The business lures arms companies with unmanned flight drones, as it uses the CIA for the terrorist hunt. Now Air Force boss stieglitz visited for the first time the secret flier, with whom the European EADS wants to make the American competition.
Hamburg - strict shielded from the public presented the arms company EADS of Luftwaffe the secret forerunner model of an unmanned reconnaissance drone. After information MIRROR was allowed Air Force boss lieutenant general Klaus-Peter Stieglitz past week in the Bavarian Manching, where EADS builds the "Eurofighter" and a test site maintains the German Federal Armed Forces, which secret fliers visit named "Barracuda".
The remote controlled equipment serves for the time being the testing of new technologies and might start already in February - at a separated place on the iberischen peninsula - to the first flight. "Barracuda" is developed as reconnaissance aircraft, could be high-prepared later in addition, for the fighter plane. Model are US drones like the "Predator", a reconnaissance airplane, which is equipped with "Hellfire" rockets and used by the secret service CIA for attacks on presumed terrorists.
The EADS sees so far from the USA and Israel dominated business with unmanned aircraft as promising growth market and the project "Barracuda" therefore to a large extent financed. Swiss the defense department made a small contribution. Because the Air Force would like to replace their well 20 years old "Tornado" Aufklaerungsjets by unmanned fliers, the company hopes now for larger money gene from Berlin.
Soy un narco colombiano y te vendo lo que
quieras que sea la sombra
de la selva o alguna chica brasilena, lo tengo todo
y por supuesto heroina, marijuana, ecstacy,
lsd, hongos y coca colombiana.
Si eres bueno comigo te puedo ofrecer algo
gratuito y si eres una chica con grandes melones
te doy todo gratis. Nos vemos saludos
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Interesting they say it’s meant to be a reconnaissance UAV, most sources have talked about Barrakuda being a UCAV demonstrator. It certainly doesn't look like a MALE or HALE but it doesn’t look well suited to tactical work either. Perhaps a stealthy penetrator?
Is there still no information about Spain's involvement in this?
Soy un narco colombiano y te vendo lo que
quieras que sea la sombra
de la selva o alguna chica brasilena, lo tengo todo
y por supuesto heroina, marijuana, ecstacy,
lsd, hongos y coca colombiana.
Si eres bueno comigo te puedo ofrecer algo
gratuito y si eres una chica con grandes melones
te doy todo gratis. Nos vemos saludos
This message has been edited by GER_Mark on Jan 29, 2006 1:27 PM
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
With the UK wanting to start a UCAV development programme and Germany/EADS being pretty keen, perhaps Manching and Warton can pool resources on a 50:50 (UK and Germany paying like 200 Million Euros) basis and develop a large UCAV.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
I can't see any evidence of an internal weapons bay so it probably isn't mean to demonstrate any carriage and release capability. It's probably designed to demonstrate a signature management capability, airframe features and flight control systems. Later versions will probably carry weapons though.
It'd be interesting to know whether this is strictly a demonstrator programme or whether it will actually go on to fulfil the FAWS role.
Edit - Where are you getting these pictures from, I can't find them on the link.
EADS Manching certainly has the RCS "stuff" to make good RCS modelling and testing. Saw the outside electromagnetic testing rig (they take the whole aircraft up in it, it can hold a tornado) with my own eyes.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Seeing how there's no information on Corax' size no one can really say. But it definitley seems that way; it does look to be the biggest of the UCAV related demonstrators. Way bigger than the Sky-X which was previously the biggest, I'll post a pic in a minute.
the guy who tooked the photos said it was rolling up and down the landing way , the turbine sounds like the alpha jet's ,however it wheels are obviousely inside during flight
from now on there will be dozends of planespotter observing this aereal 24/7 , so we should see if these are any other tests
Soy un narco colombiano y te vendo lo que
quieras que sea la sombra
de la selva o alguna chica brasilena, lo tengo todo
y por supuesto heroina, marijuana, ecstacy,
lsd, hongos y coca colombiana.
