Meet Iran's suicide UAV with 2000km range

[White and Green with M/S]

Iran is one of the few nations that possess jet powered stealthy UCAVs. Israel relies on importing foreign engines, and Russia has barely any UAVs to speak of. Clearly the issue here is you're talking in a topic that you know very little about.




Here is a UAV called Scaneagle:

View attachment 705561

It has an endurance of 24+ hours and cruise speed of 110km/h. If the Americans/Israelis wanted to use it as a suicide UAV, it could theoretically have a range of 2600km. In other words, such a tiny UAV would have more range than a much larger Arash.

This brings me back to what I had said earlier, just because the Americans or Israelis have not produced a suicide UAV with such ranges, it does not mean they not easily do it. Once again, you're just repeating the same debunked claims.

don't quote him sir, he come with a lame logic west master UAV tech and you're not

 

[Myth_buster_1]

Iran is one of the few nations that possess jet powered stealthy UCAVs. Israel relies on importing foreign engines, and Russia has barely any UAVs to speak of. Clearly the issue here is you're talking in a topic that you know very little about.




Here is a UAV called Scaneagle:

View attachment 705561

It has an endurance of 24+ hours and cruise speed of 110km/h. If the Americans/Israelis wanted to use it as a suicide UAV, it could theoretically have a range of 2600km. In other words, such a tiny UAV would have more range than a much larger Arash.

Look at the size of wings and then compare it with your propaganda drone which is tiny.
Plus its US not Iran so I can expect 5,000 range drone since they have the capability to develop such drones. Not Iran with hobby grade drones...

 

[Philosopher]

since they both use Chinese technology in their drones.

What Chinese technology does Iran use in its drones?

just like I wont believe if Iran claims today that they have a Submarine that can travel 50,000 km at speed of 200 km.

Right, because aerodynamics and hydrodynamics are the same. How many submarines do you know that travel at 200km/h? Now compare that with the number of UAVs that travel 200km/h.

 

[Philosopher]

Look at the size of wings and then compare it with your propaganda drone which is tiny.
Plus its US not Iran so I can expect 5,000 range drone since they have the capability to develop such drones. Not Iran with hobby grade drones...

The size of the wings have nothing to do with the range, you are just repeating this claim as if I have not already debunked it. Do you need another explanation for why aspect ratio does not put a limitation on range?

 

[White and Green with M/S]

They are not better then Pakistan since they both use Chinese technology in their drones.

Its not lame excuse btw.. just like I wont believe if Iran claims today that they have a Submarine that can travel 50,000 km at speed of 200 km.

please tell me which Iranian drones are based on or which Chinese technology they are using in their drone???

and LOL were they claim it don't be retard too much

 

[Myth_buster_1]

Right, because aerodynamics and hydrodynamics are the same. How many submarines do you know that travel at 200km/h? Now compare that with the number of UAVs that travel 200km/h.

exactly my point, how many suicided drones do you know with same aerodynamic profile as Irani drone that can travel 2,000 km? lol

The size of the wings have nothing to do with the range, you are just repeating this claim as if I have not already debunked it. Do you need another explanation for why aspect ratio does not put a limitation on range?

You are an idiot seriously. Wings have everything to do with range unless the aircraft is going really fast.
all slow drones have long wings not short like Irani propaganda drone.

 

[Philosopher]

exactly my point, how many suicided drones do you know with same aerodynamic profile as Irani drone that can travel 2,000 km? lol

That's because Iran decided to make a solely dedicated suicide UAV with that range, if you had other such UAVs to compare it to, then we could so a comparison. This is not an issue however since we can describe the shape and wing of the UAV using aerodynamic factors i.e underlying science. It seems because you lack any understanding of aerodynamics, you need another UAV of exactly parameters otherwise you'll refuse it would work. Which makes me wonder, if you don't understand aerodynamics, then what are you doing here talking in this topic?

