UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by vasu raya »

Are you guys aware of any UAVs? that could be hand launched by Infantry or sling shot from a jeep, is GPS-guided with a range of 35-50kms and a sensor allowing it to home in on a enemy artillery gun for suicide bombing? so it should be way cheaper than a artillery gun and quick enough to reach the target within the shoot and scoot window of the target gun. Its airframe and RCS should be small enough to avoid locking on by shoulder fired anti-air missiles or detected by radars at long range
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4852
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Neshant »

RamaY wrote:^ I am not talking about the HALE or MALE types or UCAVs sir, for which we may have to acquire some and build others on our own.

I am taking about the million off the shelf type variety we would need for traffic control, crowd monitoring, emergency management etc., these can be built by using off the shelf items. The whole small UAV world is becoming componentized.
Yes you're right. But I doubt anything would be built.

The modus operandi is 3 easy steps :

1) import
2) re-label as indigenous
3) sell

In the best case scenario, Indian manufacturers could come up with a few bells & whistles to throw in and over time create something with a greater indigenous content.
member_27444
BRFite
Posts: 488
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by member_27444 »

vasu raya wrote:Are you guys aware of any UAVs? that could be hand launched by Infantry or sling shot from a jeep, is GPS-guided with a range of 35-50kms and a sensor allowing it to home in on a enemy artillery gun for suicide bombing? so it should be way cheaper than a artillery gun and quick enough to reach the target within the shoot and scoot window of the target gun. Its airframe and RCS should be small enough to avoid locking on by shoulder fired anti-air missiles or detected by radars at long range
Plenty Canadian Brazilian South African Czech Slovakian UK and as usual US universities and barrages are building them
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by vasu raya »

^^^

In the context of LoC ceasefire violations, where artillery causes causalities such one-way UAVs are useful in silencing the guns both in peacetime and war. Btw these UAVs should be made deliberately vulnerable to SAMs and AAMs such as AMRAAM but not to shoulder fired SAMs, the latter seekers are low end anyways so is the engagement range

ADE developed target drones?
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Indranil »

Rustom-2 will have retractable landing gear built by CVRDE.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by kit »

Neshant wrote:
RamaY wrote:^ in a way it is better to copy than do nothing.

In UAV realm, there is nothing wrong in India copying west. Nothing wrong to be student and follower of knowledge instead of stupid fashion, slavery and dhimmitude.

Spending money and buying stuff is not "being a student" because nothing is learnt.

Its a handover of money and nothing more.

You can hand over money to buy a Ferrari but that does not make you an automotive engineer. Ditto with all the bullsh&t about "transfer of technology". You do not download the brains of foreign scientists & engineers into the local cadre of scientists & engineers by handing over money to a foreign country.

Ultimately India is financing the R&D base of a foreign country which means that much less for the domestic R&D base.

There's really no point in calling something "indigenous" if its imported, re-labelled and sold as indigenous. Any fool can do that.
+1

But poor netas and babus wont be able to make money , at least not that much in a system that is merit based and excellence driven. Status quo will maintain for all seeable future till it implodes., for finally it has to happen.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Sagar G »

vasu raya wrote:Are you guys aware of any UAVs? that could be hand launched by Infantry or sling shot from a jeep, is GPS-guided with a range of 35-50kms and a sensor allowing it to home in on a enemy artillery gun for suicide bombing? so it should be way cheaper than a artillery gun and quick enough to reach the target within the shoot and scoot window of the target gun. Its airframe and RCS should be small enough to avoid locking on by shoulder fired anti-air missiles or detected by radars at long range
AFAIK there is no such UAV.
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4852
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Neshant »

Of course there are such UAVs.

http://www.uasvision.com/2013/06/12/us- ... programme/

US Army units have already fielded the first generation of such a capability, having deployed AeroVironment’s Switchblade hand-launched munition to Afghanistan in the fall of 2012. The camera-enabled, 6-pound, 24-inch-long Switchblade is small and light enough to fit in a backpack. The tube-launched UAS can be guided to its intended target using a hand-held ground control station before detonating its explosive round by simply flying into the target. The tiny killer can fly for up to 10 minutes.

Army officials confirmed in February that the Switchblade officially became lethal earlier this year, scoring several hits on enemy targets. “It’s gained some notoriety of its own on both sides,” including among the insurgents that it has been targeting, said Colonel Pete Newell, then-head of the Army’s Rapid Equipping Force.

