Military Review

An image of a new attack drone based on the CP-10 trainer appeared on the web

71
An image of a new attack drone based on the CP-10 trainer appeared on the web

An image of a new promising heavy drone "Argument", developed on the basis of the CP-10 trainer aircraft, has appeared on the Web.


The image was presented at the presentation of LLC KB "Sovremenny aviation technology ", writes dambiev.livejournal.com.

Judging from the image, the drone is basically similar to the basic manned aircraft SR-10, it has the same characteristic forward-swept wings. The UAV is being developed by the Modern Aviation Technologies Design Bureau. Other details about the progress of development and at what stage the work on the UAV is not reported.

As follows from the presentation, the length of the drone is 9,7 meters, the wingspan is 8,4 meters. The declared payload is 680 kg with a maximum take-off weight of 3850 kg. The drone is supposed to be created subsonic, the maximum speed is 910 km / h, the cruising speed is 800 km / h. Service ceiling - 11500 m. Range with outboard tanks - 2100 km, range - 950 km, flight duration - 6 hours.



The development of a heavy attack drone "Argument" in the Design Bureau "Modern Aviation Technologies" (Design Bureau SAT) announced back in 2017. It was reported that the future UAV will be designed to break through the defense, intercept enemy drones and strike at ground targets.

Recall that the basic CP-10 aircraft was developed in the SAT Design Bureau on its own initiative and took off for the first time in 2015. It was planned that the aircraft with a forward-swept wing would be used for training pilots and taking part in competitions. However, the development project was not received.
Photos used:
https://dambiev.livejournal.com/
71 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. OgnennyiKotik
    OgnennyiKotik 27 February 2021 14: 34
    +13
    Older infographic, from 2017. Really interesting and promising project. Hopefully they will give him a green light.
    1. venik
      venik 27 February 2021 14: 45
      0
      Older infographic, from 2017. Really interesting and promising project. Hopefully they will give him a green light.
      ========
      good In my opinion, have you posted this infographic either today or yesterday (in an article about American UAVs - "slave")? Or I'm wrong?
      PS Actually, the idea is good! Cheaper than the "Hunter", but the performance characteristics, although worse than the "Hunter", but quite at the level!
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 27 February 2021 14: 48
        +4
        Yeah, there is also infographics from the news, in principle, this presentation was on Thursday. VO publishes such news with 2-3 days delay.
      2. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 27 February 2021 15: 01
        +1
        Quote: venik
        PS Actually, the idea is good!

        The main thing is that this machine can be made in a short time, it can be useful here and now. Reconnaissance aircraft, light attack aircraft, UAV and CD fighter guided to the fighter, etc., etc.
        It can be launched from a poorly prepared airfield, it will definitely take 3-4 FAB-250 or analogs. This is already a weighty argument and is definitely much better than the Su-24/25/34 being driven.

        Combined with the Probe, they would work perfectly. On the Probes, reconnaissance, AWACS and signal relaying. CP-10 direct strikes.
        1. dauria
          dauria 27 February 2021 15: 37
          +11
          Scout, light attack aircraft, UAV and CD fighter guided to the fighter, etc.


          Stop it. And so it is understandable. People invested their money, did not beg from the state, created an excellent training desk to replace the same Czech L-39. For once it turned out to be a worthwhile thing. After all, the influx in combination with a moderate backward sweep is its highlight, it does not lose control at large angles. And after all, the solution is elegant - on a larger aircraft it is difficult to do this - the torsional rigidity will gobble up all the advantages.
          And now they are forced to adapt it at least somewhere, except for the place - where it is really needed - the desk of initial training.
          One to one story of the Yak-30.
          1. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 27 February 2021 15: 42
            +6
            One does not cancel the other. We need both a training vehicle and a UAV. Due to the mass scale and unification, the entire production will be cheaper. CP-10 and AR-10 both need to be launched in series. As well as a pair of Yak-130 and Probe-1/2.
            1. dauria
              dauria 27 February 2021 15: 49
              +2
              We need both a training vehicle and a UAV.


