Chinese UAV/UCAV development

Status
Not open for further replies.

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
Re: New Chinese UAV

So, ideally, to do that, one'd have to have a missile that's cheap enough to use in vast numbers and small enough to be launched in vast numbers without having to use like 90% of the planaf aircraft inventory. 6 per jh7 seems like a minimum. that way 48 airplanes could launch a probably sufficient number of missiles, almost 300 of them.

Biggest hurdle, of course, is cost. One must make the missile cheap enough so several waves, if needed, could be performed and several targets engaged over a prolongued period of time. We're talking about perhaps up to 10.000 missiles in the whole inventory. A Harpoon costs some million dollars, if not more. Chinese equivalent would be cheaper, but even at third of the pricetag it's still a pricy figure - 3.5 billion dollars. Now, IF that's enough to mission kill 3-4 CBGs, then its a bargain. But one can't be so sure.

What is really needed is a cheaper missile still. And since the costliest part of the missile is its guidance section, perhaps getting rid of it is a possible solution. Make only 30-50% of the missiles in the swarm use proper guidance. The rest of the missiles, randomly positioned in the swarm, fly by just following the data fed to them by the missiles with guidance. Jamming such a link shouldn't be a problem, as microwave datalinks are of such short range that the defender wouldn't be able to jam them until they're like 5 or so km from the ships. (issue might be the added cost of such datalink systems on the missiles) They probably won't have enough precision to strike at a target, but that wouldn't be their role anyway. Since the defender doesn't know which missile has guidance, it'd have to try to intercept every single one. Cost of the missile invetory should be able to go down by a billion or two.

Naturally, this approach would simply not work if defender would be aware of its probability. If the attacker gives the defender several years of preparation, to come up with an equaly cheap defense solution (which he would) then it all comes apart. And trying to calculate the spy race is not a very smart thing to do...

So, realistically, the first solution of biting the bullet and just invest 5 billion in missile inventory seems like a better way to go about it.
 

Pointblank

Senior Member
Re: New Chinese UAV

Right, and how are the fighters and helicopter's missiles going to lock on to a stealthy, IR-suppressed, fast moving maneuvering target with point-defense systems? Are they going to come in and go toe to toe with the AK-630 mount?

I very much doubt that; it may reduce radar and IR signatures, but it does not eliminate it. The USN and the Coast Guard are more than capable of tracking and intercepting the go-fast boats at a reasonable distance that are used by drug smugglers in the Caribbean using both radar and EO/IR systems, despite the fibreglass construction, very small size, and speeds of up to 80 knots.
 

RedMercury

Junior Member
Re: New Chinese UAV

Define reasonable distance. Compare dedicated radar and EO/IR systems on expensive platforms versus missile seekers. Also, point defense systems.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Re: New Chinese UAV

Guys, let's shift the 022 stuff to Navy forum please.
 

Ambivalent

Junior Member
Re: New Chinese UAV

I very much doubt that; it may reduce radar and IR signatures, but it does not eliminate it. The USN and the Coast Guard are more than capable of tracking and intercepting the go-fast boats at a reasonable distance that are used by drug smugglers in the Caribbean using both radar and EO/IR systems, despite the fibreglass construction, very small size, and speeds of up to 80 knots.

No. The OTH radar has a scan frequency of 18 minutes. Yes, minutes. All it tells us is that something interesting might be out there. Some other unit has to fly out and classify the target. Ships engaged in honest commerce will have let international authorites know where they are and where they are going. Anything we don't know about, especially something that is on a route frequented by drug traffickers gets a look.
OTH radars are not fool proof either. Drug runners are not (yet) using electronic countermeasures. If they do those OTH radars will be fairly useless. The US Navy was pretty adept at spoofing the Soviet's OTH radars, and their satellites. Believe me, if the carrier does not want to be found it can hide. Ask yourself how Admiral Ace Lyons was able to sneak his CSG right up to Murmansk without being found by the Soviets. He knew things from exercises with B-52's off the US Atlantic coast. He knew if he could hide from Buffs that hiding from Bears was far easier, less capable sensors. The Soviets were so upset by that exercise they filed a diplomatic protest. The first the Soviets knew of our carrier was when a Bear being refueled in flight was buzzed by a pair of Tomcats well beyond the speed of sound. There is only one way a pair of Tomcats could have been there, but the Russians never found that carrier.
 