The Switchblade is the first take on what the service is calling the Lethal Miniature Aerial Munition System (LMAMS) programme. Last August, the Army issued a request for information to move forward with the programme. While an urgent battlefield request for more Switchblades in Afghanistan is winding its way through the Pentagon’s bureaucracy, the LMAMS programme is asking for more than what the Switchblade can currently provide.

Among other things, the service wants a munition that can loiter for up to an hour with a range of up to 6 miles. With its eye on LMAMS as well as a host of similar requirements from the US Marine Corps and Special Operations Command, Textron Defense Systems has developed its own soldier-fired loitering munition that can be controlled from a tablet or smartphone device, allowing soldiers to change the bird’s course simply by tapping on the touchscreen.

Dubbed the BattleHawk, the 5.5-pound system has been demonstrated to the Army and Special Operations Command. It’s also gearing up for a second appearance at an annual Army field exercise at Fort Benning, Ga., early next year.

Henry Finneral, Vice-President for Advanced Weapons & Sensors at Textron, said the system has been designed so a dismounted soldier can take the 3.5-pound munition and the 2-pound launching tube out of his backpack and fire it within 90 seconds. The 40mm warhead also contains a dual-mode fuze, enabling either height-of-burst or point detonation. “Our bird is fairly unique in that it has a carbon-fiber wing that wraps around the fuselage,” Finneral said, so when fired from the launch tube, the wings snap out to better control the flight. The 18-inch-long UAS can reach speeds of 100 knots, and the BattleHawk can loiter for up to 30 minutes at a range of 5 kilometers.

If the bomb doesn’t find a target, it can self-destruct, Finneral said, instead of crashing and blowing up. While these precision-strike technologies provide invaluable capabilities to the infantryman, the lightweight systems are still an added load that must be lugged around on dismounted patrols. Well, there’s an app for that. Instead of calling in division-level assets such as Predator UAS, the ground forces are laying plans to attach precision munitions to small UAS such as Ravens and Pumas, which can be controlled at the brigade level and below.

One possibility is Raytheon’s Pyros, a 13-pound, 22-inch-long, air-launched bomb with a 5-pound fragmentation warhead that has been specially designed for UAS. JR Smith, a Raytheon Senior Manager of Business Development, said that during testing last year with a laser targeting system, accuracy was within a meter of the target, while with GPS guidance, it came within 3 meters. Smith said the company is aiming to have the Pyros mounted on the Army’s Shadow UAS and the Marine Corps’ RQ-21, which is still in development. “We’ve taken a hard look at those platforms,” he said, adding that putting them on small UAS is not as simple as just attaching a missile to a wing.

Raytheon has developed a 2.5-pound launch rack and an electronic interface to link the weapon to the UAS, which has proved out on its own testbed UAS. Testing has proved the capability as mature, Smith added, saying that “literally, it’s a matter of days to put that stuff in and start demonstrating” for potential clients. General Dynamics has developed a version of its 81mm mortar that can be fitted on small UAS, and has demonstrated the capability to the Army.

Joe Buzzett, director of technology programmes at GD’s Ordnance and Tactical Systems, said the company has fired 10 or 12 GPS-guided missiles from a Tiger Shark UAS that landed within 7 meters of the target grid. “The guidance navigation and control has all been demonstrated,” he said. The service could put two of the 10-pound mortars under each wing of a Shadow UAS. The technology is there and ready to be used, industry representatives said, but as Buzzett put it, “it’s the requirements that really are what’s evolving,” as American forces move from two relatively static conflicts to unknown future battlefields.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by vasu raya »

Good to know, we also have slybird but haven't seen it mentioned in any reports of action across LoC by the Infantry.

Now that a lot of precision munition kits are being developed, we should look into folding wings for Nishant as well, easing its logistics
KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 964
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by KrishnaK »

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Victor »

vasu raya wrote:Are you guys aware of any UAVs? that could be hand launched by Infantry or sling shot from a jeep, is GPS-guided with a range of 35-50kms and a sensor allowing it to home in on a enemy artillery gun for suicide bombing? so it should be way cheaper than a artillery gun and quick enough to reach the target within the shoot and scoot window of the target gun. Its airframe and RCS should be small enough to avoid locking on by shoulder fired anti-air missiles or detected by radars at long range
We could also try and develop LMAMS type weapons (as posted by Neshant) ourselves instead of futzing around with Rustom for years on end without anything to show for it. To keep costs low enough to justify, I'm guessing that an effective hand or jeep launched UAV will carry an RPG size anti-personnel round. This would disable the gun crew but not the gun itself.

