Russian UAV/UCAV developments

[mixelflick]

@mixeflick


I can agree with you new engine could be PITA but that doesn't have much with weapon tests. New engine will not increase cruise speed so if you need to test Su-57 weapon separation on max cruise speed you can do it with 117, only it would need to use AB.

There's no question in my mind that any responsible aerospace engineer would re-certify weapons carriage, release and separation with new engines. New engines will result in changes (likely an increase in vibration) in the airframe, and that extends to the weapons bay. Whether that occurs in military power, afterburner. both or not at all is the only question. And that means testing and how said forces affect (or don't) release of weapons from the internal bay. And remember, this will be at supersonic speeds - leading to big risks for the pilot.

Now you may be right - the Russians just won't do it, believing that everything will be just fine. Or there may be political pressure due to the fact it's already late. This situation has been seen before, but the best example is probably cosmonaut Vladimir Kamarov. Party premier Brezchnev was so intent on doing something big in space, he ordered the mission by X date. Problem being, the Soyouz spacecraft they wanted to use was known to have defects. Kamarov himself was so certain of his death that he requested an open casket funeral, so his handlers could see what they did to him. Predictably, his capsule's parachutes failed to deploy properly, and he slammed into the earth and was incinerated in the resulting fire. This is an example of what can happen, when you fail to test things...

[mixelflick]

I can agree with you new engine could be PITA but that doesn't have much with weapon tests. New engine will not increase cruise speed so if you need to test Su-57 weapon separation on max cruise speed you can do it with 117, only it would need to use AB.[/quote]

There's no question in my mind that any responsible aerospace engineer would re-certify weapons carriage, release and separation with new engines. New engines will result in changes (likely an increase in vibration) in the airframe, and that extends to the weapons bay. Whether that occurs in military power, afterburner. both or not at all is the only question. And that means testing and how said forces affect (or don't) release of weapons from the internal bay. And remember, this will be at supersonic speeds - leading to big risks for the pilot.

Now you may be right - the Russians just won't do it, believing that everything will be just fine. Or there may be political pressure due to the fact it's already late. This situation has been seen before, but the best example is probably cosmonaut Vladimir Kamarov. Party premier Brezchnev was so intent on doing something big in space, he ordered the mission by X date. Problem being, the Soyouz spacecraft they wanted to use was known to have defects. Kamarov himself was so certain of his death that he requested an open casket funeral, so his handlers could see what they did to him. Predictably, his capsule's parachutes failed to deploy properly, and he slammed into the earth and was incinerated in the resulting fire. This is an example of what can happen, when you fail to test things...

https://i.imgur.com/X0eX4HY.jpg

[project458]

Back to topic

First pics and video of the Altius-M in flight, it has 5000 kg take off weight and 20,000 m ceiling and 25 hour endurance, range is classified but should be least 2000km if not more, with this and and Hunters test flight about to start
what ever lead the West has in drones its about to fade away fast

P.S Flight tests of the Altius-M have been going on for two years, so these pics and video are probably not recent.


















https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W3mS3KE9hY

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3335511.html

[element1loop]

Terrifying!

A draggy old turboprop ... 20,000m (65,617 ft) ceiling ... sure! ... why not ... it's fantasy time ... so why not go big?

RQ-4 first flight was February 1998.



MQ-4 spec (wiki)
Maximum speed: 357 mph (575 km/h; 310 kn)
Range: 9,436 mi (8,200 nmi; 15,186 km)
Endurance: 30 hours
Service ceiling: 60,000 ft (18,000 m)

[knowan]

Good to know Russian propaganda will severely exaggerate performance, even for UAVs.

[zhangmdev]

That is not turboprop. Looks like V12 turbocharged.

http://imgup.nl/images/2017/04/21/JneAW-800.jpg

[element1loop]

You're right! No exhaust horns!

Ah, so 20,000 m was the 'typo' ... it was supposed to be 20,000 ft.

I hope they're using unleaded in that thing ....

[knowan]

http://www.deagel.com/Support-Aircraft/ ... 61001.aspx

The Altius or Altius-M is a medium-altitude, long-endurance (MALE) Unmanned Air Vehicle (UAV)

This is what is required to reach 20000 meters with props:


The Altius-M definitely can't reach 20000 meters; this is a textbook example of Russian propaganda exaggerating performance of their military products once again.

[project458]

Those who doubt that fact Altius-M can reach 20,000 m, just don't know how big Altius really is , but I will give you a clue

Thats a Tu-214 next to it by the way.

[project458]

That is not turboprop. Looks like V12 turbocharged.

http://imgup.nl/images/2017/04/21/JneAW-800.jpg

The engines will be upgraded in future, the program is barely 7 years old, there are a few more years of development left before its ready for the Military, and in the mean time Russia will continue to launch more military communication satellites, which means by 2022 Russia can deploy drones globally the US does with Global Hawk and RQ-170 !

[project458]

Whole family of guided weapons being developed for UAV/UCAV strikes in the future.

[knowan]

https://southfront.org/russias-altius-m-heavy-uav/

maximum altitude of 12km

[element1loop]

https://southfront.org/russias-altius-m-heavy-uav/

maximum altitude of 12km

Turbos could get it to 30 K feet just, but it would wheeze to get to 39k feet if at all. Maybe with 5% fuel remaining it could struggle to get close to that, eventually, but it would be empty of payload and just about out of juice to do it. Oh, and that link claims it's a "heavy-UAV". The next thing is its miserable available payload and viable range, and high-drag design.

One wonders why they couldn't manage a low-drag single-engine airframe design?

Yeah, I think we all know the answer to that.

First pics and video of the Altius-M in flight, it has 5000 kg take off weight ...

Good luck with simultaneous useful payload, and useful range.

The engines will be upgraded in future, the program is barely 7 years old, there are a few more years of development left …

oh right, the non-existent engine thing once again. “Seven years” of development and they couldn’t sort out a PT6-ski? Another lame excuse for having nothing ready to go once more. As for the US/West having only an alleged “small” and temporary lead over Russia in UAVs and UCAV tech you really are well beyond clinically delusional as someone else already suggested.

[element1loop]

Those who doubt that fact Altius-M can reach 20,000 m, just don't know how big Altius really is , but I will give you a clue

Thats a Tu-214 next to it by the way.

Really? Where are the engines? I blew your image by 400% and no engines, no visible shadows cast by engines and no stinger present, plus no V-tail. Whatever that is it isn't an 'Altius-M', it appears to be just a regular glider.

[sferrin]

Terrifying!

A draggy old turboprop ... 20,000m (65,617 ft) ceiling ... sure! ... why not ... it's fantasy time ... so why not go big?

Ahem...

"In 1989, the Condor set the world piston-powered aircraft altitude record of 67,028 ft (20,430 m) and was the first aircraft to fly a fully automated flight from takeoff to landing and also setting an unofficial endurance world record in 1988 by flying continuously for more than 50 hours; the flight was not ratified by the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale (FAI) and is therefore not considered an official record.[3]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Condor