CASC Caihong-7 (CH-7) UCAV

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Via https://twitter.com/HenriKenhmann

Length 10m, wingspan 22m, MTOW 13t, cruise at 13km / 0.6Ma, Vmax 0.75Ma.
Positioning: Strategic recognition and strikes high value targets. First flight 2019, serial production 2022.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Wang Yongzhi, the technical expert of the Rainbow series, told the Global Times on Monday in an exclusive interview that the Caihong-7 is a high-altitude, subsonic, and stealth drone, which has a maximum takeoff weight of 13 tons and a wingspan of 22 meters. Rainbow-7 is currently in the design stage.

The rainbow series of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) can perform fire suppression, electronic warfare, reconnaissance, long-term warning and other tasks on the battlefield.

The CH-7 was developed by China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC).

Its development makes China among a handful of companies to develop high-altitude, high-speed and stealth drones worldwide. The CH-7 is competing with the US RQ-180 and X-47B, Wang noted.

The Rainbow-7 can perform tasks together with manned aircraft, including four generations of stealth fighters. The UAV would perform pre-reconnaissance and surveillance missions, using its stealth capabilities and long-haul performance, together with manned aircraft and early warning aircraft, Wang said.

With a maximum takeoff weight of 13 tons, it can mount more advanced reconnaissance payloads and more combat weapons, performing on-demand missions on high-value targets.

Wang believes that high altitude, high speed and invisibility will be the trend of high-end drone development.

According to Wang, the CH-7 will continue to inherit the advantages of the CH-4 and CH-5 - high reliability, high attendance, universal ground station and full automatic control technology - but will also adopt technology of previous models that have not been used.

Unlike the CH-3, CH-4, and CH-5 which adopted the traditional unmanned structure, the CH-7 adopts a flying wing configuration with typical stealth characteristics. With the breakthrough in aerodynamic designs, the flight control also adapted a tailless wing configuration. In terms of power, it uses a turbofan engine that can fly at high altitudes and high speed, Wang told the Global Times.

To achieve a stealth performance, Wang noted that the CH-7 will also have an invisible shape and coated wave-absorbing material.

The CH-7 is mainly meant to meet the development needs of China's own related equipment. If it conforms to the national export policy, it can also be sold to help improve the defenses of other countries, Wang said.

The UAV has the ability to be modified for use on carriers, Wang noted, adding if it is equipped with radar, it would improve China's ability to safeguard maritime rights and interests.

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1125929.shtml

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

https://defence-blog.com/news/china-to-unveil-ch-7-new-generation-stealth-unmanned-combat-aircraft.html

 

[totoro]

The guy in the interview basically said it is for Chinese armed forces' needs, primarily. And it'd be a crazy thought that CASC is developing it without a clear customer. Especially if they already have a date for batch production...

So... that changes my mind and now it does look CH-7 is indeed already funded by and developed for Chinese armed forces. I guess we'll know better in 2019, if the first flight indeed happens next year.

Still, the choice of developer is fairly weird. For such complex, large UAVs it does seem more logical that a company with more experience when it comes to heavy aircraft and stealth aircraft would be contracted with such a project.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Additional 'official' data alleged on Chinese forum:

Engine thrust: 4000kg or 10000kg (lots of arguing on this point)
Endurance : 15 hours
Payload: 2000kg
RCS: 0.01sq m

https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2509035-1-1.html

 

[Forest Green]

Focus: How China is Preparing for the New Drone Warfare

Focus: China's Strategic Preparations for Next-Generation Drone Warfare

armyrecognition.com

 

[Deino]

Allegedly the CH-7 prototype

 

[Combat-Master]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1854841485453070825

View: https://x.com/clashreport/status/1854841485453070825

 

[Deino]

Here also

https://twitter.com/x/status/1854873296623288421

View: https://twitter.com/Hurin92/status/1854873296623288421

 

[SOC]

Airfield is here: 28.574867 121.577822

 

[Forest Green]

China’s Stealth CH-7 Long-Endurance Drone Emerges

The large flying-wing CH-7 drone has gone through several iterations but is reportedly due to complete its development imminently. The flying-wing drone has gone through several iterations but is reportedly due to complete its development imminently.

www.twz.com

 

[TomcatViP]

Here also

https://twitter.com/x/status/1854873296623288421

View: https://twitter.com/Hurin92/status/1854873296623288421

I am sorry but this thing wouldn't weight 10t in any configuration. Without the wings. perhaps.
Then that what we see is a simple a mockup, OK.

 

[Blitzo]

I am sorry but this thing wouldn't weight 10t in any configuration. Without the wings. perhaps.
Then that what we see is a simple a mockup, OK.

Why do you think it wouldn't weigh 10t in any configuration?

These are the official specifications of it from a few years ago (below), and the aircraft in the video looks consistent with the wingspan of 26m and 10m length.



It's possible they're describing a 10t takeoff weight in a light configuration or loadout, but the spec sheet is clearly meant to describe a real aircraft rather than a mockup. The video doesn't change that assessment, it just confirms that CH-7 has the same dimensions they've outlined before.

 

[TomcatViP]

Look closely how the wing flexes on the runway asperities. There is no way that it can sustain the weight of an a/c with a 10t MTOGW.

 

[Blitzo]

Look closely how the wing flexes on the runway asperities. There is no way that it can sustain the weight of an a/c with a 10t MTOGW.

That seems rather normal to me, considering the aircraft's aspect ratio. 10t is not particularly heavy either -- the empty weight of X-47B for example is under 13t, despite having a similar length and a lower wingspan.

 

[quellish]

Allegedly the CH-7 prototype

Looks almost identical to Aviation Week's "RQ-180" concept from 2013

Aviation Week: Air Force's new stealth spy drone is already flying

www.nbcnews.com

 

[totoro]

Which is curious. How is it possible that a real plane is so similar to artistic rendering from a news source, from a decade ago?!?
A) the ch7 plane was modeled after the graphic from said article
B) graphic from the article wasn't pure nonsense but the author actually saw some real life secret designs to base their work on.
C) it's coincidence.

 

[Hydroman]

Focus: How China is Preparing for the New Drone Warfare

Focus: China's Strategic Preparations for Next-Generation Drone Warfare

armyrecognition.com

View attachment 738083

Look at the Boeing Ghost Bat clone behind the wing, again, copy, copy, copy.

 

[Hydroman]

Looks almost identical to Aviation Week's "RQ-180" concept from 2013

Aviation Week: Air Force's new stealth spy drone is already flying

www.nbcnews.com

Probably where they got it from.

 

[flateric]

Which is curious. How is it possible that a real plane is so similar to artistic rendering from a news source, from a decade ago?!?

You'd read Sensorcraft thread and take a look on NGC SC concept development three. At least one other NGC SC configuration (final) was carefully studied by Chinese.

 

[quellish]

Probably where they got it from.

I wonder how they solved the flutter problem

 

[TomcatViP]

Probably with their next design.

 

[Blitzo]

Which is curious. How is it possible that a real plane is so similar to artistic rendering from a news source, from a decade ago?!?
A) the ch7 plane was modeled after the graphic from said article
B) graphic from the article wasn't pure nonsense but the author actually saw some real life secret designs to base their work on.
C) it's coincidence.

There are only so many flying wing configurations out there.

CH-7 is somewhat similar to RQ-180 artistic depictions but it should be far smaller than it.

Just think about how many UCAV/UAV airframes there are with the Phantom Ray/GJ-11 esque platform.
At a certain point you're going to see a few configurations adopted that look broadly similar.

 

[quellish]

There are only so many flying wing configurations out there.

There are a lot of flying wing configurations, especially for this mission, that are not workable.

The degree which this design mimics the Aviation Week concept though is surprising.

Maybe soon we will see a country produce a full sized Testors F-19!

 

[Blitzo]

There are a lot of flying wing configurations, especially for this mission, that are not workable.

The degree which this design mimics the Aviation Week concept though is surprising.

Maybe soon we will see a country produce a full sized Testors F-19!

Even the CH-7 did not always have this exact geometry.

From memory it first showed up in Zhuhai 2018 with a wingspan of 22m and a length of 10m. Overall the years it's wingspan has grown to 27m while keeping the same length

 

[VTOLicious]

Mounts for optional vertical tails or rather for spin recovery chute?

 

[quellish]

Even the CH-7 did not always have this exact geometry.

From memory it first showed up in Zhuhai 2018 with a wingspan of 22m and a length of 10m. Overall the years it's wingspan has grown to 27m while keeping the same length

Sounds like it’s been taking some little blue pills… maybe performance anxiety?

 

[Blitzo]

Sounds like it’s been taking some little blue pills… maybe performance anxiety?

Not sure. It's not a particularly important program so there hasn't been much rumours about its development course, but it seems like they pursued some design revisions

 

[quellish]

Not sure. It's not a particularly important program so there hasn't been much rumours about its development course, but it seems like they pursued some design revisions

It’s almost like some committee was dictating the design, not by engineer but by politics or optics!

*orders sensorcraft from wish*

 

[Blitzo]

It’s almost like some committee was dictating the design, not by engineer but by politics or optics!

*orders sensorcraft from wish*

Usually revisions of design should be assumed to be due to requirements or engineering needs, the idea that they were specifically wanting to redesign an aircraft to superficially look like old RQ-180 art is difficult to entertain.

Their equivalent of sensorcraft would be more the Divine Eagle UAV.

 

[quellish]

Usually revisions of design should be assumed to be due to requirements or engineering needs, the idea that they were specifically wanting to redesign an aircraft to superficially look like old RQ-180 art is difficult to entertain.

Their equivalent of sensorcraft would be more the Divine Eagle UAV.

The CH-7 is straight out of the Aviation Week concept, which is derived from the sensor craft studies.

My bet is that they may build a few of them but operate them at medium altitude not high altitude, and all of the advantages of this configuration will be lost. All of the LO advantages of this configuration are lost at this size and medium altitude - facts that would be obvious to engineers rather than party officials.

