Personnel from 700X Naval Air Squadron have built their first remotely-piloted air system in what the Royal Navy is calling “a milestone moment for the Culdrose-based team”.
The Walrus drone will be used specifically as a testbed for sensors and other sensitive payloads.
The Royal Navy say here that the 20kg octo-quadcopter is named Walrus after the flying boats pioneered by 700 Naval Air Squadron and flown from cruisers and battleships during the Second World War.
“This is the first time the navy has built its own air system using basic components. It’s an important step in our recognition of endorsed manufacturer status with the Military Aviation Authority. Built to high, aviation standards, the Walrus will be used specifically as a testbed for sensors and other sensitive payloads.
It will be our independent test and evaluation platform. As we’ve built it, we know the system and exactly what it’s capable of. We’re now testing it using a rigorous regime here in a controlled environment. When we’re confident it’s operating correctly and safely, we’ll conduct our first flying tests, probably in the new year.”
Today’s announcement follows the MoD’s announcement of 250 more high-tech drones for the British military, under a £129 million contract with Lockheed Martin announced last week.
This looks interesting. If the team at RNAS Culdrose can build drones like this – and it doesn’t turn into another £1billion+ Watchkeeper disaster – maybe the RN could export them to some of our allies
No way these can be accepted into service as they don’t come with any jobs for the boys 😀
… cheques of course. The numerous committees will cut in short once they receive the direct feedback from their industrial mates in the Gentleman’s clubs in the coming mates. Actually I mock but I fear considering that’s pretty much what happened in projects before the war which pretty much cut upstarts like Westland off at the knees I fear such a scenario might still be in existence. Britain always does better during a conflict when the ‘renegades’ through necessity actually are allowed to get things done while the Top Brass are knocking back their 18 year olds single malts.
Everyone assumes that the issue the top brass stopping things when it is probably more likely to be a process issue. How do you go out and spend a couple of hundred grand (small beer in Government terms) on parts and get the Government to pay the bill? All the bean counters will likely refuse it for fear it might be seen as a bad move or some form of fraud maybe? That’s before you think about procurement processes.
(For some reason my post went to spam, so posting it again) I’m sorry, how is the fact that the Royal Navy which has led the way in so many fields is blowing its trumpet over how one of its Naval air squadrons has built a quad copter which will be used to test sensors when: ISIS was using quad copters to drop explosives in Iraq and Syria years agoIsrael uses quad copters to do likewise (Granted theirs are suicide ones ) and to drop C gasIn the Ukraine both sides use quad copters to lethal effect (Current video is… Read more »
I think this is what irritates so many, me included.
We spend decades faffing about, mean while others get stuff into service, stuff that heaven forbid can actually kill people – Bayraktar as an example.
When our UAV news is less toy aeroplane trials and more useful kit in the real world that does the job at a realistic scale and cost then I might be more interested in this. And yes, I appreciate it is only a trial for sensors.
That hanger in the photo may have held helicopters once too…..🙄
Needs must. The Ukr Army have teams of young engineers adapting commercially available drones to drop mortar shells on targets of opportunity. George’s system won’t let me post the links but YouTube has video of the workshops – and cam footage of the drones dropping mortar shells directly through the open turret hatches of Russian T-90M tanks, with outstanding results.
Maybe someone at Culdrose knows more than they are letting on about Hunt’s forthcoming SDSR
I’ve seen them, going back many a month. The one dropping through the sunroof onto the orcs laps was memorable.
@farouk just what I have said. I am left pulling my hair out over the whole mess. The procurers are not interested in buying anything British. This means the companies will develop the technology outside the UK.
I have said in my comment above the even BAE is getting into them in a big way. Unfortunately, it’s their independent US arm, developing the technology in the US, for the US. Anything they succeed in will only be sold to/through the US military.
As far as the UK/MOD is concerned, it’s a Chimps Tea Party, again.
Miserable bastards the pair of you.
Thank you, I do my best.
Christmas party pooper wrote:
My dear Richard Edward, if you are going to take verbal umbrage at one of my posts, it doesn’t help your cause, if afterwards you knock out a much more damning post which reveals you to be a hypocrite.
I am pretty sure that HMS Protector has two drones on broad that were mainly made of 3D printed parts that suggest if they lost one they could print the parts and assemble a new one, which leaves you to believe they had a 3D printer on ship. This was in a book from I think about five years ago
Morning Simon.
Yes, I’m sure you’re right. I only recall this as Lusty mentioned it on this very site.
Just seems a bit odd a big press release , when it is something that has been done before. Also shows that the Navy has been using drones for some time. Mind you even if HMS Protector could have a helicopter onboard, we probable haven’t got one to spare
Yes, no hanger and with only 28 Wildcat replacing 80 plus Lynx ( there were over 60 Lynx still in 2009 according to NL ) she won’t have.
Daft, the Antarctic Patrol Ship should have a Heli and hanger, but what do I know? The NL article on her mentions the 2 UAV too.
I wonder since HMS Protector was a conversion was it feasible to fit a hanger and landing pad or not? spot on about the helicopters, always cross my mind when people talk about adding more escorts to the fleet. We dont have enought for the escorts, RFA, and carriers we have now
It did a few years back. Maybe they are still there. More recently Protector has been trialling Evolve Dynamic’s Sky Mantis.
