The need for iconic projects in defence
Britain has created some of history’s most iconic projects, but limited budgets draw into question our future aspirations. Are iconic projects in defence still worth it? If so, what will they look like?
On Wed 20 Sep, the Oxford chapter of DEF UK hosted an agora to discuss iconic defence projects in the UK. We were fortunate to host three fantastic speakers:
- Nick Colosimo, strategy executive and global engineering fellow at BAE Systems
- Simon Harwood, director of defence and security at Cranfield University
- Mick Mansell, retired director of future systems and concepts at BAE Systems
Nick Colosimo took attendees on a journey through some of the most iconic military projects in recent history, including the UK’s venerable Challenger 2 and Typhoon fighter and the US’s Spirit stealth bomber and Raptor fighter. He also highlighted BAE’s own enviable list of iconic projects, from large (QE-class carriers) to small (railguns) to truly revolutionary (reaction engines).
Nick challenged attendees to think broadly about what can justify iconic status. Uniqueness, complexity, size and impact are obvious criteria, but resonance with science fiction is another interesting consideration. In this vein, autonomy and human/machine interfaces are likely to redefine just what will be iconic in the future. Attendees also recognised that iconic status can vary by audience, with the TFX fighter — developed with support from BAE — already becoming iconic for Turkey.
Mick Mansell took the audience on a fascinating trip from the Hawker Kestrel to the Lightning II. Hawker developed the Kestrel without a clear mandate from the government, taking on the risk inherent in this revolutionary VTOL design. Watching video of an early Kestrel prototype, tethered to the ground and flopping around uncontrollably, was reminiscent of NASA’s formative Redstone disasters; Hawker decision-makers must have been very brave. On the other hand, years later a Harrier in the hands of John Farley, BAE’s chief test pilot, was a balletic sight to behold (have you ever seen a plane fly backwards?). Perhaps the Hawker leadership actually had a keen balance of bravery and vision.
The Harrier is without question one of the most iconic planes ever built, even getting a starring role in a Hollywood blockbuster. But why has it achieved this status? There are two explanations. First, the Harrier is clearly technologically unique: it is simply awe-inspiring to see a fully laden fighter rise vertically from a stand of trees (or an empty warehouse in Berlin). This puts it in league with the Blackbird and the Nighthawk, but also with the not-as-yet-iconic Osprey. Technological uniqueness is clearly not sufficient. The second factor is some notable success; in the case of Harrier, this is clearly its pivotal role in the Falklands War.
To these two concrete factors, one might add a third: serendipity, or perhaps good marketing. The agora discussed why the Spitfire is more iconic than the arguably superior Hurricane, for instance. One could equally ask why the Tomcat is so much more iconic than the Hornet or the Eagle, and Top Gun must be the biggest explanation.*
The Harrier programme produced more than 800 planes, and the aircraft has been in service for nearly fifty years. The programme also supported around 200 companies in the UK at its peak.
Simon Harwood began his remarks by noting the decline in the number of iconic defence projects; even aerospace giants are simply turning out fewer new platforms as time goes on. They are increasingly impacted by political short-termism, risk aversion and shrinking budgets. Whereas in the past defence contractors were at the forefront of R&D, with their innovations often commercialised for civilian use, the situation is now reversed: the military is seeking to co-opt civilian innovations for its own use.
Following prepared remarks, the audience debated the future of iconic projects. The trend seems clear: fewer but more complex projects, with long development timelines. No one foresaw any change to this, despite yearning for the aspiration and resources of bygone eras. Many audience members lamented our future: quite apart from the tangible benefits of great technological achievements, there are benefits to morale as well. Dubious economics aside, the Concorde was an undeniable fillip to our national pride, for example.
Nick provided what could be the most interesting insight when he suggested that what is iconic in the future could a process or approach, rather than a particular platform. There seems to be a deep mismatch between the evolving operating environment and the way the military procures, and a method for better harnessing our most fundamental comparative advantage — our dynamic and innovative civilian economy — could easily become the most iconic pillar of our national defence.
* And not just any movie, but a popular one. D.A.R.Y.L. helped the Blackbird, but Iron Eagle didn’t do much for the Falcon. It will be interesting to see if Top Gun 2, if ever made, will make the Super Hornet iconic.