Si eres bueno comigo te puedo ofrecer algo
gratuito y si eres una chica con grandes melones
te doy todo gratis. Nos vemos saludos
This message has been edited by GER_Mark on Jan 29, 2006 1:53 PM
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Rob, yeah Barrakuda does look like a more complete system. Not to play down Sky-X but I’m not exactly sure what it was meant to demonstrate, I mean it doesn’t look stealthy, nothing seems to have been done to shield the engine from the front nor is the construction precise enough. As far as I know autonomy was not demonstrated either.
From what I remember it is based on a munitions dispenser pod and it does look like it has a weapons bay so maybe it dropped either real or virtual weapons. But then again I don’t think they ever said that this happened, which being the milestone it would be, is not very likely.
Soy un narco colombiano y te vendo lo que
quieras que sea la sombra
de la selva o alguna chica brasilena, lo tengo todo
y por supuesto heroina, marijuana, ecstacy,
lsd, hongos y coca colombiana.
Si eres bueno comigo te puedo ofrecer algo
gratuito y si eres una chica con grandes melones
te doy todo gratis. Nos vemos saludos
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Once AGAIN it is relevant of what i was sayting....
No score for this post
January 29 2006, 2:14 PM
The UK are likely to get into a collaborative programme for their future UCAV TDP. Since NEURON is well clutered with partners, the next option is Germany....
Note that the RCS of this Barracuda is likely to be lower than the straight winged Corax. Is show more stealth features as well in particular the IR reduction measures taken around the exaust and the absence of straight angles (No perpendiculary positioned fairings under the wing)
- CDG: Thunder SAY AGAIN? Your intentions are unreadable... (Thunder) AGAIN?... AGAIN?...AGAIN?...
This message has been edited by sampaix on Jan 29, 2006 2:18 PM
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
It's possible and it'd be great if it happened but I doubt it, with an agreement between BAE and the MoD either already signed or to be signed in the next few weeks at the most there just doesn't seem enough time to negotiate a joint project unless they’re willing to give up a lot of time. I mean Neuron has taken from 2003 to now to get sorted; with only two partners it probably wouldn’t take that long but perhaps a year or so could go by before any satisfactory agreement was made, I don’t think that would be acceptable. The MoD has said that it has not held any discussions with Germany on a UCAV project.
Information available also suggests that Germany would like to take this aircraft in particular forward to produce a much more substantial system like Neuron or the X-45C, that would put there design at odds with those produced by BAE which are much more along the lines of those produced by Boeing, Dassault, SAAB and Northrop Grumman.
If any collaboration did happen I think the best bet would be Australia; we’ve already collaborated on UCAV technology, we’ve tested Corax in Australia so they obviously know about some of our classified work, they have a potential requirement for a UCAV (Air 6000 phase 3) and a partnership with them would put the UK in the driving seat.
Note that the RCS of this Barracuda is likely to be lower than the straight winged Corax.
"It's possible and it'd be great if it happened but I doubt it, with an agreement between BAE and the MoD either already signed or to be signed in the next few weeks at the most"
You mean next few hours. This was to be signed this month.
"If any collaboration did happen I think the best bet would be Australia; we’ve already collaborated on UCAV technology, we’ve tested Corax in Australia so they obviously know about some of our classified work, they have a potential requirement for a UCAV (Air 6000 phase 3) and a partnership with them would put the UK in the driving seat."
Sorry UCAV Not Corax isn't an UCAV to start with and the more it goes the more it is obvious that it classifies as L.O or stealthy not STEALTH.
As for doing it alone, wait and see there was absolutly NO indication that the programme MoD was mentioning was to be a single venture quiet the contrary.
More to the point you keep blanking Official stament showing that even MoD was a lot more favourable to a collaborative programme than a purely National one. Like you do on Corax official qualification as stealthy...
"Defense Tech reports on BAE Systems' CORAX Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV), an unmanned fighter with stealth features whose early models look somewhat like the USA's Darkstar technology demonstrator. DefenseTech offers a quick background that draws on behind-the-wall material at Jane's, explaining some of the key differences and where CORAX fits into the UK's long term plans.
