Royal Navy flies first mega Mojave drone from aircraft carrier
- Reference: 1700487249
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2023/11/20/royal_navy_flies_large_drone/
- Source link:
The "Mojave" aircraft took off and landed back on the carrier HMS Prince of Wales last week in [1]trials being conducted off the eastern coast of the US. It is part of the Predator-series family of fixed-wing drones built by General Atomics, and much larger and more capable than other drones the Royal Navy has operated until now.
It is also said to be the first time that any navy other than that of America has been able to fly such an unmanned aircraft from one of their ships.
[2]
"The Mojave trial is a European first – the first time that a Remotely Piloted Air System of this size has operated to and from an aircraft carrier outside of the United States," Royal Navy director of Develop, Rear Admiral James Parkin, said in a statement.
[3]
[4]
Parkin said the success of the trial "heralds a new dawn in how we conduct maritime aviation," hailing it as another step in the evolution of the Royal Navy's carrier strike group into a mixed crewed and uncrewed fighting force.
The [5]Mojave is described as a version of the MQ1C Gray Eagle drone that has been adapted for short take-off and landing (STOL) from "austere" runways where it would otherwise not be possible to operate large unmanned aircraft like the Predator.
[6]
This is how it is able to operate from the Royal Navy’s Queen Elizabeth-class ships, which lack the catapults and arresting gear that are normally used to launch and recover fixed-wing planes from aircraft carriers. The F-35B fighters that the UK's navy operates launch using a ramp at the bow of the ship and typically perform a vertical landing, like their Sea Harrier predecessors.
Mojave is 9 meters (29 ft) long and has a 16 meter (52 ft) wingspan. It is claimed to be able to carry up to 1.633 metric tons (3,600 lb) in payload, the equivalent of 16 AGM-114 Hellfire missiles. Configured for a surveillance mode, it is said to be capable of staying aloft for more than 20 hours, which is one of the attractions of this type of aircraft, as they don't need to carry any crew.
Commander Martin Russell, in charge of air operations aboard HMS Prince of Wales, said the trial felt like "a glimpse into the future."
[7]
During the first trial take-off and landing, the Mojave didn't carry anything, however, so further tests will be required to see how easy it is to operate an aircraft like this when carrying weapons or sensor payloads, and in varying weather conditions. It also unclear how easy it will be to land a drone safely on the Queen Elizabeth-class ships when there are other aircraft such as F-35 fighters parked on the deck.
But the Mojave will likely not be the drone that the Royal Navy operates, even if it does decide it is perfectly feasible to operate these aircraft from the carriers. According to the website [8]Navy Lookout , this would probably be the [9]MQ-9B SeaGuardian , which is essentially the same aircraft that is due to enter service next year with the Royal Air Force as the [10]Protector RG Mk 1 , but which can be configured for STOL operation aboard carriers with a wing and tail kit inspired by the Mojave.
The potential missions of an unmanned aircraft include ISR (intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) and anti-submarine operations, dispensing and monitoring sonobuoy sonar sensors. They could also be used to carry anti-ship missiles or weapons to attack targets on land.
Another role mooted could be carrying radar for airborne early warning and control, perhaps eventually replacing the specially adapted [11]Merlin helicopters that currently fulfil this role for the Royal Navy. The Merlin can only stay aloft for a few hours and also cannot fly as high as an aircraft such as the MQ-9B, which limits how far out its radar can detect threats.
[12]We're getting that fry-day feeling... US Army gets hold of drone-cooking microwave rig
[13]Amazon unveils new drone design, plans liftoff of aerial delivery in UK, Italy
[14]DARPA takes its long-duration Manta undersea drone for a test-dip
[15]Let's give these quadruped robot dogs next-gen XM7 rifles, says US Army
As such, drones would not replace the F-35B in Royal Navy service, but instead complement them. This is just as well, as the UK government has no plans to procure more than 74 of the stealth aircraft, and these are operated as a joint force that sees the planes shared between the RAF and the Navy.
Currently, there are understood to be 31 in service in the UK, with a Tranche 1 purchase of 48 aircraft due to be completed by 2025, and a follow-on Tranche 2 purchase to be complete by the early part of the next decade. Drones could supplement these, and are likely to cost less, with some sources putting the [16]cost of an MQ-9B at $37.8 million, compared with about $80 million for an F-35B.
A House of Commons Defence Committee [17]report in September claimed there had been "significant cuts" to the UK's air power capabilities that have left the country "dangerously exposed." While the UK air fleet is made up of highly capable aircraft, it was criticized as being "just too small" and the report called on the MoD to "urgently address this lack of combat mass." ®
Get our [18]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2023/november/17/20231117-royal-navys-successful-crewless-aircraft-trials-offer-glimpse-into-the-future
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZVuQvTDc3Md-pUM79Xdg@gAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZVuQvTDc3Md-pUM79Xdg@gAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZVuQvTDc3Md-pUM79Xdg@gAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.ga-asi.com/remotely-piloted-aircraft/mojave
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZVuQvTDc3Md-pUM79Xdg@gAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZVuQvTDc3Md-pUM79Xdg@gAAAMg&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.navylookout.com/mojave-uncrewed-air-system-successfully-flown-from-hms-prince-of-wales/
[9] https://www.ga-asi.com/remotely-piloted-aircraft/mq-9b-stol
[10] https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/protector-rg-mk-1-mq-9b/
[11] https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-gb/products/crowsnest.html
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2023/11/03/microwave_anti_drone/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2023/10/19/amazon_drone_delivery_expands/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2023/09/28/darpa_underwater_drone/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2023/08/30/quadruped_dogs_gun_xm7/
[16] https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/air-warfare/decision-to-delay-mq-9b-protector-programme-cost-186-million/
[17] https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmselect/cmdfence/178/summary.html
[18] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Interesting...
