European UCAVs Take Shape

[u_fokker]

Jul 13, 2008

By Robert Wall and Douglas Barrie

Britain's Taranis unmanned combat air vehicle demonstrator will fly in 2010, with the French-led Neuron to follow in 2011. Both will use the same model of Rolls-Royce Adour engine - though ironically, propulsion is one area that is underfunded by both nations in terms of future development.

Europe will conceivably be in a position to begin fielding operational UCAVs toward the end of the next decade, but both programs already build on years of predominantly classified research and development.

The U.K. and France have been instrumental in pushing UCAV technology development in Europe; in Britain, through the BAE Systems-led Taranis project, while France has taken the lead on the multicountry Neuron UCAV demonstrator. Even with defense budget pressures in both countries, industry officials are confident their efforts will proceed.

In the U.K. a UCAV is a candidate to meet at least part of the air force's Deep and Persistent Offensive Capability (DPOC), which is now assumed by the Defense Ministry to be entering service in 2018. For the Royal Air Force a UCAV would provide a first-day-of-war deep-strike capability against enemy air defense systems and time-sensitive targets using a platform capable of surviving in airspace defended by double-digit surface-to-air missile systems in the class of the Russian Almaz Antey S-400. A 24-hr. endurance capability is believed to be under study.

Taranis will take the U.K. a considerable way toward an operationally capable system. The effort is aimed at risk reduction in several areas, including signature control and flight performance. Beyond Taranis the ministry is looking at an as-yet-undefined assessment phase. Taranis is being run by the Defense Ministry's Strategic UAV Experiment (Suave) team. Industry partners alongside BAE Systems are Rolls-Royce, Qinetiq and GE Aerospace.

The program, publicly launched in 2006, builds on classified low-observable and UCAV design work that started more than a decade ago. Taranis, says BAE Systems Suave project director Chris Allam, draws in part from the experience of the Testbed/Replica manned aircraft low-observable (LO) demonstrator program from the late 1990s in terms of airframe and systems integration. In terms of LO technology, Allam suggests that the "reasonable gap between the two mean things have moved on a bit."

Another LO-related effort was the 4-5-year Nightjar program carried out by the Defense Ministry in conjunction with industry using BAE's radar cross-section range at Warton. This is thought to have looked at specific elements of airframe design and performance related to LO signature. The Raven sub-scale demo program, first flown by BAE Systems in December 2003, provided valuable input in terms of development of control laws for an unstable tailless airframe.

The Taranis design was the culmination of several studies by the ministry and industry, a process that is continuing in support of developing an operational platform.

"The Taranis build program is going well, we're effectively in mid-build, while avionics rigs are also up and running. We'll start final assembly [at Warton] toward year-end."

Taranis will undergo flight testing in 2010 with aims including examining the "operational utility" of aspects of the design, says Allam. Several research efforts are underway regarding autonomous operation of unmanned platforms in the DPOC role, including Qinetiq's Surrogate program, which has used a BAC 1-11 test aircraft to act as a UCAV. One aim of the Taranis trials is to demonstrate the required level of autonomy, including a representative strike mission. Sensor and payload integration are also being addressed.

The Initial Gate approval - part of the ministry's procurement process - is due in 2011. Allam suggests the industry and the ministry are looking at how to proceed with the program in the assessment phase. A "spiral development-type approach" is one option.

The Taranis design utilizes comparatively mature LO technology, thought to be baselined against the present generation of threat systems. In moving forward with the full development and acquisition - or off-the-shelf purchase - of an operational system, it must prove to be survivable against projected threat systems in the 2020s and beyond. With this in mind, the ministry is continuing to fund research into LO capabilities running in parallel with the Taranis project. The control portion covers not only the RF but the infrared spectrum, with work undertaken to examine reducing the engine signature in terms of the jet efflux. The engine intake and jet efflux nozzle have also received considerable focus.

The U.K. continues to pursue a dual-track approach to the acquisition of a UCAV, since it remains involved with the U.S. in examining the operational utility of such systems. While an off-the-shelf purchase remains an option, issues surrounding what London terms operational sovereignty could militate against purchasing a system from Washington.