              Want to make it cheaper? So why the hell are the UAVs the same standards of strength, resource, requirements for redundancy, laying and everything, everything that knits the creators of manned aircraft?
              The Americans quickly realized that an unmanned F-35 was an unaffordable luxury.
              1. OgnennyiKotik
                OgnennyiKotik 27 February 2021 16: 05
                +1
                Therefore, they take the F-5/18 as the base, and for the cheapest, limited reusable cruise missile base.
                1. NEOZ
                  NEOZ 28 February 2021 18: 28
                  0
                  Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                  Therefore, they take the F-5/18 as the base, and for the cheapest, limited reusable cruise missile base.

                  so F5 is a follower of a cruise missile (the same engines).
                  1. The eye of the crying
                    The eye of the crying 1 March 2021 11: 41
                    0
                    The F-5 is a descendant of a training vehicle, not a cruise missile.
                    1. NEOZ
                      NEOZ 1 March 2021 13: 35
                      0
                      Quote: Eye of the Crying
                      The F-5 is a descendant of a training vehicle, not a cruise missile.

                      initially the General Electric J85 engine was created for a cruise missile, and then ... then !!! The engine has increased its resource and began to be used in small jet aircraft, including the Northrop T-38 Talon, Northrop F-5, Canadair CT-114 Tutor, and the light attack aircraft Cessna A-37 Dragonfly.
                      1. The eye of the crying
                        The eye of the crying 1 March 2021 13: 38
                        0
                        Quote: NEOZ
                        initially the General Electric J85 engine was created for a cruise missile, and then ... then !!!


                        It doesn't matter what the engine was created for. It was about the F-5, and it is a descendant of a training aircraft.

                        Quote: NEOZ
                        and the light attack aircraft Cessna A-37 Dragonfly.


                        Also a "follower of a cruise missile"?
                      2. NEOZ
                        NEOZ 1 March 2021 13: 41
                        0
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        It doesn't matter what the engine was created for. It was about the F-5, and it is a descendant of a training aircraft.

                        whatever is convenient for you ..... I don't care what you think ....
  • Victor_B
    Victor_B 27 February 2021 14: 46
    -5
    Somehow our development of UAVs is going in other directions compared to "probable friends".
    The problems for the Hunter and the Argument are poorly visible from my sofa.
    They can turn out to be both breakthrough (lacking analogs) and dead-end branches of UAV development.
    On the other hand, there is Altius analogue of Global Hawk or Reaper (?), That is, the tasks are already well defined.
    1. Nestor Vlakhovski
      Nestor Vlakhovski 27 February 2021 15: 05
      +2
      The problems for the Hunter and the Argument are poorly visible from my sofa.
      The tasks there are painfully simple - the maximum possible replacement of manned tactical aviation.
      Loitering drones occupy completely different niches.
      1. The eye of the crying
        The eye of the crying 1 March 2021 11: 43
        0
        Quote: Nestor Vlahovski
        The tasks there are painfully simple - the maximum possible replacement of manned tactical aviation.


        Only for some reason the composition of manned tactical aviation is increasing, not decreasing.
        1. Nestor Vlakhovski
          Nestor Vlakhovski 1 March 2021 15: 01
          0
          Where is it growing?
          In comparison with the 80s, the number of tactical aviation has decreased by 4 times around the world, if not more.
          The end of the Cold War played a significant role, but drones also did their share.
          1. The eye of the crying
            The eye of the crying 1 March 2021 15: 18
            0
            Quote: Nestor Vlahovski
            Where is it growing?


            China, USA.