Anything that can damage a big gun, picture a flying artillery shell weighing 25-50kg which would be too big for hand or jeep launch and is perhaps better off as a Krasnopol/Excalibur .

We do have the Israeli Harpy anti-radiation drone and the Harop loitering suicide drone but they are expensive and for high-value targets onlee. China will almost certainly get a sample from Turkey, if they haven't already, and gift it to the pakis.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by vasu raya »

One would be happy if we could fire Krasnapol or Excaliber during ceasefire violations, since thats not the case and losing their arty guns will make TSP think on escalating, the UAV option or LMAMS concept has relevance here.

In the now situation,
Nishant with a payload of 45kg should be good enough to carry a light weight ATGM with a range of 5kms and its targeting system, an ATGM can take care of an arty gun.

The ATGM could be retrofitted with wing kits similar to the Sudarshan ones (the NG version mentions 50km range) increasing the glide range when launched at an altitude from Indian side of LoC, the ATGM can jettison its wing kit when in the range of the target i.e., within 5kms and has LoS. Involves a UAV or a Chopper.

Even for man portable ATGMs having a foldable wing kit with miniature wankel engines and a initial booster to gain altitude should work. The existing ATGM stock close to expiry can be used, and if the wing kit is capable of flying on its own once the ATGM is released maybe even wire guided ATGMs can be controlled with the wire hanging off of the wing kit that is still flying. Small UAVs are susceptible to wind gusts, having an ATGM take over terminal homing removes that uncertainty even if the UAV drifts. Then the wing kit which is slow flying can be targeted by ground forces if detected hence it will keep its distance from small arms fire when releasing the ATGM. At this level, it is an Infantry level tasking.

if atleast PoK can be in the shadow of such low cost targeting, things become easier on the LoC and also ensures that the motivational leadership visits there are restricted whether in uniform or not.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Indranil »

All you wanted to know about the airframe shapes of Rustom-2.

Click for larger sizes.

Overall configuration
Image

Tentative Container Layout
Image

Ground Clearance
Image

Overall Fuselage and wing config
Image

Fuselage Detail
Image

Wing Detail
Image

Image

Image

Overall tail assembly
Image

Horizontal stabilizer Detail
Image

Rudder detail
Image
Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Victor »

indranilroy wrote:All you wanted to know about the airframe shapes of Rustom-2.
Good info, thanks. Removed a lot of guesswork on the actual dimensions of the thing.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by vasu raya »

Rustom-2 containerization is good, hopefully they do something similar with Rudra for transport by C-17 or IL-76 to be used by special forces

the issue with Rustom-2 is what if it has to fly in contested airspace? does AWACS provide early warning to it about scrambling enemy fighters? the Predators don't operate in contested airspace and they use stealth UAVs when operating say in Iranian airspace. Over time we might get there until then we need disposable mini UAVs that can extend the engagement zone 50km beyond LoC and can fire a CLGM or ATGM

they could block runways by straying in the flight paths causing 'bird hits' if any jet takes off until special operations using Rustom-2 and/or Rudra behind enemy lines are complete. A few of them can take out AA guns around the airfield.
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Vipul »

India to Bolster UAV Fleet for Border Surveillance.

India plans to spend more than US $2 billion in the next five years to boost its UAV fleet, including mini UAVs, and sharpen its border surveillance, intelligence and communications capabilities.

More than a dozen domestic private-sector players are eyeing the mini-UAV market, while the Defence Research and Development Organisation concentrates on developing high-altitude, long-endurance; vertical takeoff; medium-altitude, long-endurance; and combat UAVs.

The Army this month floated a tender to acquire 49 UAVs to be used for real-time intelligence and surveillance, to detect human or vehicular movement, target recognition and identification, and electronic intelligence and communication intelligence.

The tender has been sent to private Indian companies Idea Forge, Dynamatrics, Hi-tech Robotics, Ufcon, Omnipresent Technologies, Datapattern, Tata Advance Systems and state-owned Bharat Electronics.