While Taranis will fly using Rolls's Adour 951, development of an operational UCAV could be accompanied by work on a new engine, or a project based on using a more advanced core than Adour's.

Rolls-Royce had been pushing for an engine demonstrator project to run along with Taranis, but funding was lacking. The engine has a fundamental impact on the size of the UCAV, while some of the likely performance demands - both in loiter capability and power output for directed energy weapons - also drive a more-advanced propulsion solution.

The U.K. is pursuing development of high-power microwaves (HPMs) and laser weapons, with the UCAV certainly a clear candidate for an HPM payload.

The Rolls-Royce-Turbomeca relationship on Adour could yet continue in terms of UCAV propulsion. There have been suggestions that this could be an area of reemerging Anglo-French collaboration.

The six industrial partners involved in Neuron - Dassault Aviation, Saab, Alenia Aeronautica, EADS CASA, Ruag Aerospace of Switzerland and Hellenic Aerospace Industry - are also preparing to start production of their lone flight-test vehicle, now slated to undergo trials in 2011. The go-ahead for the production phase comes after months of validating technologies deemed critical to the operational concept.

Developers created 13 technology road maps in which to tackle key issues before production go-ahead. The bulk of those are now complete, with good results, says Neuron program manager Benoit Dussaugey, Dassault's senior vice president for military sales and cooperation.

A special emphasis has been placed on LO technologies. Although some team partners, such as Dassault and Saab, have already dabbled in low-observable shaping and materials - including applications on combat aircraft - Neuron is aiming at a level of stealth not attempted before in continental Europe. In part, it was only when development started that engineers realized how every design choice can impact stealthiness. Eight of the 13 technology efforts were related to radar and infrared low-observability.

For instance, Saab has built a model of the front forward-fuselage and the landing gear door for measurement at the outdoor radar cross-section facility in Linkoping. The emitter is about 500 meters from the test specimen and therefore provides good radar return data, Dussaugey indicates.

Alenia is doing similar work. The company is assigned the window for the electro-optical sensor. Unlike on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which features a protruding sensor window, Neuron designers have opted for one basically flush with the fuselage. The Italians also have run tests on a partial weapons bay door to gauge whether radar returns are meeting specifications.

Last year, Dassault ran tests of the leading and training edges of the air vehicle. Dussaugey says results were good, but the company is pursuing upgrades to further improve LO performance.

A key element of Neuron is the engine intake, which features radar-absorbing material. Tests are being evaluated.

Preliminary design reviews for almost all Neuron systems have now been completed and developers are in the final stages of defining interface control documents so team members can proceed with detailed design activities and production. Orders for long-lead items are likely to be on contract by year-end to begin the process of turning the €400-million ($628-million) undertaking - which kicked off in 2004 and went to contract in February 2006 - from concept to reality.

The airframe shape has been largely frozen for well over a year, with only tweaks being applied. The vehicle is expected to be 9.3 meters (30.5 ft.) long and have a 12.5-meter wingspan. Maximum takeoff weight will be 5,000-6,500 kg. (11,000-14,300 lb.). Top speed is Mach 0.85, with 12-hr. endurance. Composites will feature heavily in the design.

The air vehicle will sport four control surfaces and two weapon bays, each sized for a Mk.82 bomb. Beyond the electro-optical sensor, it will be fitted with a line-of-sight data link, but no synthetic aperture radar or radar-warning receiver (although there will be provision for one).

Infrared signature suppression is also a watchword for engineers. Designing the exhaust assembly was another major technology demonstration area and a full-scale demonstrator was built. The first run of the Adour engine is due this month; the exhaust assembly is to be added a few months later. It includes a masking plate to shield the infrared signature from the ground. Engineers will be scrutinizing thermal and dynamic strains on the exhaust assembly during those trials. HAI built the full-scale nozzle from alloys since composites were deemed too costly.

The airframe and engine team also has worked closely to ensure that the S-shaped inlet to mask the turbojet's fan doesn't starve the engine of vital airflow. A series of wind tunnel tests has been completed with an inlet distortion grid to mimic the airflow impact on the inlet.

Coming trials will be done in three steps, first just running the powerplant, then adding the distortion grid and nozzle, and then the masking plate. Dassaugey notes that this gradual process should make it easier to get flight clearance approval from authorities.

