Small UAS / Drones and related general thread - NOT Swarming ones.

Single rotor is quieter and I believe more energy efficient. I think the multi rotor set ups are faster, easier to control, and are liable to have a rotor strike in confined quarters.
 
Josh_TN said:
Single rotor is quieter and I believe more energy efficient. I think the multi rotor set ups are faster, easier to control, and are liable to have a rotor strike in confined quarters.
Click to expand...
So:

Speed:
Multi rotor.

Controllability/stability:
Multi rotor.

Endurance:
Single rotor.

Signature:
Single rotor.

Salad:
Both.

Did I get that right?
 
Those are my guesses; take it with a grain of salt. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable posts.
 
GTX said:
US startup develops football-sized kamikaze drone

1730223571791.jpg
1738169613607.jpg
Click to expand...

The consumer market needs this asap. A non-lethal one for people hiking or surveilling their property etc. Apple Football? Maybe an overhead Apple drone for the wedding photos? :)
 
tyrin said:
Deploying an FPV from a UGV is interesting

View attachment 762869
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, it my unsolicited opinion, I found the UGV's contribution to the latest battlefields as... "meh." It would appear dominating the terrain element still requires something like an Abrams or Bradley, just like the old days. I'm not sure what the UGV mothership provides you that is otherwise not provided by an FPV with greater range. :confused:
 
Last edited:
VishnuOsiris said:
For what it's worth, it my unsolicited (and uneducated) opinion, I found the UGV's contribution to the latest battlefields as... "meh." It would appear dominating the terrain element still requires something like an Abrams or Bradley, just like the old days. I'm not sure what the UGV mothership provides you that is otherwise not provided by an FPV with greater range. :confused:
Click to expand...
that’s true although if you fibre optic the UGV to the FPV you’d allow the operator to stay out of danger?!
 
www.twz.com

Ukrainian Long-Range Attack Drones To Be Tested By U.S. Military

Project Artemis will also evaluate American designs that could evolve into long-range kamikaze drones for the U.S. military.
www.twz.com www.twz.com

DIU awards contracts for long-range, one-way drones; Ukrainian companies involved | InsideDefense.com

The Pentagon's innovation arm has selected four companies, two of which are partnered with Ukrainian firms, to receive contracts under its project to operationally evaluate long-range, one-way drones, the Defense Innovation Unit announced today.
insidedefense.com insidedefense.com
 
Last edited:
Big_Zukini said:
Scientific Question:

What are the pros and cons of multi-rotor and single-rotor designs?

I see all sorts of UAS for all sorts of endurance and payload categories and there doesn't seem to be a cutoff where one is preferable over the other. Big and small, these designs exist for all.

To simplify this, let's assume I need UAS for the following missions:
  1. Small radar, no platform speed requirements, long endurance.
  2. 1-2 ATGMs, no platform speed requirements, short endurance.
  3. 3-4 APKWS rockets, higher platform speed preferred, long endurance.
  4. 1-2 APKWS rockets, higher platform speed preferred, short endurance.
Every mission can have its own dedicated platform. What are my considerations for picking a single rotor or multi-rotor?
Click to expand...

The choice isn't really single or multi-rotor...

It's IC or Electric, and VTOL or other launch method and winged or not.

1. Anything other than an IC engined fixed wing is pointless, something like a Tekever AR3, which already has a SAR payload and is in use in Ukraine. IC engine gives you power and endurance that batteries can't match at present...unless you want to go to something like the Zephyr for ultra long endurance at high altitudes.
2. A large Multirotor makes sense, Electric is possible due to short endurance
3. Given the weight and demand for long endurance you're back to a IC engine winged UAV, for the size of munitions you've basically just got yourself a Predator A...or if wanting something with VTOL the Strix.
4. You could use a large multi rotor copter for this, but why?
 
@kqcke for you : it won't work much at sea. For example, the fact that the UAS is pushed out of the island wind shielding is a major source of potential catastrophic failure, for the airframe and the ship.

At hook up, during landing, the probability of catching the cable are fairly low with the ship rolling and the wind blowing. Think that UAS would have to fly into the wind, crabbing, to have a linear trajectory, extending the cable sidewise, hence having to overfly the ship with all the risks of the cable being entangled in the ship structure.
(small vessels cannot always navigate into the wind in all sea states conditions)

Not a good idea.
 
Last edited:
www.navalnews.com

French Navy experiments new unmanned systems to support amphibious operations - Naval News

The French Navy tested new technologies within amphibious operations to better adapt to threats faced in modern warfare.
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com

The French Navy Chief of Staff commented the exercise as follow:
  • “Adapting capabilities, training and organization, and adapting tactics to the threat. This is the aim of the DRAGOON FURY exercise, which ends tomorrow in the Mediterranean region. DRAGOON FURY is a force projection scenario in a restricted, coastal and contested air-sea area. DRAGOON FURY involves the joint integration of 700 soldiers from the French Navy and Army.
  • Above all, DRAGOON FURY is a full-scale laboratory for testing all types of drones and drone systems, both defensive and offensive: surface, airborne and submarine drones. It’s the place for tactical innovation in all phases of maneuver:
  • Before: intelligence, reconnaissance
  • During: fire in depth, mine warfare, land force projection, air-combat from the Amphibious Helicopter Carrier
  • After: support for ground troops, defense against multi-milieu multi-field attacks (cyber, informational, electronic warfare…)
 
www.jpost.com

Technology, drones and complexity: The IDF’s battle for Jabalya

Reporters' Notebook: This is my second time in Jabalya during the war against Hamas. It’s also the second time in the neighborhood with the IDF’s Multi-Dimensional Unit.
www.jpost.com www.jpost.com

"Before units like the Multidimensional Unit brought new technology to the field, infantry and tanks would have to call in drone strikes, which takes time. They might investigate threats themselves and could run into ambushes."

"Using new precision technology, such as precision mortars called Iron Sting or the plethora of new drones that are arriving, gives units the ability to quickly close the circle in terms of timing, from seeing the enemy to confirming it to carrying out a precision strike."

"One terrorist who emerges with an AK-47 doesn’t need to be taken out with warplanes and artillery collapsing a house. A small precision weapon can get rid of the threat cheaper and faster."
 
Forest Green said:
View attachment 763617
Click to expand...
Received EOTS finally

Unfortunately I don’t know if bays are big enough to hold BVRAAMS

The P32 has a length of 2.4 meters but im not sure how much space is left inside of the bay.

1742890879039.jpeg


That bottom section is particularly interesting, would build up a lot of knowledge for a full fledged fighter if that’s the route the want to pursue.

This whole program will build up a lot of knowledge for larger aircraft eventually.

a joint GCC program would have the funds to develop a 6th gen program imo even if using many foreign components.

IMG_1193.jpeg
 
Last edited:
tyrin said:
Received EOTS finally

Unfortunately I don’t know if bays are big enough to hold BVRAAMS

The P32 has a length of 2.4 meters but im not sure how much space is left inside of the bay.

View attachment 764335


That bottom section is particularly interesting, would build up a lot of knowledge for a full fledged fighter if that’s the route the want to pursue.

This whole program will build up a lot of knowledge for larger aircraft eventually.

a joint GCC program would have the funds to develop a 6th gen program imo even if using many foreign components.

View attachment 764336
Click to expand...
1743084351207.png


1743084384868.png


Any opinions on whether the bay extends longer than the length of the P-32 with is 2.4 meters? It looks to me like it does which would allow carrying of BVRAAMs.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom