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
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Rakesh »

AkshaySG wrote:
Massive if true , Although I hope this means US and Biden shutting the **** about CAATSA and S400 .

Its surprising how quickly we manage to scrounge up Billions of $ for foreign deals while LCH et al have to wait for months for even a paltry order due to budget concerns .
CAATSA and S-400 will not go away, with this purchase. Neither will it go away with a purchase of an American fighter in MRFA for the IAF or MRCBF for the Navy. CAATSA will always remain a Damocles sword over India's head. Makes sense from an American point of view.

Even if we retire all current Russian military platforms (unlikely to ever happen) and move over to Amreeki, it will still stay in effect.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Rakesh »

https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 86532?s=20 ---> Report: Indian military agrees to US $3 billion deal to buy 30 MQ-9B drones from USA. Will be a huge boost to ISR capabilities. DSCA notification expected.

https://twitter.com/MI6GB/status/136882 ... 12992?s=20 ---> For those squabbling about the high price surrounding this deal:

1) France: 16 unarmed MQ-9 for $1.5 billion in 2013.
2) Italy: 4 MQ-9 for $330 million in 2008.
3) Belgium: 4 MQ-9B for $600 million in 2019.
4) UAE: 18 MQ-9B for $2.97 billion.
5) Taiwan: 4 MQ-9B for $600 million.

https://twitter.com/MI6GB/status/136883 ... 28358?s=20 ---> The deals for sale of MQ-9 to UAE, Taiwan are as of 2020 prices.
AkshaySG
BRFite
Posts: 407
Joined: 30 Jul 2020 08:51

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by AkshaySG »

Rakesh wrote:
4) UAE: 18 MQ-9B for $2.97 billion.

The deals for sale of MQ-9 to UAE, Taiwan are as of 2020 prices.


Many details yet to come out obviously but still interesting to see the per-drone price difference between India and UAE's deals , Theirs comes out to almost 1.5X our price

Wonder what extra support/capabilities/infra they added to their deal to make it so expensive.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by brar_w »

DSCA notifications are a reflection of a request and not a contract. Nations request all sort of integrations, hardware, software, weapons, options and support they they may never end up contracting for (to avoid having to go through the long FMS process again). Similarly, the more nation specific or non US std. content (hardware, software or service) that is requested the more these numbers tend to deviate from actual contracted prices. This is because the DOS is extremely conservative in cases it doesn’t have the cost of a system, integration, or service that does not have a US analogous. Finally, since the last year or so, much like the F-16 the MQ-9 has been commoditized in terms of firm configuration with all those contracts for FMS having been negotiated and awarded upfront under an IDIQ scenario. So a low firm fixed price FMS number is the result with each individual customer negotiating any deviation from that baseline configuration separately through either an independent (DCS) route or via subsequent upgrades. The baseline system and its components have been negotiated and agreed upon by GOTUS and the OEM's concerned. You just need to tell them the quantity for a given year and they'll deliver that. No need to negotiate each case and each component within each case separately. A better defined IDIQ, that is pre-negotiated, and approved means that the DSCA estimate ends up being closer to the actual contracted cost when compared to them essentially guessing what the user specific request may cost once negotiations get underway.

See this. The IDIQ contract is has a 5 year term, a max buy capacity of 180 (@ a rate not to exceed 36 aircraft a year) and a cost ceiling of $7.4 Billion.
In an effort to field MQ-9 Reapers faster and meet an increasing operational demand for the aircraft, the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center’s MQ-9 Program Office awarded a $7.4 billion ceiling Agile Reaper Enterprise Solution (ARES) contract to General Atomics Sept. 17.

The MQ-9 is an unmanned aircraft with intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and strike capabilities, and is one of the most in demand weapons systems in the U.S. Air Force.

ARES, a five year fixed indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract, developed by the MQ-9 Program Office, will stabilize costs, allow for the procurement of up to 36 aircraft per year in the same appropriation year, and reduce the time it takes to deliver the aircraft to operational units by approximately 35%.

ARES is flexible and it has streamlined the traditional contract award process.

ARES has a pre-negotiated $3.3 billion price-quantity-curve. This curve allows the Air Force and foreign military sales partners to unilaterally order between 4-36 aircraft in a single year.

Foreign Military Sales partners will be allowed to procure the Dash 21 variant, which is the NATO exportable version of the MQ-9A.

