Chinese UAV/UCAV development

Bltizo said:

To be fair, I think BAMS is meant to operate in a relatively forward position as well, it's just that the USN can rely on air superiority for their MQ-4Cs to not be shot down.

Click to expand...

I only know what other people tell me

The disadvantages with using a UAV, is some of the same disadvantages that all UAV operation has. You're vulnerable to disruption of signals, your UAV might be more vulnerable to shoot down than a manned aircraft during periods of peacetime tension, and it's difficult to troubleshoot any flight problems on a UAV compared to a fully manned AEWC bird. But these are all problems that will be mitigated with continued maturation of UAVs, and are similar challenges that have to be and were overcome by the US in developing programmes like UCLASS and BAMS. So if the PLA are confident enough to put so many expensive radars on a UAV like this then they must be making some impressive strides as well.

Click to expand...

In a conflict with equal tier opponent, disruption of datalink through ECM and information attacks should be assumed. Heck, Iran can pull it off. UAV will continue to mature and have their niche, but for the foreseeable future parallel manned platforms are still necessary.

UAVs have another advantage. They're scalable. I can launch a greater number of UAVs faster to build redundancy into my surveillance system than if I used larger manned platforms, and because they're unmanned I can afford to more of them without having to worry as much about survivability. In short they provide more effectiveness for less logistical burden.

shen said:

I only know what other people tell me

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

I think the idea for BAMS to operate in high intensity situations is to leech support off USN and USAF as they try to gain air superiority, leaving BAMS somewhat free to patrol.
Also, I don't think I expect Divine Eagle to really operate in "forward positions" in the same sense as say, air superiority fighters. Divine Eagle will probably still operate in a standoff range the same as any surveillance aircraft. I think its stealth features are to facilitate to get to stand off range and patrol there without being detected. I don't think it is expected to get right on top of (say, within 200km) of an enemy. The same goes for BAMS, but the difference is that the USN and USAF will likely be able to contest and enforce air superiority at greater ranges from BAMS's base of deployment than the PLA will for Divine Eagle, thus necessitating Divine Eagle's stealth features whereas BAMS may not need it as much.

In a conflict with equal tier opponent, disruption of datalink through ECM and information attacks should be assumed. Heck, Iran can pull it off. UAV will continue to mature and have their niche, but for the foreseeable future parallel manned platforms are still necessary.

Click to expand...

Of course, manned and unmanned surveillance platforms will continue to complement each other for years to come.

latenlazy said:

UAVs have another advantage. They're scalable. I can launch a greater number of UAVs faster to build redundancy into my surveillance system than if I used larger manned platforms, and because they're unmanned I can afford to more of them without having to worry as much about survivability. In short they provide more effectiveness for less logistical burden.

Click to expand...

Yes, there is definitely less cost in a UAV which is smaller than a Y-9 or 737, and not requiring all the control consoles and life support systems to support the crew with.

But I think that doesn't necessarily mean a UAV will be produced in greater numbers, I think the big ticket is that you can make your UAV fly higher, and longer, without worrying about the crew getting fatigued.

What would be the difference between the role of this and say a manned AWAC?

Would be more effective cost and endurance wise for peace time large area surveillance, like over South China sea? The side radars also have SAR capability.

They could base those birds on islands and pilot them from the islands. Maybe can also be used for search and rescue?

Bltizo said:

But I think that doesn't necessarily mean a UAV will be produced in greater numbers, I think the big ticket is that you can make your UAV fly higher, and longer, without worrying about the crew getting fatigued.

Click to expand...

If you can put up two nexus points for surveillance instead of one for the same cost and effort, you would do it simply because it builds redundancy and provides greater capability.

In a war though sometimes rather than actively disrupting datalinks it might be more advantageous to silently tap into it if possible and make use of the enemy's assets.

Bltizo said:

Via Hongjian, CDF

Apparently it's a near space UAV.

Diagram shows four AESAs with near 360 degree coverage, suggesting broad area coverage, with all four sets featuring X and UHF band AESAs all with AMTI mode, and the middle two featuring GMTI and SAR. In terms of function, looks like a mix of AEW and JSTARS onboard a HALE UAV.

A very spectacularly strange design.

Worth keeping in mind, if this is a near space, HALE UAV, then it must have quite a large wingspan. But it's also quite long as well, like two conjoined flying wings, a small one at the front joined to a big one at the rear. Also, remember you'll need a lot of power to get all four radars going. So probably going to be a big UAV.

Click to expand...

A large aircraft which uses its wings to mount the radar antennae can achieve accuracy in determining the direction of a target while using long wave radar. This is a beautiful concept.
I have long wondered why something that was used in WWII was so generally replaced by radomes mounted above the fuselage in radar aircraft.

delft said:

A large aircraft which uses its wings to mount the radar antennae can achieve accuracy in determining the direction of a target while using long wave radar. This is a beautiful concept.
I have long wondered why something that was used in WWII was so generally replaced by radomes mounted above the fuselage in radar aircraft.

Click to expand...

Because it wasn't possible to get enough power density on leading edges of wings with vacuum tubes. Miniaturization's enabling this one.

Big ups to skywatcher for putting out an article so quickly, hopefully when this plane finally catches the attention of other outlets they will source back to your blog!

Although it's probably worth rephrasing the title as "watch this space" or something similar, because we don't actually have photos of the thing yet, nor confirmation that it flew, only that it's probably under advanced development.

Bltizo said:

Big ups to skywatcher for putting out an article so quickly, hopefully when this plane finally catches the attention of other outlets they will source back to your blog!

Although it's probably worth rephrasing the title as "watch this space" or something similar, because we don't actually have photos of the thing yet, nor confirmation that it flew, only that it's probably under advanced development.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Did you check out the new Z-18 and Z-20 helicopters on that same article?