            Quote: Nestor Vlahovski
            Compared to the 80s


            And compared to the 40s ...
            1. Nestor Vlakhovski
              Nestor Vlakhovski 1 March 2021 15: 24
              0

              China, USA.
              This is not true. The number of tactical aviation in the foreseeable future will be reduced by a third.
              And compared to the 40s ...
              you can compare and 40, if you so want. Themselves on the "build-up" declared, no one pulled the tongue.
              1. The eye of the crying
                The eye of the crying 1 March 2021 16: 19
                0
                Quote: Nestor Vlahovski
                you can compare and 40, if you so want.


                You want to compare this with the times of 40 years ago.
                1. Nestor Vlakhovski
                  Nestor Vlakhovski 1 March 2021 17: 27
                  0
                  How do I know what I want if I haven't mentioned anything like that?
                  1. The eye of the crying
                    The eye of the crying 1 March 2021 19: 35
                    0
                    Quote: Nestor Vlahovski
                    How do I know what I want


                    Also to me, binomial of Newton. Once you do it, it means you want it.
    2. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 27 February 2021 15: 12
      +3
      Quote: Victor_B
      Somehow our development of UAVs is going in other directions compared to "probable friends".

      Nothing like this. Their bet is also on jet UAVs. Propeller-driven UAVs have reached their limit of perfection, they are good for certain tasks. But the future belongs to jet engines.


      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 27 February 2021 17: 13
        +2
        Both have a future. And both directions need to be developed. And also helicopter and multicopter.
  • Lipchanin
    Lipchanin 27 February 2021 14: 49
    +5
    About the development of a heavy attack drone "Argument"

    Named promising good
    Good luck in fine-tuning and putting into service. Moreover, the sounded characteristics are impressive. but what really and what they kept silent about ...
    the length of the drone is 9,7 meters, the wingspan is 8,4 meters. The declared payload is 680 kg with a maximum take-off weight of 3850 kg. The drone is supposed to be subsonic, with a maximum speed of 910 km / h and a cruising speed of 800 km / h. Service ceiling - 11500 m. Range with outboard tanks - 2100 km, range - 950 km, flight duration - 6 hours.
    1. Destiny
      Destiny 27 February 2021 14: 51
      +12
      I agree, the name is correct.
      1. Tektor
        Tektor 1 March 2021 14: 56
        0
        The name is as a name, but the mass-size is the most optimal for an impact drone. Therefore - what you need.
  • TerraSandera
    TerraSandera 27 February 2021 14: 52
    +1
    What can he do that is not already undergoing tests and other projects? 6 hours in my opinion is very small in comparison with others.
    1. Lipchanin
      Lipchanin 27 February 2021 15: 06
      +2
      Quote: TerraSandera
      What can he do that is not already undergoing tests and other projects?

      Well, who will tell you this. This is not a massive vehicle for sale to the public smile
      6 hours in my opinion is very small in comparison with others.

      Well, it probably depends on the tasks for which it was created
    2. Nestor Vlakhovski
      Nestor Vlakhovski 27 February 2021 15: 15
      +7
      It is built on a fairly cheap and already serial base.
      This alone makes it a good option in Russian realities.
      He also knows how to transonic flight, has a radar, therefore, unlike his patrolling counterparts, it is potentially suitable for air interception of simple targets and low-altitude breakthrough.
      I think there is a sense of development.
    3. Intruder
      Intruder 28 February 2021 13: 28
      0
      6 hours in my opinion is very small in comparison with others.
      why not enough, when cruising - 800 km / h and a radius - up to 950 km, quite normal parameters!
  • rocket757
    rocket757 27 February 2021 15: 20
    -3
    ... However, the development project did not receive