The program and platform share some resemblances with the USA's J-UCAS program, whose fate is uncertain in the coming Quadrennial Defense Review, and the European NEURON UCAV that has now confirmed participation from France's Dassault, Sweden's Saab (building on their SHARC program), and Spain's EADS CASA. Greece, Switzerland, and possibly Italy are also slated to join the NEURON program, which is intended in part to keep Europe's aerospace industrial design base occupied now that no new fighter programs are scheduled until 2030 or so."
To finish every single developed country in the west have done researches and classified researches on L.O and stealth. - CDG: Thunder SAY AGAIN? Your intentions are unreadable... (Thunder) AGAIN?... AGAIN?...AGAIN?...
This message has been edited by sampaix on Jan 29, 2006 5:32 PM This message has been edited by sampaix on Jan 29, 2006 5:31 PM This message has been edited by sampaix on Jan 29, 2006 5:28 PM
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
And as usual, Thunder has to try to turn every thread into a dicussion about Britain o he can fill the forum with his hate of the country he lives in and left France to become a part of!
Thunder, even realjacks thinks your childish!
hh
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
You mean next few hours. This was to be signed this month.
Well BAE said it hopes to sign in January but it wouldn’t be unlikely for it to drag into February.
As for doing it alone, wait and see there was absolutly NO indication that the programme MoD was mentioning was to be a single venture quiet the contrary.
No there wasn’t, but like I said there are very few options for collaboration available. Australia is the only one that would work in my opinion. A joint project with Germany is just not very likely to happen in the next couple of days/weeks. Again this is just my opinion.
As for the rest about the UK, none of it has anything to do with Barrakuda or Germany; you’ve brought up your opinions about Corax and the UK UCAV research in seven separate threads since the information was released. In not one of those did you follow the discussion to the end. I don’t see you doing it in this thread so can you please, if you want to discuss this again, bring the following thread back up or start a new one and not divert this one.
Soy un narco colombiano y te vendo lo que
quieras que sea la sombra
de la selva o alguna chica brasilena, lo tengo todo
y por supuesto heroina, marijuana, ecstacy,
lsd, hongos y coca colombiana.
Si eres bueno comigo te puedo ofrecer algo
gratuito y si eres una chica con grandes melones
te doy todo gratis. Nos vemos saludos
This message has been edited by GER_Mark on Jan 29, 2006 9:08 PM
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Nod You're still lying to everyone to try to make your point...
No score for this post
January 29 2006, 9:00 PM
Would be nice if you were to show some intelledctual honnesty for once.
Case for the uk to collaborate on the UCAV TDP:
Based on Official staments...
“There is a huge lobby now within the MoD to go more European [and] I think we would be welcomed.”
Mike Turnwer BAe.....
"AIR SECTOR
BAE Systems and the MoD intend to work together to explore how a long-term partnership arrangement for the through-life availability of a significant proportion of the fixed-wing fleet might be delivered.
It was acknowledged that Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles (UCAVs) and Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs) will play a significant role in the future force mix and BAE Systems will work to secure an agreement in January with the UK MoD. The MoD intends to invest in a new technology demonstration programme in this key area and the company already has significant skills and experience in this domain. It successfully achieved the first fully autonomous mission of an unmanned aircraft in UK airspace, on 18 August 2005."
"A UCAV technology demonstrator was also a key recommendation of the government and industry Aerospace Innovation Growth Team. Not only will it serve to develop U.K. capabilities in this area, it will also provide potential leverage on the U.S. The U.K. is participating in the U.S. Joint Unmanned Combat Air System.
JUCAS have been cancelled so if confirmed, the US collaborative route is still to be reopened.
>>>>>
>>>>>
-1994 BAe press release:
"BAe began trying to persuade the UK MoD of the need for a technology demonstration program (TDP) to -- in the words of one official at the time -- "safeguard [BAe] design expertise in the run-up to decisions". The emphasis for this TDP, at the core of which would be a manned flying test-bed, was to be on airframe design "because of the need to master the stealth issue"."
>>>>>
2004 BAe press release:
"Continental Europe is getting its act together on UAVs and UCAVs,” Turner said. "We are working with the Defence Procurement Agency on programs [of our own]; it’s really important as a nation we get onboard."
