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.
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.
^^^ 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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
"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.
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 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.
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
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.
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...
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..
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.
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.