Chinese UAV/UCAV development

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Clark Gap

Junior Member
Registered Member
by78 said:
The CH-4 was rumored to be powered by the Limbach MD550. Limbach started out as a German company, but was bought by the Chinese in 2011. Production now takes place in Xiamen. MD550 has since been replaced by the 118kw Skylark DB416 engine (2nd and 3rd image) made by Hangrui Power (航瑞动力).



52489046824_6ac9de7255_k.jpg

52488828916_770c89eb28_o.png

52488341192_e8cae768ee_o.jpg
Click to expand...


No, new CH-4 is powered by DB416(云雀-118kw), and new CH-5 should be powered by DB883(金鹰-max 600kw). MD550 on has 37kW power...
 
by78

by78

General
by78 said:
The original CH-4 was rumored to be powered by the Limbach MD550. Limbach started out as a German company, but was bought by the Chinese in 2011. Production now takes place in Xiamen. Apparently an upgraded version of CH-4 was powered by the Austrian ROTAX-915IS. Now, ROTAX-915IS has been replaced by the 118kw Skylark DB416 engine (2nd and 3rd image) made by Hangrui Power (航瑞动力).



52489046824_6ac9de7255_k.jpg

52488828916_770c89eb28_o.png

52488341192_e8cae768ee_o.jpg
Click to expand...

Speaking of Hangrui Power (航瑞动力), it apparently also makes a new 600kw engine for the CH-5, named DB883.

52488858781_a43c2a718b_b.jpg

52489046794_7553dba03f_h.jpg
 
by78

by78

General
by78 said:
The engines for the Tengden/Tengoen TB001A and TB001D have been revealed. The former uses C145HT, and the latter uses C145I. Both engines are made by Chongqing Zongshen Power Machinery Co. (宗申动力), which also provides engines to CH-3 UAV.

52488275882_29036624f5_o.jpg
52489237980_c0c229f1e9_o.jpg
Click to expand...

Speaking of Zongshen Power Machinery Co. (宗申动力), its TD0 engine now powers the CH-3 UAV, its C115 engine powers the WingLoong-1, and its C12H engines powers a certain unnamed UAV.

52489109753_26517d565a_o.jpg

52488836694_fa6c7a0bc2_o.jpg

52488836634_58b8ee573a_o.jpg
 
B

banjex

Junior Member
Registered Member
Clark Gap said:
No way, too expensive, low speed, small warhead.
Click to expand...
But much more precise if you have the right ISR meaning a large warhead is unnecessary. One rocket per target instead of area bombardment. Idk if slow speed is that much of a concern given how much trouble Russia and Ukraine have with shooting down loitering drones.
 
C

Clark Gap

Junior Member
Registered Member
banjex said:
But much more precise if you have the right ISR meaning a large warhead is unnecessary. One rocket per target instead of area bombardment. Idk if slow speed is that much of a concern given how much trouble Russia and Ukraine have with shooting down loitering drones.
Click to expand...

Large warhead can destroy hard target. Traditional Guided Rockets are also very accurate. When army in frontline or UAV identify a target and ask to destroy it, the speed will be very important. The advantage of the loitering munition is the lower demand for reconnaissance. In the case you know the accurate coordinate of target, traditional Guided Rockets are better.
 
B

banjex

Junior Member
Registered Member
Almost every target on the battlefield, at least vehicles, can be disabled or destroyed with pretty small munitions. A loitering drone is enough to at least mission kill pretty much any IFV, APC, truck or arty piece out there if the hit is accurate.

Maybe I was too broad in my previous comment about every MLRS changing to loitering munitions. But I think a significant number will.
 
C

Clark Gap

Junior Member
Registered Member
banjex said:
Almost every target on the battlefield, at least vehicles, can be disabled or destroyed with pretty small munitions. A loitering drone is enough to at least mission kill pretty much any IFV, APC, truck or arty piece out there if the hit is accurate.

Maybe I was too broad in my previous comment about every MLRS changing to loitering munitions. But I think a significant number will.
Click to expand...

Loitering munitions need wireless video signal to keep control. The warhead is too small for a bunch of scattered infantries, or people stay in armored vehicles and fortifications. It's speed is too slow and relatively easy to intercept and avoid. And it is expensive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top