UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Leo.Davidson · Post by **Leo.Davidson** » 06 Dec 2011 01:04

rakall wrote:
Leo.Davidson wrote: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.

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.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 06 Dec 2011 03:46

^^^ 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.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 08 Dec 2011 23:42

Drone Crash in Iran Reveals Secret U.S. Surveillance Effort

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Dec 2011 05:52

Drones! 34of them

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Dec 2011 05:54

Iran shows film of captured US drone

However, Iranian officials say its forces electronically hijacked the drone and steered it to the ground.

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says the intact condition of the Sentinel tends to support their claim.

Iran's Press TV said that the Iranian army's "electronic warfare unit" brought down the drone on 4 December as it was flying over the city of Kashmar, about 140 miles (225km) from the Afghan border.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Dec 2011 08:16

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

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Dec 2011 08:19

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

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 09 Dec 2011 11:36

NRao wrote:Iran shows film of captured US drone

However, Iranian officials say its forces electronically hijacked the drone and steered it to the ground.

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says the intact condition of the Sentinel tends to support their claim.

Iran's Press TV said that the Iranian army's "electronic warfare unit" brought down the drone on 4 December as it was flying over the city of Kashmar, about 140 miles (225km) from the Afghan border.

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.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 09 Dec 2011 11:46

^^ Does Panda have such good relations with Iran ?

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 09 Dec 2011 19:36

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.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 09 Dec 2011 20:41

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.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Dec 2011 21:40

UCAV is also covered in this thread?

chandanus · Post by **chandanus** » 09 Dec 2011 21:45

tsarkar wrote: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.

Looks a big bird to mee

!!

sanjeevpunj · Post by **sanjeevpunj** » 09 Dec 2011 21:54

NRao wrote:Drones! 34of them

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

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 09 Dec 2011 21:55

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

UAV-Snipers

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 09 Dec 2011 22:03

Old article

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

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 09 Dec 2011 22:08

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

UAV-Snipers

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.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Dec 2011 22:16

Mr hellfire is a good sniper too.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 09 Dec 2011 22:26

What about Helina?

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

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 10 Dec 2011 00:04

uddu wrote: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.

Garooda · Post by **Garooda** » 10 Dec 2011 01:21

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

"Iran's military has downed an intruding RQ-170 American drone in eastern Iran," Iran's Arabic-language Al Alam state television network quoted the unnamed source as saying.
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.

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/T ... 27413i.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 ... uEs5fJS3YE

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Dec 2011 04:59

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.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 10 Dec 2011 07:17

Shrinivasan wrote:
uddu wrote: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.

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.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 10 Dec 2011 11:13

India Tests Mini-Drone With Pulsejet Engine

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

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 10 Dec 2011 12:06

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

Yes, gun stabilization has rapidly improved
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/06 ... arms-race/
http://www.as.northropgrumman.com/produ ... ote]RAMICS has also demonstrated rated capabilities to penetrate earth, metal and a six foot solid block wall.[/quote]
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.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 10 Dec 2011 12:11

suryag wrote:India Tests Mini-Drone With Pulsejet Enginewhat are its implications? How will this engine be used?

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

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Dec 2011 12:24

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 ?

VinayG · Post by **VinayG** » 10 Dec 2011 13:10

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/

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 10 Dec 2011 17:16

India to develop solar-powered UAV

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Dec 2011 17:19

simpler it is better for single use and mass production. and it will likely be lighter and have less moving parts. perhaps could even be used for a MLRS type of 214mm rocket to extend the range out to 100km off small rockets....heh heh.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 10 Dec 2011 17:22

Can a pulse jet be put in the Nirbhay?

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 10 Dec 2011 17:49

Check this photo on the link posted by Garooda about the US drone.

I see the right wing taped to the body.. what do you see?

That and the absence of the landing gear is pretty suspicious

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 10 Dec 2011 17:55

Pratyush wrote:Can a pulse jet be put in the Nirbhay?

Lets build the V1 then http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-1_flying_bomb

Kailash wrote:I see the right wing taped to the body

The cyber-commandos are not pilots, they broke the wing while landing

abhishek-nayak · Post by **abhishek-nayak** » 10 Dec 2011 19:50

WHAT PULSEJETS????

Pulsejets are so stone age that even my college rejected it for my 7th sem project.

pulse jet has no future other than being used in toyshops.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 10 Dec 2011 19:56

You wouldn't consider it for a bomb with wings and propulsion?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Dec 2011 20:08

if NAL is doing it has to be a serious purpose.. they are not into making hobby shop models as a stream of new revenue.
and if this pic was released without stating the purpose, has to be a 'message' being sent to someone...

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 10 Dec 2011 20:40

Singha wrote:if NAL is doing it has to be a serious purpose.. they are not into making hobby shop models as a stream of new revenue.
and if this pic was released without stating the purpose, has to be a 'message' being sent to someone...

VKS has been talking for a while.. he mentioned a few time "loitering disposable missile".. May be this is one of the tech they are considering for that..

Needs to be silent, long loitering/endurance needs low speed, low thrust, low fuel consumption performance.. pulsejet is a suitable candidate technology.. may be they have a few choices - needs evaluation to make a decision.. just wait & watch, they may even have a big surprise for all..

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Dec 2011 20:45

here is the video off the defense daily link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vorWHmk3 ... r_embedded

it is surprising they are not stripping the puppy open yet. I am sure, chippanda is sending a special team to package and export, by replacing the original with a tin copy replica.

Aditya_M · Post by **Aditya_M** » 11 Dec 2011 02:13

Uh, guys, bad news on the Pulse Jet UAV.

Link

Scroll a little down and second video and second photo.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 11 Dec 2011 03:48

Wonder what happened to this Indian micro turbine? This report was from 2003.
Don't see it in the company's present site. I am pleasantly surprised at the awesome products these people are making.