UK Team Tempest


SamuraiBlue

Captain
So you are telling me to seperate the most expensive subsystem of a plane? Did you think that through?

Even ignoring the old aircraft design rule that the engine, size, weight, fuel consumption, thrust, thrust to weight ratio etc., determines the entire aircraft design.
Aughhh, How about J-20? How about the Harrier?
There are so many various examples it's just ridiculous to even argue about it.
 

Pmichael

Junior Member
Aughhh, How about J-20? How about the Harrier?
There are so many various examples it's just ridiculous to even argue about it.
I'm not getting the Harrier... which got various upgrades within the same family. And the J-20 is a prime example how a subpar enigne holds the entire plane back.

You post is confusing, especially when previous attempts of multinational developement didn't work out because Japan made specific requirements regarding having fully domestic systems on the fighter.

Also the plain fact that Japan announced a close relationship to the USA regarding a next generation fighter, while nothing ever happened regarding Tempest.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Brumby

Major
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #43
BAE Envisioning Future Factory For Tempest

Britain’s Team Tempest consortium now has hundreds of millions of pounds invested in technology studies and development work to prepare the resulting next-generation combat aircraft to fly in the battlespace of the 2040s.

Nonetheless, long before the platform reaches contested airspace it will be challenged by the complexity of how to build such an advanced platform both quickly and affordably.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
—the leading member of the Team Tempest consortium, which also includes Leonardo, MBDA and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
—has begun looking at new manufacturing techniques and technology that will not only apply to work on Tempest but potentially also existing programs such as the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
as well.

Current manufacturing processes, such as drilling 150,000 holes in and around the fuselage and wings of the BAE Systems Hawk jet trainer, or the Typhoon’s moving production line, are too slow for what is envisaged for Tempest, said Andrew Schofield, BAE’s director of manufacturing and materials, speaking earlier in August.

He said future production methods will need to be leaner and more productive.

“When you take the length of time from concept and bringing Typhoon to service, we are looking to halve that time across the whole organization,” said Schofield.

“We will not be producing at the volumes associated with
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
or even the F-35, so we have got to be more flexible,” he added.

In a building a short walk from where the last British Typhoons are being assembled, BAE has established a laboratory for its factory of the future concept. The idea is based on greater use of digitalization and big data, as well as so-called “cobotics,” which calls for human operators working alongside robots.

“The challenge of Tempest is that it has to be connected, upgradable, flexible and affordable. And when you translate those requirements, you need a factory of the future,” said Schofield.

Unlike in a car factory, where robots will perform one task on a rolling production line, BAE envisions the use of reconfigurable assembly cells using robots that can be programmed to perform several different tasks as the assembly process progresses.

Rather than using costly tooling and jigs, the robots will be able to hold large aircraft structural components in place as assembly progresses.

Technology such as additive manufacturing has the ability to reduce manufacturing lead times. The company has already proved it can produce components that would normally have a lead time of 100 weeks, not to mention components that can be produced and ready to be fitted to the aircraft, in just 100 days
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

The move is a step beyond the laser-alignment technology that BAE installed on the Typhoon assembly, which means UK Typhoons are slightly more fuel efficient than those assembled elsewhere in the program.

The company also wants to make use of the digital twin concept, in other words mapping and collecting data on individual components so that a virtual representation of the component can be recreated.

In the coming weeks, the company plans to produce a large piece of a representative Tempest fuselage demonstrating different manufacturing and joining techniques.

BAE is already working with academia, including universities in Birmingham, Bristol and Manchester, as well as the Sheffield, England-based Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre and companies including Stratasys and Siemens.

The company has also developed an advanced workbench, or collaborative workstation, where employees will liaise with robots on the assembly. The bench is capable of self-adjusting to the comfortable working height of the operators, while the systems can be customized to their skill level. Someone new to the role could be given extra steps to complete the task, whereas more experienced operators would see fewer.

Workers would also have a direct connection with engineers through a camera and projection system that will be capable of showing how components should look during the various steps. The system will even warn operators through a process called “pick by light” if they try to take and install the incorrect component. The aim is increasing productivity, as well as reducing and ensuring that components are assembled correctly the first time.

Two of the workbenches are already being used in F-35 component production.

In addition to manufacturing, BAE is exploring the use of multifunctional materials, usually composites that can embed aircraft systems within it. Schofield said the company has experimented with such materials that can be used as batteries to store electrical charge for onboard systems. Sensors can also be embedded in the material for signature control and sensing. The company is also continuing its research into materials with low-observable (LO) attributes. The company’s research is exploring LO materials with a lower weight and maintenance penalty, but also those that operate across wider frequency bands.
Source : AWST August 27, 2019
 

Pmichael

Junior Member
The framing is absurd again. They didn't invest hundreds of millions of pounds into Tempest but to modernize production facilities, where F-35 and Eurofighters are produced right now.
Or do people believe bringing your facilities on a similiar level of Airbus, Boeing, Lockheed gonna impress anyone in 2040?
 

Pmichael

Junior Member
The UK government is investing £2 billion in the fighter project, with industry is putting in around £1.5 billion, he said. That government funding might be found by cutting the order for the F-35 joint strike fighter to 48 units from 136, saving some £8 billion.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
I'm not getting the Harrier... which got various upgrades within the same family. And the J-20 is a prime example how a subpar enigne holds the entire plane back.

You post is confusing, especially when previous attempts of multinational developement didn't work out because Japan made specific requirements regarding having fully domestic systems on the fighter.