    And why not?
    If you look closely, this is again a weapon against the "Papuans" because wherever there is air defense, it is just a convenient target!
    Those. the question of price-efficiency in the first place.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 27 February 2021 15: 36
      +3
      That's just a great car against air defense. It is possible to implement a full-fledged stealth, low-altitude breakthrough, additional reconnaissance and strikes on radar and launchers.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 27 February 2021 15: 57
        0
        For starters .... and complete "stealth" is what it is, where is it and what is it with?
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 27 February 2021 16: 04
          0
          I don't know how to do full stealth, do you know? Here's how to make a full-fledged stealth more than understandable and calculated. If you want to see, above 3 photos posted
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 27 February 2021 16: 19
            +1
            In the photo, the aircraft was originally designed for the task of MINIMUM RADAR SECURITY, as it relates to an aircraft designed according to the standard method.
            If you look closely, there is no "full-fledged stealth", just "at hand" there is no suitable locator.
            Oh yes, it DOES NOT HAPPEN, this is all BUT ... science does not stand still and the "game" STEALTH - RADAR will go on forever. Most likely with varying degrees of success.
        2. Insurgent
          Insurgent 28 February 2021 08: 16
          +1
          Quote: rocket757
          а full stealth what is this

          Apparently it's like - lean stealth, just the opposite lol
      2. The eye of the crying
        The eye of the crying 1 March 2021 11: 44
        +1
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        It is possible to implement a full-fledged stealth


        Are there stealths with a forward-swept wing?
  • Aviator_
    Aviator_ 27 February 2021 15: 31
    +4
    Does this mean that as a training aircraft it did not take place, therefore it is being converted into a drone? Previously, I saw him several times over the LII airfield.
    1. Genry
      Genry 27 February 2021 17: 22
      +1
      Quote: Aviator_
      Does this mean that as a training aircraft it did not take place, therefore, it is being converted into a drone?

      While frozen.
      We need money for the production of several factory samples for static tests (now the flying ones are just prototypes).
      Launching production (and components), with little demand, is also a problem. If drones are added, the chances will increase significantly.
      1. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 27 February 2021 18: 40
        -1
        Clear. No money, but you hold on.
      2. Souchastnik
        Souchastnik 1 March 2021 12: 13
        +1
        If drones are added, the chances will increase significantly.

        I will diminish my optimism a little, but it was made under the AI-25 (Ukrainian). We have a problem with the engines. And only the lazy do not develop UAVs. Therefore, there is tough competition, and there is not enough money to buy everything. Again, there is such a word unification.
        Someone will win, either the best or the most connected and influential.
  • mvg
    mvg 27 February 2021 15: 35
    -4
    There is no radar station, we have not mastered the aiming container, how will it use high-precision weapons? The carrying capacity is negligible, taking into account the hanging tanks - none. The 39 L-1968 looks just as good.
    PS: No wonder the UBS project was closed. Plus the engines of Zaporozhye, it seems, have been replaced by imports.
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 27 February 2021 15: 58
      -1
      Ha, from it they also offer to implement "full stealth" ???
    2. Genry
      Genry 27 February 2021 20: 29
      0
      Quote: mvg
      The carrying capacity is negligible, taking into account the hanging tanks - none.

      You are from Russia ?
      Suspended tanks are used only for moving vehicles.

      You are fixated on the stupidity of Western aircraft manufacturers, where the customer is given the development of a lightweight aircraft with potentially high speed and maneuvering characteristics, and then it is disfigured with outboard tanks due to its small combat radius.
      1. mvg
        mvg 27 February 2021 20: 53
        -4
        on the stupidity of Western aircraft manufacturers,

        I looked at the sign of 4 classmates. Wed-10, Yak-130, L-39 and someone 4th. there on the Zaporozhye AI-25, the freak has a range of 1500. And the cruising speed is not 800, but 500. There is no radar, the height is the smallest of 4, 6000. It is only used as a kamikaze. There is no question of loitering.
        It is necessary to cram a radar, an aiming and navigation container, communication equipment into it, a camera is the minimum. And what remains?
        PS: And what do you have against the F-15/16/18, Rafale, Mirage III these are cars that have always won. Chinese J-10D. somehow it does not seem like stupidity.
        The whole world flies with tanks, only in the Russian Federation 12000 liters are poured into the plane
  • lopuhan2006
    lopuhan2006 27 February 2021 16: 55
    -1
    They want to add something to the stillborn project. A drone is effective when it is created initially as an unmanned one without loss of mass per crew.
    1. Genry
      Genry 27 February 2021 17: 44
      +2
      Quote: lopuhan2006
      A drone is effective when it is created initially as an unmanned one without loss of mass per crew.