System software also features heavily in the design. One technology road map dealt with validating the open architecture approach, which should allow companies to modify code for a subsystem they are developing without requiring the rewrite of the entire system software - the team settled on the Arinc 653 software design standard. Saab is writing the core underlying computer software, with a first version expected by early 2009.

Dassault is responsible for the fly-by-wire flight control software, which the company is adapting from its Falcon 7X long-range business jet. The Falcon 7X has greater redundancy than the Rafale fighter's fly-by-wire system, and with only one flight-test article, developers want as much safety margin as possible.

In fact, Neuron's airworthiness safety standard should be almost as good as that of the European Aviation Safety Agency's or FAA's requirement for commercial aircraft, Dassaugey says. Avionics, hydraulics and electrical systems will be fully redundant to meet JAR 23 civil airworthiness requirements.

As developers build the program, concern about loss of the lone vehicle is weighing on them heavily. In particular, Neuron officials realize what a significant setback EADS suffered when its Barracuda UCAV demonstrator crashed, and are mindful of the magnitude of Lockheed Martin's loss of the Polecat stealth endurance UAV. One lesson gleaned from Polecat is to design a more flexible flight termination system. If a flight has to be terminated but the problem can still be resolved before the vehicle crashes, Neuron operators will have the ability to retake control of the UCAV. Since most of the flight tests will be in sparsely inhabited areas, the flight termination process will also be gradual, rather than directly commanding the vehicle to fly into the ground or sea.

Aircraft autonomy - another key design driver - will also reflect the design-to-cost approach. Unlike existing UAV programs, which tend to be personnel intensive, Neuron will nominally require only a small ground staff. Controllers will merely provide waypoint updates, allowing the vehicle to replan its route automatically, taking into account programmed threat information. Planners think this approach, which parallels work on other UCAV programs, will allow the vehicle to be controlled by just two individuals - and might even permit several vehicles to be handled by the same team.

With the basic design process coming to its end, the Neuron team is getting ready to reduce the core team of 100-150 personnel now operating at Dassault's St. Cloud headquarters outside of Paris and standing up the "virtual plateau." This will have engineers working at their dispersed sites. The core team will likely be reduced by half within a year.

Although Neuron is not designed to be an operationally representative system - it is about three-quarters the scale of what a future production model would probably require - attention will nevertheless be on the flight-test program. Those trials will commence at the facility in Istres, France, where the vehicle also will be assembled. They will then move to Sweden, for LO trials and weapons release, before finishing up in Italy. Radar testing at different frequencies will take place in Rennes, France. Stealth measurements will be performed after a few flights, in part to assess the impact of flight operations on the radar cross-section. Flight trials will run around 18 months.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...20Take%20Shape

[Trident]

12 hours endurance? I realised that UCAVs (flying wings in particular) would have superior endurance to a manned tactical aircraft, but if we assume a loitering speed of around Mach 0.6 to 0.7 that's almost Europe's reentry into the business of strategic bombing (disregarding the small payload). And that's a 75% scale vehicle! I wonder how the USAF likes the Navy's UCAS-D

[Rob L]

BAE Mantis has a 24 hour endurance.

Link.
http://www.defensenews.com/osd_story...VSDF&i=3625470

[Trident]

Yeah, most UAVs in that class have obscene endurance figures, but their loitering and cruise speed is glacial compared to what can be expected of the likes of Neuron, Taranis, UCAS-D and Skat. So it doesn't translate into that much range afterall.

[glitter]

Originally Posted by Trident

Yeah, most UAVs in that class have obscene endurance figures, but their loitering and cruise speed is glacial compared to what can be expected of the likes of Neuron, Taranis, UCAS-D and Skat. So it doesn't translate into that much range afterall.

Do you think that a Rafale or Eurofighter can sustain more than M0.7 for a very long time ?

[Trident]

Define very long time. Mach 0.7 to 0.8 should be about their most efficient cruising speed, depending on the loadout, so they'll have less range going faster than that. I'm also not quite sure what you're getting at with that question? Even at their most economical speed, neither aircraft will be able to match the 12h endurance of Neuron or the corresponding range without inflight refueling (and I just realised that the article specifically mentions the UK considering up to 24h endurance for a production strike UCAV - that'll be plenty of range!).

