The stinging ramp unmanned tanker took off in the US

The prototype of the first unmanned refueling vehicle, created for the needs of the Navy, made its first test flight from an airfield in Illinois. This was reported on Thursday at Boeing Corporation.

The MQ-25A Stingray T1 was in flight for two hours under the control of test pilots who were commanding from the ground station.

The aircraft did taxiing and take-off in an autonomous mode, and then flew along a predetermined route to check the basic flight functions and the process of controlling it from a ground station

- explained in the company.

Last year, Boeing won a $ 805 million contract to build the first four copies of the MQ-25A. The basis for the development of the new device was the secret prototype of the X-47, which was created as part of a project that was subsequently canceled. Northrop Grumman X-47B made its first autonomous landing aboard the USS George HW Bush (CVN-77) 19 on July 2013. The contractor changed its design to fit the tasks of refueling in the air.

The US Navy plans to purchase 72 Stingray units, allocating a total of about $ 13 billion for their purchase. This will ease the load on the F / A-18F Super Hornet fleet, which refuel other aircraft. The Pentagon intends to put the MQ-25A into operation in the 2024 year.

“Stingray” translates to “Stinging Slope”. It is noteworthy that this name was already worn by the American light tank "Stingray", developed at the beginning of the 1980's and produced for the needs of Thailand.

Comments

[Nycomed]

By the way, it was a very good idea, the main thing was on the surface. And only now "raised".

[Jurkovs]

A good idea for those who want to fight while sitting on the couch.

[GELEZNII_KAPUT]

Quote: Jurkovs

A good idea for those who want to fight while sitting on the couch.

So that's it!

[Nycomed]

Here I misunderstood something? Or maybe start running with clubs and slings? Here are the "real" wars!

[ultra]

And the idea is good, and about the price, I think, it’s wonderful at all. It’s a pity I’m not a Boeing shareholder.

[Lipchanin]

Yes, it’s unlikely that he can take a lot of fuel to refuel another plane

[Nycomed]

So "Hornet" fills from an external tank, which, as far as I can judge from the photo, is about the same in volume.

[Lipchanin]

Did not see....

[Lexus]

With KA-6, the story was the same - 4 small "cans" under the wing. And then all the fuel is inside. Stealth + increased autonomy = AUG's "arms" extended well. ILC can also "stick", because also use a hose-cone scheme. The Air Force is milking Pegasus with its barbell.

[Vadim237]

Cubes of 6 kerosene will definitely fit.

[Lipchanin]

May be. But to calculate it is necessary to know at least approximately the sizes

[akropin]

If we assume that the chevy suburban escort car, then the length is about 15 meters, and then, if not lazy, you can estimate the volume. Offhand about 10 cubic meters.

[Lipchanin]

Well it will be very approximate.
Length 15 Width 3 Thickness 2
Total 90 cubes

[Vadim237]

Do not forget that this aircraft also needs fuel, and this is a separate tank. As you calculated 90 cubic meters - the standard railway tank holds 60 cubic meters.

[dauria]

Offhand about 10 cubic meters.

Do not think so. A wing with a span of 10-15 m, an area of ​​no more than 20 -25 sq m. With a wing loading like a deck boat (370 kg per sq m), more than 9 tons of take-off weight will not work. So, offhand, you need an engine for 4 tons of thrust. And under the payload, throwing out the pilot and the unnecessary tripe maximum half. This is an exceptionally good result, in reality it is a third. So much for you and 3 tons of fuel will remain for "spill".

[akropin]

I'm not good at aerodynamics. The only thing that is noticeable is that the fuselage itself is not simple (but golden ) but it has a form for creating lift. Therefore, only talking about the wing area is not entirely true in my opinion.

[garri-lin]

6 tons? Exact Shornet with an empty tank refill.

[Graz]

The stinging ramp for the refueling name is not suitable, it was necessary to name Tipo

[Nycomed]

Beautiful, by the way: manatee or dugong!

[Rwmos]

And most importantly, they were quickly exterminated.

[Nycomed]

Not to be confused with Steller's Cow. Manatees and dugongs are doing pretty well these days.

[Rwmos]

Yeah. Endangered species. Great just feel. Do not confuse YOU. One and a half manatees hang out in the bay, they even forgot how to migrate because of the thermal power plant. Now they are heated with water

[Nycomed]

They live, and Glory to God! And not one and a half. But the inhabitants of "Russian America", at one time, staged such a massacre for a sea animal that those species that have survived until now, with proper protection, cannot restore their populations.

[vadim dok]

"STINGING SKAT" - this was invented by the author of the article! Normal translation - SKAT, without any spare! Any dictionary in your hands!

[Mavrikiy]

The stinging ramp unmanned tanker took off in the US

It is difficult to imagine a more idiotic name for a gas station, except for "Biting Ray", although "Wild Ray" remains free.

[Paranoid50]

Quote: Mavrikiy

stays free "Wild stingray"

Home, it seems, is also not busy.

[Letun]

Quote: Mavrikiy

It’s hard to imagine a more idiotic name for a tanker

It sounds stupid literally. And in English "Stingray" sounds fine.

[Errr]

At first I did not understand where he had an air intake.

It turned out that from above. Very original. Obviously, the Rolls-Royce AE 3007N can work with this, providing 4,5 tons of traction.

[Pavel57]

The idea is curious, especially for peacetime. If through satellites you can control the drone and provide a safe refueling, then it makes sense in this option refueling. Most likely it will be cheaper than specialized aircraft. So, it’s possible to saturate the tanker fleet faster with them, especially since we obviously have few of them.

[Vadim237]

And you can also make a heavy kamikaze drone with 5 tons of explosives on its base.

[Pavel57]

And how will a kamikaze drone differ from a medium-range missile?

[Vadim237]

Probably a much greater flight range and, accordingly, warhead - the rocket has a maximum ton.

[askort154]

To me, in general, the idea of ​​"refueling" in the air seems like an empty idea in real modern warfare. Drive through the deserts "barmaley" without air defense,
this one. And to use them against Russia or China is a utopia. Refuellers will be under special control. They will be destroyed first of all, on the ground or in the air. The combat mission will be thwarted unambiguously. And in the air the same. Shoot down one refueller, and his "kids" will be left without fuel. Either they will not return to the base, or they will fall on the territory of the "enemy". It turns out that it is necessary to accompany the "tanker" with a squadron of fighters and hide them well from satellites on the ground.

[Vadim237]

At a distance of 1000 kilometers from the coast over the oceans, we won’t be able to intercept them, we won’t get air defense, fighter aircraft will not fly so far.