The contract contains pre-priced Mobile Ground Control Stations, Ground Data Terminal, spares, and support equipment. This pre-priced contract allows the MQ-9 Program Office to go through the complete contract clearance process only once.

“Prior to ARES, the standard contract award timeline was roughly 380 days,” said Alicia Morales, aircraft production manager with the Medium Altitude Unmanned Aerial System (MAUAS) Program Office, who was instrumental in developing ARES. “Now, once we have a budget, and it’s in our account, we can award in just a couple of days and field the aircraft in 26 months.”

In addition to fielding MQ-9’s faster, ARES brings a level of certainty to the MQ-9 Program.
rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 855
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by rajsunder »

AkshaySG wrote:
Rakesh wrote:
4) UAE: 18 MQ-9B for $2.97 billion.

The deals for sale of MQ-9 to UAE, Taiwan are as of 2020 prices.


Many details yet to come out obviously but still interesting to see the per-drone price difference between India and UAE's deals , Theirs comes out to almost 1.5X our price

Wonder what extra support/capabilities/infra they added to their deal to make it so expensive.
Abhijit Iyer says that the prices for Amrs purchased by middle east countries tend to be high because they use these deals to pay themselves or a prince a nice fat commission.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by brar_w »

They also create very little support infrastructure that is domestic so they tend to negotiated very large support packages that are much longer in duration compared to what it would normally take for most nations to bed down a fleet and then take over some of the sustainment operations themselves using organic military or industrial capability. If you are a supply chain or a sustainment professionals at one of the vendors supporting a system that they've bought you can pretty much spend your entire career going back and forth between gulf countries and never really onboard any of their local industry partners to any higher level work. This is changing of late in particular with the UAE but it is one aspect of their contracts that is generally not seen elsewhere. This is reflected in the upfront state department notification.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4215
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Prem Kumar »

Mixed feelings about this:

1) Its great because we don't have armed drones (I'm not counting loitering munitions). Hopefully, we use it in peacetime for LOC jihadi-hunting, to get useful operational experience and to save our jawans lives

2) The per-unit price is astronomical: 2.5X that of Tejas-MK1A. HALE/MALE UAVs are high-end items. All the more reason to accelerate Rustom & its armed version. We need to kick ADE's backside & open this up to the private sector in building up our own fleet. UAVs are game-changers and we should seek to become a world-leader and exporter

3) Shows how our forces & MoD are ready to pump $3B for imports, while being stingy with homegrown programs. An investment of $1B into Rustom or the Kaveri program will do wonders!

4) God-forbid, what happens if one of these crashes? Are they covered by some sort of insurance (accident) or warranty (in case of fault)?
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by arvin »

While I agree that purchasing 30 of them is wasteful expenditure, I think this is more a part of annual hafta payment that we dish out to Roos and Amrica. EspeCIAlly since 5 state elections are on the way and Bengal in particular was a pitstop for Hillary in 2012.
Only positive I think of is, precious air frame life on Navy P8i will be saved. IA and IAF get expensive target practise toys.
Rishi_Tri
BRFite
Posts: 520
Joined: 13 Feb 2017 14:49

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Rishi_Tri »

Don't think it was posted here:

https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2021/ ... e-uav.html

Rustom-II has achieved eight-hour flight endurance at 22,000 feet and efforts are now on to take the endurance closer to 24 hours at 30,000 feet, as per the user mandate.

Rustom capabilities are gradually being proven to higher standards. Does make case for their induction!
sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1544
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by sooraj »

https://twitter.com/FrontlinerUV/status ... 8536693760


Frontliner
@FrontlinerUV
1. Bengluru based private firm Kinetix Engineering Solutions limited and UK based comapany Marques Aviation are developing 'Eklwya' Loyal wingman and 'Maya' Medium altitude long endurance UAV.


2.Eklwya
It will have stealth technology, EW system, Data fusion, Al Swarming Technology and Air to Air Refueling probe . Can cary weapon also. It will have speed auto 0.8 mach.