[ppp]

2010 < 2011

Originally Posted by Trident

Define very long time. Mach 0.7 to 0.8 should be about their most efficient cruising speed, depending on the loadout, so they'll have less range going faster than that. I'm also not quite sure what you're getting at with that question? Even at their most economical speed, neither aircraft will be able to match the 12h endurance of Neuron or the corresponding range without inflight refueling (and I just realised that the article specifically mentions the UK considering up to 24h endurance for a production strike UCAV - that'll be plenty of range!).

True, a production 12hr or 24hr Taranis would have a good range, but we have to consider the range's are going to be reduced when loaded with a bunch of bombs plus some of the endurance will be reserved. With AAR they would have immense utility to the RAF.

[Trident]

Originally Posted by ppp

True, a production 12hr or 24hr Taranis would have a good range, but we have to consider the range's are going to be reduced when loaded with a bunch of bombs plus some of the endurance will be reserved.

It's still a capability unheard of in Europe since the days of the V-Bombers and possibly beyond that mark in terms of range at least.

The more I think about it, I get the impression that the UK at least does not consider strategic reach an incidental byproduct of long endurance. I mean, BAE dropped the word 'strategic' in the press release when they announced Corax, the project that gave rise to Taranis is called SUAVE (Strategic Unmanned Air Vehicle Experiment) - the programme's got strategic written all over it! They're not even trying to hide the fact, really.

[ppp]

Originally Posted by Trident

It's still a capability unheard of in Europe since the days of the V-Bombers and possibly beyond that mark in terms of range at least.

The more I think about it, I get the impression that the UK at least does not consider strategic reach an incidental byproduct of long endurance. I mean, BAE dropped the word 'strategic' in the press release when they announced Corax, the project that gave rise to Taranis is called SUAVE (Strategic Unmanned Air Vehicle Experiment) - the programme's got strategic written all over it! They're not even trying to hide the fact, really.

It being strategic doesn't necessarily mean its got the range of a strategic bomber though as the word is often used to suggest. Let say Taranis does 0.5M @ 30k ft as its most efficient speed to reach its 12 hour endurance. This would give it a range of 4068 miles (6552km) one way, using double that as a measure of a 24 hour endurance gives us 8136 miles (13,104km). Of course combat radius would be far less and we dont know anything about its payload, cruise speeds ect but it's still a useful comparison against aircraft like Tornado and Typhoon. Of course the actual UCAV if it's ever put into production could (and probably will) be much longer ranged, since the whole pilotless thing makes it much more practical.

[sealordlawrence]

Originally Posted by Trident

It's still a capability unheard of in Europe since the days of the V-Bombers and possibly beyond that mark in terms of range at least.

The more I think about it, I get the impression that the UK at least does not consider strategic reach an incidental byproduct of long endurance. I mean, BAE dropped the word 'strategic' in the press release when they announced Corax, the project that gave rise to Taranis is called SUAVE (Strategic Unmanned Air Vehicle Experiment) - the programme's got strategic written all over it! They're not even trying to hide the fact, really.

Which is why I suspect that the RAF/MoD has so much support for UK UCAV projects, it is the only way on the horizon that the RAF will be able to claw back some of its strategic capability from the RN which currently (and rightfully) posesses practically all of it.

[Super Nimrod]

Sorry to bring this back, but in the original first post it suggested that UK Taranis would be flying in 2010. However, in the hoopla around the damaged wind turbine in Louth in the UK this week, the newspapers are reporting that the MOD as saying that the Taranis was using the ranges in the area at the time. One of the newspapers on the attached link. Its also being reported elsewhere

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...bine-site.html

Could this be that very rare occurance when a UK project is actually ahead of schedule ?

[LordAssap]

One aim of the Taranis trials is to demonstrate the required level of autonomy, including a representative strike mission. Sensor and payload integration are also being addressed.

Can we have details of Taranis weapon load please?

Do you think that a Rafale or Eurofighter can sustain more than M0.7 for a very long time ?

Typical cruisng speed at 89% power setting and heavy STRIKE configuration:

3 X 2.000 l, 2 X MICAs, " X Scalps = 1.000 Nm+.

Short answer = SEVERAL HOURS AT LEAST.

