • Nothing definitive, but here’s a few others that come to mind over the last few years:

      Proteus
      FTUAS
      Dare (tethered)
      Heavy lift (intra theatre)
      Heavy lift (inter theatre)
      Tempest (FCAS)
      Human-Machine Teaming
      Aether
      Sharman
      C-UAS (also C-sUAS SWS & EMI)
      MRUAV

        • All those are UK initiatives, although FTUAS is also a US acronym for a different drone. The UK one is “Flexible Tactical” and is due to be deployed on HMS Lancaster in the Gulf next year (the US one is “Future” something). Aether is currently being trialled in California by a US company (Sierra Nevada), but it’s for the MOD.

          Proteus will be the new Leonardo three ton rotary under development in Yeovil.

          Dare was won by Evolve who make the Sky Mantis, on trial on HMS Protector this last year.

          Heavy lift (MILT) is expected to be Malloy/BAES T-650, but it’s still open for competition

          Heavy lift (Inter) has trialled  Windracers Ultra, but is also still open.

          Human-Machine Teaming project I’m thinking of is the Army’s although there are some others. It includes nano-Unmanned Aerial Systems (nUAS) project, Atlas and Elbit drones.

          I don’t know who got Project Sharman or the Multi-role drones. The C-UAS are all counter UAS, and again, I’ve not followed them.

  17. As these drones the Russians are using are guided by GPS , why not use localised GPS jammers to confuse or divert them .

    • They may well be using jammers. The Ukrainians are claiming 80% or so being downed.

      The problem is Ukraine uses GPS as well, so has to target the drone specifically or risks shutting down their own capabilities. As these drones are small, apparently low flying (Ukraine seems to be pretty flat for the most part) they’ll be hard to detect and engage and the drones can approach targets froma wider range of directions. So getting your localised jammers in the right place at the right time and sufficiently far out from the target to be effective is quite a command and control problem.

      As such there will always be ‘leakers’ and because they are cheap drones you can afford to lose quite a high percentage and still do a lot of damage because of shear weight of numbers. Was it Stalin who said ‘numbers have a quality of their own’? This seems to be demonstrating that in the modern context very well indeed, sadly.

      We should also note the targetting civilian infrastructure in the modern world is worryingly easy – not that we didn’t alreay know it.

      Cheers CR

      • I do not disagree that other people use GPS but gos is routinely jammed during military exercises. Plus many of the targets are away from the front line so they can afford to “ turn off” gps with little or no affect to more important activities.
        Just my opinion.
        As for the effectiveness of any airdefense system I am well aware that it will never be perfect and have a 100% kill rate.

  18. I’m not sure what the article is trying to say? Is it the only project is the 2035 loyal wingman or is it multiple programs to get drones in service sooner?
    Are loitering munitions included.

  19. I cant be arsed to read all 80 comments, no doubt they all bemoan the inability of the uk MOD or govt to actually decide whats needed, so how about having a dozen MORE initiatives, and in a years time cancelling all of them and having another dozen initiatives and…..and….
    Its beyond a joke it really is.
    Aeralis has a good (workman like, not top end, but something in place) design for a trainer/advanced trainer/unmanned “loyal wingman” …..order some of the buggers, get some in the air, now. No faffing. get some in the air, see how they go….make them agile (as they will need to be in three places at once) tweak them digitally.
    Rant over.
    AA

      • Why do you think it will cost that much?

        By analogy, consider the hospital bed. When people talk about expanding the number of beds in a hospital they aren’t talking about something for patients to lie on. They also are including the room space, the equipment, the nurses, the doctors, the support staff from catering to cleaners, the administrators, everything that is needed to add an extra patient to the hospital. Even the most expensive bariatric bed costs peanuts in comparison to the rest of it.

        If we are talking about buying some drones, but not the training, the integration, the extra people to use them, operation and maintenance costs, and the change to battlefield C2 to use them productively: modelling, wargaming, etc, the cost of the actual drone is relatively peanuts. We could order 5 drones from Aeralis and it definitely wouldn’t cost billions. Add in everything else to make it part of UK Defence and it very well might.

        I have to agree with AA. At the minimum it would increase Aeralis capabilities and those of its subcontractors/partners, which would be an increase to UK industry’s capabilities in an area we are sadly lacking.

        • But those drones don’t exist. So you’re paying for development not just the unit price (still >>£10m). And developing that sort of system (performance, complexity, size) is easily >£1bn.

          Now if Aeralis want to self fund that development cost then fine, but that seems unlikely.

          • Development of the Mosquito demonstrator was going to cost £30m, including design; the Leonardo rotary demonstrator is costing £60m; but an Aeralis drone will somehow cost >£1bn. I ask again, why? Isn’t the whole idea of digital design with new modes of build that that’s faster and cheaper than traditional methods?

            Part of the point of the Mosquito project was to learn how to leaverage new fast and cheap design/build techniques.

  21. Two of the six bidders for the NMH helicopter contract have been eliminated. AceHawk Aerospace based on the Tyne was offering reconditioned second hand Black Hawks, meanwhile Bell was pitching the 525 Relentless but admitted that it wouldnt be ready for production within the timeframe (still doing license approval in the US which has been very slow after its 2016 crash where it shook itself apart mid-flight after they simulated one engine shutting down).

  22. Would we not be better asking bae if they could get their drones going in quick time, could we not ask drone makers in Britain what they can come up with for £20,000 to £150,000 for different operations?

    • Just out of curiosity why does it take so ungodly long for the UK to train a pilot of anything. Other countries are doing a lot better. Seems a bit off.

      • RAF working hours is one reason.
        Start on a Monday afternoon and secure Wednesday evening. Travel time covers Thursday and Monday morning leaving you a full weekend Fri-Sun to go partying and at said “party” you tell everyone you are a Pilot…
        Then there are the Mess dinners which you need a day to prepare for and a day to recover from. They are usually on a Tuesday which writes off the whole week…

      • Hi Esteban,

        Basically, privatisation has brought supply chain management just in time, profitable management practice to UK pilot training. Which works well so long as everything works well…

        Just check out global supply chains at the momment for a few clues of what happens when they don’t work…

        One serious issue with UK pilot training is a lack of enough jet trainers that work.

        It’s a long sorry tale.

        I became aware of the first signs of trouble about 15 to 20 years ago when we got a panicked message out of MoD that they had forgotten about the rapidly deminishing airframe life on the Hawk T1’s… Folk in my office couldn’t believe it. I kid you not!

        Cheers CR

      • Hi Esteban it does seem a crazy amount of time but how long does it take other western nations?the Chinese are the only one’s I see who are really quick but they seem like they’re on a war footing all the time.

    • Yes, while countries like Turkey established themselves as a drone superpower within 7 years and next year are flying their first unmanned fighter jet drone MIUS which in reality is like a 6th generation jet marking the begining of the end for manned fighter jets we are debating still basic drones . Their light carrier will be the world first drones only designated aircraft carrier. It shows we are starting to lack behind despite our big ego others are innovating and moving faster

  24. I’ve been trying to find the announcement of Alvina being cancelled (as opposed to the fact brought out by FOI request that nobody did anything for 18 months. Does anyone have a link to an official cancellation?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here