Rolls-Royce and MoD to develop hypersonic technology

Sweden interested in colab on tech? No thanks, they will be the ones getting something out of that deal.

Apparently they are mainly after assistance from BAE developing software for the Gripen E, according to Saab “The platform is 75% software so capabilities can be enhanced without upgrading hardware”. They are reviewing joining several other R&D projects over the next year including Tempest. but are stressing that the Gripen E will meet their short to medium term requirements (that they wont cease development on Gripen to work on sixth gen).

“…systems including Gripen, as well as the potential for a joint FCAS programme that will meet the requirements of the UK and Sweden, as well as the international market”

They’re not signed up to a new plane but they’re definitely intent on exploring the possibilities of one.

I agree Gandalf, let this be one the the (extremely few) times we go it alone.

We wont go it alone, because the cost is unbelievable to go it alone, Typhoon has cost the UK somthing in the region of 37 billion , maybe alot more, and that’s shared with 3 other nations. Plus, we will only buy relatively small numbers. Look how expensive the F35 still is, and over 3000 will be built!

Robert, for your information, (from a comment from someone else below) a parliamentary committee concluded Typhoon cost the U.K. 98% of going it alone. So no, the cost isn’t unbelievable if we go it alone. Also we would get exports for it.

I admire your optimism, but it even the Americans run out of money to pay for the F22 program, and only bought around 170 airframes. We wont design and pay for a 6th gen Tempest program on our own, not unless you are happy to see 50+ billion shaved off the NHS budget or education ect, which will definitely never happen.

We spend £14 billion every single year on foreign aid, start there. The truth is the U.K., as one of the richest countries in the World with a G.D.P. of $2.6 trillion, could easily afford this on our own, with unbelievable amounts of money left over.

Get real Stephen, what financial dream world are you living in. And the foreign aid budget is this countries soft power budget, it gives us a huge amount of influence around the world, most of the work goes unseen, but that budget does a huge amount for work for us and UK plc.

The foreign aid budget is £billions of British people’s hard earned money being given away to foreign countries every single year. Money that could be better spent improving our own country.

Better start petitioning then: the Tories passed a bill in 2015 that commits us to spending 0.7% of gross national income on aid. It would take another act of Parliament to overturn that.

@ Robert Blay – i am not too sure offering the F-22 as some guide to what Tempest will cost is too accurate. You have to understand that the US Military and US Incorporated are a) rather adept at managing projects badly which extends the life of the project costing money and b) adding specifications even after production starts (F-22, F-35, USS Gerald R Ford and Littoral ships all illustrate). Yes the F-22 cost over $67 Bn in 2010 money and which proves my point a) above but the numbers were scaled back more because there was no need for it given the lack of a peer threat, the ban on exports and the imminent arrival (as they thought) of the F-35.

I am pretty sure that given where we are with all the key systems, engines, the earlier Replica work, combat systems etc etc on Tempest we will not need a protracted R & D phase which is where black money pits open up. And as someone else mentioned having a small more focused team means we can deliver faster as the key specifications will not change. That means less cost …

Hi Chris. I hope you are right, I would be amazed if we go it alone, and I still believe Tempest will be a multi national project, but maybe it wont be like the model used for Tornado and Typhoon, with separate production factories ect. I did read just yesterday that Tyhoon will be used extensively over the next 10 years + to prove many of the technologies used on a potential 6th gen fighter, so maybe you could be correct about more focused RnD, and will definitely enhance the capabilities of the Typhoon in coming years.

I would also be amazed if we go it alone, there are people high up who force us to colab on every single thing, even when we don’t actually have to.
Also if we use separate production, factories, etc. it will end up costing nearly the same as if we just go it alone (98% of the cost in Typhoon’s case.

And where do you get this 98% figure from? Do have a link? I would very much like to see who stated this figure and when?

Robert – that works out at about £231 million a copy then – not exactly cheap as chips is it lol ?.

No, ? the research & development costs alone are eye watering.

Reaction engine’s origins are from the RR RB545 classified air breathing rocket for the HOTOL in the 80’s. but the precooler tech addresses a fundamental issue with turbojets, -extremely hot & pressurised air arriving at the compressor, causing surging. The tech has the Potential to improve all turbojet engines above Mach 1 & without having to use exotic materials. I think it’s less about pure straight line speed & more about efficiency, manoeuvrability & acceleration. Politicians like to push buzzwords like hypersonic & stealth but they fundamentally lack any knowledge of the tech, RR BAE & RE refer to it as “high Mach propulsion technology”

The pre-cooler allows a combination engine i.e. turbojet/ramjet to function seamlessly in that the turbojet can be made to work more efficiently and at higher air speeds, before it crosses over to ramjet mode.
The pre-cooler will work from zero to very high Mach. As it’s cooling the inlet air not slowing it down, which is the job of the shock cone. By cooling the air you make it denser and thus more oxygen rich = more potential power.
The pre-cooling if fitted to a Typhoon has the potential to increase thrust by at least 25% if the main fuel is used as the cooling medium. If a separate liquid gaseous system is used the potential is even greater and would benefit the whole speed range.

That’s a very elegant explanation. RR have stated they are working on a variable cycle engine (have both high & low bypass modes) & the only one I can think of is the American GE F120 -from the YF23. The cancelled 2nd engine for the F35 was the General Electric/Rolls Royce F136. Also developed from the F120. Do you think pre-cooler tech would work on this type & if RR are planning a British variant based on this very cool engine?

