Reaper Replacement
 

So, PM has stated that the RAF Reaper fleet is to be replaced by 20 more advanced models with increased range and payload.

What are looking at here? Predator C?

(I am disregarding the name "Protector", the only type I can find with that name is an Israeli unmanned boat (USV). I assume a slip of the tongue - but just as the USAF changed fron RS-71 to SR-71 after a ,presidential gaffe, I presume whatever we get will be renamed appropriately.)


UK drone fleet to double in fight against IS, says PM - BBC News

I think they're about to rename Watchkeeper :O

I suspect if the journalist had listened very carefully he'd have heard "by 2020, subject to delays, overspends, etc etc, don't expect to see them by 2025""

Scavenger's output is supposed to replace Reaper in about that timeframe.

I suspect this is MQ-9 Reaper Block 5 ER - from the GA website:

At the same time, they are working on getting MQ-9 fully certified for European airspace (don't forget that France and Italy also operate MQ-9). Here is a link explaining this: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/06/25/ge...uropean-skies/

So now that UK Reaper can fire dual-mode Brimstone as well (MQ-9 Reaper Fires Brimstone Missiles) then I suspect that MQ-9 Block 5+ ER that is certified is going to be SCAVENGER and that is what the PM is talking about.

LJ

PS. Delivery date is expected from 2019 according to the DoDBuzz link above.

Kitbag.
That's very naughty, but was my first thought too.
I can just imagine the prime minister boasting how the new watchkeeper has better boundary control etc etc, and hoping that no one picked up on the boundary control in question being in a marginal seat the government of the time want to win/keep with the jobs watchkeeper would bring. :)

Is it reallly so terrible if it turns out the "made in Britain" tag has carried some weight in this decision? There's going to be a huge market in RPAS; surely giving UK industry a toe hold is an all-too-rare act of responsible far-sighted government?

Avenger would make sense, given our involvement in the series of products thus far.

So probably not.

As 'Avenger' is the (inappropriate) name of the Beech King Air in use for FAA Observer training, perhaps not.

Predator C is a generation behind Taranis and oher UCAVs. Hopefully, we will get son of Taranis as well as the latest MQ-9s. Here is a hi-res piccy of the ER variant with drop tanks and winglets - http://www.dmitryshulgin.com/wp-cont...9-Reaper-4.jpg

Here are the airframe changes (there are also lots of gadgetry changes as well)
http://www.uasvision.com/wp-content/...Opt2_ISR-1.jpg

With a couple of sqns of Taranis replacing part of the GR4s role (with F35 and Typhoon doing the rest) and MQ-9 B5 ER doing the Medium-High Alt Long Endurance recce role that was done by the PR9 then we might have a half decent capability to offer for Combat Air once again.

http://content5.video.news.com.au/ND...65530-hero.jpg
BAESYSTEMS TARANIS

Thing is Pred-C exists. Taranis is only a tech demonstrator.

... from a company with, lets be honest, a fairly rubbish track record at military aircraft in the last 40 years.

Indeed. Who can fail to remember the "Bugger-off"....

Phoenix

At some point one has to put a broom stick in the merry-go-round of development and make a decision to buy something, else one ends up with a 20+ yr development period. Can't THINK where that's happened before...

Can I just pose the question as to whether 20 new aircraft will be enough?
Is this a replacement for what we have now to carry on the same role, or something else?
I'm asking as it seems we will soon have a fleet of AH64E helicopters and we may want some UAVs to go with those.

Slow down old stick, I believe that Pred C Avenger has yet to find a customer and is still a 'developmental' aircraft. I'm no big fan of t'bungling baron but I don't believe that Pred C is much further ahead and the UK product is up there with the more advanced ones like X47 and nEUROn.

Anyway, Reaper Block 5+ ER makes much more sense for now...

http://jamesdrewjournalist.com/wp-co...up-672x372.jpg

LJ

No you don't. You get companies to provide you with the service you require with the best they can offer at the time. As and when they can provide a better service (more operational hours within a given time window or better functionality), they get paid more for doing so. That way you don't get stuck with half-baked equipment which is obsolete by the time you get it. The supplier is always striving to improve the product, get more hours on station, and capability in a wider range of conditions, as that earns them more.

You are only tied to the supplier for as long as they have the best product on the market, so they have to keep upping their game.

Don't be so bloody boring.

You seem to be suggesting air combat capability be leased in, Mechta? Radical step..might work. Can't see it getting by all the vested interests tho

"pay per slew", sorry - old EO joke! :O

ShotOne, the reaper is hardly an air combat aircraft, certainly not offensive air-to-air in its current form. A strike aircraft might be a more apt description, and there is no reason why a strike aircraft could not be leased*. At the rate things are changing with UAVs it would not be wise to tie oneself to one system for too long.

The only stage at which military personnel might be required is when making the decision to engage a target. Even then, there are precedents in Iraq of contractors making those decisions (Blackwater perhaps?).

*The French provision of Super Etendards to Iraq being a case in point.