In China, tested a new heavy three-engine drone

In China, tested a new heavy three-engine drone

China has tested the latest heavy three-engine unmanned aerial vehicle. The tests took place at one of the airfields in the south-west of the country on January 16 this year. This is reported by Chinese media.


According to the publication, the drone was developed by the Chinese company Tengoen Technology (also known as Tengdun), founded in 2016. Moreover, this is the second drone developed by the company, earlier it launched into mass production the heavy UAV TB-001 Scorpion.

The new Chinese drone is a three-engine aircraft, built on a two-fuselage scheme. The wingspan is 20 m, length - 10, height - 3,3 m. The maximum take-off weight reaches 3200 kg, while the drone can carry a payload of over one and a half tons.

According to the declared characteristics, the maximum drone speed is more than 300 km / h, the maximum ceiling is 9,5 km, and the flight duration is at least 35 hours. For take-off of a drone with maximum load, a runway less than 500 meters long is required.


According to the developers, this drone was originally developed for civilian use, but the Chinese military has already paid attention to it. The drone can be used to perform a wide range of military tasks.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

44 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67 18 January 2020 14: 10 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    while the drone can carry a payload weighing more than one and a half tons.
    Well, how many explosive and murderous things can you hang on it?
    1. LiSiCyn 18 January 2020 14: 18 New
      • 9
      • 4
      +5
      The Chinese are developing very fast what . Intelligence, seen at the level of working.
      Quote: svp67
      Well, how many explosive and murderous things can you hang on it?

      Why, the supply of the "front line" without the participation of crews. Band less than 500 m. You can land on any track.
      1. svp67 18 January 2020 16: 20 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: LiSiCyn
        Why, the supply of the "front line" without the participation of crews.

        For this
        flight duration - not less than 35 hours.
        clearly unnecessary characteristic, and a helicopter UAV is better to use
        1. LiSiCyn 18 January 2020 17: 01 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          Quote: svp67
          flight duration - not less than 35 hours.

          This suggests that there can be many flights without service.
          Quote: svp67
          Yes, and a helicopter UAV is better to use

          I agree "turntable" easier with sites. But delivery speed is less. Yes, and roominess, too.
          In general, there are plenty of use cases, there would be a base.
    2. TermNachTer 18 January 2020 15: 34 New
      • 10
      • 0
      +10
      Vague doubts torment me. With a weight of 3,2 tons - a payload of 1,5 tons. What remains on fuel, glider, etc.? Three engines, definitely "eat" well.
      1. Oquzyurd 18 January 2020 16: 48 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        "With a weight of 3,2 tons - payload 1,5 tons" This is impossible. With a total weight of 3.2 tons, the payload cannot be more than 700-800 kg., Especially since there are 3 engines.
        1. BARKAS 18 January 2020 17: 25 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Fuel could be counted as part of the payload.
          1. TermNachTer 18 January 2020 17: 30 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Since when did fuel begin to be considered a payload? These are two mutually exclusive elements. You can take more than one, but you will have to sacrifice others. The Chinese obviously lied, and quite a bit.
            1. hydrox 19 January 2020 04: 58 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              So, it’s also 35 hours in the air - some extraordinary characteristics of the device!
              Percussion, cargo or reconnaissance device?
              1. svp67 19 January 2020 09: 00 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Quote: hydrox
                Percussion, cargo or reconnaissance device?

                "Chinese" laughing
              2. xGibSoNx 19 January 2020 21: 12 New
                • 0
                • 3
                -3
                Strategic-purpose cargo, shock reconnaissance UAV of China's intergalactic fleet!
        2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Oquzyurd 18 January 2020 16: 17 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Turkish drone "Akinci" is more real in terms of performance characteristics, more beautiful, and technically better equipped, from equipment to weapons. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkHQvxJv31E
      1. svp67 18 January 2020 16: 22 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Oquzyurd
        Turkish "Akinci" drone is more real in terms of performance characteristics, more beautiful, and technically better equipped, from equipment to weapons

