Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Soaring Dragon reappears

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:56 PM
link   
New pictures have emerged of the Chinese High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE) UAV known as the Soaring Dragon. It appears similar in some aspects to the RQ-4 Global Hawk, but has unique features all its own. First flight was supposed to take place in 2009, but there is no evidence that is has flown yet.

It's much smaller than the RQ-4, with a length of 47 feet, and a wingspan of 82 feet. No word on endurance, but the range is supposed to be just over 4300 miles. It is supposed to cruise at 60,000 feet, and perform as an ISR platform, as well as a communications relay.

What makes it interesting is that what should be the horizontal stabilizers come forward and attach to the wings, making a diamond box wing design.

theaviationist.com...




edit on 1/21/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


both look massive and defeat the whole idea of creating a UAV. It may be just me but the idea is to get them small enough to carry a limited payload while still retaining a very small radar signature. Maybe I'm wrong here not really a plane guy



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


"Soaring Dragon" is such a ridiculous name for that aircraft. The only reason it bears that name is because of the symbolic meaning attached to the word in Asian culture. At least make it look like a damn fire-breathing lizard! Does it even have flame throwers?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


What would they do? Barbecue birds???



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58


What makes it interesting is that what should be the horizontal stabilizers come forward and attach to the wings, making a diamond box wing design.


Can't possibly be true - that would make it original and unique as the only sizeable a/c in the world to have such a design, and we all know that the Chinese can only copy what's been done before and cannot ever develop anything on their own.



wiki page



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by digital01anarchy
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


both look massive and defeat the whole idea of creating a UAV. It may be just me but the idea is to get them small enough to carry a limited payload while still retaining a very small radar signature. Maybe I'm wrong here not really a plane guy


you are wrong.

The idea of them is to carry out missions - some of those missions requrie stealth, and UAV's designed for those missions tend to have features that are appropriate.

This one is designed for high altitude work - so it needs lots of lift to support it in the thin atmosphere up there. Lift is generated by eitehr massicve wings or high speed - eg imagine the U-2 and the SR-71 as different ends of the spectrum.

Massive speed also usually means limited range/endurance - unless you have a flying fuel tank, in which case you need an even bigger airframe in order to carry the payload as well.

So for maximum endurance (but nto speed) and altitude the U-2 extreme is more appropriate.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 06:43 AM
link   
Interesting aircraft.

The Chinese obviously see a need for this kind of long range surveillance across the Pacific tracking CBG's, and despite the American Superiority Syndrome (ASS) attitude off some posters, developing and flying this kind of thing is an acheivement for sure.

Do the Russians have an equilavnt of this and Global Hawk? I've never seen one suggested, but I may have just missed it.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 07:28 AM
link   
Noticed on the underside of both forward and aft wings, what appear to be mounting brackets.
Could this be an example of a craft built with more tactical usages in mind?
A "drone" fighter craft could be a game changer in many ways.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by teamcommander
 


I'm not sure if those are hardpoints, or if they're part of the flap assembly. Without more pictures it'll be hard to tell, but with the wing design, I doubt it could carry much of a payload, even missiles would be pretty heavy for the wing design. That's more of a U-2 style wing designed for high altitude slow speed.

You won't see an air-to-air UCAV for awhile yet. The control lag problem is just too much of a problem for real time combat control of a UCAV.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Interesting aircraft.

The Chinese obviously see a need for this kind of long range surveillance across the Pacific tracking CBG's, and despite the American Superiority Syndrome (ASS) attitude off some posters, developing and flying this kind of thing is an acheivement for sure.


Like that thing is going to get anywhere near a Carrier Battle Group. The USS Lake Erie knocked down a satellite in low Earth orbit, what do you think it would do to that thing? The only way that thing will track a CVBG is by the Chinese noting where they disappear at.
edit on 22-1-2013 by JIMC5499 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by JIMC5499
 


::sigh::

yes, obviously, because only American forces can do things and other nations can't yadda yadda yadda...


just once I'd like to see a technical achievement by another nation applauded instead of being assaulted by a load of territorial pissing



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


Personally, I like the design. I've always been fascinated by the box diamond design, and have wondered why others haven't used it for anything. I think this is a pretty elegant design.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I think it is too. They've obviously seen a benefit from it, be it aerodynamic stability or RCS - will be interesting to see how it develops.

Are you aware of any Russian designs for this kind of aircraft?



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


The UAV, or the diamond box design? Actually the answer is the same for both. No, I'm not aware of Russian designs for any UAVs actually. They're currently concentrating on the T-50, which just flew its first long range sortie, and went over 3,000 miles in one flight. They're about to add a fourth aircraft, but that's the only aircraft that I've seen lately from them. I haven't heard a word out of any UAV programs they have going.



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
yes, obviously, because only American forces can do things and other nations can't yadda yadda yadda...


just once I'd like to see a technical achievement by another nation applauded instead of being assaulted by a load of territorial pissing


I never said that it wasn't an achievement. I just took exception to your statement.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 06:43 AM
link   
do the russian's not have a UAV called the Skat or something along those lines?

I think I remember seeing it a few years back, not sure what happened with it, whether they took it forward or it was just a tech demonstrator , I do not now.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 07:20 AM
link   
Aye it's got quite an interesting,functional look about it.

The diamond box layout should give what looks like long,flexible wings some strength and rigidity.

An impressive looking machine indeed.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by maintainright
do the russian's not have a UAV called the Skat or something along those lines?

I think I remember seeing it a few years back, not sure what happened with it, whether they took it forward or it was just a tech demonstrator , I do not now.



There's a very interesting interview with Denis Fedutinov about the Russian UAV programs. He says that mini and tactical UAVs from Russia are on par, or slightly behind Western and Israeli UAVs, including one that uses a hydrogen fuel cell for up to 10 hours of endurance.

However, when we get to the HALE, MALE, and UCAVs Russia has nothing in those categories. MiG and Sukhoi aren't even working on UAVs in those categories, and don't seem to be even interested. Transas and Sokol have been provided tenders to produce MALE class UAVs, similar to the Predator and Reaper

It's short, but interesting.
Full interview



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Just read a report that the Russian Air Force will receive long range, possibly jet powered strike UAVs to replace some of their bombers. But they won't get them until 2040. The USAF plans to field the first jet powered UCAVs in 2020 at the earliest.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


The Russian Su-27 or Mig-29 family is a great example of what you want. Love both those aircraft, especially because civilians can buy one.

French came up with the Rafale which is unquestionably bad ass
Same with the Typhoon2000 that the UK, Germany, Italy developed.
and thats just recent.

Lets focus on the aircraft instead of pointing fingers at who for whatever. Plenty of other anti-american themed threads already. Being proud of your country doesnt make you an ass. Its easy to point fingers at the ones at the top, damn that green eyed monster jealousy.
edit on 25-1-2013 by StratosFear because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join