Tempest mock up

[general rocket]

I saw on line that Cosford Museum had the mock up of the Tempest future fighter until next week. So I thought some of you may find it of interest.



















































Some of them are not the best pictures, but hopefully of interest.

[iggie]

They forgot the prop

Nice piccies, thanks for posting them up

[wokka]

Interesting on the final photo, they state the aircraft is affordable, especially after all the huha over costs, I like the old saying falsely attributed to Stalin. 'mass production has a quality of its own' which means having the most sophisticated does not necessarily give you an advantage.
Still an amazing looking aircraft though.

[ShaunW]

An interesting concept but it looks too expensive for us lot to afford - I think we've already blown the budget on F-35's and aircraft carriers - so we might have to reintroduce the Tempest V to give the beleaguered British taxpayer a "battle proven, affordable and traditional answer to the hugely expensive and rather ghastly looking alternative"

Assuming H.M. Government does find some spare cash, what should the aircraft's proper designation be I wonder? Tempest III, Tempest VII?

[wokka]

I'm a fan of the Textron Scorpion, a fraction of the cost, multi role, cheap to maintain as well. I don't understand why it's not being taken seriously yet. At the list price we can afford a hell of a lot of these for the price we're paying for the F35's and if we lose a few, there're still plenty left.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textron_AirLand_Scorpion;

[Stuart]

What a hideous looking aircraft...

[Gregers]

I have to admit I like the look of the Scorpion. The Tempest however......YUK.

All the best

Greg

[wokka]

What a hideous looking aircraft...

Which one, the Tempest or the Scorpion?

[Stuart]

What a hideous looking aircraft...

Which one, the Tempest or the Scorpion?

Ah - the Tempest!

[Tarkas]

What a hideous looking aircraft...

Which one, the Tempest or the Scorpion?

Ah - the Tempest!

It's the nose. The rest of the design is fairly standard for a modern fighter with stealth aspirations, and thereby unexceptional, but that nose is unusually bulbous and ruins the lines of the thing as a whole. Still, at least it's not as bad as the X-32!

As for the Scorpion, I think the reason for it being neglected is fairly obvious: it has no pretentions to air-to-air capability, and the brass are either past, present or wannabe fighter jocks. Also, it would be harder to export since many countries require their latest fighters to be jacks of all trades.

[Stuart]

It's the nose. The rest of the design is fairly standard for a modern fighter with stealth aspirations, and thereby unexceptional, but that nose is unusually bulbous and ruins the lines of the thing as a whole. Still, at least it's not as bad as the X-32!

Agreed about the nose - but I'd argue the X-32 was a nicer looking aircraft... But then I'm weird!

[Tarkas]

[...] I'd argue the X-32 was a nicer looking aircraft... But then I'm weird!

No, the X-32 was weird -- but what do you expect from an aircraft trying to imitate a basking shark?

[Stuart]

[...] I'd argue the X-32 was a nicer looking aircraft... But then I'm weird!

No, the X-32 was weird -- but what do you expect from an aircraft trying to imitate a basking shark?

[ShaunW]

Gasp, I've just googled it and it's safe to say that the X-32 hit a fair few of the branches during its fall from the ugly tree. The Tempest mock up only hit a few less branches though. That said, I'm no barometer of good taste in aircraft looks, I think the F-4 Phantom is a thing of beauty

[Tarkas]

[...] I'm no barometer of good taste in aircraft looks, I think the F-4 Phantom is a thing of beauty

Oh, the dear old Phantom has its attractions, to be sure. It's big, massive, powerful, purposeful and, overall, just can't be ignored -- but one of the reasons they nicknamed it the Rhino; seen from the right angle, the aircraft looks as though it's about to charge and trample you . It ain't pretty, but no-one can call it ugly. By contrast, the X-32 just slaps one in the face with how utterly awful it looks in a way unrivalled since the Amiot 143. It's a moot point as which of those was worse.

Speaking of the Phantom and its appearance (not to mention charging someone ), back in the early 70s, someone put out a book about the Blue Angels and USAF Thunderbirds, both of which flew the F-4 at the time. The book was mostly photos, but they were good ones, and I always wish I'd picked up a copy; unfortunately, I haven't seen the book since! The point is, one unforgettable photo shows the Thunderbirds solo aircraft (only the one back then) doing the pilot's favourite "party trick", namely finding the press box and charging it at low level and high speed. Imagine this huge red nose heading straight towards you... I think that conveyed the sheer presence of the Phantom as little else could.