        With one clarification, the engines on it are already considered "Chinese" ... and this can change a lot
        1. Oquzyurd 18 January 2020 16: 39 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          2 days ago, the Turks launched their engines on the series. Soon, drones from the Bayraktar series (Bayraktar-TB2 and Akinci from Baykar) and Anka (Anka and Aksungur from TAI) will mainly fly on local engines. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCu70Of3y2Y
          I add that they say that they can, if necessary, allow engines for different UAVs in different weight categories.
        2. TermNachTer 18 January 2020 17: 32 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          The engines on it may be Motor Sich. They have already put it on Bayraktar, it is undergoing tests. There was a Turkish delegation - they walked around the factory, watched, agreed on something.
    4. shinobi 19 January 2020 01: 36 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Yes, in general, it’s not very much by modern standards. For reconnaissance, yes, it’s very good. For targeted attacks, like the American ones where there is no air defense as a concept. For something serious, in my uninformed opinion, strike UAVs are generally of little use. It’s rather
      weapon of terror.
  2. Gardamir 18 January 2020 14: 10 New
    • 17
    • 8
    +9
    Just think experienced, it is now not fashionable. We must promise to launch it by 2030, and then promise the promise, but the people are so happy.
    1. Kleber 18 January 2020 14: 14 New
      • 16
      • 4
      +12
      You do not confuse China with Russia. There, for such promises, the official will be drowned in a sewer.
      1. Livonetc 18 January 2020 14: 26 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        No connection.
        This is a real project of a commercial company engaged in development and production.
        1. sabakina 18 January 2020 15: 22 New
          • 5
          • 2
          +3
          Speak no? Chubais would have chopped his head there every day with his Rusnano! wink
      2. D16
        D16 19 January 2020 09: 06 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        You do not confuse China with Russia. There, for such promises, the official will be drowned in a sewer.

        Something for the ARJ-21 has not yet drowned anyone. However, for the C-919 it’s also time to drown someone:
        https://www.aex.ru/news/2020/1/17/207225/ laughing
  3. Piramidon 18 January 2020 14: 14 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    The new Chinese drone is a three-engine aircraft, built on a two-fuselage scheme. The wingspan is 20 m, length - 10, height - 3,3 m.

    If this trend towards the enlargement of drones continues, I won’t be surprised to see, over time, a strategic strike drone comparable to the Tu-95 and B-52. winked
    1. Gardamir 18 January 2020 14: 17 New
      • 4
      • 3
      +1
      Rather, it is a tendency to replace all dense aircraft with unmanned aerial vehicles.
  4. Old26 18 January 2020 14: 19 New
    • 12
    • 1
    +11
    The new Chinese drone is a three-engine aircraft, built on a two-fuselage scheme.

    Or maybe all the same according to the "two-beam scheme", but not the "two-fuselage" ??
    1. Piramidon 18 January 2020 14: 41 New
      • 0
      • 6
      -6
      Quote: Old26
      Or maybe all the same according to the "two-beam scheme", but not the "two-fuselage" ??

      Do not find fault with the little things that are constantly characteristic of non-professional bloggers. After all, both you and everyone here perfectly understood what was at stake.
  5. Malevich 18 January 2020 14: 21 New
    • 5
    • 6
    -1
    What kind of authoritative Chinese publication is there, I suppose, I often hear links to a certain SOHU. It would be interesting to see in their publications about this drone:
    1. Did they promise his appearance or simply confronted a fait accompli?
    2. If its appearance was announced in advance, did it meet the stated deadline?
    3. Anyway, read the Chinese comments on this issue, who are they looking at as leaders and outsiders in this matter?
    1. nm76 18 January 2020 14: 24 New
      • 9
      • 7
      +2
      Legislators of fashion in terms of unmanned aerial vehicles Israel and the United States, so if there is a comparison, then not with us)))
      1. zyablik.olga 18 January 2020 14: 42 New
        • 6
        • 3
        +3
        Quote: nm76
        Trendsetters in terms of unmanned aerial vehicles Israel and the United States

        The Chinese have far surpassed the Israelis in many ways.
        Chinese jet drones
        https://topwar.ru/163725-kitajskie-bespilotnye-letatelnye-apparaty-s-reaktivnymi-dvigateljami.html
        1. Zeev Zeev 18 January 2020 15: 50 New
          • 3
          • 7
          -4
          When the Chinese begin to sell their UAVs to Russia, the USA and the EU, but let's talk about how they overtook Israel.
  6. Dikson 18 January 2020 14: 28 New
    • 8
    • 10
    -2
    Well, a Chinese even looks like an airplane, not a plywood box, like some products of our UAV builders ...
  7. Last centurion 18 January 2020 14: 30 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    the future is for drones - no need to carry the carcass of the pilot, the cockpit, and everything related to life support. and this is an overdrive of useless mass. certainly in agriculture and the transportation of goods for sure
  8. Old26 18 January 2020 14: 55 New
    • 11
    • 1
    +10
    Quote: Piramidon
    Quote: Old26
    Or maybe all the same according to the "two-beam scheme", but not the "two-fuselage" ??