Image

3. MAYA
EO, IR, Thermal Sensors
Laser Range Finder, COMINT, ELINT
Electronic Support Measures (ESM)
Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR)
Maritime Patrol Radar (MPR)
SATCOM,TACAS,RWR, Identity Friend and Foe, Line-of sight data link.
Endurance: 32 hrs
LOS: 250 350 km
SATCOM: > 5000 km

Image
Image
Last edited by sooraj on 19 Mar 2021 09:50, edited 1 time in total.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Rakesh »

Sooraj, please put link to tweets. Thank You.
V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 1379
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by V_Raman »

One good thing about Massa hafta payments is you get good stuff which are force multipliers
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by arvin »

No doubt Massa hafta payment have got us top notch stuff like Apache, C130, MH 60 and so on. But 3 billion for 30 drones is way to costly. Reduce the deal size by a third and just let IN have 10 - 12 of them since they have largest area to patrol. IA and IAF already operate other types and in a few years there will be a flood of drones from private sector. Hopefully TAPAS will also come along. They can depute people to IN if they want to get a feel of MQ 9B operation.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by kit »

Rakesh wrote:
AkshaySG wrote: Massive if true , Although I hope this means US and Biden shutting the **** about CAATSA and S400 .

Its surprising how quickly we manage to scrounge up Billions of $ for foreign deals while LCH et al have to wait for months for even a paltry order due to budget concerns .
CAATSA and S-400 will not go away, with this purchase. Neither will it go away with a purchase of an American fighter in MRFA for the IAF or MRCBF for the Navy. CAATSA will always remain a Damocles sword over India's head. Makes sense from an American point of view.

Even if we retire all current Russian military platforms (unlikely to ever happen) and move over to Amreeki, it will still stay in effect.
CAATSA is just one tool of the American foreign policy., just like hooman rights and the multitude of active and "passive" treaties like MCTR., NPT, "Seven Eyes"(passive)_
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by kit »

V_Raman wrote:One good thing about Massa hafta payments is you get good stuff which are force multipliers
and also ensure prolonged dependence on them !!
V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 1379
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by V_Raman »

that is same with any import from any country - we do manufacuring from RAW material for SU30-MKI. If we have to pay hafta anyway - get the good stuff...
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Manish_P »

Would request resident gurus to check on this critical policy

India’s 2021 drone rules could be a deathblow to an already struggling industry
As per the Unmanned Aircraft System Rules, 2021, every stakeholder of the industry needs to procure an official certificate of ‘authorization’ from the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to continue doing what they may have been doing for years now – right from manufacturing the simplest of drone components, such as a wire or a screw, to conducting research and development of an unmanned aircraft system. And this is just the first step. The new rules are deliriously high on the licensing system.

Once you have received your ‘authorization’ certificate, you need to submit a separate application to the DGCA to obtain permission for the manufacture or import of a prototype drone (for a fee, of course. There’s a fee to be paid with every application). Each prototype drone that you create or import will be assigned a unique identification number by the DGCA. Hold on to these UINs, because their transfer from one stakeholder to another will also entail a time-consuming paper trail and fee at each step.

Now, to obtain a certificate of manufacture and airworthiness, you send another application to the DGCA, post which you handover your prototype drone and all the design documents to an ‘authorized’ testing laboratory chosen by the Director-General.

And then, you wait. Maybe for weeks, maybe for months. The rules don’t specify any timeline or tracking mechanism for the progress of any of these applications.

What they do specify is that if you need to import a spare part for a drone for which a certificate of manufacture and airworthiness has already been granted to you, you still need to take prior approval of the DGCA by filling out yet another application form. And no, it doesn’t help that the Directorate General of Foreign Trade has already issued you an Importer-Exporter Code (IEC) number.

That said, chances are, you may never reach the test flight stage. It would take nothing short of a miracle for you to find ‘authorized’ manufacturers for all the components the DGCA says your drone must have before it makes its way to a testing laboratory.

And by the time you check off the boxes on the list of the technical requirements, your drone would have become economically unfeasible for today’s markets.

A 360-degree collision avoidance system, for example, has been mandated for a Micro category drone (weighing ≤ 2 kg) that would be flown by a trained, ‘authorized’ operator within the visual line of sight. And an emergency recovery system is absolutely essential for a Small category (weighing ≤ 25 kg) agricultural spraying drone that has been designed to fly only 2 meters above the ground level. Even toy drones (weighing less than 250 gm) are to be outfitted with Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receivers and have high-tech features like geofencing capabilities and autonomous ‘Return to Home’ options.

For a hobbyist, however, the higher price point for a beginner drone will not be the only barrier to entry. To fly any drone weighing more than 250 gm for recreational purposes, you are required to undergo a week-long training program costing upward of INR 25,000. Two separate pilot permit applications need to be submitted to the DGCA – first as a student and then, after the completion of the training, as an operator. Two other applications must be submitted to get both the drone and the drone owner registered with the authorities.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Thakur_B »

^^ Only a Super- Babu could have come up with this policy.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Indranil »

Yet another offshoot of the AAAU.: An AAAU-based maritime patrol radar with 512 TRMs.

