S-70 "Okhotnik" UCAV

Another amateur aerodynamics expert here

The problem I see with using TVC to correct for unneeded lift is that it's only one engine/nozzle, and one that's exactly inline with the longitudinal axis of the aircraft. A lot of force will be generated on afterburner and with a downward momentum, and under such conditions even a slight bit of turbulence underneath one of the wings can cause the aircraft to roll to one side because such an arrangement is not stable. And afterwards the UAV will careen out of control in a big spiral, as the TVC nozzle will still be inclined downwards, causing massive stress to the airframe.

You'd want at least 2 engines with TVC side-by-side, with enough of a gap between them to provide stability. Same arrangement as the moving tail surfaces on either side of the engine(s) on normal supersonic aircraft.

flamming_python wrote:Another amateur aerodynamics expert here

The problem I see with using TVC to correct for unneeded lift is that it's only one engine/nozzle, and one that's exactly inline with the longitudinal axis of the aircraft. A lot of force will be generated on afterburner and with a downward momentum, and under such conditions even a slight bit of turbulence underneath one of the wings can cause the aircraft to roll to one side because such an arrangement is not stable. And afterwards the UAV will careen out of control in a big spiral, as the TVC nozzle will still be inclined downwards, causing massive stress to the airframe.

You'd want at least 2 engines with TVC side-by-side, with enough of a gap between them to provide stability. Same arrangement as the moving tail surfaces on either side of the engine(s) on normal supersonic aircraft.

I would call your post an absolutely needed callback to realism, _python.


I don't know if it possible to overcome all-wing transonic limit thank to TVC and I am even less secure if it would end up to be advantageous (I mean: if it would limit into attaining a max speed of 1.2/1.3 doubling the cost and development time, no thanks).

Even in the best scenario it would be a very difficult task but if someone could EVER get trough it, I'll bet on Sukhoi!
In any case let's give a cut to all unsubstantiated speculations and wait almost until its first take off or, even better, until they shown up a second, more refined prototype.

TVC is actually a good thing for a flying wing... if you have any familiarity with boats the angle of the propeller in a small boat is critical... when you start off it is angled down to lift the boat out of the water... once at speed and riding on the water you change the angle of the propeller because it not longer needs to lift the boat... the speed of the boat will hold it out of the water, so once you get up to speed you angle the propeller again so that it directs the thrust backwards which increases the speed of the boat because no energy is wasted trying to lift it any more.

With a modern flying wing it should have surfaces on the leading edge and trailing edge to change its level of lift... max lift for takeoff and landing, while minimum drag low lift for very high speed flight.

At different speeds different angles of thrust will improve performance and reduce drag.

At very high speed having the control surfaces in neutral means less drag but changing the angle of attack of the wing surface can also reduce drag too and a TVC engine should allow the aircraft to do that without adding the drag of a control surface deflection.

(Note the thrust angle is called trim...)

The problem I see with using TVC to correct for unneeded lift is that it's only one engine/nozzle, and one that's exactly inline with the longitudinal axis of the aircraft. A lot of force will be generated on afterburner and with a downward momentum, and under such conditions even a slight bit of turbulence underneath one of the wings can cause the aircraft to roll to one side because such an arrangement is not stable. And afterwards the UAV will careen out of control in a big spiral, as the TVC nozzle will still be inclined downwards, causing massive stress to the airframe.

The control surfaces on the wing still work and could keep the wing level... a single TVC nozzle really just changes the angle of attack of the engine thrust and can be used to pitch the nose up or down or yaw it left or right. With just one TVC nozzle the only thing it cant do is roll around its central axis which is critical for a dogfighter in a dogfight in a superstall with no airflow over the wings, but a near supersonic flying wing would have enormous roll control using its wing mounted control surfaces...

this 20x15m UAV could be the first image of the Okhotnik (Hunter)-B.



https://twitter.com/reutersanders/status/1130404949463044097

its big …..

this thing …. my money says
is a subsonic Su-57 flight control system ….. sans pilot … no after burners
but almost everything is carried over from the Su-57 ….

my money also says …. bigger weapon bays …. Kinzhal size …. ?

brilliant stuff … as you would expect from such pragmatic people …
I'd do exactly the same …. financially production wise ….. just right …

thing is …. if that huge Belgorod sub is correct and can lay nuke powered sub detector listening posts …
and with these stealthy things floating around above getting co-ordinates ?

what's to stop them taking out SSGNs with kinetic velocity missiles ?

thing with all flying wings is you have no tail to make the back slower than the front
most people don't realise this …. the tail even on an arrow is to make it obvious that the back is slower than the front

I actually have 1st hand experience of this …. having tried to break speed records on sailboards …
when you snap your fin at 30+ knots.... the board is unsure where the front is supposed to be ….
so the tail starts skidding 30 degrees each way ….. as the front and rear try to swap ends …

all is not as it seems …. I always thought …. they made me go straight
how wrong was I … 2 cracked foot bones later and mild concussion ….

what's to stop them taking out SSGNs with kinetic velocity missiles ?

