GarryB wrote:And how many countries around the world have actually implemented such a scheme....
You are moving the goalposts, the question was whether this was a pipe dream or something sustained by engineering, I demonstrated it is the second
Ironically Russia is the only country making stealth fighters as cheap as western large drones... but even for them it would not make sense to make 50-60 million dollar manned Su-57s and 40-50 million dollar unmanned S-57s.
Odds are that a Su-35 is RUB2B, Su-57 RUB3B, Okhotnik RUB1B. Not cheap for a subsonic bomb truck, even when it is single engine. How much more expensive do you think a 5G light fighter would be?
I would suggest the only sensible reason for being able to fly them unmanned is when the enemy has given up the F-35s and F-15s and F-22s and Rafales and Typhoons as just being too expensive and they start using unmanned drones that can pull enormous g that a manned fighter simply can't match in a dogfight...
Easy then, fly higher and avoid high g turns. UAVs with huge wings to sustain the g you keep on suggesting would suck major time at high speed.
but even then the manned fighters of today would be of no use because the aircraft are designed for humans so are not intended for more than 9 g... just taking the man out does not make them able to match a drone designed for high g manouvering.
What makes you think the Su-57 for instance is necessarily limited to 9 g? Why would they limit the plane, if they:
> have created a plane capable of sustaining 9 g continuously (propulsion wise)
> already know the future is unmanned
The point is that a drone based on a platform designed to carry a human wont have the control surface limits and structure to pull much more g than it does and flying high or low g limit is more about speed than altitude... the transition from WWI biplanes to high speed mono planes of WWII was such a shock because in slow little biplanes it would not be possible to turn hard enough to pull more than 4-5g and the speed would bleed off so quickly you couldn't maintain it.
The drone capable of sustaining and actually using much higher g will be much heavier and way slower because of the big wings. I have already explained this
With modern transonic and supersonic drones enormous g can be achieved easily and quickly... a 5 g turn at subsonic speeds can become a 15 g turn at mach 2.
What is the aero / propulsion / altitude combination needed to make 15 g at 2 M?? Do you even realize what you are saying?
That is very true, but a whole section of the aircraft is dedicated for containing that pilot and keeping him safe while offering him a view of the world and a view of the information collected by sensors and other platforms.
The avionics for making the plane autonomous takes some space too. In any case you will probably add some fuel (not even 1 t) to the unmanned version, slightly improved aero and that's it. It is very nice, but it does not mean an unmanned plane si going to be half the size with the same range and payload.
Replacing analog dial instruments with digital instruments and CRT displays... note that is cathode ray tube displays... not much lighter LCD ones in the MiG-29M from 1988 reduced the weight of the cockpit by 500kgs... the ejection seat weighs 250kgs and includes survival equipment and other bits and pieces too and 100kg for the pilot himself... not to mention the weight of the canopy, which is quite heavy compared with aluminium structure.
I would like some sources for that... for instance the installed weight of a Zvezda K-36 is 100 kg. My point above stands.
The point is that the oxygen system and the cooling and heating systems to give him a comfortable operating environment all add up in weight and cost... that would be wasted in a drone design.
Not wasted, you just need to design with the two versions in mind and remove all unnecessary items in the unmanned one, substituting them with the additional avionics needed plus additional fuel.
I am not disputing that, what I am saying is that basing a drone on a manned version is just stupid, because from a design perspective a manned platform makes a lot of compromises that are not needed in an unmanned drone.
Says GarryB the internet authority, correcting Rostec?
Take an MPA... is a drone replacement going to look like an Orion or a Tu-142 or P-8?
Has the Orion the payload and range of the others? You are the one saying AEW drones cannot substitute manned AWACS BTW...
Surely you would save lots of money making an MPA drone based on the current manned model.... that is what you are saying for fighters.
You are being disingenuous. It would be absurd to make a huge fuselage for carrying people when there is no people on board. That is a far cry from the crew factor o a fighter
There is an argument that fighters don't need to be super manouverable...
Yes, that is a BS argument defended by F-35 salesmen and by you...
Who cares about the transition...
Professionals responsible for air force operational planing do care a lot about that. Do you not understand why?
you will rapidly find your dual manned and unmanned fighter is at an enormous disadvantage to a custom designed unmanned one.
No, it is just you imagining magical capacities to unmanned drones, completely oblivious of physical realities.
Ask yourself why the S-70 and other fighter support drones don't look like current generation fighters... they essentially perform a bomb truck role with air to ground or air to air missiles.... an extra set of eyes and extra munitions for the job.
No shit, Sherlock! Because they are mainly extreme endurance, low RCS strike aircraft...
What a stupid thing to say or suggest.
Being civil is not a bad habit for an admin. Regardless, just look and see this manned / unmanned becoming the new normal.
You don't also need to be very intelligent to recognise this suggestion is coming from the company that makes the damn engine and would have it running vacuum cleaners and washing machines too.
Again, it comes from UEC. And the only 5G engine they have is izd. 30. Maybe if you give them the money, the engineers and the capabilities needed, they will build you the 5G Klimov you want.
MiG works with Klimov and not Saturn and I would expect Klimov probably has a few engines in mind for the LMFS and the MiG-41.
Sure they have, do they also fancy Saturn making turboprop and helo engines to compete with them? It is for UEC to decide what company specialises in what type of engines, otherwise the holding will turn into a circus.
I am sure they probably thought the MiG-29 should have had a single Al-31 as its power supply, which might have worked fine, but they would not be selling them to China and Pakistan like they are with the RD-93 they do sell.
On the contrary, I am sure a lighter MiG-29 with one AL-31 would be in high demand even now.
You can say that but how about we wait until someone actually achieves it in the real world before we accept it could be true.
Agreed. Until then, this is the best we have, and it looks damn good
So the single engined MiG-29 has 75.22kN dry and 122.6kN full AB, while the twin engined actual MiG-29 with RD-33s has 98.84kN in dry thrust and 163.16kN in full AB.
Who says a medium fighter can be powered by one of those engines? It is only a light fighter that works that way, that is the whole point of the concept...
RD-33 is not half the thrust of the AL-31, it makes no sense to substitute two of them with one AL
More to the point when the Al-31 gets an improvement that increases the thrust by 1,000kgs, and the RD-33s get improvements that also increase thrust by 1,000kgs, having two engines means the single engined MiG gains 1 ton of extra thrust, but the twin engined MiG gains 2 tons extra thrust.
1 tf increase for the RD-33 is much more improvement than 1 tf for the AL-31...
UEC Saturn... a jet engine maker. Surely they would show the MiG-41 and LMFS with Klimov engines too just to be fair and honest...
Again, this is signed by UEC, not Saturn for god's sake... all the bureaus are represented in that presentation. Should UAC create yet another plane, so that Salut can also have their 5G ambitions satisfied?