Technically speaking the SR71’s J58 was a variable cycle engine. During design it suffered significant engine stall problems and overheating. The solution was to by-pass some the air entering the compressor and feed it to the afterburner. This ensured that the pressure ratio (between inlet and exhaust) was greater than 1 but also made sure that the afterburner ducting was cooled. Thereby allowing the aircraft to reach a published airspeed of Mach 3.5. The engine was seriously held back due to the very high inlet air temperature.
The pre-cooler would work on any turbojet or turbofan engine be it high or low bypass. The best analogy I can use is that it’s like a very fancy intercooler used on a turbo-charged car engine. The inlet air after being compressed by the turbo is usually above 100C, the intercooler tries to bring it down to a more ambient temperature. The delta between the inlet and outlet of the intercooler is dependent upon the the type of material used for the intercooler the force of air through it and thereby its ambient temperature. To increase the efficiency further, a number of racers squirt water at the cooler.
The RE pre-cooler takes this to the next level. On the Scimitar and SABRE engine they use either liquid hydrogen or nitrogen as the cooling medium which is passed down ultrafine tubes to increase the “wetted” surface area. The hot inlet air is cooled down from over 500C to -150C in less than a second. Normally due to such a sudden and dramatic temperature change you would get ice build up. However, RE have solved this problem and it’s part of their secret of how their pre-cooler works so well.
On an aircraft such as a Typhoon, you could use the aircraft’s fuel as the cooling medium, except it wouldn’t be cooler than the ambient temperature because of thermal cycling from the aircraft’s skin heating up as its not insulated. You would still gain a benefit especially as speed increased from transonic to supersonic. The real benefit would come when the pre-cooler is used with gaseous liquids. How that could be introduced on Typhoon were much of the internal space is already used is the big question?

@ Gandalf – Totally agree about Germany as a partner nation. They habitually talk up order numbers, get the larger workshare and then scale back orders. Or even want to pull out at a critical time as we found it in the early days of Typhoon (and indeed Tornado). And you are right about promoting Typhoon for exports – all done by the the UK and Italy.

Sadly I have to differ about the French. What we achieved together in the ’60s with Concorde (BAC / Sud Aviation) and the ’70s with Jaguar (BAC / Breguet) is a very different era and set of people from our experience in the late ’80s with Typhoon with France led by a staunch Europhile Socialist Mitterand who was no friend of the UK. History is repeating itself with Airbus / Dassault and an even more Euro Federalist and Socialist Macron who is clearly no friend of the UK especially after we decided to leave his beloved EU.

We can and should have cordial relations with France as a country but their political, foreign and even defence policies are decided by the EU and why they are so keen to work with Airbus (Germany & Spain) to the exclusion of the UK. Of course Italy got caught in the fallout….

There is the further experience of the QE Class carriers and the French version (PA2) which was (in an odd turn around in politics) all signed up by the Socialist President Chirac in 2004. 3 years later and the Conservative Sarkozy was President and he canned the idea!

Look at it another way, how many Eurofighters did the UK originally commit to build vs how many were built in the end? How many tempests or equiv will we now buy, i assume even less, as each generation gets more expensive and the budget gets tighter.

The problem economy of scales, we no longer have it to keep the costs down enough to make a go it alone jet viable, at least not one that has the capability we would get if we joined the US or another larger customer.

Ever heard of exports? Also, as one of the richest countries in the World, the truth is, yes, we could absolutely go this alone, and still have absolutely huge amounts of money left over.
Agree that if we join anyone it should be the U.S.A., not a minor little country like Sweden, etc. (lol!) who will offer us nothing we can’t do for ourselves.
Also, it doesn’t matter what it is when someone say Britain should go something alone (cars, trains, ships, steel, aeroplanes, tanks, space rockets, etc., etc., etc.), literally every single thing, bar nothing, without fail, someone will come along to say it is absolutely impossible and we shouldn’t even try, when other countries, even smaller ones, go right ahead and do at least some of these things.

Exports are a risk, a huge risk.

The UK would need to put up the money to invest in the project and then hope they get exports, at the same time competing against the bigger economy of scales/cheaper unit cost of the US version and/or the French/German version.

Additionally if we go chasing after exports, we add to the cost, as each tender comes with it.

Steve – the original requirement for what became the Typhoon was for 250 Aircraft.As the programme progressed the Contractual obligation was reduced to 232.The number ordered thus far for the RAF stands at 160.

The U.S.A. with a G.D.P. of $19 trillion could EASILY have afforded the F22 program if they had truly wanted to, if you honestly think it would have come anywhere even close to bankrupting them you you are not being realistic.
Our current financial situation, as one of the richest countries in the World, with a G.D.P. of $2.6 trillion could easily afford this, with absolutely huge amounts of money left over.
If we collab on Tempest then under no circumstances whatsoever are we collabing on Skylon. We are not collabing on every single thing, bar nothing. Even much poorer countries than us have developed their own indigenous space programs. We are more than capable of doing some things on our own, and they will be amazing things too, things that will make the World sit up and take notice. We need some prestige projects where Britain goes it alone and shows the World what 21st century Britain is still capable of and Skylon would be perfect for this.