The mini UAVs will be used for counterinsurgency operations in the northern state of Jammu and Kashmir, bordering Pakistan. The UAV will have an endurance of 30 to 90 minutes carrying a camera, and be able to perform auto tracking of targets.

The mini UAVs will gather intelligence and carry out reconnaissance along the Line of Control with Pakistan and the India-China border, an Indian Army official said. Mini UAVs are effective electronic eyes in the skies against border infiltrations, which have increased recently, the official added.

The Army is employing UAVs as a communication constellation and has put them to use in rescue operations, as observation posts and for medical evacuation, said Mahindra Singh, a retired Army major general.

The Army and Air Force have an immediate requirement for more than 700 mini UAVs.

The drones need to have endurance of 90 minutes with a loiter time of one hour. The vehicle needs to be able to reach an altitude of 2,000 feet carrying its camera.

The mini UAV should have a mission range of at least 10 kilometers.

In addition, the drones would have jam-resistant uplink and secured downlink, and the system should be easily transportable in one light vehicle and carrier in dismantled configuration in backpacks.

The Army plans to have about 1,600 mini UAVs by 2017 for use by the infantry and mechanized infantry, the Army official said, adding that these vehicles would be employed to enhance the Army’s situational awareness in the border regions.

The mini UAVs will be integrated into a system that will include assets such as artillery, locating radar, bigger UAVs, aerostat radars, and airborne early warning and control aircraft, which could be used as a force-multiplier, the official said.

“The Indian Army needs to have a variety of UAVs, especially [combat UAVs] equipped with missiles which could be effectively used against insurgent hideouts. The Indian Army is spending most of its time fighting these insurgents in what is called low-intensity warfare, leaving little time for preparing for a major future battle,” Singh said.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by vasu raya »

Iran's New Drone-Like Guided Missile Is Held Together With Duct Tape
Iran's latest drone isn't one. The "matchstick with wings" body, camera slung beneath the fuselage, and remotely piloted nature of the Ra'ad 85 all obscure the vehicles' true nature: it's a flying bomb, slapped together with duct tape and meant for one use only. Built from the body of Iran's Mohajer 4 drone, the Ra'ad 85 straddles the line between remotely piloted vehicle and guided bomb.

The distinction between drones and guided missiles is a bit arbitrary, as either can be remotely piloted or steered by an internal guidance system. In fact, both categories have a common ancestor. Designed in WWI and dubbed an aerial torpedo, the Kettering Bug was a minature biplane carrying explosives. With a rudimentary, pre-programmed guidance system, the Bug would fly a set distance (up to 75 miles, and counted out by an odometer attached to the propeller), and then crash to the ground, hopefully hitting its intended target. Developed too late to be used in the war, the concept was tested further during the interwar era; the UK's ship-launched RAE Larynx was an early example. While the Bug and the Larynx were never used in war, drone-like flying bombs have seen a recent revival, notably with America's Switchblade piloted missile.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by vasu raya »

Would like to see one of the Prithvi warheads such as this to actually carry disposable UAVs in the form factor of each rocket munition. Those UAVs can be dispersed say over an airfield and each can be programmed to a specific target, this is similar in concept to a CBU-105 except it has wider coverage with each UAV having a range of 50km.

Image
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by vic »

Rustom can be versatile platform and hopefully will be developed into turboprop and turbofan variant also.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Indranil »

Okay, here are some details that have emerged from the tender for testing the fuel system of Rustom-II.
Rotax 914f3 engine has been identified as the propulsion system for Rustom II. The UAV will be integrated with two Rotax 914f3 engines in tractor configuration. Rotax 914f3 is a four stroke, four cylinder, turbocharged, reciprocating piston engine. (This is the same engine on the Hansa and Heron, and so they should have some experience with this engine).

Rotax 914f3 engine is integrated with MTV-6-A/162-112 constant speed propeller. A hydraulic governor is mounted on the engine which maintains the propeller speed constant at a set throttle position. Pitch of the propeller can be varied from fine to coarse and vice versa during the engine operation.