Defence companies don't get paid directly for R&D work and so their R&D costs are recouped via higher costs on things that do get ordered.
Typically this then results in the unit cost being higher than expected, which results in cutting the number of units to save money, which results in the unit cost going up.
Personally I think it'd be more honest to just account for and pay the R&D work directly given that in most cases our own government is the sole customer. (Unless you want to sell our military technology to the Russians/Chinese, who'd probably be delighted at buying a single copy to reverse engineer...)
Re: Interesting...
In 1947 the UK SOLD Rolls-Royce Derwent and Nene engines to the Soviets. Soon afterwards MiG-15 and La-15 jet fighters with similar engines rolled from their assembly lines.
Stalin reportedly said "What kind of fool would be willing to sell his secrets!". Stalin and the Bomb, page 235.
Re: Interesting...
Not so much Rolls Royce, the deal was an instructed sale by the Labour government of the day, to their "friends", and against the advice of anybody sensible. If you can speed read you'll get most of the gist in the link below before the "register to read more" banner pops up.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/22/attlee-ignored-warnings-send-stalin-rolls-royce-engines/
Numbers planned
Isn't 74 the number that have actually been ordered, while the plan is for 138?
Or did I miss another treasury-driven defence cut?
Probably the future of carrier operations
Given the rapidly escalating price of modern combat aircraft (carrier-based or otherwise) I would expect that carrier operations will increasingly move to drones, keeping manned aircraft for those times when you just have to have eyeballs connected to wetware looking directly at the target. Drones are typically smaller and cheaper (so we can get more on the carrier), are increasingly capable of carrying the same payload (so your effective strike capability is not degraded) and are relatively expendable (no pilot is lost if the drone is shot down). We are seeing something like this operational methodology develop in the Ukrainian conflict over the last 12-18 months, so its reasonable to expect it to become more widespread.
Re: Probably the future of carrier operations
no, we're _not_ seeing something like this develop in Ukraine, quite the reverse. In Ukraine we're seeing high altitude, small, or smallish observational drones, that slip though air-defences, to spot for targets, also low-to-mid altitude loitering ammunition (though, in general, there's little actual 'loitering' here), we're seeing high (relatively) altitude, very long distance kamikadze drones (both sides use them), and we're seeing low-alt consumer-grade observational drones sometimes used to bomb the opponents and, of course, consumer-grade fpv kamikaze drones. Plus a couple of in-betweens, like those switchblade drones, or a few other, fixed wing Ukraine-made equivalents. There's nothing there used effectively now that's similar to reaper, etc., unless the battlefiled becomes more 'dynamic' and bayraktar drones manage to slip through Russian defence.
Actually, reaper-style drones are not a replacement for manned aircraft, as they lack speed (though the Turks are apparently advanced in their jet-powered fighter drone).
Re: Probably the future of carrier operations
"Actually, reaper-style drones are not a replacement for manned aircraft, as they lack speed"
Then the Western military need to get some supersonic combat drones ordered pronto. The F35 is a dreadful camel of a machine, and a purpose built supersonic combat drone could be smaller, faster, lighter, without the complications of meatsacks requiring years of training, or of heavy life support systems. No need to scrap the slower Reaper-style machines because they'll have better endurance.
Re: Probably the future of carrier operations
The immediate use case driving this current project is to find a replacement for Crowsnest (radar mounted on a Merlin helicopter) by 2030, which is when Crowsnest is scheduled for retirement.
The current plan is to have drones take over a lot of the routine monitoring and surveillance jobs that manned planes would have to be otherwise used for, freeing up the manned planes for more complex jobs. The latter includes both F-35s and Merlin helicopters. Drones have lower operating costs than high performance manned aircraft, and it's the operating costs, not the purchase price, which dominate the overall lifetime costs.
The issues being looked at include factors such as how well the model being evaluated will take-off and land in all sorts of weather and sea conditions, and how to deal with safety issues such as making sure the drone doesn't crash into parked aircraft on the deck in the event of a bad landing. Since there's no pilot, I imagine the options for ensuring the latter are probably a lot more "robust" than would the case if there were a pilot in the aircraft.
slow, big, cheap as chips
meanwhile in Ukraine, their fleet of (armed) bayraktars has been, metaphorically, mothballed. I wonder why...
ok, fair enough, UK-China border is MUCH longer, something that small might slip through ;)
Interesting...
That a slow, unmanned drone costs half the price of the F35. Different capabilities obviously, even so, seems a very expensive drone.
Of course, there was a time when £80m for an F35 seemed an outlandish price, but since that only buys 300 metres of HS2, maybe it's a bargain (even if the F35 is over-complex, and poorly conceived).