Source: Jane's.
>>>>>
2005 BAe press release:
"While the report maintains the Defense Ministry has "no funded UCAV program," the ministry is supporting classified UCAV-related research, in part through low-observable (LO) platform work. It recently recast its future offensive strike needs within the Strategic UAV Experiment program."
Source: Jane's.
>>>>>
"A UCAV technology demonstrator was also a key recommendation of the government and industry Aerospace Innovation Growth Team. Not only will it serve to develop U.K. capabilities in this area, it will also provide potential leverage on the U.S. The U.K. is participating in the U.S. Joint Unmanned Combat Air System."
“The government could decide against US or national programmes, so there could be potential for European collaboration,” says Turner. “There is a huge lobby now within the MoD to go more European [and] I think we would be welcomed.”
BAe Official stament.
Quiet clearly they say that they are not at the stage where they can launch anything less than a TDP, which is not the case of the US programmes and NEURON.
Also there is a very obvious indication that collaboration is not only considered by MoD but favoured by many officials as well.
>>>>>
I don't know much about the state of advance of Gernamy in the stealth technology field and if this vehicle is already a full scale stealth UCAV TDP (still to be launched in the UK) it doesn't mean they would not have any interest in collaborating on one for one very obvious reason. COST.
NEURON launch cost is Eus 400 millions for a six tons vehicle but its goals is not to demonstrate stealth technology as this hqave been done by previous TDPs by both SAAB and Dassault.
It is designed to go one step further and allow for the demonstration of fighting capabilities within a network with very little reaction times. This was achieved by J-UCAS (X-45A) in April 2004.
- -
Dassault first NEURON configuration...........................Early Dassault Ducs and NEURON designs.
Reasons for developing Neuron...
So the nearest the EUs are to keep up with the US programme is still at least six years behind them in terms of programme developements.
A colaborative programme between Germany and the UK would allow them to keep up at lower cost with the US and the NEURON partners on the developement of an operational demonstator which is what X-45/47 and NEURON are.
A lot of people within the British MoD seems to think that this is the most likely solution.
“There is a huge lobby now within the MoD to go more European [and] I think we would be welcomed.”
World First entirely automatic mission...
Europe is shaping up and i don't think the UK is going to do it alone also this German UCAV looks quiet advanced too...
- CDG: Thunder SAY AGAIN? Your intentions are unreadable... (Thunder) AGAIN?... AGAIN?...AGAIN?...
This message has been edited by sampaix on Jan 29, 2006 9:05 PM This message has been edited by sampaix on Jan 29, 2006 9:01 PM
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Really weird how the french president shows off with this Neuron and the German one is secret, do they need to compensate something?
Soy un narco colombiano y te vendo lo que
quieras que sea la sombra
de la selva o alguna chica brasilena, lo tengo todo
y por supuesto heroina, marijuana, ecstacy,
lsd, hongos y coca colombiana.
Si eres bueno comigo te puedo ofrecer algo
gratuito y si eres una chica con grandes melones
te doy todo gratis. Nos vemos saludos
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
I have done a few rough calculations based on the pictures.
The vehicle looks like a UNIMOG; the top edge of the tailgate is about 1.9m from the ground. Adult males are just under 2m tall, say 180cm.
I estimate that this UAV is 2m tall at the top of the intake and 2.75m high at the top of the fins, 8m long (excluding nose probe) and with a span of 10m. The undercarriage has a wide track; about 3m and the main wheels are near 0.5m in diameter. MAUW 3,500kg, with an appropriate engine, speed, transonic (0.75 - 0.98 Mach), range 1,000 - 1,500km transit, combat (RTB) ~500km +.
Size, somewhere between the size of the Folland Gnat and the Hawk, but should be able to pull + and - 20g.
On another post, it has been noted that the German and Spanish flags are painted on the tail of this UAV, why? Why, because EADS, has divisions from previous Spanish companies, INDRA and ENOSA? I think that one of the Swiss Cantons has a similar flag, but although Swiss involvement has bees suggested, I cannot think of why a Canton flag should be painted on this platform. I think that it must be a Spanish flag.
