Chinese UAV/UCAV development

Status
Not open for further replies.

Philister

Junior Member
Registered Member
How many Shahed 136/ Geran 2 type drones China could produce in a day? They seems to be more cost effective way to attack bunkers, ammo depots and fortifications than cruise missiles and ballistic missiles.
That’s basically a flying motorcycle with simple electronics, production is only limited by need
 

Sinnavuuty

Senior Member
Registered Member
The SEL4-FL01 UCAV. Yet another flying thermos of death. It appears to come in 60mm and 100mm variants.
I had never heard of this drone (or would it be a loitering munition?). In a certain respect this UAV is quite similar to Firefly and PHOLOS.
Firefly
FT8uCjmWUAEktak.jpg
PHOLOS
FT8skQoX0AIJdX2.png
The Firefly is very similar, but it has two differences from the one in the image: one is its second rotor, which is in the most central position and the second is that the PHOLOS has a 40 mm grenade underneath. On Firefly, the warhead is in the central part and the camera is at the bottom, which is quite different from the image.
 

BoraTas

Captain
Registered Member
The laser targeting system can provide long-distance guidance from 20km away and provide precision strike guidance from 13.5km away.

52395822288_7143ca119b_k.jpg
I didn't understand that sentence. So it can laser designate from 20 km away? That would be competitive with the hugely popular Wescam MX-15D.
 

SEAD

Junior Member
Registered Member
I didn't understand that sentence. So it can laser designate from 20 km away? That would be competitive with the hugely popular Wescam MX-15D.
I guess that means laser ranging in 20km then calculate absolute coordinate of target basing on position of the drone (btw some DJI can do that, amazing. LGB is out of date and should be replaced by iron bomb+simple datalink).
And laser designating in 13.5km.
 
Last edited:

SEAD

Junior Member
Registered Member
I had never heard of this drone (or would it be a loitering munition?). In a certain respect this UAV is quite similar to Firefly and PHOLOS.
Firefly
View attachment 98862
PHOLOS
View attachment 98863
The Firefly is very similar, but it has two differences from the one in the image: one is its second rotor, which is in the most central position and the second is that the PHOLOS has a 40 mm grenade underneath. On Firefly, the warhead is in the central part and the camera is at the bottom, which is quite different from the image.
That's not the first Chinese version Firefly, we have seen many similar drones recent years.
btw I found a teenager is building his own one yesterday...
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

BoraTas

Captain
Registered Member
I guess that means laser ranging in 20km then calculate absolute coordinate of target basing on position of the drone (btw some DJI can do that, amazing. LGB is out of date and should be replaced by iron bomb+simple datalink).
And laser designating in 13.5km.
I wouldn't say LGB is outdated. Laser designation is still the most affordable and straightforward way of engaging moving objects. Depending on constant position updates through data-link doesn't sound prudent when laser designation can do the job in a much more reliable way without needing data links. I know the state-of-the-art is sending an imaging IR guided bomb that is capable of lock-on-after-launch and automatic target recognition. But really, what are price and availability of such bombs?
 

SEAD

Junior Member
Registered Member
I wouldn't say LGB is outdated. Laser designation is still the most affordable and straightforward way of engaging moving objects. Depending on constant position updates through data-link doesn't sound prudent when laser designation can do the job in a much more reliable way without needing data links. I know the state-of-the-art is sending an imaging IR guided bomb that is capable of lock-on-after-launch and automatic target recognition. But really, what are price and availability of such bombs?
I guess datalink is reliable too since many missiles are also based on (even bidirectional) datalink(e.g. AGM-65).

ATR is not expensive, at least much cheaper than IR so just ignore its cost.
 

SEAD

Junior Member
Registered Member
I wouldn't say LGB is outdated. Laser designation is still the most affordable and straightforward way of engaging moving objects. Depending on constant position updates through data-link doesn't sound prudent when laser designation can do the job in a much more reliable way without needing data links. I know the state-of-the-art is sending an imaging IR guided bomb that is capable of lock-on-after-launch and automatic target recognition. But really, what are price and availability of such bombs?
The main problem of LGB is the huge, power consuming designator which needs extra cooling design. That means it can only be installed in relatively large platforms, while laser rangers are so light that even DJI marvics are decent for them.

another problem is that the designator can only guide the bomb for a short time before overheating, while datalink can guide as long as you want.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top