General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
jonas
Senior Member
Posts: 1110
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:20
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by jonas »

More testing :- click on excerpt to read article

https://www.defenceonline.co.uk/2021/12 ... protector/

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by bobp »

Bit more on the above story here....

https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles/ra ... n-the-usa/

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by SW1 »


Dahedd
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Dahedd »

Maybe we need to look at some of these while we're at it.

https://timesofsandiego.com/military/20 ... ator-line/

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

I wonder if the Mojave could carry a radar big enough to replace the CROWSNEST on the UK's carriers? With its short take off and if the Carrier heads into the wind it may not need a catapult to launch and it may only need barrier rather then arrestor wires to land. Just thinking out of the box as if a modular radar could be fitted it would, without said radar be able to carry out a number of other missions.

bobp
Senior Member
Posts: 2684
Joined: 06 May 2015, 07:52
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by bobp »

Lord Jim wrote: 28 Dec 2021, 20:56 I wonder if the Mojave could carry a radar big enough to replace the CROWSNEST on the UK's carriers? With its short take off and if the Carrier heads into the wind it may not need a catapult to launch and it may only need barrier rather then arrestor wires to land. Just thinking out of the box as if a modular radar could be fitted it would, without said radar be able to carry out a number of other missions.
The wingspan would limit its use from a carrier unless you could fold them.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

How complicated would it be to make the wings fold manually I wonder?

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Timmymagic »

Another Warzone article on the Mojave.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... d-aircraft

Must say I like the idea of it for the QE Class....if the Protector (and Reaper) can drop Sonobuoys this can as well...persistent ISR, armed overwatch..whats not to like...all it needs is a wingfold...a buy of 8 would do the RN (and RM) no end of good.
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post (total 2):
DaheddJensy

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by SW1 »

These users liked the author SW1 for the post:
Lord Jim

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Timmymagic »

Gareth Jennings is reporting that SeaSpray will be used by the RAF on Protector. Presumably installed as and when required.

Makes me wonder what the plans are with our remaining 10 x Reaper..one of which is brand new. Can they be upgraded and re-lifed to fly in controlled airspace? Retained for overseas use? Or are we going to gift them to someone eventually?

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Timmymagic »

Interesting pic that I've not seen before. General Atomics Predator/Reaper line up. It does clearly illustrate the difference in size between the platforms.

12 'o' clock - MQ-1 Predator
3 'o' clock - MQ-9 Reaper (aka Predator B)
6 'o' clock - MQ-20 Avenger (aka Predator C) - Is actually in service with USAF and CIA
9 'o' clock - MQ-9B Reaper i.e. Protector RG.1 for the RAF

Image
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post (total 2):
RunningStrongLord Jim

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7930
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by SKB »

Millennials & Gen Z will not understand these analogue clock references. Please redo with 24 hour digital time. :mrgreen:
These users liked the author SKB for the post (total 2):
Lord JimTimmymagic

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by SW1 »

These users liked the author SW1 for the post (total 2):
JensyTimmymagic

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Timmymagic »

A marinised Mojave/Protector mash up with folding wings...yes please.

Much as I want a UK solution (I still think we missed a massive opportunity with Mantis) this makes an awful lot of sense for the RN...Add in the sonobuoy capability, Seaspray radar, Brimstone, Paveway IV and it would be a great addition to the QE Class.

It would also add some real meat to the RN's concept of using the QE Class in littoral/expeditionary warfare. Suddenly a load out of 8-12 F-35B on the 2nd carrier for CAP only, but with these for CAS/ISR etc. is a whole lot more convincing...
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post (total 3):
RepulseCaribbeanJensy

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by SW1 »

Timmymagic wrote: 10 May 2022, 14:21
A marinised Mojave/Protector mash up with folding wings...yes please.

Much as I want a UK solution (I still think we missed a massive opportunity with Mantis) this makes an awful lot of sense for the RN...Add in the sonobuoy capability, Seaspray radar, Brimstone, Paveway IV and it would be a great addition to the QE Class.

The missed opportunity was not gettting a “European” assembly and integration facility for all European purchases of mq9!

But yes uk sensors and complex weapons integration and use of such a platform has to be the way fwd in this space, I’d argue things like osprey radar should also be looked at.