My conclusion is that, a UAV, such as this, could carry a significant payload, well into FOAS territory. Although no doors can be seen, my guess is that a 1/3rd split payload, 1,000kg platform, 1,000kg fuel and 1,000kg weapons should be practical, (with a few shavings depending on role, systems carried and the required range).
I am slightly worried about the paint scheme, why advertise?
Lucky photographs or just fake pictures?
Why fly such a valuable as asset as this in poor conditions, snow and bad visibility?
Others have suggested that it could have been operating from Sweden, which suggests that it is a long way into the flight test program. The paintwork looks rather too clean.
I think that this is a "Ringer" [aka fake], why I'm not wholly sure; I just think that it doesn’t look like anything that has ever flown. Or more likely that this an EADS PR mock-up for some future air show that was being moved between hangars. There has been lots of snow in Germany over recent weeks.
Why the crosses, why the German and Spanish flags? Do we paint real prototypes in this manner?
I do not think that this particular bird has ever flown.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Thunder please read my posts before you reply, most of your post does not contradict anything that I said.
I never said that the majority of official opinion would like to see a collaborative programme; I would like to see a collaborative programme.
However (and this is where you have to use your own mind) there is little evidence that would suggest a collaborative project is possible at this stage. Let’s look at the options:
Germany/Barrakuda – The information made available on this project suggests that Germany wants to take the aircraft shown forward into a far more capable and complete demonstrator demonstrating the whole range of UCAV capabilities. The design concept of this aircraft however is similar to Alenia’s Sky-X aircraft and not anything BAE has produced either as a concept or actual aircraft. If the UK and Germany did want to discuss joining forces, which hasn’t happened yet then BAE and EADS would need to agree on exactly what design they will take forward; this isn’t going to happen in a few days. Taken with all other factors in negotiating then actually getting an agreement could take over a year. BAE wants a contract signed by the end of this month; that is just impossible if Germany was on board as well. Hence I do not think, and again it is just my personal opinion, that that this is much of a possibility.
US/X-45, X-47 – Though the UK is involved with studying CONOPS, utility, interoperability with the J-UCAS office etc there is no government to government cooperation on actual flight or ground control hardware going on. Both the X-45A and X-47A have been completed and flown, the X-45C and X-47B are currently under construction so it’s obvious that there design is complete. Given that fact any cooperation would have very little return for British industry in terms of design experience. The amount of share the UK could get would not be very large either considering the large gap between the level of investment the US has made and that which the UK can make. Another issue is of course technology transfer, the only way such a joint programme would be worthwhile would be if the US gave the UK complete access to past work which is highly unlikely. Future technology transfer is not something that anyone would want to rely on considering the JSF saga. Overall the UK is at least six years too late to start working with the US.
Europe/Neuron – It’s being reported that the final contract to start actual work is either going to be signed in the next few days or already has been. Another partner would mean sharing out 50% of the work share between six instead of five members, it’s unlikely that this would be welcomed. It may not even be possible with a contract already signed.
That is why I don’t think there will be any collaboration with either of these nations/partnerships. Maybe Australia but that’s just a hunch.
Yes there are opinions in the MoD and industry that would like a collaborative project I don’t deny, nor have I ever denied that and I have previously said that Germany could be a possible partner. However the timescale the DIS has set out makes it practically impossible.
Now we’re getting further and further away from the topic, I don’t want to take about the UK in this thread unless it has something to do with Germany or the Barrakuda, make a new thread or bring up the last one but please let’s not turn this into another one of those debates.
Chris; the flag is definitely Spanish in my opinion. I said in another post that it could be there because EADS’ Spanish division but I don’t think that this would be enough to stick a flag on it; that would require actual government involvement.
As for whether it’s an actual aircraft or just a mock-up, I think it’s the former; one of the pictures seems to show a maintenance panel opened up. That’s not something you find on every air show model.
Umm the JUCAS has not been cancelled - it has been split or mutated if you will due to increased capabilites requirements of the USAF.
It is in fact detailed in the QDR which will officially be presented to the US Congress on 6 Feb.