This shows how much confidence DRDO, IAF and IN have on the AAAU radar and its derivatives: Netra, new AEW&Cs, Mk1A, Mk2, AMCA and now this.

I am pretty sure Su-30 radar upgrade can be Uttam-derived!

Image
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Rakesh »

Integrating unmanned platforms and enabling tech in India’s warfighting doctrine
https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/ ... -doctrine/
24 March 2021

By Major General BS Dhanoa (retd)
deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4024
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by deejay »

Thakur_B wrote:^^ Only a Super- Babu could have come up with this policy.
Thakur Sa'ab, DGCA is the ultimate babudom. Anyone who has dealt with DGCA will tell that. Entire Indian Civil Aviation works through this quagmire. Also, this tells you about how under informed and under confident DGCA is about drones and the challenges their flying throws at it.

Time and again, wrt DGCA, I am reminded how every rule and policy harks back to worst case scenarios and each rule being made to cater only to worst case scenario. License Raj ka doosra naam DGCA.

The speed at which technology and time at which DGCA acquires domain expertise is inversely proportional.

That said, we are one of the few countries to have a set of regulations to operate drones under. Until now mostly it was a grey area and hazards of drone operations were many.
AkshaySG
BRFite
Posts: 407
Joined: 30 Jul 2020 08:51

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by AkshaySG »

https://twitter.com/alpha_defense/statu ... 5387085827
Jagdalpur: A Rustom UAV was damaged during landing after hitting an airport wall. The drone was brought there about a week back to carry trials for use in anti-naxal ops.
Image
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Kakarat »

It seems to be a wall before the airport wall, why was the UAV flying so low?
kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by kvraghav »

Seems to be the Rustom 1
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5383
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Manish_P »

Kakarat wrote:It seems to be a wall before the airport wall, why was the UAV flying so low?
The tweet mentioned it was landing. Perhaps a misjudged landing or something failed?
Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4102
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Neela »

Isnt an altitude sensor a must-have in such a large UAV with or without autonomous landing
nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4712
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by nam »

It could be anything. It could even be a sudden gush of wind, which forced the uav down.

Since Indians believe other Indians don't know what they are doing, there is no need to wait for the investigation. They are already guilty.

Personally I don't give a toss, if they crash 20 more. As long as they are making progress.
Rishirishi
BRFite
Posts: 1409
Joined: 12 Mar 2005 02:30

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Rishirishi »

arvin wrote:While I agree that purchasing 30 of them is wasteful expenditure, I think this is more a part of annual hafta payment that we dish out to Roos and Amrica. EspeCIAlly since 5 state elections are on the way and Bengal in particular was a pitstop for Hillary in 2012.
Only positive I think of is, precious air frame life on Navy P8i will be saved. IA and IAF get expensive target practise toys.

I am struggling to understand the rationale with them. They fly in medium height and can operate in defended airspaces, as they can be shot down. So they cant be used against our friends in East or West. They can be used against Jehadis, but at a cost of 100 million per copy, does it make sense? There must be cheaper options out there. The same goes for sea surveillance. Cant this be done from cheaper platforms? 3 billion is a lot for a country like India. India needs to spend on infrastructure to boost its industrial capabilities. For 3 billion it is possible to build 1500 km of expressway.

I am not saying it is a bad decision, i just do not understand it. I do not think it is a "hafta" thing. Us never forced India to purchase them. Had it been 30 JSF's I would have been rejoicing .
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Aditya_V »

UAV drones can do survelliance of vast areas of the Ocean/ seas, when a potential target is discovered , a manned platform like P-8 can be dispatched, they can detect a ship probably from a distance and dont need to go in SAM range, thats what I am thinking. There is clealry a Quid pro quo for the MTCR and Nuclear deal and we have to make these Hafta payments, some of these have been really useful like P-8I's, C-17, C-130, MH60R, Chinooks etc. Hell we if you add them up its quite a lot from 2008.
Rishi_Tri
BRFite
Posts: 520
Joined: 13 Feb 2017 14:49

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Rishi_Tri »

Chattisgarh has been very hot over the past few days. First soldiers lost their lives. Number of Anti India maoist cadres have been eliminated over the last few days, perhaps in retaliatory action. Rustom I may have been taken down in the process. Investigation shall reveal the true cause.

In any case, if Rustom I is being operated in hostile territory, then the powers be are serious about honing indigenous drone capability. Commendable.

Now over to Rustom II / Tapas high altitude tests.
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by arvin »

Rishirishi wrote: I am not saying it is a bad decision, i just do not understand it. I do not think it is a "hafta" thing. Us never forced India to purchase them. Had it been 30 JSF's I would have been rejoicing .
They did not force us, but these 'small' hafta at regular intervals ensure say block 52 dont turn into block 70 under Taliban excuse.
Technically yes we sure can do without it since we already have dornier with belly mounted radar like the one posted couple of posts above doing the same job.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4215
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Prem Kumar »

"Rustom UAV runs into a wall" - quite an appropriate headline :)

Jokes aside, I am very happy that they are using UAVs for anti-Naxal activities.

1) We should become experts in tech like foliage-penetrating radars, earth-penetrating radars etc & deploy these on UAVs, to counter the naxal threat.
2) Similarly, we need persistent UAV presence over "sensitive areas" of the country to scoop up COMINT & improve our internal security.
3) We need to deploy armed variants against jihadis crossing LoC too.

The necessity is there. Invention must follow.
nash
BRFite
Posts: 946
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by nash »



at 5:14, which UAV is this? similar to CATS warrior but looks different.

Edit: Seems like they have include Boeing wingman concept in video.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Rakesh »

nash wrote:at 5:14, which UAV is this? similar to CATS warrior but looks different.

Edit: Seems like they have include Boeing wingman concept in video.
https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/13845 ... 78720?s=20 ---> This. Indian Army is a partner.

Image

Image
andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1676
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by andy B »

Admiral that looks suspiciously similar to the boeing loyal wingman project being worked on for the RAAF down under.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by brar_w »

andy B wrote:Admiral that looks suspiciously similar to the boeing loyal wingman project being worked on for the RAAF down under.
It’s a video still from taxi/flight test footage shared by Boeing.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Rakesh »

andy B wrote:Admiral that looks suspiciously similar to the boeing loyal wingman project being worked on for the RAAF down under.
Because it is :)

I copied the tweet verbatim (including his words) from G/C HV Thakur (retd) Sir. Apologies for not being clear. Let me explain.

At Aero India 2021, G/C HV Thakur (retd) Sir introduced the HAL CATS Warrior. This is it. Same picture as above, but from a different angle.

Image

And this is the Boeing Loyal Wingman....

Image

What the video wanted to display was the Indian Armed Forces moving to drones (among other new platforms) as part of her future warfare strategy. The Army even displayed the use of drones - but a different platform altogether - during Army Day 2021. Now the Armed Forces do not have a workable CATS Warrior prototype, so they lifted a video grab from the Boeing Loyal Wingman project.

So when G/C HV Thakur (retd) Sir published that picture as part of the tweet...it is assumed that folks would make the connection.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by Rakesh »

And no Boeing Loyal Wingman is coming to India, AFAIK. Nothing more than a video grab. Please do not read anything else into it.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Post by hnair »

The whole Turkish PR about the awesomeness of their UAV’s performance notwithstanding, the Gaza festivities is confirming more and more that it is useful against a dysfunctional military with shoddily protected big targets like Armenia or some militia type force. Not against a more integrated military like pakis or cheenis and most certainly it is not the panacea for dismounted infantry in a cluttered environment like in the hills or urban areas. Same is true about their usage against Indian forces.

The recent Israeli ops is a good eye opener. Israel is current #2 behind Khan in having a wide spectrum UAV and UCAV capability. It has everything from micro ones to Eitan type SATCOM enabled long endurance armed ones. All except the flying wing types that only khan has. Israel had loitering munitions like Harop since decades.

Yet, it’s counter rocket effort in Gaza has been predominantly using very expensive solutions like Iron Dome for defensive, Spice/Popeye variants against command buildings and counter artillery against qassam launch clusters.

All these are very expensive solutions against cheap unguided rockets. It would have been cheaper for them to launch loitering munitions over Gaza and let them take out the launchers accurately. But it couldn’t, probably due to FOV issues when flying among buildings etc. similar issues exist in forests or hills too

Am assuming the jamming of the links of even small LoS UAVs is beyond Hamas, due to Israel’s known EW capabilities triangulating on such efforts quickly.
Post Reply