 

[Blitzo]

The CH-7 is straight out of the Aviation Week concept, which is derived from the sensor craft studies.

My bet is that they may build a few of them but operate them at medium altitude not high altitude, and all of the advantages of this configuration will be lost. All of the LO advantages of this configuration are lost at this size and medium altitude - facts that would be obvious to engineers rather than party officials.

Why do you think they would be operated at medium altitude rather than high altitude?

I also think you're over-emphasizing the whole "party committee" stereotype a bit. These sort of export oriented projects typically are pursued without much high level direction -- if anything there's so many of them, that through luck of the draw you're going to see a few different flying wing permutations emerge naturally anyway.

 

[quellish]

Why do you think they would be operated at medium altitude rather than high altitude?
[ /quote]

Because they don’t have engines qualified to operate at that altitude , and the airframe isn’t big enough…

 

[piginapoke]

Certain people may need to sit down to hear this one, but the Chinese are..... wait for it.....highly skilled engineers. Shocking I know.

Form follows function.

Leave the C word to the 'vigorous' forums on X and facebook.

 

[Blitzo]

Because they don’t have engines qualified to operate at that altitude , and the airframe isn’t big enough…

What altitude is that?
The ceiling of CH-7 is described as 16,000m, and I'm pretty sure they have engines that are viable for that altitude.

The airframe itself is 27m in wingspan, 10m in length, and while it's smaller than say the B-21, it is still among the larger flying wing UAV designs out there.


Don't get me wrong -- I'm actually not too impressed by the CH-7. It's an industry project without PLA backing, and it's probably smaller than what the PLA would like for them to be truly interested. But there's also nothing particularly indicative of it being a non viable or irrational planform for an aircraft of its size.
If the argument is that its specific planform is non-viable because it resembles some RQ-180 concept art, then one should present an argument for which variations of the cranked kite planform are particularly viable for which sizes of aircraft and why this particular combination in CH-7 makes no sense.

 

[TomcatViP]

Mounts for optional vertical tails or rather for spin recovery chute?
View attachment 747860

I would say lug points. Probably using a strap at the front (what should give to all an indication of the real weight of this "vehicle")

 

[quellish]

What altitude is that?
The ceiling of CH-7 is described as 16,000m, and I'm pretty sure they have engines that are viable for that altitude.

The CH-7 configuration is almost identical to a SensorCraft configuration that itself was based on an earlier program. The SensorCraft configuration was designed for operation at 23000m, and the earlier version was designed for even higher.

My point here is that this configuration is very clearly for those much higher altitudes. But they're not using it at those altitudes, and probably do not have the capability to do so (engines, etc). So why go with this configuration? Why not something optimized for the altitude it will actually operate at?

 

[sferrin]

There are a lot of flying wing configurations, especially for this mission, that are not workable.

The degree which this design mimics the Aviation Week concept though is surprising.

Maybe soon we will see a country produce a full sized Testors F-19!

 

[Blitzo]

The CH-7 configuration is almost identical to a SensorCraft configuration that itself was based on an earlier program. The SensorCraft configuration was designed for operation at 23000m, and the earlier version was designed for even higher.

My point here is that this configuration is very clearly for those much higher altitudes. But they're not using it at those altitudes, and probably do not have the capability to do so (engines, etc). So why go with this configuration? Why not something optimized for the altitude it will actually operate at?

A few reasons.

First, is just what kind of performance it will have at its 16,000km versus say, a higher altitude of 23,000km. There's a difference between being optimized for a higher altitude versus being unable to operate at its stated altitude (which is still rather high).

There's also a question of what they are comparing it to -- there have been more than a few flying wing UAV/UCAV drones from China that adopt a configuration of GJ-11/Neuron/Phantom Ray, and CH-7 deviates from that planform. What is the reason for that, when they could've just adopted the same configuration as others. I.e.: CH-7 shouldn't be compared with a larger, higher altitude drone but rather it should be compared with other similar sized drones of a different planform.

Finally, this is also a product that the PLA isn't buying. PRC medium aerospace companies usually have a bit more leeway for experimentation with these export cleared products. This may well be part of developmental efforts oriented that are aimed to eventually produce a larger and higher altitude UAV with a similar planform to the now present CH-7 but they are carrying out risk reduction (they flew an even smaller scaled flying wing with the same configuration as part of developmental tests), and are offering this as an export product to see if anyone abroad is interested in it, in a market where stealthy flying wing UAVs are rarely advertised.


Any combination of these seems like a viable explanation rather than "they copied RQ-180/Sensorcraft concepts because of politics".

 

[quellish]

First, is just what kind of performance it will have at its 16,000km versus say, a higher altitude of 23,000km. There's a difference between being optimized for a higher altitude versus being unable to operate at its stated altitude (which is still rather high).

It's paying a significant performance (and stability) penalty at the lower altitude. As a comparison, you don't fly a U-2 or RQ-4 at 10000m on purpose. Well, unless you're North Korea.