[kev 99]

Originally Posted by Super Nimrod

Sorry to bring this back, but in the original first post it suggested that UK Taranis would be flying in 2010. However, in the hoopla around the damaged wind turbine in Louth in the UK this week, the newspapers are reporting that the MOD as saying that the Taranis was using the ranges in the area at the time. One of the newspapers on the attached link. Its also being reported elsewhere

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...bine-site.html

Could this be that very rare occurance when a UK project is actually ahead of schedule ?

If those turbines we hit by an aircraft then you'd expect some debris. Also in the middle of a wind farm isn't exactly an ideal place to be test flying a prototype aircraft.

[LordAssap]

Could this be that very rare occurance when a UK project is actually ahead of schedule

LOL!

Considering they do use mostly exiting technologies from previous UAVs and does not have to develop a weapon bay nor the associated systems (Emulation of the attack) it would be a shame to be behind schedule...

[toan]

Originally Posted by LordAssap

Typical cruisng speed at 89% power setting and heavy STRIKE configuration:

3 X 2.000 l, 2 X MICAs, " X Scalps = 1.000 Nm+.

Short answer = SEVERAL HOURS AT LEAST.

1. Combat radius 1,000 NM+ --> 3,700 km+ in range.

2. Average speed: 450 ~ 550 kts --> 833 ~ 1019 km /hr.

3. Flight time: 3700 / 833 ~ 1019 = 3.6 to 4.5 hrs.

[LordAssap]

Originally Posted by toan

1. Combat radius 1,000 NM+ --> 3,700 km+ in range.

2. Average speed: 450 ~ 550 kts --> 833 ~ 1019 km /hr.

3. Flight time: 3700 / 833 ~ 1019 = 3.6 to 4.5 hrs.

At a typical cruise speed of M0.82/347kt, Chris Yeo/ISTRES FLIGHT TEST CENTRE DATE:23/06/99
SOURCE:Flight International
Combat ready
Flight International puts the Rafale BO1 two-seat prototype to the test in its heavy configuration
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...bat-ready.html

Let's be precise...

[toan]

Originally Posted by Super Nimrod

Sorry to bring this back, but in the original first post it suggested that UK Taranis would be flying in 2010. However, in the hoopla around the damaged wind turbine in Louth in the UK this week, the newspapers are reporting that the MOD as saying that the Taranis was using the ranges in the area at the time. One of the newspapers on the attached link. Its also being reported elsewhere

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...bine-site.html

Could this be that very rare occurance when a UK project is actually ahead of schedule ?

Don't worry, it will be far, far behind schedule, or even be terminated finally, once UK prepares to formally introduce productional UCAVs instead of just playing with an experimental toy......

TSR-2, FOAS, Future Attack Submarine (FASM), FSC, FRES.........So many previous examples....

[toan]

At a typical cruise speed of M0.82/347kt, Chris Yeo / ISTRES FLIGHT TEST CENTRE


347 kts = 642.644 km/hr

642.44 / 0.82 = 783.7 km/hr = 217.7 m/sec --> Mach 1 ???

[LordAssap]

Originally Posted by toan

Don't worry, it will be far, far behind schedule, or even be terminated finally, once UK prepares to formally introduce productional UCAVs instead of just playing with an experimental toy......

TSR-2, FOAS, Future Attack Submarine (FASM), FSC, FRES.........So many previous examples....

I am not worried at all.

What worries me is the press (or a small fraction of it) which keep talking about the Taranis TDP as the European first UCAV when if fact it is only by (MoD) definition and UAV TDP designed to develop (later programmes) UCAV technologies.

Mike Turner cried a long time for MoD to allow proper funding for BAe to keep up technologicaly with the rest of europe but from nEUROn lauch we have seen this "Me too" thing florishing in both forums and some uninformed articles.

The "All-British" UCAV vehicle is not designed just yet...

And i'm still waiting for details of this UAV weapon load which owes me to be called all sort of names when i mention these little "details".

642.44 / 0.82 = 783.7 km/hr = 217.7 m/sec --> Mach 1 ???

Depending on local MTO conditions and kind of Airspeed given?

Mach is given with a typical 24* at sea level (NOT corrected thus) so be aware it doesn't always fit the aircraft local airspeed/Mach...

Thank you all and Happy New Year to you.

[Super Nimrod]

With an engine similar to a Hawk, the weapon load probably won't be dissimilar. Weight saving due to all pilot related gear being removed will no doubt be counteracted by less lift from a stealthier more compact planform

[LordAssap]

Originally Posted by Super Nimrod

With an engine similar to a Hawk, the weapon load probably won't be dissimilar. Weight saving due to all pilot related gear being removed will no doubt be counteracted by less lift from a stealthier more compact planform

WHAT weapon load?

[Rob L]

WHAT weapon load?

The one going into the two weapons bays.

Taranis has two internal weapons bays.

Link.
http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/frtypen/FRTaran.htm

Just because it will simulate this at the beginning doesn't mean it can't carry weapons, Taranis is Europes second UCAV, right after the BAE Mantis, being rolled out in a few weeks/months.

[LordAssap]

Originally Posted by Rob L

The one going into the two weapons bays.

Link.
http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/frtypen/FRTaran.htm

Just because it will simulate this at the beginning doesn't mean it can't carry weapons, Taranis is Europes second UCAV, right after the BAE Mantis, being rolled out in a few weeks/months.

NOT according to MoD AND Taranis program goals documentation beside this source is the only one mentioning Weapon baies on this TDV and is by NO MEAN an official source...

What MoD says is cristal CLEAR; it is NOT intended to drop weapons and it is an UNARMED Technology Demonstrator Vehicle NOT and UCAV.

Thanks.

[Mick]

True, no weapons bays - but they are going to use simulations for the bomb-dropping stuff. It is still considered a UCAV technology demonstrator because that is where it would head if the MoD decide to make Taranis the basis for a future production UCAV model (that would be its role). Neuron falls into the same category, except it will have bomb bays and will actually drop bombs as part of the testing.

[LordAssap]

Originally Posted by Mick

It is still considered a UCAV technology demonstrator because that is where it would head if the MoD decide to make Taranis the basis for a future production UCAV model (that would be its role). Neuron falls into the same category, except it will have bomb bays and will actually drop bombs as part of the testing.

Yes it IS a UCAV technology demonstrator but NOT an UCAV in itself, it is an UAV...

We agree.

[Mick]

My mistake, it will have two weapons bays, but they won't be used.

[swerve]

That Flug Revue story was last updated over 2 years ago. Plans may have changed.

[Rob L]

Originally Posted by LordAssap

Yes it IS a UCAV technology demonstrator but NOT an UCAV in itself, it is an UAV...

We agree.

Doesn't matter even if that was true (which it isn't - there are lots of RAF/MoD statements to it as a UCAV), BAE Mantis will fly a full two years before your little wooden Neuron.

[LordAssap]

Originally Posted by Rob L

Doesn't matter even if that was true (which it isn't - there are lots of RAF/MoD statements to it as a UCAV), BAE Mantis will fly a full two years before your little wooden Neuron.

ONLY the truth matter Mr Rob L; as for your stament you still obviously can't make the distinction between an UCAV demonstrastor (A demonstrator UCAV as opposed to Demonstrator aircraft) and an UCAV technology demonstrator (An UAV-UCAV terchnology demonstrator)...

And NO NONE of MoD or BAe refers to Taranis as being an UCAV demonstrator ot an UCAV...

[Rob L]

And NO NONE of MoD or BAe refers to Taranis as being an UCAV demonstrator ot an UCAV...

Really? The following are all from the MoD, RAF or BAE websites (5 minutes of searching lol):

Taranis unmanned combat air vehicle

a £124m unmanned combat aerial vehicle demonstrator

to build the first pilotless front line fighter-bomber.

Then, once it has been authorised to do so, it autonomously attacks that target

The cutting of first metal for the UK's 124m Taranis UCAV (unmanned combat air vehicle) technology demonstrator programme

Links.
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/De...ersForward.htm
http://www.baesystems.com/Newsroom/N...824122437.html
http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/archive.c...58E8AA111D1784
http://www.baesystems.com/Newsroom/N...915121728.html