Chinese UCAV/CCA/flying wing drones (ISR, A2A, A2G)

So some are asking "what about the landing". Here are some possibilities

• It might be a one-way (expendable) UAV.
• It could also land by parachute (the image notes “≤ 2000 kg”).
• It might be able to recover at an airfield as well—takeoff wouldn’t take up runway usage.
• Using an arresting net is also an option.
• If operating near the coast, water recovery (retrieval at sea) is also possible.

00CuriousObserver said:

So some are asking "what about the landing". Here are some possibilities

• It might be a one-way (expendable) UAV.
• It could also land by parachute (the image notes “≤ 2000 kg”).
• It might be able to recover at an airfield as well—takeoff wouldn’t take up runway usage.
• Using an arresting net is also an option.
• If operating near the coast, water recovery (retrieval at sea) is also possible.

Click to expand...

Regarding the landing/recovery -- it has wheeled landing gear, so I think it is certainly intended to be recoverable conventionally at an runway as a primary recovery method.

IMO if it was not intended to be capable of conventional landings at a runway, then it probably would lack landing gear and just be some kind of sled instead. In fact, for this kind of EM catapult launch there's no reason they had to make it have a similar catapult attachment and landing gear configuration to proper catapults and conventional aircraft to begin with. The fact they went for this route, at least for this aircraft, is somewhat indicative.

The real question, I suppose is how feasible this thing is as a concept, whether it's launched from land or from sea. Depending on the actual weight of the aircraft, the utility and significance of it might be relatively limited.

Maybe they’re for launching heavier longer range suicide drones with larger warheads.

A full image

By 欧阳振我86468

Building a warship by legoing containers together
Building a carrier by legoing trucks together

Nekminit you go on a road trip in China.
"Dad we're going to get oven taken by that... aircraft carrier..."

-> Get a 200 TEU container ship
-> Put radar and sensor systems onto it
-> Put 60 VLS containers armed with SAMs and AShMs onto it
-> Put CIWS onto it
-> Put containers with catapult-launched UCAVs onto it (we don't talk about the landing part)

Welcome back, aircraft cruisers. Welcome back (from the dead), Admiral Kuzntesov.

00CuriousObserver said:

So some are asking "what about the landing". Here are some possibilities

• It might be a one-way (expendable) UAV.
• It could also land by parachute (the image notes “≤ 2000 kg”).
• It might be able to recover at an airfield as well—takeoff wouldn’t take up runway usage.
• Using an arresting net is also an option.
• If operating near the coast, water recovery (retrieval at sea) is also possible.

Click to expand...

The Valkyrie is listed with a range of 5600km.

---

So if a Valkyrie were to be launched from a containership 2000km offshore, then it could fly another 1500-2000km, and still have enough fuel to return to a mainland China.

Has anyone tried to guesstimate the dimensions of this CCA?

ACuriousPLAFan said:

-> Get a 200 TEU container ship
-> Put radar and sensor systems onto it
-> Put 60 VLS containers armed with SAMs and AShMs onto it
-> Put CIWS onto it
-> Put containers with catapult-launched UCAVs onto it (we don't talk about the landing part)

Welcome back, aircraft cruisers. Welcome back (from the dead), Admiral Kuzntesov.

View attachment 167147

Click to expand...

All this reminds me of the iranian merchant carrier ship, fitted with a proper flight deck and various small drones and helicopters in addition to various missiles. The chinese CCA is of course far more capable, makes you wonder if it can carry couple of AAMs for a rudimentary yet still significant air defence capability.

Blitzo said:

Regarding the landing/recovery -- it has wheeled landing gear, so I think it is certainly intended to be recoverable conventionally at an runway as a primary recovery method.

Click to expand...

The position of the landing gears and its simplicity are kinda weird, though. The main landing gear is too far back and not at wing/cg level, the landing gears themselves are really sparse and there doesn't seem to be any doors around it to suggest they are retractable, without mentioning that whichever way they could retract, the mechanisms could take quite a bit up of internal volume in order to minimize wheel intrusion.

I think, if its not a mockup, those landing gears are actually jettisonable. Putting them so far back allows you to not have to reinforce the wings for a proper landing gear and you can get away with using the structures around the engine to deal with the loads, also such a narrow wheelbase is not particularly conductive to an easy recovery, at least on an aircraft carrier