      Compare the CP-10 and the AP-10 and you will see ... how much you were wrong.
      1. mvg
        mvg 27 February 2021 18: 44
        -1
        The drone has the main hardware ... it's not there. The project was stopped several times, but someone strongly lobbied for it. Out of despair, they did it and remade it. Nowhere in the world have forward-swept aircraft entered production.
        1. Genry
          Genry 27 February 2021 19: 50
          0
          Quote: mvg
          The drone has the main hardware ... it's not there.

          The pacer is. I see no obstacles ...
          Quote: mvg
          The project was stopped several times, but someone strongly lobbied it.

          He did not lobby but put sticks ... This reduced orders for the Yak-130. And there was a stupid hype about the MiG-AT, which is in the Yak-130 class, which has already blown.
          Quote: mvg
          Nowhere in the world have reverse-swept aircraft entered production.

          You are on the principle: "Nobody wears this anymore."
          1. The eye of the crying
            The eye of the crying 1 March 2021 11: 47
            0
            Quote: Genry
            The drone has the main hardware ... it's not there.

            The pacer is. I see no obstacles ...


            At least what the Pacer does at the other office.
            1. Genry
              Genry 1 March 2021 16: 15
              0
              Quote: Eye of the Crying
              what pacer does another office

              And do they make electronics?
              Can you say the same about composites?
              What about other components?
              1. The eye of the crying
                The eye of the crying 1 March 2021 16: 22
                0
                What are you talking about, where are the composites.
                1. Genry
                  Genry 1 March 2021 16: 38
                  +1
                  Quote: Eye of the Crying
                  What are you talking about, where are the composites.

                  It doesn't even reach you that the avionics are made by a third company, as well as composites, so this equipment can be installed on the AR-10.
                  1. The eye of the crying
                    The eye of the crying 1 March 2021 19: 40
                    0
                    Quote: Genry
                    It doesn't even reach you that the avionics are being made by a third company


                    You don't see the difference between hardware ("hardware") and components.

                    Quote: Genry
                    like composites


                    Composites are materials. And for an airplane, you need products made of these materials.
      2. lopuhan2006
        lopuhan2006 27 February 2021 18: 45
        0
        You probably don't understand. It was originally a manned aircraft, with its initially weighted structure for ekpage. Despite the fact that the glider does not imply a long stay in the air. Accordingly, under equal conditions, it will lose to the originally created unmanned vehicle. And there are nuances with the forward-swept design.
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 27 February 2021 19: 38
          0
          Despite the fact that the glider does not imply a long stay in the air. Maybe not the glider itself, but the volume of fuel in the tanks at maximum refueling.
          1. lopuhan2006
            lopuhan2006 27 February 2021 19: 49
            -2
            The gliding properties of a glider of such a design will be inferior to a straight wing. Why do you enter into an argument if you do not understand? I repeat once again that this is a stillborn project with absolutely illiterate management and project defense. Created for the Ukrainian engine, backward sweep for initial training! It's like TVS to replace An-2 with the same grief managers. And the option with a drone is just a desire to attach at least somewhere. Well, I think that Kronstadt and Kalashnikov will still not give him a move, which will be correct.
            1. Genry
              Genry 27 February 2021 20: 13
              +4
              Quote: lopuhan2006
              The gliding properties of a glider of such a design will be inferior to a straight wing.

              Will not. Aerodynamics is determined by the laminarity of air flows, and for a given wing, at low speeds, it is better than for a straight or swept wing, and at high speeds, it makes no difference.
              Quote: lopuhan2006
              Why do you enter into an argument if you do not understand?