 

[Philosopher]

You are an idiot seriously. Wings have everything to do with range unless the aircraft is going really fast.
all slow drones have long wings not short like Irani propaganda drone.

So lets debunk this yet again. This time pay attention:

What you're seeing in Arash UAV vs something like a predator UAV in terms of wing size is something called Aspect Ratio.

Arash has a relatively low aspect ratio and predator UAV have long aspect ratio. Both have their own benefits such as lower induced drag vs parasitic drag. Induced drag is higher at low speed and higher altitude.

Induced drag is most significant at low speeds and high altitudes

How Does Aspect Ratio Affect Your Wing?

Some wings are short and stubby, while others are long and skinny. What's up with the difference?

www.boldmethod.com

A system like Arash will not be flying at higher altitude, certain not during most of its all flight path. Another advantage of using a high aspect ratio is to help create a STOL, however this does not apply to Arash given it utilises assisted launching, i.e it does not require runways.

With regards to the speed, low aspect ratio in Arash are useful given it is relatively slower:

Low aspect ratio: the design

1. more useful internal volume
2.can fly slow

link to article:

Low AR-planes

www.nurflugel.com

Another factor to note is something called wing loading. This is a component of wing size and weight, Arash suicide UAV similar to cruise missiles have large wing loading, again this has its own benefits. Note in this case, speed is not part of the calculation.

Given the design requirement of Arash, i.e use as a suicide UAV which spends most of its time flying at lower altitude and lower speeds, it is a matter of aerodynamic illiteracy to claim it should use "larger wings". What aspect ratio you use depends on many factors such as mission design, practical needs such as storing UAVs in launch containers i.e compactness, shape of the UAV etc. Thus you cannot refute the range of a system solely by looking at the wing size.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

That's because Iran decided to make a solely dedicated suicide UAV with that range, if you had other such UAVs to compare it to, then we could so a comparison. This is not an issue however since we can describe the shape and wing of the UAV using aerodynamic factors i.e underlying science. It seems because you lack any understanding of aerodynamics, you need another UAV of exactly parameters otherwise you'll refuse it would work. Which makes me wonder, if you don't understand aerodynamics, then what are you doing here talking in this topic?

So basically every time Iran decides to make a technology that no other superior technological advance nation can produce but Iran can simply because they have decided to make it?

You are more brain washed then North Koreans are.

 

[Philosopher]

So basically every time Iran decides to make a technology that no other superior technological advance nation can produce but Iran can simply because they have decided to make it?

You are more brain washed then North Koreans are.

You're flip flopping, you have already agreed that US could make this technology if it wanted. The issue is about need. Iran decided it will need such a system hence why it made it. If the US, Israel or any nation for that matter with decent enough underlying UAV technology wanted, they could create such a long range suicide UAV.

At this point, you're just engaging in whats called eristic argument. In other words, you have nothing of substance but are just replying for the sake of replying.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

So lets debunk this yet again. This time pay attention:

What you're seeing in Arash UAV vs something like a predator UAV in terms of wing size is something called Aspect Ratio.

Arash has a relatively low aspect ratio and predator UAV have long aspect ratio. Both have their own benefits such as lower induced drag vs parasitic drag. Induced drag is higher at low speed and higher altitude.

How Does Aspect Ratio Affect Your Wing?

Some wings are short and stubby, while others are long and skinny. What's up with the difference?

www.boldmethod.com

A system like Arash will not be flying at higher altitude, certain not during most of its all flight path. Another advantage of using a high aspect ratio is to help create a STOL, however this does not apply to Arash given it utilises assisted launching, i.e it does not require runways.

With regards to the speed, low aspect ratio in Arash are useful given it is relatively slower:





link to article:

Low AR-planes

www.nurflugel.com

Another factor to note is something called wing loading. This is a component of wing size and weight, Arash suicide UAV similar to cruise missiles have large wing loading, again this has its own benefits. Note in this case, speed is not part of the calculation.