Protector has two commercial drones (Chinese made). Not really the answer. Given that most commerical drones – even if customised by brilliant UK companies like the Ediburgh Drone Company – have Chinese base platforms, making our own stuff is imperative. The Ukrainians have been successfully building their own custom-designed drones from commerically available components, so that may have been the inspiration. At minimum it creates a new set of skills sets in FAA to support UAS.
There is obviously an intelligence deficit going on here. Building a quadcopter to military spec versus quadcopter for dropping granades or other civilian toys are of different orders of magnitude, if you can’t get your head around that, why are you on this blog?
No need to be rude, OkamsRazor
Do u think this will have been built to full military specs? Hard to find what they are for drones.
This is a good step forward. Basic components put together for the task at hand.
Depends if it is EM/EW hardened with jam resistant coms and datalink(s).
If it is it is actually quite significant.
EM/EW is nothing special. That nut was cracked in 2015 by a commercial company in Sweden that uses UAV’s for scanning utilities infrastructure. You have to shield various parts due to the nature of the lines and transmission equipment. eSmart license it out to many companies.
Riiiiight.
I’ll forget all I learned about EMP protection….
And hardened comms are so simple that the school science club should be able to them. Not.
If you honestly think all the very skilled people who work on UK Defence projects are idiots I suggest you get a reality check.
There is a massive difference between screening from 11kV 50Hz and people who are deliberately trying to mess the drone up.
@SupportiveBloke, Yes, there’s a massive difference between the shielding required from an OHPS and HPM in DEW’s. The difference from my point of view has been sorted many years ago. I am fully aware of the SWaP requirements and how they affect the platforms. I have had to write several requirements in PoC’s for engineering teams use of metamaterials on our side of the projects that will shield the vulnerable parts enough to allow the AI to remain in control without having the Engineers putting in that many layers it lights up like a meteor entering the atmosphere. I never… Read more »
Oh dear, it appears that the play ground bully is upset, over how a post of mine has resulted in his single brain cell still boarding at the station. It’s a message board, where people can peddle their thoughts. More than happy to be critiqued and to be honest, even have abuse thrown my way. But was made me laugh is how you arrived at the conclusion, that I should reevaluate my place here. Why? Are you so little of mind that any form of free thought can only be construed as a threat , which tends to point in… Read more »
I cannot say I share your negative appraisal of the situation. While I understand the frustrations we all share. This country develops, builds and exports military equipment on a scale very few countries can match. We are still one of the largest exporter of military kit in the world. I’m not going to list everything we develop, but British engineering and development is at the forefront of military capability.
Too much info. Daniele is right, I think we are missing a trick with The Ukraine. They are amassing shed loads of data from logs resupply, through expenditure, to results, can we harvest that data? Equally, be it their pilots… DACT… or AFVs: Ajax, they have lessons to teach. Now, let’s take Latvia and Latvian IT who subcontract to 🇺🇦 their systems which power Scandic banks and IT infrastructure as well as American time shares in Florida and there is a whole VSLUE FOR MONEY world out there who can deliver for BritMil. RN should be working, UKEMil, can deliver… Read more »
There was a massive Drone Ex out here recently. Air and Surface drones of every sort tested and trialled by 5th Fleet. There was input from UK suppliers and UK Military (Spotting a Brit in MTP is easy!)
Quadcopters.
Small winged drones
Tethered Drones
Surface drones of at least 10 differing types from small Laser Dingy sized hulls with very low free board, solar panels and electric drive to massive off shore racing Cats with huge twin diesel outboards.
Not only used for surveillance with EO turrets but some also deploying underwater sensors.
Drones are the new big thing!
Great lets order 1, with options for more, then scrap it…
These serving personnel will come up with exactly what is required, if given the tools and the funds to do so. The same could be said for all manner of ‘projects’ across the 3… oh hold on, now 4 branches of the military.
It would be a terrible shame to see corrupt third parties, and huge monopolies cashing in (as they usually do) on taxpayers money.
Would be fantastic to see more of this kind of thing!
It seems a bit small to me, but I suppose you have to start somewhere and I’m a big fan of (others) building stuff in the garden shed. RN have already been trialling Sky Mantis, a 7kg quad, and the MOD have just purchased 159 Indago 4 rotaries at 2.5kg, so we have plenty of lightweight drones to choose from that can handle EO/IR. I’m wondering what moving up to 20kg gets you. As a test rig will it even have the lifting power a 20kg quadcopter would normally? I doubt it can lift/power a commercial SAR — the lightest… Read more »
Hi All…. A small aside…
Just watching Christmas University Challenge and Chris Terrill was on there,
He has a documentary series in post production about HMSQE visiting the South China Sea
Hopefully the BBC will be showing this soon
Happy New Year…. Ian
About time the UK actually built some of its own. It appears they even make them in tents in some countries. Even Ukraine is building its own. Yet it appears beyond the abilities of the UK, a country with a multi-billion pound defence budget. I attended a seminar a few months ago where a few companies that build Mil/Civil versions were presenting new technologies. I was left totally perplexed by the attitude of the procurers, who were only interested in buying US made. The really annoying aspect is there’s a few UK companies that are leaders in sensor, imaging and… Read more »
I see the press release begins ““This is the first time the navy has built its own air system using basic components.”
That is an innacurate claim – in 1917/18 Royal Naval Airship Station Mullion, (which was ironically situated only a few miles away from present day Culdrose), designed and built the “Mullion Twin” airship designation SSE2 which went into production as the SST. These airships were used for U-Boat hunting.