kroko

Senior Member
Re: New Chinese UAV

Ask yourself how Admiral Ace Lyons was able to sneak his CSG right up to Murmansk without being found by the Soviets. He knew things from exercises with B-52's off the US Atlantic coast. He knew if he could hide from Buffs that hiding from Bears was far easier, less capable sensors. The Soviets were so upset by that exercise they filed a diplomatic protest. The first the Soviets knew of our carrier was when a Bear being refueled in flight was buzzed by a pair of Tomcats well beyond the speed of sound. There is only one way a pair of Tomcats could have been there, but the Russians never found that carrier.

hmm...where can i find info about that?
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Re: New Chinese UAV

the YiLong UCAV at display in the Beijing airshow. I guess this is Chinese version of Predator. It is much smaller than Reaper. I think they just don't have a larger enough turboprop engine (this one has 75 kw in power) to really support a larger UCAV. Maybe they do, but I guess we will have to wait and see.
 

Attachments

  • YiLong-Sep26.jpg
    YiLong-Sep26.jpg
    186.7 KB · Views: 108
  • YiLong-Sep26-2.jpg
    YiLong-Sep26-2.jpg
    50.2 KB · Views: 78
  • YiLong-Sep26-3.jpg
    YiLong-Sep26-3.jpg
    53.3 KB · Views: 80
  • YiLong-Sep26-4.jpg
    YiLong-Sep26-4.jpg
    97.5 KB · Views: 78

victtodd

New Member
Re: New Chinese UAV

No. The OTH radar has a scan frequency of 18 minutes. Yes, minutes. All it tells us is that something interesting might be out there. Some other unit has to fly out and classify the target. Ships engaged in honest commerce will have let international authorites know where they are and where they are going. Anything we don't know about, especially something that is on a route frequented by drug traffickers gets a look.
OTH radars are not fool proof either. Drug runners are not (yet) using electronic countermeasures. If they do those OTH radars will be fairly useless. The US Navy was pretty adept at spoofing the Soviet's OTH radars, and their satellites. Believe me, if the carrier does not want to be found it can hide. Ask yourself how Admiral Ace Lyons was able to sneak his CSG right up to Murmansk without being found by the Soviets. He knew things from exercises with B-52's off the US Atlantic coast. He knew if he could hide from Buffs that hiding from Bears was far easier, less capable sensors. The Soviets were so upset by that exercise they filed a diplomatic protest. The first the Soviets knew of our carrier was when a Bear being refueled in flight was buzzed by a pair of Tomcats well beyond the speed of sound. There is only one way a pair of Tomcats could have been there, but the Russians never found that carrier.

Then I guess USN need not worry about PLA's DF-21 ballistic antiship variant, assuming there is indeed such a variant.
 

Ambivalent

Junior Member
Re: New Chinese UAV

Then I guess USN need not worry about PLA's DF-21 ballistic antiship variant, assuming there is indeed such a variant.
I am not saying it is not a worry. What I am saying are two things. Number one, no nation has yet to demonstrate any ability to hit a moving target with a ballistic missile. It has never been done. Pershing used it's MARV to reduce it's CEP against fixed targets on land, so the size of the warhead could be kept small and light ( you want the blast radius to exceed the CEP ). The second point is that even if such missiles existed and had a satisfactory performance against moving targets, there is no guarantee a CSG could be found and targeted with sufficient accuracy to allow an attack. It's not a slam dunk.
Such talk does make for heated, edge of the seat, discussions when military budgets are discussed, and I think that has more bearing on this subject's tenacity than anything that has happened in the physical world.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Re: New Chinese UAV

Unknown new UAV.

Postd over at CDF.

uav125492237341218.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top