Given the design requirement of Arash, i.e use as a suicide UAV which spends most of its time flying at lower altitude and lower speeds, it is a matter of aerodynamic illiteracy to claim it should use "larger wings". What aspect ratio you use depends on many factors such as mission design, practical needs such as storing UAVs in launch containers i.e compactness, shape of the UAV etc. Thus you cannot refute the range of a system solely by looking at the wing size.

Thiss is just gibberish you are resorting to while avoiding common sense facts.

That Arash aerodynamically can not achieve 2,000 range while flying low slow and with limited fuel.

Arash Aerodynamically is very similar to British target drone so its performance too will be similar in terms of speed and range of mere 200 km/hr and 200 km range. not 10x exaggerated figure...

 

[White and Green with M/S]

Their are many other ways to respect someone instead of giving someone the status of a master. The word "sir" is a term used by your gora masters.

@The Eagle @waz @krash can we banned this troll from this thread, thanks

 

[The Accountant]

Drone can also have programmed path

As an additional option yes but this is a different matter. Claim of 2000 km range without ability to communicate at 2000 km means claim is fake

There is a grey area between a cruise missile, loitering munition and a suicide drones. You can call it bibedi babedi for all I care. It’s a huge fuel tank with wings attached to it and it’s task is to locate, identify and destroy fixed enemy objects.

U can do it with any commercial plane as well. Give him auto pilot and some sort of seeker. But drone has much more capabilities.

Anyways lets agree to disagree. As long as claim is to go to 2000 km range at a pre determined path then its a possibility and nothing new so i am fine with the claim but claiming something can go 2000 km with capabilities of drone ... It is something huge

 

[Philosopher]

Thiss is just gibberish you are resorting to while avoiding common sense facts.

I have given you referenced aerodynamic facts such as the benefits of low aspect ratio. Do you realise you're trying to deny hard science?

That Arash aerodynamically can not achieve 2,000 range while flying low slow and with limited fuel.

We're going back to square one again. Most UAVs nowadays that fly for many hours at speeds beween 200-400kmg/h can reach those ranges regardless of flying low or high.

As demonstrated, a UAV with "small wings" in this cause low aspect ratio actually helps it fly slow at low altutude:

" Low aspect ratio: the design
1. more useful internal volume
2. can fly slow at low altitude"
Link:

Low AR-planes

www.nurflugel.com

Are you denying this aerodynamic fact?

Arash Aerodynamically is very similar to British target drone so its performance too will be similar in terms of speed and range of mere 200 km/hr and 200 km range. not 10x exaggerated figure...

That's because one has a longer endurance due to different engines. Apples and oranges.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

You're flip flopping, you have already agreed that US could make this technology if it wanted. The issue is about need. Iran decided it will need such a system hence why it made it. If the US, Israel or any nation for that matter with decent enough underlying UAV technology wanted, they could create such a long range suicide UAV.

At this point, you're just engaging in whats called eristic argument. In other words, you have nothing of substance but are just replying for the sake of replying.

You dont understand the fact. US Israel west or Russia China have the capability to design and develop technology that it wants... on the other hand Iran can only desire such technology and is not capable of fullfilling its desire simply because its lack of technical advancement in such field. its very fanboyish to believe that just because Iran needs something it will achieve it..
BM, cruise missiles are relatively easy for Iran to obtain since it can access such technology from China and Russia which are its primary source of military technology. It can not achieve 2,000 km suicided drone technology because none of other technologically advanced nation have such a thing.
Just like if you want to be a weight lifter you would always lose in heavy weight category as a light weight. I hope you got my analogy.
Which powerful nation would not want to have a drone that can sneak up 2000 km inside enemy territory and destroy important enemy's military installments. Israel which is technically advanced then Iran has been working on suicided drones for decades and if they cant achieve 2000 km range then so cant Iran.