You know what Aircraft would make a good ISR drone?

Sub-scale and Full-Scale Aerial Targets and RPAs - Remotely-Piloted Aircraft
User avatar
Elite 2K
Elite 2K
 
Posts: 2652
Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
Location: USA

by KamenRiderBlade » 30 Nov 2016, 22:38

The Rutan Voyager
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rutan_Voyager

That thing had a 9 day round the world endurance record.

Now imagine modifying the propellers to use the next generation Electric Motors

Add in a Fuel to Electricity generator for night time power generation

Add in some Solar panels for day electricity generation

Add in a reasonable amount of batteries, not too much

And you would have a decent ISR platform for long endurance

And with two outter pylons, you can mount your standard Optical Sensor Turret underneath, one on each outter pylon

In the center, you can probably have enough room to mount a single modernized ARGUS-IS module:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARGUS-IS
This would allow wide area Persistent Stare

Add in a IR version of ARGUS-IS, and you'd have your self a giant ISR unit with super endurance

While MQ-9 Reapers are nice with their 14 hours endurance and weapons

Don't we need a more Longer Range and Endurance, persistent platform for ISR?


User avatar
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 681
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 03:44

by rheonomic » 14 Jan 2017, 07:36

KamenRiderBlade wrote:The Rutan Voyager


IIRC the way Rutan did the Voyager was by reducing the safety factors, g-limits, etc., so I don't think it would be feasible to add all of that extra equipment to it.

Not to mention most of the MTOW is fuel, so you have about 450 lb of payload.

KamenRiderBlade wrote:While MQ-9 Reapers are nice with their 14 hours endurance and weapons


I think the actual numbers are classified, but I'm pretty sure the Reaper can fly for longer than 14 hours. GA-ASI lists 27 hr endurance for the base Reaper, 34 for the Reaper ER. Another configuration has 42 hours of endurance. Actual perf is probably higher (too lazy to do the Breguet equation).
"You could do that, but it would be wrong."


User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 7720
Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

by popcorn » 14 Jan 2017, 08:53

Have a signed copy of "Voyager" by Jeana Yeager somehwhere, a fascinating account of an incredible flighht into the unknown.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh


User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 7720
Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

by popcorn » 14 Jan 2017, 08:58

This would be more feasible. A production could probably exceed the 4-day endurance limit.
http://www.boeing.com/defense/phantom-eye/
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh


User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 7720
Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

by popcorn » 14 Jan 2017, 09:01

"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh


User avatar
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 681
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 03:44

by rheonomic » 14 Jan 2017, 18:20

popcorn wrote:This would be more feasible. A production could probably exceed the 4-day endurance limit.
http://www.boeing.com/defense/phantom-eye/


I'd only ever seen in-flight pictures or renders of this thing before, but finally saw a picture with it next to ground equipment at SciTech last week. That thing is huge!
"You could do that, but it would be wrong."


User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5907
Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

by sferrin » 14 Jan 2017, 18:33

rheonomic wrote:
KamenRiderBlade wrote:The Rutan Voyager


IIRC the way Rutan did the Voyager was by reducing the safety factors, g-limits, etc., so I don't think it would be feasible to add all of that extra equipment to it.


It was built so close to the margins that after they sanded off one winglet on the runway from the wings dragging on takeoff, they were able to snap the other one off inflight with a gentle side-slip.
"There I was. . ."


User avatar
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 681
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 03:44

by rheonomic » 14 Jan 2017, 18:54

sferrin wrote:It was built so close to the margins that after they sanded off one winglet on the runway from the wings dragging on takeoff, they were able to snap the other one off inflight with a gentle side-slip.


Hadn't heard that story. Interesting--and terrifying!
"You could do that, but it would be wrong."



Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest