Bharat Rakshak

::: MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION :::
With the existing wing design, I do not know how much payload it will be able to carry ???

^^^ What is your question regarding the present wings?

The Rustom design is a slim/slender 'cranked arrow' delta wing and the load bearing position of the wings are to the aft of the fuselage. This design with canards may be an elegant design.

But loading the wing (payload) will make the Tail HEAVY.

What you refer to is Rustom-1. It is more of a TD & gap-filler..

The longer endurance version Rustom-2/Rustom-II/Rustom-H is completely different.. Check archives for pics from AI09.

Can you post some pics?

Sirjee google it and you will find it

Leo you are right about the layout of the Long EZ model which is the basis of Rustom-1. So at the moment the payload would be roughly the weight of two human beings ... the idea there is a proof of concept and using it for reconnaissance.

And for that it is one of the best airframe that could be chosen for it's extremely low drag characteristics.

But increasing payload could be also be done by scaling up the aircraft.

I have no clue about what you are speaking of canards ... because the Rustom-1 has one and it is critical to its flight characteristics.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 982396.cms


I have little trust in Iran but if the news is true then it again shows how wrong is the general perception that stealth is some impregnable tech...almost magically so.
But personally I take all of Iran's claims with a bucket of salt.

Even the Taliban managed to down a couple of low flying UAVs during the start of the US-Afghan war back in 2001. They needed to fly low to map the terrain and hence fell prey to small arms fire.

US is working on mapping equipment that can work at higher altitudes so these crafts don't need to fly so low.

Its got nothing to do with stealth which is evasion of radar. These crafts were probably shot down just by sight alone i.e. eyeballign it or with infrared goggles.

The people in the Naamkaran dept are useless. Rustom-1 and 2 are two completely different UAV's. Even the Israeli's from whom most of the designs are based, have different names. So, the Rustom-1 is like the Harop and the Rustom-2 is like the Heron.

My initial grip was based on the assumption that DRDO was going to attach a weapon payload to Rustom-1. This is a no go, even the Israeli's know it, instead making itself the payload.

On the other hand, we should weaponize the Rustom-2.

^^^ Rustom-1 and Rustom-2 (or H) are completely different UAVs, so what is the gripe here about the name... one is a MALE and another a HALE... why bring the Israelis into this?? you see any connection here... since the Rustom uses a Burt-Rattan air frame?!?.
Also what makes you think DRDO cannot attach weapons to Rustom-1? pure conjecture or do you have any sources?

Rustom-1 is a surveillance drone and Harop is a Anti-Radiation suicidal drone!!! my 0.00002 paise.

windfall for the chinese analysis team that must be airborne now.

there are small weapons available like MBDA saber which even a rustom-1 class UAV could carry a couple....could be used for targeted stealthy strikes on small targets though useless in a wartime sense where a more heavily armed 8xweapon loadout is a must

From the video, looking at the size of UAV, it does not seem a Nishant type Net capture UAV but a predator type runway landing UAV. From the video the UAV is not standing on its wheels but is kept on a platform with no view of the undercarriage. Given that, Iran electronic capture story seems improbable and most probably the US lost control of the UAV.

Looking the video one more time, the cream colour of the UAV looks like its under skin and not outer skin or paint. looks like panda has already taken the skin for analysis to use in J-20. In fact I would not be surprised if all that is being shown is the inner frame of the aircraft and Panda has already taken the engine, sensors and avionics for analysis.

^^ Does Panda have such good relations with Iran ?

Panda can always give the lollipop – you give us access of the drone and we will give you our super duper JF17 along with a couple of missiles we gave to the pukes.

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2011/12/r ... light.html

I strongly speculate Nishant payload and control systems are being used with the Rustom 1 airframe. I believe the development to deployment of Rustom 1 system will be much shorter than the earlier Nishant because of this.

This is a good leapfrog by using a proven Long EZ airframe with mature Nishant payload and control systems.

UCAV is also covered in this thread?

Looks a big bird to mee !!

Thanks nice link,didn't know so much variety existed.

Can you attach a sniper type guns to UAV and make them act like snipers in the sky?

UAV-Snipers

Old article

http://www.esquire.com/the-side/feature ... tan-061709

The problem with it might be first we need to develop stationary UAV's which can stay in the sky at a stationary position. Since I think it is not feasible to snipe while moving for UAV's. Or we need to develop some lock on mode for sniper bullets.

Mr hellfire is a good sniper too.

What about Helina?
Surpisingly the Helina weighs lesser by a minimum 3 kg and maximum of 6 kg compared to the Hellfire.

Helina cannot be 3Kg, probabbly you are referring to the weight of the Warhead.
Nag is a 42 Kg missile with a 8kg warhead and its derivative Helina is slightly lighter than the original Nag.

Agreed. The game of espionage is mind boggling. The perceptions, illusions and propagandas are thrown and used very liberally in the game.

Supposedly if it was advanced drone with stealth then the pic/video is misleading on the iranian TV. Who the hell knows if it was a setup to be deliver
a Trojan Horse/Wild Goose Chase/Diversion (Syria just experienced a pipeline bomb explosion btw) ??? One may never know. With the conflicting stories from both sides, it is questionable until we see more credible news or reports. The whole thing looks and sounds too damn easy.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zR1L0qiDWiE/TdQH63eXupI/AAAAAAAAAGw/2MY-q_mjpSo/s1600/Stealth-drone_1427413i.jpg

High Res Pics of the Iranian Version.
http://theaviationist.com/2011/12/08/stealth-pix/

And then we also have this from ABC.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/us-rq-170-sentinel-stealth-drone-shown-iran/story?id=15115781#.TuEs5fJS3YE

The Russians have given the US fits when it comes to stealth.

In Iraq, during the very early stages, they gave them fits.

Now it is reported that the Iranians used Russian supplied gadgets to take over the UAV. Cannot tell how far it is true, but ...........................

Also, there is a report out there that Obama denied a request for the CIA to either retrieve or destroy the air craft.

What i said is that Hellfire is 45.4–49kg while Nag is 42 kg onlee. So Helina will either be 42 kg or even lighter.

India Tests Mini-Drone With Pulsejet Engine

what are its implications? How will this engine be used?

Yes, gun stabilization has rapidly improved
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/06 ... arms-race/
http://www.as.northropgrumman.com/produ ... index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RAMICS_Picture.jpg

OV10D had a stabililized belly gun http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/ov-10-nog.jpg

Ofcourse, manufacturers dont like simple & cheap solutions. Otherwise how will they sell SDB bombs and Griffin missiles.

I dont see any practical utility. Pulsejet engines are stone age technology, first used on German V1 in the 40s. Noisy too.

if a pulsejet is cheaper than a proper prop/jet engine perhaps they are looking for a desi harpy type disposable cheap attack drone that can be made in large nos ?

Pulse jet engines are made with few or no moving parts and are capable of running statically. They are a lightweight form of jet propulsion, but they usually have a poor compression ratio, and hence give a low specific impulse. but they have higher fuel efficiency compared to a turbofan jet engines mainly during very high speeds. so what singha saheb said is a valid point

Rest of the story

http://www.pulsejetengines.com/