I think you have oversimplified the likelihood of being shot down vs the size of the drone, many other aspects come to play exp.- service ceiling, maximum speed, armament attack range and etc,- which WL-2 is superior vs TB-2
Chinese UAV/UCAV development
- Thread starter AssassinsMace
- Start date
- Status
I think you have oversimplified the likelihood of being shot down vs the size of the drone, many other aspects come to play exp.- service ceiling, maximum speed, armament attack range and etc,- which WL-2 is superior vs TB-2
Really? Which of those do you think would help it evade even a 60s era AA system?
Drone or not it is still a large and slow turboprop powered plane. Sending it into contested airspace without support is not what it was designed for.
if it's cheap enough, trading 1 for 1 with a SAM might not be so bad. And it doesn't have to go to the front lines to act as a recon asset.
You probably won't be trading one UAV for one SAM launcher, but rather one UAV for one missile proper.
Considering how vulnerable MALE UAVs are to even ancient, early or mid cold war SAM systems are, such a trade-off is not worth it, even if it's a cheaper MALE UAV like TB-2 or CH-3.
Abominable is correct -- a conventional MALE UAV operating in the usual ISR or strike flight profile that they are designed for, is not survivable against even old SAM systems.
Unless there is substantial offboard EW, SEAD/DEAD support, putting up MALE UAVs against an environment defended by anything longer ranged than point defense SAMs, is just unwise.
A system that can shoot down a low end MALE drone like TB-2 will have not much issue shooting down a WL-2 or a MQ-9 either. That should be a very well accepted and commonly known fact for at least the last 10 years.
Would a MALE UAV with a dedicated ISR payload i.e. radars, radar warning receivers, TV cameras, etc. be all that vulnerable to SAMs at the edge of hostile airspace?
And with the correct payload i.e. a radar warning receiver, even if the drone gets shot down you can get location data on SAM sites and launch a fast response munition like SRBM to hit the SAM site. Trading a drone + SRBM for a SAM site isn't that bad especially if you have tons of SRBMs.
Sure UAVs with more longer ranged sensor payloads and longer ranged weapons (that can operate outside of the engagement envelope of enemy SAMs) would be more capable and more survivable if they can operate at standoff range, yes.
But the sort of sensor suite you describe is more consistent with what's present on a HALE UAVs than most MALE UAVs.
MALE UAVs typically rely on a primary EO/IR payload with a small radar at best, and usually need to be within 100km of the target they are surveiling -- more often within 50km of the target if they want more useful ISR.
If they want to do a strike mission, given most MALE UAVs use ATGM sized weapons like Hellfire or KD-9/10 with a range of well under 20km, that places the UAV at even greater risk just to get close to the target as they would have to venture through surveiled and defended airspace, as an aircraft that is kinematically defense less and without any meaningful signature reduction.
Doing that without extensive preceding SEAD/DEAD and ongoing supportive EW, is just a way to lose your drone.
Technically true, but that would be an expensive way to do SEAD/DEAD.
Better just to not risk your MALE UAVs in an environment where semi capable enemy SAMs exist and do SEAD/DEAD with more dedicated platforms first, before sending in MALE UAVs with EW support.
There's no reason to force MALE UAVs into a combat environment that they are inappropriate for, unless you have no other options, or unless you are a nation so rich that you can afford to toss away MALE UAVs in useless missions that other platforms can with better efficacy. But not even the US has that kind of money.
Russia might be able to make some use of WL-2 if they employ them carefully, but even against Ukraine's antiquated air defenses, it would be considered a vulnerable asset when in the air.
D
Didn't Ukraine hit Russian refinery with a Chinese commercial drone?
Much smaller aircraft, on a low altitude ingress only flight profile that was more akin to a cruise missile.
Very different and much harder to detect and intercept than MALE UAVs that fly at much higher altitudes that loiter and orbit over an area of interest for ISR or strike missions.
Not comparable at all.
It is unironically much harder to defend against a small commercial drone flying at low altitude on a suicide/strike flight profile, than it is to kill a WL-2 or MQ-9 operating in a standard ISR or strike mission profile.
Well, I don't think either Russia or China really want to show that China does support Russia with actual weapons during the conflict.
After the conflict - probably many things will change.
Well, in fact they do stand a good chance of operating smoothly. Just don't fly them over the line of contact in areas with known presence of major enemy SAM systems.
I.e. near the frontline - it's still a very viable maneuverable "balloon" - raised observation point with very powerful optics/IR/SIGINT/SAR sensors and EW(provided we have enough onboard power) - suitable for both reconnaissance, spotting, and even interference.
Larger drones(HALEs) can drop stand-off PGMs against targets of opportunity, too (though those bite quite heavily into loiter time).
Consequently, in the areas without significant SAM presence - drones can be more aggressive without suffering prohibitive losses.
Or, if the prise is worthy - even MALE/HALE drones can penetrate and bypass those areas at low altitudes, and climb back near the target area.
Neither Ukraine nor even Russia can have SAMs everywhere on a theater this large.
Last edited:
Exactly who is dumb enough to fly drones over SAM, even a stealth fighter will not do that. Those drone usually fly over area that's suspectable moveable hideouts which more likely to carry rocket launchers. rocket launchers like stinger example has range around 8km which will be safe altitude for WL-2 but not TB-2 .
- Status