Also the plain fact that Japan announced a close relationship to the USA regarding a next generation fighter, while nothing ever happened regarding Tempest.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
That is what you call variants in the manufacturing world.
Whether it is an upgrade or a sub-par engine if you share the air frame then it will be a variant of the original. Automobile offers various variants which offers different engine displacements and components. If component shares interfaces then it is called a modular variant since it can be swapped easily with other components with the same interface.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
F16A/B models have a different engine than C/D models C/D models Block 30 and 40 have a different engine than Blocks 25,32 and 42 and Blocks 50,52 and 60 don’t share any engines with any other blocks.

Individual nations will often request that military heavy equipment be tailored to there specific wants and logistics. This may include changing engines.
—————————————

The Japanese F2 Program has left the JSDF once bitten twice shy. Many of the problems in that program could have been avoided to be blunt, but end of day it happened and Japan has been skeptical of Lockheed Martin since.
The fact they got in on the F35 came about Was not a sign of faith so much as lack of choice and need. Japan wants some degree of control and choice on its next fighter program. They want to be in the cockpit so to speak. F2 and F35 left them chafed by limits imposed by there own policy preventing exports of combat arms and lack of control on the end product.
At this point in time both US Sixth gen programs are less solid than the European programs. F/A-XX and F-X in R&D without signs of external partnering. For Japan to jump in on those as yet would be a shot in the dark. The Tempest concept at least gives a form of its aims. Where depending on who is talking F/A-XX goes from stealthy Advanced fighter to F/A35F.
And F-X sometimes sounds like a space fighter sometimes a bomber and sometimes a Raptor 2.0.
 

Brumby

Major
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #50
the US first should fix the biggest military procurement mess program in history of warfare that is the F-35 game-changer
If you think F-35 is a mess then I can assure you that the NGF will be Godzilla size "mess" by your definition.

Such programs will continue to get more complex and consequently much more expensive until no military service on the world can afford to buy them in sufficient numbers. Such a future had been written in the wall except that there is a reluctance to understand why and to accept such a future state. The development path cannot be based on historical models as they clearly demonstrate a trend that is unstainable. If you don't understand the underlying factors then every future program will simply be a "mess" by definition because they will be expensive, complex and prone to issues by our own myopic view of capabilities and outcomes.

One of the fundamental lesson with the F-35 and it serves as an insight why such a model is unsustainable is because it is too platform centric. Essentially the approach is to build all the capabilities to cater to present and future threats into the platform. If this is the approach does anybody seriously think any future platform will be any better in terms of development and sustainment cost? The game in town is that the upscale technology chain and the cycle is evolving quickly and the time cycle is compressing. A platform centric approach is too inflexible to cope with technological changes in order to remain relevant against future threats. It is the main driver why the emphasis has shifted to a concept of system of systems because development work can be undertaken concurrently on all the systems and not sequentially.

This brings me to the news of the day.

Next-Generation Air Dominance Doesn't Mean New Aircraft, Air Force Official Says
ARLINGTON, VA. --- For about two decades, the Air Force has fielded both the F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Lightning II — both billed as technical marvels. But what's next for the Air Force?

Developing what officials call next-generation air dominance likely won't require a new aircraft at all, Air Force leaders have said.

The United States is facing an increasingly competitive global security environment, Air Force Maj. Gen. Michael A. Fantini, director of the Air Force Warfighting Integration Capability said today at a Mitchell Institute-sponsored panel discussion on next-generation air superiority in Arlington, Virginia.

Nevertheless, he said, the U.S. military will need to continue to execute its core missions of homeland defense and nuclear deterrence. It also will need to be able to defeat a peer adversary while holding another at bay while continuing to engage in countering the violent extremist challenge.

"We will not be able to accomplish that without the ability to continue to control the skies," Fantini said.

The Air Force's next-generation air dominance program is meant to help it maintain control of the skies — and that doesn't necessarily mean a new fighter jet, said Air Force Maj. Gen. David A. Krumm, director for Air Force Global Power Programs.

"It is not a thing. It is not a platform," he said. "The next generation of air superiority is a network-connected family of systems that works together to get after the things we need to get after for our nation to ensure air superiority. It's not one thing; it's a multitude of things."

Next-generation air dominance involves ensuring that everything can share data with everything else, across services and across domains, including air, land, sea, space and cyberspace, Krumm said. "All of that connected is what we want it to be," he added.

And it takes into account the incredible pace of technology advancement as well, he said, noting that it will be constantly evolving and constantly changing.

The Air Force will look for capabilities that are rapidly upgradable and modular in nature, Krumm said.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


IMO, the US is best placed to exploit and effectively roll out any NGF program whatever form it may turned out to be viz a viz the Tempest or the European program. The main reason is because operating in a 5th gen environment transforms the way you operate and how decisions are shared and made. It is fundamentally different from that of a 4th generation force. As such, it will be easier to migrate from a 5th generation operating structure to a future state which is likely to be more decentralised in nature. As an example, a system of systems is dependent on robust communication links and you cannot gel different systems working together without it. The US with the F-35 is finding itself insufficiently invested in communication infrastructure to operate coherently with things like 5th to 4th gen com issues. Additionally the data pipes are simply not big enough to handle required data throughput, latency and volume as will be more demanding in a system of systems environment. Does anybody seriously think the Europeans can easily jump from a 4th gen to a 6th gen environment without having gone through the investment of a 5th gen operating infrastructure?
.
 

Top