About 20-200m of water most of the time... water is very soft if you are gently lowered in to it, but when moving at speed it gets harder the faster you are moving and a hypersonic missile is moving faster than most...

this thing …. my money says
is a subsonic Su-57 flight control system ….. sans pilot … no after burners
but almost everything is carried over from the Su-57 ….

The information released suggests it is supersonic, plus afterburner would improve acceleration and altitude performance, which would be useful for missile launches... the higher and faster it is flying the longer the effective range of its missiles.

the tail even on an arrow is to make it obvious that the back is slower than the front

No, the tail feathers on an arrow is to keep the point forward by making the tail too high drag to turn around to the front.

the Russian air force chief is already on record as saying the new flying wing bomber will be subsonic and he also said there is very little reason to fly the Tu-160 supersonic either - as they were well advanced on hypersonic or near-hypersonic missiles with 6-7000 km range soon

doesn't it seem that these flying wings all have really thick fronts to their wings ?
is that optimal for supersonic flight ?
it seems to me that they are making it obvious to the craft where the front is …. by creating a lot of lift right up front
because there is no tail telling the plane where the back is supposed to be ?

and yaw …. B2 from what I've seen seems to use split elevon type devices to slow a particular wing down
this doesn't sound a supersonic design to me …. they all seem to use that method

so my conversation starter was/is …. what is thing meant for ? its big and subsonic
not for bombing jihadis ….. its not fast enough to cover big ocean distances quickly and it doesn't need to according to their air force boss
but it would be very useful for loitering along Russia's massive coastline …. as it is very low drag and stealthy
and the biggest threat are subs … SSGNs they all have 100+ cruise missiles onboard

kinetic weapons are solid tungsten rods …. they would go through water like butter ….
they have no warhead as their speed is the killer …. going at huge velocities
that's why I said kinetic ….. might work

you can argue with the head of the Russian air force that's fine by me ….

the Russian air force chief is already on record as saying the new flying wing bomber will be subsonic and he also said there is very little reason to fly the Tu-160 supersonic either - as they were well advanced on hypersonic or near-hypersonic missiles with 6-7000 km range soon

This thread is about a UCAV, that is clearly based on the PAK FA and is designed to operate with it in combat.

The Russian air force chief is taking about a strategic bomber called PAK DA which has completely different requirements and will have a different design.

doesn't it seem that these flying wings all have really thick fronts to their wings ?

No.

The flying wing design that is the subject of this thread does not have a thick wing profile that suggests subsonic only flight.

The PAK DA probably will have a thick wing profile to have the internal volume to carry enough fuel and internal ordinance for strategic and theatre bombing missions, but this thread is about the S-70, which is a UCAV drone that will operate with the PAK FA.

is that optimal for supersonic flight ?

A Flying wing shape offers the minimum in drag for long endurance flight.

and yaw …. B2 from what I've seen seems to use split elevon type devices to slow a particular wing down
this doesn't sound a supersonic design to me …. they all seem to use that method

The B-2 is not a Russian design and is therefore a poor choice to highlight to indicate a potential Russian design.

so my conversation starter was/is …. what is thing meant for ? its big and subsonic
not for bombing jihadis ….. its not fast enough to cover big ocean distances quickly and it doesn't need to according to their air force boss
but it would be very useful for loitering along Russia's massive coastline …. as it is very low drag and stealthy
and the biggest threat are subs … SSGNs they all have 100+ cruise missiles onboard

It has been described as being a support drone intended to operate with Su-57 stealth aircraft... it can operate high and forward with sensors operating to detect targets and threats, or listening with radar for radar reflections from signals from Su-35 or Su-57s behind them scanning for threats.

Any targets found can be engaged using internally carried weapons so Russian fighters don't use up all their weapons dealing with incoming threats... a force multiplier...

kinetic weapons are solid tungsten rods …. they would go through water like butter ….
they have no warhead as their speed is the killer …. going at huge velocities
that's why I said kinetic ….. might work

As I mentioned, the funny thing about water is that the more energy you apply to it the harder it is... water does not compress... that is why it is used in hydraulics for lifting very heavy things.

Also the sea is big and by comparison a ship or sub is rather small.

you can argue with the head of the Russian air force that's fine by me ….