Mentioned before areas we should be all over is protector and mosquito development and integration along with complex weapons, they are the future priority not another manned development
These users liked the author SW1 for the post:
Timmymagic

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Timmymagic »

I long ago reached the view that we needed another UK 'Prime' other than BAE. Their stewardship of the land domain including RO has been woeful, but also their interest in taking funded research into the live environment by taking a risk has been terrible in recent years.
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post (total 3):
SW1JensyLord Jim

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by SW1 »

Timmymagic wrote: 10 May 2022, 14:39 I long ago reached the view that we needed another UK 'Prime' other than BAE. Their stewardship of the land domain including RO has been woeful, but also their interest in taking funded research into the live environment by taking a risk has been terrible in recent years.
Raytheon at broughton showed was is possible if your willing to properly engage with primes and benefit U.K. plc.
These users liked the author SW1 for the post (total 3):
TimmymagicLord JimSD67

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Timmymagic »

Timmymagic wrote: 10 May 2022, 14:21 .Add in the sonobuoy capability, Seaspray radar, Brimstone, Paveway IV and it would be a great addition to the QE Class.
Just had a random thought...if it has Seaspray and a datalink....it can carry Sea Venom. Wonder what effect on range that would have for a release from higher altitude...I don't think the 25km range seen on some sites is anywhere close. Sea Skua was believed in reality to go beyond 30km, I'd expect Sea Venom to be a considerable leap from that just purely from the improvements in rocket fuel and lift that it has. Sea Venom must have at least 40km range from Wildcat, possibly more...add a wing kit in to get a glide boost and you could add 30-40 km range to that range from a decent altitude launch.

A dedicated Anti-ship missile for UCAV might have a potential market....looks like there could be a fair few Sea Guardian out there in the future...should be easy to integrate as well.
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post:
jedibeeftrix

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

That is what Turkey has done with its TB2, develop two dedicated weapon systems that the UAS can deploy, which it has done to great effect in the conflicts it has been utilised in.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
jedibeeftrix

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Timmymagic »

Lord Jim wrote: 12 May 2022, 03:45 That is what Turkey has done with its TB2, develop two dedicated weapon systems that the UAS can deploy, which it has done to great effect in the conflicts it has been utilised in.
To be honest the US and UK have already done that, the list of UCAV weapons available is quite extensive, but the emphasis on long range, larger platforms has meant more capable weapons have continued to be used like Hellfire and GBU-12.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

Because of the size of UAS we have used in combat operations we have been able to use existing weapon systems. Turkey designed bespoke weapons for the TB2 to match the carry capacity of the UAS, usually two heavy and two light munitions, whose name I cannot remember.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Timmymagic »

Lord Jim wrote: 13 May 2022, 06:09 Because of the size of UAS we have used in combat operations we have been able to use existing weapon systems. Turkey designed bespoke weapons for the TB2 to match the carry capacity of the UAS, usually two heavy and two light munitions, whose name I cannot remember.
MAM-L and MAM-C.

It's worth remembering that the US has done the same a lot earlier. Not all US systems could carry Hellfire. Thats partly why Griffin was developed, and Viper Strike amongst many others...there's more out there in use than people think...

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Lord Jim »

Thanks I forgot about those tow US weapon systems. I wonder is the British Army has given any thought to arming its Watchkeepers? This seems to be an on off situation, but it would give the Army experience at operating its own armed UAS, to engage targets of opportunity as well as its usual ISTAR roles. Ukraine seems to be highlighting the need for far more UAS and of different types to what we currently operate. We will have Protector at the high end and miniature UAS at the other but a UAS similar to the TB-2 maybe something we should look at. It the latter can apparently operate with impunity over Russian units, who have substantially more air defence than we do surely this is a lesson we should seriously examine.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by Timmymagic »

Lord Jim wrote: 13 May 2022, 14:20 Thanks I forgot about those tow US weapon systems. I wonder is the British Army has given any thought to arming its Watchkeepers?
I think most of their effort has gone into flying them safely....Watchkeeper was shown to the Polish Military with 2 twin racks holding the LMM derived Fury munition though so it is possible.

Much as I'd love to see a British solution (and Watchkeeper isn't exactly British) given the huge issues the programme has faced, massively overbudget, late, a fair few crashes etc. I'd say it might be time to scrap the entire thing and just buy Mojave from GA. Anything smaller than that needs to be runway independent in my mind.
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post:
SW1

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Protector (UCAV) (RAF)

Post by SW1 »

Timmymagic wrote: 13 May 2022, 15:06
Lord Jim wrote: 13 May 2022, 14:20 Thanks I forgot about those tow US weapon systems. I wonder is the British Army has given any thought to arming its Watchkeepers?
I think most of their effort has gone into flying them safely....Watchkeeper was shown to the Polish Military with 2 twin racks holding the LMM derived Fury munition though so it is possible.

Much as I'd love to see a British solution (and Watchkeeper isn't exactly British) given the huge issues the programme has faced, massively overbudget, late, a fair few crashes etc. I'd say it might be time to scrap the entire thing and just buy Mojave from GA. Anything smaller than that needs to be runway independent in my mind.
A benefit watchkeeper does have is it doesn’t need to use satellite coms for control and controlled airspace use. But it was bought when the tech had moved on rapidly. Other issue is cap badge control if you went up to scale if you need to go to the army air corp at a minimum.

Post Reply