The JUCAS program is to be restructured to allow the airforce to develop a new version with longer-endurance and the ability to carry more payload. The current program would still continue on its path with an airframe with the charactersitics and capabilties of the X-47. If the X-45C design can be adapted for what the airforce wants added then it is recommended they stick to this baseline as well, but if this is found to not be possible it is being recommended they move on to a seperate completely new design.
The truth is out there - you just may not like hearing it.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Earlier today I asked a friend to checkout the pics with on a very BIG CPU.
Fake!?
They are VERY good, but they are CGI (or enhanced pics, national level +)
The airframe is just too clean (dirt has been replicated at about 10-100mm resolution, dirt does not replicated, it is random).
Another friend analysed the pictures (from another university and another country, blind), they checked-out these out these pictures, and found that the foreshortening is wrong and there are too many exact vertical and horizontals features (not real world, i.e. CGI).
I'm, not sure, if can we identify the guys in the blue suits in the pics, and confirm that this UAV is for real, or else?
We did a checks that these pics are level to within 1/10,000, rather unlikely with real pics. Of course they could have been reproduced and re-leveled.
I think that we are have been provided with very good CGI & enhanced graphics of a potinally good UCAV.
But, none of it is real.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Hmmm perhaps your right then; it looks like a hell of a lot of effort to go through though. Plus they're quite accurate to what has been reported, not just the aircraft itself but in terms of when it's come out; as I said before the speculation was that it would fly either late 2005 or early 2006.
I'll see if I can get on to EADS and see what they say.
They're incredible if they are fake though. Well compared to the Chinese photoshops we've seen on here!
Soy un narco colombiano y te vendo lo que
quieras que sea la sombra
de la selva o alguna chica brasilena, lo tengo todo
y por supuesto heroina, marijuana, ecstacy,
lsd, hongos y coca colombiana.
Si eres bueno comigo te puedo ofrecer algo
gratuito y si eres una chica con grandes melones
te doy todo gratis. Nos vemos saludos
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Well, i will not say that they are definitly real. The photographer is a planespotter who has taken hundreds of photos at Manching, but he is no professional. I can't see how he can do such a good CGI-work, nor why he should do so (he has not made a big story out of this). But i think that everybody is free to believe what he wants, and i can understand why someone would think that it is not real. We will see in the future.
But i have never heard such a nonsense like your analysis. Given a small picture with bad resolution and unknown compression ratio and your specialists give a research work that is even unrealistic on much better pictures. Nice try, but you did it way to exaggerated.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
West
You are right; the small pictures would be useless for checking if the pictures were real.
However my photo expert friend did his analysis using very high-resolution images, accessed by via his German Press contacts. (The reason I involved him was because I could not use the plane-spotter site, as I do not speak German and wanted to checkout higher resolution images).
He confirms that the pictures of the UAVs (not the background) have been manipulated/generated by some very fancy software (not a just simple Photoshop job), but could be a CGI skin around a real object. An analysis was also done using a medium resolution version of the same image, which did not show any sign of alteration. Just visually comparing the pictures in the two versions, the UAV looked much more real in the medium resolution images. (Note that the medium resolution images do not appear to have been published).
He tried to access other versions of these images this morning, but found that he could no longer access any of the images we had seen yesterday. (This may just be a coincidence, he will try again latter).
I will see if we can get hold of the medium resolution pictures. Yesterday we had limited rights; we could only view not download images. (My friend also has rights, which allow him to carryout remote analysis of agency pictures, to check for doctored pictures, embedded signatures, watermarks, etc, before purchasing). If I can obtain legal copies or links to the medium resolution images I will post again.
It appears likely that the low-resolution published images have been produced from doctored high-resolution images, but that the content is essentially the same as in the unpublished medium resolution images. The UAV just looks cleaner and newer, which is what made me have a sneaking suspicion that it might be fake in the first place.
It may be just be that someone wanted to freshen-up the picture before wider distribution, but why use a CGI. The only reason I can think of for doctoring the high-resolution images is to conceal some small details that we could not detect in the medium resolution un-altered images. It may be that genuine pictures have been sanitized (by an official German agency?) and provided to the press.
Perhaps a German member from this group could get a copy of the original images from the photographer and have a close look.
I'm still puzzled about the CGI issue, but I think that the medium resolution images convince me that the pictures are real and that they show a large UAV demonstrator. Even in the medium resolution images it looked too clean and tidy for a platform that has flown. (It could also be a representative model used for RCS testing, but why go to Sweden; there must be suitable radar test ranges in Germany).
Does anyone know if the photographer saw the UAV flying or did he just see it towed across the airfield? I doubt that he did see the UAV fly, because I'm sure he would have posted a picture of it in flight.
My bet is that it has not yet flown.
Does anyone know what the current legal position is for flying UAVs in German airspace? I have heard that European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) are involved in drafting new regulations for flying UAVs. Could this be a clue to why the UAV is in Sweden?
BTW: Sorry to the group if I appeared to be a bit over the top yesterday. I had been flying all day, was tired and had maybe one glass of wine too much with my dinner. Sorry again.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Chris, as far as I know it hasn’t flown yet at all (I think the article says it’s expected to fly in February).
Where did you get these high resolution images, I mean I thought they were taken by a spotter and posted directly by him on a forum without sending them to anyone else. How did the press get hold of higher resolution versions?
I can’t see why they would be doctored given that they are supposed to be from a spotter.
By the way, it looks like Manching not Vidsel according to some users here so it’s probably not Sweden. However like you said I’m fairly sure that Germany has very similar restrictions on UAV flights as the rest of Europe so perhaps larger scale flight tests will be done at the NEAT range.
"Really weird how the french president shows off with this Neuron and the German one is secret, do they need to compensate something?"
The French Assemblee Nationale have been politically declaring war on the US policies in the Eus about the way they tried to slow down progresses and make us deopendent on US technology. This for some time now...
The goal was to rally as many countries in the European technologic wagon as possible to decouple the EUs from a US dependency.....
If the UK drops F-35 and works on the Tornado replacement with other EU countries it's a start.
- CDG: Thunder SAY AGAIN? Your intentions are unreadable... (Thunder) AGAIN?... AGAIN?...AGAIN?...
This message has been edited by sampaix on Jan 30, 2006 5:29 PM
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
I have contact to the photographer who took the pictures at Manching. The smaller pictures we can see here are the original JPEGs (he has not chosen RAW) without any rework but resize. At the moment, there are no high resolution pictures available. A german magazine called "Flug Revue" (it should be known to the german speaking community) bought three pictures for internal use (march edition will be published at February 13th), german news agency dpa bought two highly compressed pictures. No other pictures were given away.
He said that it was very bad weather when he took the pictures, and that there was another planespotter who made a video of the test run and photos of the UAV, allthough he believes it was no digital camera.
He promised to send me original material when Flug Revue has published the pictures, allthough i will not allowed to publish them i can make some test to prove their authenticity.
He is a nice guy and has answered all my questions within some hours, i'm allmost without any doubt he said the truth, and i will know it within some weeks.
---
"Switzerland doesn't have an army, Switzerland is an army"
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Well, so there are high quality pictures out there, but they are still not computer generated. And the pictures above are just smaller originals. So the analysis was still wrong.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Including the location 48 42 N 11 32 E (There are good views of this area on Goggle Earth).
Ingolstadt/Manching is about 15mls East of Neurbugh Airport and 33mls North-Northwest of Muchen Airport. The airspace around here is very busy.
I have not checked but presumably this airfield must be close to a military restricted airspace zone. In the UK we can fly UAVs in such areas, but outside these areas the CAA had not finalised the regulations, now I suppose we will have to wait for the EASA new regulations to be issued.
It is mainly a military airfield, but it is available to civil traffic for a couple of hours, before and after the normal working day, when the airfield is used exclusively by the military. All civil traffic is strictly on a prior permission basis. Groundside there are separate civil and military areas. I have flown into this airfield several times, but more than ten years ago.
There are lots of public roads around the airfield offering good sites for plan-spotters, a logical place for this UAV to have first been seen.
