In Ukraine, a drone with a jet engine and a flight range of 400 kilometers has been developed
In Ukraine, a drone with a jet engine and a flight range of 400 kilometers has been developed
22 comments
-
-
-
I'd say the difference is that this one is remote controllable, a missile may fly autonomously?
-
Yeah that's a cruise missile I thought?
-
I think the difference between this and a regular cruise missile is that this has manual control and can be more than just a explosive payload delivery system. A cruise missile usually has an assigned target that when fired it will fly to and hit, this can do more complex things like reconissaince.
-
-
-
I hope these drones fill the skies in Moscow soon.
-
It's not a cruise missile. It's ECM and reconnaissance/intelligence gathering.
-
-
I believe that’s called a cruise missile
-
How many cruise missiles are flown with joysticks by humans? :)
-
Only if it's meant for a single one-way flight that ends with a big kaboom. Presumably since they're calling it a drone it's meant to fly somewhere, do something (deliver ordnance or just surveil an area) and come back for refueling, repairs, and redeployment.
-
-
Isn’t this the drone in the pics? https://www.ukrspecexport.com/uploads/redactor/6%20USEUMEXTopazPRINT.pdf
-
As far as I can tell, yes.
-
-
The cabin is inside a van folks (just before anyone asks)
The photo sequence makes it funny tho 😂
-
With all the confusion I think it's time to bring back the term UAV
-
We sent them all through the Stargate, there aren't any more.
-
-
The fake progressive neocons of lemmy should get a hard on at this. enjoy the proxy war
-
Sir if you don't support defending Ukraine from fascist right-wing states like Russia then are you even left?
-
22 comments
I wonder what the design decision was for the forward-swept wings. These typically decrease lateral stability and increase structural weight, because they require substantially higher stiffness for flutter-resistance compared to straight or rear-swept wings. Maybe so the main wing spar can be further aft to have a larger contiguous payload bay. The HansaJet had forward-swept wings for a similar reason (no main spar in the cabin).
If it were beneficial in total, most transonic planes would have it. The only aerodynamic advantage over backward swept wings is higher manoeuvrability, which isn't a priority here. This isn't a dogfighter. My money is still on better payload distribution.
Not sure what that means. I don't think agility is a priority with a jet-powered drone. Or benign stall characteristics.
That is negligible. We know how to reduce wingtip vortices, and reverse sweep is not the answer. Raked wingtips as used on the 787 and the larger-wing versions of the 777 and the 777X are optimal for transonic flight. Blended winglets are a close second, as used on the A350 and A330neo. Again, not forward sweep.
This thing also does not look very refined aerodynamically, and there are many more things that could be done to reduce drag that are much cheaper. Wing-body fairings come to mind to reduce interference drag, or winglets if you really want to go there. This has all the looks of "Eh. Good enough. Send it!", which makes sense given the urgency.
Ah yes, I know what some of these words mean.