Rustom II is designed with a gravity feed fuel system configuration with a collector tank which provides uninterrupted fuel supply to the engines at the required pressure and flow rate under all flight conditions throughout the flight envelope.
Entire test mounting
Image

The test envelop covers pitch angles of -25 degrees to +25 degrees and roll angles of -45 degrees to +45 degrees.
Image

Engine mounts
Image

Engine nacelles
Image

Fuselage fuel tank
Image

Wing fuel tank
Image
Raman
BRFite
Posts: 304
Joined: 06 Mar 2001 12:31
Location: Niyar kampootar onlee

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Raman »

With all the measurements, specifications and drawings, the Chinese can probably mass-manufacture and export Rustum to Pakistan before we IOC it ... :D
Leo.Davidson
BRFite
Posts: 119
Joined: 09 Aug 2011 05:34
Location: Boston, USA

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Leo.Davidson »

Raman wrote:With all the measurements, specifications and drawings, the Chinese can probably mass-manufacture and export Rustum to Pakistan before we IOC it ... :D
Why will they copy our stuff, when they have access to all of the americano CAD drawings, etc.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Indranil »

Interesting development. ADE has a tender for 8 engines and 12 propellers for Rustom 2. These engines are much more powerful than the "selected" Rotax 914F3 which they had reported in tenders just a week back.

1) Max continuous Power(Bhp)
at ISA Sealevel : Not be less than 170 Bhp and it should be available up to a minimum altitude of 8000 ft.
Power at 11,000 ft altitude : Not less than 140 Bhp
Power at 20,000 ft altitude : Not less than 110 Bhp

2) Max Take off power at ISA sea level : Not less than 185 Bhp and should be available for a minimum duration of 5 minutes.

3) Installed total weight (wet engine) including propeller and all the mandatory accessories required for the engine operation should not be greater than 220 kg.

4) Technically possible (by design) to operate up to 32000 ft. Engine should have FAA or EASA certification up to 18,000 ft altitude and above.

5) Dimensions: The maximum volume of the engine shall not be greater than 800mm x 900mm x 700 mm (l x b x h). (This will not fit in the current nacelle.

6) Endurance: Continuous operation of 30 hours Minimum. (Current advertised endurance is of 24 hours).

So what are the possibilities:
1) This is MALE version of Rustom-I, possibly UCAV version. Rustom-II is a misprint (appears only once in the tender).
2) The Rotax engine agreement has fallen through. Or they have realized, that amount of power is not enough. (Now :eek: ) Most likely option though :| .
3) This is for a longer endurance version of Rustom. This will be great news. Because they want the engines really soon (all 8 before the end of next year).
4) These are for UCAV versions of Rustom. But then why the 30 hour endurance? We don't have such long range of communications yet to require that kind of endurance (unless loitering is a necessity).
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by vic »

I think that there is a realization that 115hp Rotax is underpowered so they are going in for a more powerful engine. A likely candidate is SR 305 engine.

Though I fail to understand as to why are we not immediately launching a programme for turboprop engine powered Rustom, as one of the major requirement of UAVs-UCAVs is in Himalayan Region. Turbocharged piston engine may give an altitude of 20-30,000 feet but we require altitude capabilities of 40-60,000 feet which can only be given by a turboprop or turbofan engine.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Sagar G »

Neshant wrote:Of course there are such UAVs.
Look at the specs and intended mission asked for by vasu raya and the one posted by you and decide for yourself whether there is any such UAV.

A 120 HP, 4 stroke SI engine in under development in CVRDE for Rustom, which version it is going in then ???
pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by pragnya »

indranilroy wrote:Interesting development. ADE has a tender for 8 engines and 12 propellers for Rustom 2. These engines are much more powerful than the "selected" Rotax 914F3 which they had reported in tenders just a week back.

..........
they might be from Honeywell if one goes by this. they are 'partnering' DRDO on Rustom 2.
In India, Honeywell is partnering with DRDO on Rustom II. Can you elaborate on it?

Rustom II is an exciting development in the evolution of India’s defence capabilities. I cannot give any specific details today regarding our involvement with the program however, as with all emerging major platforms, we always look for opportunities to bring our expertise and innovation to improve performance and enhance mission success.
Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

Iranian New Drone Fotros

Post by Avinandan »

Somehow, news of this new Iranian Drone Fotros got missed in BR.
looks like Heron, I was sceptical thinking that it was probably a mockup.
But got convinced when saw it flying. Looks pretty impressive.

Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

UAE's new HALE UAV unveiled in Dubai Air Show

Post by Avinandan »

Image

Specs :--
http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/2638/hs0x.jpg

Link : Russia is interested in previous version (Adcom United 40 Block 5).

Again, very much impressed by ingenuity of the design with 4 wings for long endurance.
I was never aware that UAE guys were so good in UAV stuff :eek: .
Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Avinandan »


Link : http://theaviationist.com/2013/11/20/p1 ... ozVv8Txqvw
Posting in full :--
The new P.1HH HammerHead, a multi-purpose MALE (Medium Altitude Long Endurance) drone based on the Piaggio P-180 Avanti twin-engine turboprop plane has conducted a successful test flight from Trapani airbase, in Sicily, on Nov. 14.

The UAS (Unmanned Aerial System), unveiled earlier this year, is designed to perform intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) missions and believed to be capable of flying up to 45,000 feet for more than 16 hours.

Italy plans to purchase 10 such drones for reconnaissance and immigration control.
member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAE's new HALE UAV unveiled in Dubai Air Show

Post by member_22539 »

Avinandan wrote:Image

Specs :--
http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/2638/hs0x.jpg

Link : Russia is interested in previous version (Adcom United 40 Block 5).

Again, very much impressed by ingenuity of the design with 4 wings for long endurance.
I was never aware that UAE guys were so good in UAV stuff :eek: .
Just like EVERYTHING ELSE, they get foreigners to do it. Easy right, doesn't even matter if 99% of your population are useless parasites that never got over being tribal bedouins.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by kit »

It doesnt really matter if foreigners work in your facilities or not. UAE produces some very good artillery systems and there seems to be focus on UAV designs and manufacture will full government support. The UAE also holds patents and rights on many upgraded french and European military systems which has been made possible through joint ventures.

OT .. but the flood of billions into air transport will make emirates one of the largest airlines and the Dubai/ abu dhabi into one of the biggest transport hubs in the world.

These people seem to have a vision and a will to take things forward once it runs out of oil.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Lalmohan »

^^^ maybe, personally i think they will go back to herding camels
johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by johneeG »

Lalmohan wrote:^^^ maybe, personally i think they will go back to herding camels
I think they'll do piracy like Somalian biraders. And perhaps go back to slave trade from Africa when the immigrants stop coming if the oil is dried. Unless, someone does the Vikramarka on them.

As for the patents and stuff, if and when you don't have the muscle and clout to enforce it, they are not worth the paper they are written on.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Aditya_V »

Dubai an UAE are still very dependent on OIL, thats why DUbai economy crashed with oil prices in 2008. If not directly it is through Abu Dhabi and Saudi investments, plus a lot of powerful Indians put thier wealth in Dubai to be out of reach of Indian law.

They really don't have much capacity or manpower to manage.

European contractors are putting products out of uAE forr H&D, the Russia buying stuff is again H&D.

Thier rulers have vision yes, but thier inherent lack of skill in manpower means they will be dependant on oil for time to come.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Lalmohan »

dubai itself has no oil, but is a trading hub for the region
the regional economies without oil are really marginal, especially when they all want to create their own dubai's
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Indranil »

I hope that the news of the Avanti MALE system reaches the eyes and ears of the naysayers of the NAL-Kadet systems Hansa-UAV.
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4852
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Neshant »

kit wrote:
OT .. but the flood of billions into air transport will make emirates one of the largest airlines and the Dubai/ abu dhabi into one of the biggest transport hubs in the world.

These people seem to have a vision and a will to take things forward once it runs out of oil.
Exactly what would they be transporting?

Countries are competing to carry passengers and will give their national air carriers a priority. What advantage does UAE have.


Sounds like they are putting up expensive buildings and residences, large air fleets of planes but with no real plans of who is going to buy or use these services.

India will probably be buying these airplanes from them at a discount when the market crashes.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Lalmohan »

and when the next gen of ultra long range birds come in, or the next gen of supersonic cruisers - then the utility of a mid east hub will be less interesting
member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by member_20067 »

Emirates is spending like a binge drinker in a pub--- with 100+ A380, 50+ B787 and 50+ A350.... just insane amount of capacity... I hope they got their capacity planning right--
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Philip »

The successful tests of the USN's X-47B,should spur our indigenous efforts too in developing a naval UCAV which will be able to operate from the decks of Indian carriers and amphib vessels from 2020 onwards.While we are developing the AURA UCAV,its payload is inadequate for naval requirements.

http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stor ... oad-ahead/

X-47B UCAS-D to UCLASS: The Road Ahead

By John D. Gresham - December 8, 2013
X-47B Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV)

The X-47B Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) conducts touch-and-go maneuvers aboard the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71). Theodore Roosevelt is the third carrier to test the tailless, unmanned autonomous aircraft's ability to integrate with carrier environment. U.S. Navy photo By Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Anthony N. Hilkowski

The accomplishments of the Northrop Grumman X-47B Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) test program this past summer have been a source of pride for U.S. naval aviation as well as spurring debate about the future of the community. The successful test program of takeoffs, landings, deck handling procedures, and traffic patterns flown by the X-47B decisively proved the viability of a UCAV being integrated into future U.S. Navy Carrier Air Wings (CVWs). Questions at the moment surround where the Navy presently stands with its UCAV program, and how does the road ahead lead to carrier-capable unmanned warplanes?

Additional testing of the X-47B prototypes is presently ongoing aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71)

Following the completion of this summer’s sea trials aboard the USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77), both X-47B prototypes were initially put into storage. But that didn’t last long. In fact, additional testing of the X-47B prototypes is presently ongoing aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71). Trials to evaluate the feasibility of in-flight refueling of UCAVs are also presently ongoing. As the final act in the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency’s (DARPA’s) Unmanned Air Combat System – Demonstration (UCAS–D) program, the refueling trials are bringing to a close one of the most successful technology demonstration/test programs in history.
X-47B Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV)

A X-47B Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) demonstrator prepares to execute a touch and go landing on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77). The X-47B spent much of the summer conducting a series of demonstrations aboard the Bush. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Timothy Walter

Along with the Boeing X-45 test program, DARPA and its military service partners have evaluated a vast range of technologies, tactical scenarios, and operational concepts needed to develop the first generation of U.S. Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles (UCAVs) over the next decade. Just a dozen years after the first combat shot of a Hellfire missile from a modified Predator drone, it today looks like the technologies needed to make a legitimate UCAV ready for service have arrived. However, it needs to be said that no combat aircraft, or for that matter any other weapon system, is the product of the current state-of-the-art technologies available. On the contrary, aircraft like the UCAVs being envisioned will be the products of the requirements and specifications written long before their creation.

Many supporters of unmanned systems have genuinely hoped that America’s next major tactical aircraft program would produce a pilotless aircraft with similar qualities (stealth, sensors, range, armament, payload, etc.) to the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fight (JSF)

The first such program of record is expected to be the Navy’s Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike System (UCLASS). Many supporters of unmanned systems have genuinely hoped that America’s next major tactical aircraft program would produce a pilotless aircraft with similar qualities (stealth, sensors, range, armament, payload, etc.) to the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fight (JSF). That hope looks to be on hold for now, and as might be imagined, given the statement above about technologies, requirements and specifications, the problem lies in the nether land between what is possible, what is affordable, and what is needed.
Boeing X-45

The DARPA/U.S. Air Force X-45A Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) system demonstration program completed the first phase of demonstrations, known as Block I, on Feb. 28, 2003. The X-45 was one in an array of programs used to develop the first generation of U.S. Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles (UCAVs). NASA photo by Lori Losey

The problem of deciding what UCLASS will look like and be capable of will be defined by the Navy’s program requirement, which has been developed through the inputs of a number of different groups from the Navy and the Department of Defense (DoD). It is the varying opinions of what UCLASS should do and be that have been the cause of so much concern and confusion in recent months.

It is the varying opinions of what UCLASS should do and be that have been the cause of so much concern and confusion in recent months.

The problems begin in late 2012, when the original Navy UCLASS requirement was submitted to the DoD’s Joint Requirements Oversight Committee (JROC). Headed by Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. James Winnefeld, the JROC severely “dialed back” the Navy’s robust UCLASS requirement that previously had included strike/reconnaissance missions into “contested” airspace. Instead, the revised JROC requirement projected a more surveillance-oriented mission set in “permissive”/undefended areas, with only a limited strike mission and a payload similar to the General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper. While the justification for this revision was never fully explained by DoD, there appear to have been several reasons for their reluctance to specify a more capable and robust UCLASS, including:

Cost – Despite the well-understood cost benefits of unmanned systems versus manned aircraft, the JROC appears to have thought that the cost of developing and fielding a “high-end” UCLASS would be too great, and potentially unsupportable in the projected budget environment for the rest of this decade. This could become particularly troubling in light of the Navy’s continued acquisition of the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, and the probable move to high-rate production of the F-35 JSF.

Risk – DoD and the Navy are still stinging from the cost escalations that transpired during the development and fielding of both the F-35 JSF and the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). In particular, the U.S. Navy’s inability to control development and contractor costs, along with a number of risk-related problems bringing new technologies to the fleet, probably caused the JROC members to want to limit UCLASS.

Fighting the Last War – There is an unfortunate and common tradition within DoD and the military services to buy weapons systems and develop tactics/doctrine to fight the war just finished. Given that the U.S. military has been fighting insurgencies over the past dozen years, it is very easy to forget that across the globe, the militaries of many countries are buying state-of-the-art air warfare systems. These include fifth-generation fighter aircraft (Sukhoi PAK FA/T-50, Chinese J-20, etc.), and advanced surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems like the Russian Almaz S–300/350/400 series.

When word of the JROC-revised UCLASS requirement was released earlier this year, the reactions from the halls of Congress to the naval aviation community itself ranged from outright disbelief to outrage. Members of the House of Representatives wrote directly to Secretary of the Navy (SECNAV) Ray Mabus, expressing concern over the inputs from the JROC, and the possibility that the pending UCLASS requirement would make for a much less capable aircraft. Numerous editorials and opinions from analysts and aviation experts supported these concerns. However, a recent GAO report also expressed concerns with the anticipated pace and risks of the UCLASS program, which intends to put four detachments of four to six aircraft on carrier decks for deployment in the 2020 to 2022 timeframe. All this public attention appears to have recently had an effect on the near-term future of the UCLASS program.

“As a system, what we want to do as an affordability initiative is to ensure that the air vehicle design upfront has the growth capability without major modifications to go from permissive to contested [environments].”

Beginning earlier this month, the Navy began to lay out its own vision for UCLASS, explained by Rear Adm. Mat Winter, USN, the commander of the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Unmanned Aviation and Strike Systems Program Executive Office (PEO). “As a system, what we want to do as an affordability initiative is to ensure that the air vehicle design upfront has the growth capability without major modifications to go from permissive to contested [environments],” Winter said. “Specific proposals and the designs that are given back to the government, those will be informing us of how much of that permissive to contested and the air refueling provision actually shows up in their designs. Air refueling provisions are still part of the requirements.”
Lockheed Martin UCLASS

The Lockheed Martin Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) air vehicle concept is likely one of the four competitors for the U.S. Navy UCLASS program. Lockheed Martin rendering

In speaking to the basic UCLASS requirement changes from what the JROC specified in late 2012, Winter explained, “Some are modular, some are fill…. so there is a whole spectrum of traditional design growth paths. We have to wait to see what industry proposes. The plan here is to provide an early operational capability that will be verified and validated for a light strike permissive environment. What we will ensure is that the design of the system (UCLASS) does not preclude what we call “capability growth,” to be able to operate in contested environments.”

Winter explained where the program stands during a Nov. 7 press conference.

Currently, four contractors are planning to submit bids, including Boeing, Northrup Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and General Atomics.

“That draft [UCLASS] request for proposal is in the final approval stages of our senior leadership authorities,” he said. “We anticipate that being released by the middle of December.”

Currently, four contractors are planning to submit bids, including Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and General Atomics. The UCLASS contract award is currently anticipated in late 2014, with the achievement of an early operational capability in the 2019 to 2021 timeframe, according to Winter.
General Atomics UCLASS

The General Atomics’ submission for the UCLASS program is based around their Sea Avenger. General Atomics photo

“That’s the current timeline,” he said. “With that, we’ll go into our source selection activity to down-select to a single air vehicle vendor. From that point we’ll be able to determine the exact timeline or schedule for the UCLASS program because we will have picked the specific air vehicle.”

While the Navy seems to have regained control of the UCLASS program and schedule, it remains to be seen if they can possibly put airframes onto an operational carrier deck by the end of this decade.

While the Navy seems to have regained control of the UCLASS program and schedule, it remains to be seen if they can possibly put airframes onto an operational carrier deck by the end of this decade. Fiscal limitations alone could derail both the program and schedule, resulting in a delay of years before UCAVs operate from the decks of U.S. aircraft carriers.
Post Reply