I doubt the head of the Russian Air Force gives a fuck about foreign SSBNs... well he might care, but it has nothing to do with his job... he is probably more interested in the 3,000 odd F-35s the americans say they are going to make... I am sure he is racking his brain to work out how he can make them build every single one of those and perhaps some more to bankrupt NATO....

aircraft are optimised for certain flight regimes - closely linked to the engines used
turboprops and propellers - move a lot of air a little bit … they fly best at 5-600 kts …. so almost every turboprop on Earth consequently has straight wings
turbofan high bypass designs are optimal at high subsonic speeds .and surprise surprise every airliner on Earth has a wing optimised for that speed range about 30 degrees angle …. they all look the same now too

next turbojets and low bypass military jet engines are optimal for supersonic …. and most military jets are similar looking too ….
are you detecting a pattern yet ? wind tunnels do not change ….

so here we have a flying wing design that is the same as all other USA and NATO designs …. and they are all high subsonic designs
45 degree angles thick wings ….
your hypothesis is that somehow Russia is using the same basic universal design and they can by some miracle make it perform in a flight range that nobody else can ? it will go supersonic …

how is it that every wind tunnel on Earth gets similar results for all other aircraft types ?
what you are suggesting is nonsense
the reason they are using the engine from the Su-35 is it currently available and it is already used in an Su-57 control system
its called expedience and practicality

this Okhotnik won't be built for minimum 4-5 yrs … by then the Su-57 will have the more compact and variable cycle Iz-whatever-30 ….
it will be built in mass production with that engine …

most current USA UAVs use high bypass civil and military designs …. some even from business jets
Russia doesn't have engines like that right now …

you can nitpick every single word I say as you always do …. I'm talking about a huge body of aerodynamic evidence that says this flyingwing will fly just like the others …. just like all the wings on turboprops look the same … just as all the jet airliners look the same … etc etc

my vote says …. the air in wind tunnels in Russia is no different to the air in France or the USA …
I'm a pragmatic realist

We don't know for sure either way...best to wait for more info to be released on it

Although, initial info states that it's meant to be supersonic, but we'll see

Cyberspec wrote:We don't know for sure either way...best to wait for more info to be released on it

Although, initial info states that it's meant to be supersonic, but we'll see

The initial info you refer to are coming from an official source?

aircraft are optimised for certain flight regimes - closely linked to the engines used

Totally agree here.

turboprops and propellers - move a lot of air a little bit … they fly best at 5-600 kts …. so almost every turboprop on Earth consequently has straight wings

True, except for the worlds fastest propeller driven aircraft, the Tu-95 Bear, which needs swept wings because of the speeds it can operate at require swept wings... but basically your point that turboprop designs are not expected to be supersonic is valid.

turbofan high bypass designs are optimal at high subsonic speeds .and surprise surprise every airliner on Earth has a wing optimised for that speed range about 30 degrees angle …. they all look the same now too

Agree... a high bypass jet engine trades volume of air for exhaust speed so gets high thrust but no good for supersonic flight speeds.

next turbojets and low bypass military jet engines are optimal for supersonic …. and most military jets are similar looking too ….
are you detecting a pattern yet ? wind tunnels do not change ….

Actually wind tunnels are designed for an enormous variety of aerodynamic shapes and engine types... the shape of the Tu-160 needs to be able to operate at the aircrafts top speed of mach 2, but it also has to take off and land at much much much lower speeds... in fact the landing speed of a Blackjack is almost always subsonic...

so here we have a flying wing design that is the same as all other USA and NATO designs …. and they are all high subsonic designs

Bullshit... the wing angle for this drone is exactly the same wing angle of the Su-57 sitting next to it... and the Su-57 is supersonic.

The only flying wing manned aircraft operating anywhere in the world at the moment is the B-2 and it does not have the same wing sweep angle that this drone has.

45 degree angles thick wings ….
your hypothesis is that somehow Russia is using the same basic universal design and they can by some miracle make it perform in a flight range that nobody else can ? it will go supersonic

This drone is not a strategic bomber like the B-2, it is a drone that is supposed to operate with the Su-57 in combat and that is the flight envelope it is supposed to operate within.

Modern fighters rarely spend very long periods at top speed because it dramatically reduces their flight range, but altitude and a supersonic flight speed does improve the flight performance of any missile fired so a high altitude drone that accelerates past the speed of sound to launch some R-77s or R-37s can get a decent reach with its AAMs without the Su-57 it is operating with needing to burn up fuel or use up its own weapons.

the reason they are using the engine from the Su-35 is it currently available and it is already used in an Su-57 control system
its called expedience and practicality

If you are correct and it is a subsonic long range PAK DA replacement then why the fuck is it so small... what other countries have strategic bombers smaller than a Flanker?

