BAE Tempest - Science Fiction or Science Fact

[JohnT]

What do you think?

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62289737

 

 

[stevehnz]

I hope they keep their anti-virus software up to date if software upgrades are as easy as downloading apps.  

Steve.

[cerperal]

Interesting read, even if the title is a tad misleading. I feel like Tempest, of all these programs, has the potential to be the most successful provided there is constant support and their Norton's up to date as Steve said.

 

Having spoken to the teams representing the project at Farnborough last week progress seems good, the technology doesn't seem as fanciful as 4 years ago and BAE and RR already have a testbed engine running. Hopefully in a few Farnborough's time I'll see the real thing

 

Will

 

[exdraken]

22 hours ago, cerperal said:

 provided there is constant support

 

 

That will be the clue, as most of the time!

British design often had potential, the political  environment although lots of uncertainty... now even more so than in recent years!

You always  have to keep in mind  under  which  circumstances these programs started and were promised, and by whom of course!

 

Money will most certainly be tight again in the near future...

 

 

[Dr. Quack]

"Sensors in the pilot's helmet will monitor brain signals and other medical data. So, over successive flights the AI will amass a huge biometric and psychometric information database."

 

 

 

Sounds like Amazon will be targeting some very personalised ads.

 

Q

[Zephyr91]

On 26/07/2022 at 22:49, cerperal said:

Interesting read, even if the title is a tad misleading. I feel like Tempest, of all these programs, has the potential to be the most successful provided there is constant support and their Norton's up to date as Steve said.

 

Having spoken to the teams representing the project at Farnborough last week progress seems good, the technology doesn't seem as fanciful as 4 years ago and BAE and RR already have a testbed engine running. Hopefully in a few Farnborough's time I'll see the real thing

 

Will

 

Sorry of this seems a while since the last comment but I've been away from BM for a yr or 2 and am franticaly picking up on lots of interesting threads.  So please forgive the late comments.  I agree that this is likely to stand a better chance of success than some previous UK project proposals, partly 'cos the goverment realises the potential commercial gains to be had and partly 'cos one of the greatest reasons for the need is old Vlad Putin! 😉.  However a couple of things strike me.  1. whatever flies in the next 3-5yrs is as likely to be as representative of the "in-service" plane as EAP was to Typhoon.   The BBC note that it will be a "technology demonstrator", so not the final product.   2.  From a modelling point of view the external shaping these days is not just "aerodynamically driven" it is driven by detectability issues (radar, IR, acoustics etc) so won't give much potential for interesting lumps, bumps, add-ons etc.  Not so good for the super-detailers but great for those of us who have digits like a pack of chipolatas and welocme the chance of doing a detail-free exterior!!😁

[exdraken]

Wasn't that the case for the F-35 as well for at least 15 years if its development time?

 

But of course, you are right, it was quick started / boosted with the Brexit implementation it seemed to me at least.

New governments might if course see that urgency different

But with Sweden, Italy and Japan somehow involved I do see chances for it to succeed!

Which engine are we going to see by the way? Especially in the wake of the GE variable cycle engine concepts?

Has Rolls Royce something up the sleeve?

[Mike]

On 26/07/2022 at 22:49, cerperal said:

and their Norton's up to date

They're doomed if they're using Norton

[Bobby No Mac]

At some stage not far away, someone in charge of the purse strings will say: "So, this really expensive aircraft programme. Will it be able to fly from our really expensive glorified helicopter carriers?"

To which the response will be: " ... "

[Pete in Lincs]

'In the Tempest, it is hoped AI will act as a kind of gatekeeper, preventing the pilot from becoming overwhelmed by incoming intelligence.'

 

Is this in the same way that my satnav fails to tell me which exit to take as I approach a roundabout?

[Mike]

25 minutes ago, Pete in Lincs said:

it is hoped AI will act as a kind of gatekeeper

...and we all know how well gatekeeping works out. Maybe they should have likened it to a personal assistant?  At least those can be of use.

[spruecutter96]

On 10/27/2022 at 10:15 PM, Mike said:

They're doomed if they're using Norton

Could be worse... If MCAFEE do them a good deal, they shouldn't have any problems (yep, sarcasm being applied, here). The company's founder was a fine, upstanding citizen (NOT!). 

 

Cheers.

 

Chris.  

[Mike]

4 minutes ago, spruecutter96 said:

Could be worse... If MCAFEE do them a good deal, they shouldn't have any problems (yep, sarcasm being applied, here). The company's founder was a fine, upstanding citizen (NOT!). 

Worse still, Microsoft now own them, so are probably busy "upgrading" the software to lose market share and make it even more buggy, at which point they'll buy in and white label someone else's product.

[bentwaters81tfw]

3 hours ago, Bobby No Mac said:

At some stage not far away, someone in charge of the purse strings will say: "So, this really expensive aircraft programme. Will it be able to fly from our really expensive glorified helicopter carriers?"

To which the response will be: " ... "

There was talk of making this carrier capable, but it would be CATOBAR.

[Mike]

2 minutes ago, bentwaters81tfw said:

There was talk of making this carrier capable, but it would be CATOBAR.

I just hope that they put plenty of effort into consideration of the present and future needs for the type, and we don't end up with another "no gun, gun but no ammo, of go on then, we'll have the ammo" situation, but with something equally crucial.  it's almost standard practice though, sadly

[JohnT]

1 hour ago, Mike said:

...and we all know how well gatekeeping works out. Maybe they should have likened it to a personal assistant?  At least those can be of use.

RAF pilots union got that sorted. Stick in a second seat behind and voila - personal assistant doubling as ballast aka the Nav. 
 

I’ve always wondered why the two carriers were designed and built with the restriction of only being able to deploy one type of fixed wing aircraft and one which at the time of carrier design was an unproven aircraft. At least I think that was likely the scenario. What would have happened had the US end pulled the F-35 VTOL version?  
 

 

[Procopius]

On 10/29/2022 at 10:37 AM, JohnT said:

I’ve always wondered why the two carriers were designed and built with the restriction of only being able to deploy one type of fixed wing aircraft and one which at the time of carrier design was an unproven aircraft. At least I think that was likely the scenario. What would have happened had the US end pulled the F-35 VTOL version?  
 

 

 

Given that the USA needed other buyers for the F-35 to bring the per-unit cost down, the UK's participation in the program from the outset, the fact that components for all three versions are manufactured in the UK, and the strong USMC support for the F-35B, I don't think it was ever at risk. It would be a situation akin to when the USA cancelled Skybolt and ended up having to give Britain not only Polaris, but quite a bit of submarine technology as well by way of recompense.

 

That said, the lack of a catapult does seem to be a short-sighted choice; as I recall, there were attempts to change this while QE was under construction, but it was found the alterations required would be immense. 

 

There is one bright side to this, however: there is no chance of the UK ever having to operate the most boring, mediocre grey jet in history: the Super Hornet.