• dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    1 year ago

    long-range one-way attack drones

    So, modern V-1 buzz bombers. Even the launch ramp sled thing in the article looks like a similar concept. Everything old is new again!

    • ShadowRam@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I hate this stupid word ‘drone’

      Cruise missiles have all the same navigation and course correction tech in it.

      These are the same thing with a propeller instead of a rocket and less payload.

      • CompostMaterial@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, there is a difference. You even pointed it out. With a rocket you go point A to point B. That is it. With a prop, you can fly around for as long as your fuel supply lasts. Which is what makes it a drone.

        • ShadowRam@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          These only go from point A to to point B.

          rockets can fly around for as long as their fuel supply lasts.

          • Pipoca@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            These seem like they can circle for rather longer than a rocket could.

            There’s a bit of a difference, tactically, between a rocket with 2 min of fuel vs a prop plane with 5 hours of fuel.

        • mercano@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          A Tomahawk cruise missile only uses a rocket motor to take off from a ship or submarine. After launch, it unfolds its wings and uses a jet engine to fly to its target.

          • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            “Added unfolding wings for effect of cool.”

            Seriously though, Rocket and jet engine is heavy. I know that from KSP.

      • sylver_dragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Cruise missiles are usually self-guided. Drones are often remotely piloted with some autonomous functions (loitering, station keeping, return to base). No idea what the case is for these new AQ400 units. Given the usage of the term “drone”, my guess is that these will be remotely piloted.

    • perviouslyiner@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      V1 was a much larger pulsejet (hence the buzz) with a third of the range and ten times the payload of this thing

    • AlotOfReading@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There’s probably a bunch of reasons for the multi wing design, but the big one is going to be improving lift/carrying capacity without increasing the width.

      The most efficient wings for low speeds are glider wings: as long and thin as possible. That makes them inconvenient to pack and folding joints are weak points. The second wing adds lift, but also problems: it’s less efficient than a single wing of the combined length would be and the front wing makes the rear wing less efficient. The winglet improves the situation somewhat. Facing downward also improves maneuverability.

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thanks. How does this shape compare with the Iranian Shahed drones?

        Is two seperate wings more efficient than a full v shape body?

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            They increase efficiency if you don’t have space for longer wings to park your giant ass airplane in an airport with width limits

            Longer wings should be more efficient