Why isn't its engine a high bypass turbofan like a PD-35 or something equivalent?

Why a medium bypass turbofan with powerful afterburner?

this Okhotnik won't be built for minimum 4-5 yrs … by then the Su-57 will have the more compact and variable cycle Iz-whatever-30 ….
it will be built in mass production with that engine …

The first Su-57s are already built and in the future will likely change engine a couple of times and it will be the same for any drone designed to operate with it.

most current USA UAVs use high bypass civil and military designs …. some even from business jets
Russia doesn't have engines like that right now …

If the drone is going to operate with the Su-57s then it makes sense not to develop a whole new engine class for it... just put whatever the Su-57 is using at the time into it.

you can nitpick every single word I say as you always do …. I'm talking about a huge body of aerodynamic evidence that says this flyingwing will fly just like the others …. just like all the wings on turboprops look the same … just as all the jet airliners look the same … etc etc

I think if you look at a turboprop like a C-130 or An-12 and a turbofan like a 737 or whatever you will see the Turboprop aircraft have straight wings... the exception is the Bear and Bear related aircraft like the Tu-116 and Tu-126 which also have swept wings because of their top speeds require swept wings... just like jet airliners with turbofans.

What I don't understand is WTF turboprops has anything to do with the Su-57, the S-70 drone or the PAK DA strategic flying wing...

my vote says …. the air in wind tunnels in Russia is no different to the air in France or the USA …
I'm a pragmatic realist

And if they were the same why would the Europeans want to use Russian wind tunnels?

I would also point out that the Russians and Soviets have used wind tunnels for testing cars and ships at low speeds right up to rockets and hypersonic missiles and aircraft shapes... and I can tell you there is more than one wind tunnel at the TsAgi in Russia...

The initial info you refer to are coming from an official source?

PiBo doesn't normally make things up...

Sources: Russian stealth drone "Hunter" first flew. * Dino00 (jumps not flight)

The plane at the beginning of spring for the first time made a full dispersal and broke away from the runway of the Novosibirsk aircraft factory, the exact date of the planned first flight is not yet known

MOSCOW, May 25. / Tass /. Russian heavy drone drone "Hunter", made using the technology of "stealth", in early spring for the first time took off from the runway of the Novosibirsk Aviation Plant. Chkalov. Two sources in the aircraft industry reported this to TASS, noting that testing is not a flight.

At the beginning of spring, the “Hunter” made a full dispersal for the first time and broke away from the runway of the Novosibirsk aircraft plant. The device rose into the air to a height of several meters, making a so-called jump, and then immediately landed, "- said one of the agency interlocutors.

Another source in the industry stressed TASS that the tests "are not a full-fledged flight, but only anticipate it and are necessary for the final test of the aerodynamics of the car, its controllability and on-board systems." He added that in a few weeks a series of “jumps” of the “Hunter” was held. "At the same time, all actions of the unmanned aircraft, including taxiing, takeoff, speeding, jumping into the air, landing and stopping at the end of the runway, were carried out by the Hunter autonomously," the source said.

Sources did not mention the exact dates of the tests, as well as the date of the planned first flight of the “Hunter”.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6470291

Jump! Jump!

The key here is the word "autonomous".  Full machine control, no meat sack with a control stick required.

Nice.

marcellogo wrote:

The initial info you refer to are coming from an official source?

In a recent article by P. Butowski, Aleksandar Nemov (Deputy Department Chief of the RUAF Central Scientific Research Institute) is quoted as saying that work is ongoing on a LR unmanned system capable of supersonic flight at low altitude....

So unless they've got another UAV in development, it's assumed he's referring to the S-70.

I doubt it will be a supersonic supercruising aircraft but it might be capable of achieving supersonic dash for a limited time....I've seen speculation it will be able to achieve a speed of 1400km/h  at low altitude...which would be pretty impressive....but lets see which way things develop. It's too early still

dino00 wrote:[b]Sources: Russian stealth drone "Hunter" first flew.    * Dino00 (jumps not flight)
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6470291

Jump! Jump!

Good news...the first flight shouldn't be too far off

Russia will soon finish working on heavy strike UAV
The unit was named "Hunter"

Moscow. May 23. INTERFAX.RU - work on the creation of a new heavy shock UAV "Hunter" soon to be completed, said Deputy Minister of defense of the Russian Federation Alexey Krivoruchko.