Because of its location I would be surprised if EADS were allowed to fly the UAV from this site in a fully autonomous mode.
During the summer last in the UK autonomous UAV flight trials were contacted from Campbeltown (ex-RAF Machrihanish, where the USN operated for several years). The airport is on the west coast of Scotland South West of Glasgow. A special military restricted zone over the sea was established by NOTAM to exclude all other traffic.
Vidsel Sweden is located 65.88N 20.15E. It is a suitably remote site, without airspace problems, but at this time of year being close to the Artic Circle it is rather cold and has very short days; not the sort of place to conduct (first) flight trials in the winter. Indeed it is often used for Cold Environmental Trials. It could be also be a very good trail site in the Summer, with very long days, but I suspect that personal would suffer from the explosion of biting insects found in Arctic regions at this time of year.
In the winter it is also cold in Germany. If the first flight is to be during February, I wouldn’t be surprised if the UAV were to be transported to a site further south, the UK has used Australia for similar trials. I wonder if that is the significance of the Spanish flag painted on the tail?
They could use the EADS Military Aircraft Spain (ex-CASA) site at Getafe near Madrid, but I think that this would be too close to Madrid or even at the Spanish Air Force base of Morón (near Seville), again a little too close to Seville and other airports. The weather would be OK at this time of year. (Google Earth also has good views of these airfields).
Ideally the airfield should be well away from busy airspace and close to either an uninhabited area or sea where military restricted airspace can be established. (i.e. near Spanish coast or well inland). Any suggestions of suitable airfields? Can anyone easily access Spanish NOTAMs? If trials are planned for February these zones surely have already been established.
I wonder if the German plan-spotter has any Spanish contacts?
I have no proof, but usually high-speed taxing is the last thing done prior to first flight, IMHO the weather and potential airspace problems would preclude Manching, so my money is on a first flight in Spain (possibly another warm "EADS friendly country", such as Australia).
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
I see what you're saying about Spain but I doubt just allowing flight tests there would be reason to stick there flag on the tail. I don't know where first flight will be though, we'll just have to wait and see.
By the way, still nothing in the wider press about this. Anyone else found anything?
Currently German military aircraft carry their nation's flag on the tail; Spanish aircraft do not, they have a narrow black "X", often on a white background.
Lots of EADS sites, documents and press releases in this area push the "teamwork" button. I think that the Spanish flag on the UAV is there to reflect the joint nature of the company (EADS) and the project.
I was just about to ask the group what they thought about my estimates of the specification of the UAV (size, MAUW, etc), so I clicked on the link back to the original post and saw text that I did not see in the original root to this thread. (Why, I could not see this text first time-around I do not know, I still cannot see this text direct).
"The remote controlled equipment serves for the time being the testing of new technologies and might start already in February - at a separated place on the iberischen peninsula - to the first flight."
I think: -
"iberischen peninsula" in German = Iberian Peninsula in "English" = SPAIN (Would EADS fly a new bird in France - I think not, are there suitable sites in Portugal - I think not; it has to be Spain).
"at a separated place" in "Translated into Google" = a remote site (into English).
If there are any Spanish plane-spotters, please put your thinking caps on you may be able to snap a first-flight.
This approach is logical; a barren interior site is much better than a sea area; if you crash in a barren area over land, there is a very small chance that you will kill someone, (both areas have a small chance of killing anyone: however over the sea, the bits sink to the bottom and it is a huge task to find them), but on land it is easier to find the bits and determine why the platform failed.
Sea is OK, beach, well (at this time of year) there are a lots of old wreaks there already, better not to crash on the "punters"; (I was going to post an image of lots of old fat UK folk, when I realised that I could have been one [or one and a half] of them).
"The remote controlled equipment serves for the time being the testing of new technologies" = At the present the UAV will not operate in an autonomous mode.
IMHO: The first flight of this UAV will be in Spain and soon.
Did any one else miss the text on the front of the original post?
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
UFO !
-
CDG: Thunder SAY AGAIN? Your intentions are unreadable... (Thunder) AGAIN?... AGAIN?...AGAIN?...
-
-