    Do not find fault with the little things that are constantly characteristic of non-professional bloggers. After all, both you and everyone here perfectly understood what was at stake.

    I don’t find fault, Stepan. These are not trifles. And you perfectly understand that these are two different aerodynamic schemes. For many, it doesn’t matter at all that the two-beam scheme is the two-fuselage one. But the resource is still military-technical, and implies at least accuracy in the definitions.
    1. Magog 18 January 2020 20: 11 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      I agree with Vladimir. In the case when it is necessary to make a special emphasis on the "two-body" scheme, and the concepts are blurred - what should I do? Then someone made comments about the "number" and "number": the same vague concept, is found everywhere and even in the scientific literature. It annoys me. “Zero” and “zero” - where is the number (icon), and where is the number? "Order" instead of "about", "approximately", "approximately", ... - the concept from school mathematics (8th grade) "real number order" is forgotten. Etc. I would like to preserve the culture of our language and concepts!
  9. knn54 18 January 2020 14: 56 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    TODAY, Chinese developers and industry are able to create and mass-produce ALL types of drones. In operation (including outside the PRC) more than a hundred aircraft.
  10. Krasnoyarsk 18 January 2020 16: 05 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    = The new Chinese drone is a three-engine aircraft, built according to the two-fuselage scheme. =
    Well, where are the two fuselages? Two tail booms - yes, but not two fuselages.
  11. Angrybeard 18 January 2020 16: 05 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    I wonder why until now such drones do not carry parcels, mail, fresh fruit, say to the Far North. In theory, this is much cheaper than conventional air delivery, namely it is used, and from there on small settlements by rivers in the summer, by road in winter. UAV eats less, does not require insurance salaries for 2-3 pilots, etc. And for smaller settlements, smaller drones can be used, on the scheme of the convection plane, all the more such are being developed. And not a helicopter on the tundra.
    1. Tibidokh 18 January 2020 16: 25 New
      • 1
      • 3
      -2
      And they forgot about the airships ...
    2. Mityay65 18 January 2020 16: 34 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Angrybeard
      why so far such drones do not carry parcels, mail, fresh fruit, say to the Far North.

      Why only to the Far North? Now they are going, and not the first year, to develop drones delivering goods from Pyaterochka, mail, spare parts, etc. Certain successes have been made in this direction. The richest people in the world are investing a lot of money in these technologies. While it is up to the development of propulsion systems, energy storage and artificial intelligence.
      1. Angrybeard 18 January 2020 17: 25 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Because delivering a drone with the same Amazon has already been worked out, it’s kind of like, they learned how to deliver pizza somewhere right on the lawn near the house, and this is not such a task, but I'm talking about a large board flight Krasnodar - the north with a load of fruits and vegetables there, fresh fish and venison to Moscow on a return flight. I saw a plot where blackened bananas cost some basic money in northern stores, because apparently the transport logistics included both an airplane and a helicopter
  12. Saxahorse 18 January 2020 22: 25 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    A completely useless trough. Apparently another Chinese company is trying to get a piece of government procurement. Three engines, and even screw ones, is an obvious huge minus. The Chinese are full of much more interesting UAVs.
    1. Dikson 19 January 2020 07: 36 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Minus, you say? Huge? With a takeoff weight of 3200 - more than 1500 payload? Such a good minus ...
      1. Saxahorse 19 January 2020 18: 36 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        And what does the load have to do with it? The airship will lift even more. An UAV is a consumable; China has a CH-4 and Wing Loong (aka Pterodactyl) as a strike, and Chengdu Xianglong, an impressive analogue of the US RQ-4 Global Hawk, is a long-range reconnaissance aircraft.
        Take-off weight 7500 kg
        Top speed 750 km / h
        Flight altitude 18 300 m
        Flight range up to 7000 km

        And how does the new three-engine shine in comparison with them? Cost of operation?
        1. xGibSoNx 19 January 2020 21: 15 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          Chengdu Xianglong, an impressive analogue of the state-owned RQ-4 Global Hawk
          Let's clarify! Paper! For he did not fly further than polygons.
  13. Chingachguk 18 January 2020 22: 37 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    In tse toy !!!!! Well this is the skills of contraband fat can be taken !!!!