"Hunter" is a very promising system in the near future is also expected to have completion of the works. Unfortunately, it will take some time," said Krivoruchko in an interview with TV channel "Zvezda"

He noted that hundreds of other drones had entered the army.

Earlier it was reported that the first flight of a "Hunter", built at the Novosibirsk aircraft plant of Sukhoi company (part of UAC), is planned for spring 2019.

"Next year, "Hunter" will be released on the test. Work on this project priority, it goes at a good level. In the spring we expect the first flight of this drone. This is a serious problem for us," - said in December 2018, Deputy Minister of defense of the Russian Federation Alexey Krivoruchko in interview to TV channel "Zvezda".

In February, the head of Minpromtorg Denis Manturov declared that the drone already performs a "race" on the runway, and "in the near future is planned for, respectively, the UPS".

In January in the Internet appeared the first photos of the new Russian drone, they placed an anonymous user of one of the forums. The photo shows the aircraft, built on the aerodynamic configuration "flying wing" (no tail) with tricycle landing gear. It is assumed that this is a promising heavy attack drone "Dry", developed in the framework of development work "the Hunter".

Earlier in social networks there were photos of one of the first prototypes of the su-57, the keel of which depicts the silhouette presumably of the UAV "Hunter". Currently, the su-57 in the new color actively operates flights in Zhukovsky.

28 Jun 2018 source informed "Interfax" on the first rollout of the new drone. By the end of the year, the unit entered the final stage of ground trials.

Characteristics of "Hunter" is currently not disclosed. According to open sources, his take-off weight will be 20 tons, making it the heaviest of which is currently being developed UAVs.

According to the source "Interfax", the "Hunter" is intended, in particular, to break the air defense (PVO) when paired with a fifth generation fighter, the su-57.

"It is assumed that the "Hunter" will be able to work in conjunction with the su-57. That is one of the objectives of the drone - break defense, and then in the perimeter part of a manned aircraft," - said the Agency interlocutor.

According to him, in the future, in combination with the fighter there will be some shock drones. "The crew of the su-57 would be able to remotely control the "Hunter" to both devices worked in a single network circuit," said the source.


https://www.interfax.ru/russia/662134

to break the air defense (PVO) when paired with a fifth generation fighter, the su-57.

So for instance it might be loaded up with long range AAMs and ARMs and could be sent forward operating at high altitude with the purpose of getting the enemy air defence to light up... it can start taking down major radar and SAMs and any aircraft that gets airborne while transmitting radar and IRST information to the fighters it is operating with...

Impact drone "Hunter" will first present at the "Army-2019"

It will be shown in the open area of ​​the center "Patriot"

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6474593

I doubt it will be a supersonic supercruising aircraft but it might be capable of achieving supersonic dash for a limited time....I've seen speculation it will be able to achieve a speed of 1400km/h at low altitude...which would be pretty impressive....but lets see which way things develop. It's too early still

Actually I disagree... top speed is not about power to weight ratio, and it is not about being super light... top speed is about low drag and high engine thrust with a high speed engine exhaust speed... the MiG-31 has a much lower power to weight ration compared with modern fighters but is much faster.

If you want very high altitude flight then an enormous thin wing and very light weight will get you there in a sail plane and a very fast aircraft might be another way of getting there... certainly a flying wing will have the best lift/drag ratio, the lowest overall drag and the lowest wing loading... with a modern 5th gen fighters turbojet engine or low bypass turbofan you get a hot high speed engine exhaust for high speed and high altitude flight...

First flight of Russia's heavy UAV Okhotnik planned for July-August — source

More:
http://tass.com/defense/1060553

Mig-29k, Su-30, Su-35, Su-57 and Okhotnik drone.

Su-57 is much more compact than it looks on other pictures.

It was stated in the past that Su-57 would be between MiG-29 and Su-27 in terms of dimensions.

It is still the size of su-35. Mig-29/35 is much smaller like we can see on the pic. In terms of operating cost there should be a huge gap btw the two family.

The Su-30SM looks like it's gonna became a transformers at any moment

That picture is interesting because of all the weapons on the ground next to the drone and all the fighters seem to have external weapons fitted... except the Su-57 of course... makes me think that this was a staged setup for a guest to come and look at rather than operational testing of all the aircraft fully armed... someone was coming to inspect the troops...

GarryB wrote:That picture is interesting because of all the weapons on the ground next to the drone and all the fighters seem to have external weapons fitted... except the Su-57 of course... makes me think that this was a staged setup for a guest to come and look at rather than operational testing of all the aircraft fully armed... someone was coming to inspect the troops...

Good guess it was when Putin inspected the airbase.

Too. Bad we don't see the missiles because they will be used by su-57 too.