              How do you know what I understand or don't understand?
              Quote: lopuhan2006
              I repeat once again that this is a stillborn project with absolutely illiterate management and project defense.

              This does not mean that the aircraft / drone itself is bad.
              Quote: lopuhan2006
              Created for the Ukrainian engine,

              There is an AI-55, though not yet serial.
              Quote: lopuhan2006
              backward sweep for basic training!

              Again you have a reality shift. Reverse - very good for takeoff and landing. The lower the speed and the higher the stability and safety.
              Quote: lopuhan2006
              It's like TVS to replace An-2 with the same grief managers.

              You are even worse. Simply utterly. And An-2 is just a completely outdated concept that does not fit into modern aviation rules in terms of dimensions.
              Quote: lopuhan2006
              Well, I think that Kronstadt and Kalashnikov will still not give him a move, which will be correct.

              What do you have to do with them? Working out your relationship with the press ???
              1. Intruder
                Intruder 28 February 2021 13: 38
                0
                Again you have a reality shift. Reverse - very good for takeoff and landing. The lower the speed and the higher the stability and safety.
                if, in a heap to collect the advantages and disadvantages of the "reverse":
                The reverse sweep is devoid of a significant part of the disadvantages that are generated by the straight sweep of the wing. In addition, the reverse shape of the wings reduces the amount of fuel consumed, improves maneuverability by 15%, reduces the acceleration distance of the car by almost 34% during takeoff and by 33% the braking distance of the car during landing, increases the flight range, increases the stability of the aircraft, and reduces the risk of the car falling into corkscrew. Finally, the reverse sweep reduces the turning radius by 14%.
                The problem with backward sweep is that these wings are very fragile. Until the end of the 1970s, all of the above existed only on paper, since it was not possible to create a sufficiently strong wing with a forward sweep without a critical mass gain of the part. This changed only as a result of the emergence of modern composite materials in the early 1980s.

                The brightest representatives: Kh-29 and S-37 "Berkut", but not everything was smooth with them: beyond the Ocean - alas, the designers faced a new unsolvable problem - a strong shaking of the aircraft during the flight. As a result, the project was closed by the Pentagon ...
                Soviet designers tried to solve the shaking problem with the use of tilting toe technology, creating their own C-37 "Berkut". However, at first, the collapse of the Soviet Union prevented the testing of the car, then the project was almost closed. Flight tests were resumed only in 1997. Unfortunately, the proposed solution did not allow aircraft with reverse swept wings to be free from shaking. It is for this reason that, despite its many advantages, this form of design is still not used in the Air Force.
                1. Genry
                  Genry 28 February 2021 15: 40
                  +2
                  Quote: Intruder
                  Unfortunately, the proposed solution did not allow aircraft with reverse swept wings to be free from shaking.

                  The SR-10 does not have such a problem, since the aircraft is not supersonic. Shaking occurs only at high angles of attack, i.e. when the speed dropped to a state close to a spin. This is positive for this aircraft, as a warning for novice pilots.
                  1. Intruder
                    Intruder 28 February 2021 16: 15
                    0
                    The SR-10 does not have such a problem, since the aircraft is not supersonic. Shaking occurs only at high angles of attack, i.e. when the speed dropped to a state close to a spin.
                    this is the main drawback of this aerodynamic scheme and therefore they are in no hurry to use it in manned aircraft .. by the way!
                    1. Genry
                      Genry 28 February 2021 17: 03
                      +1
                      Quote: Intruder
                      this is the main drawback of this aerodynamic scheme and therefore they are in no hurry to use it in manned aircraft .. by the way!

                      You have a formal answer.
                      Are you talking about supersonic or loss of stability?
                      Only combat aircraft fly at supersonic speed - a very small part of aviation. And the shaking, with the loss of stability, in almost all aircraft (some fall apart) and for the SR-10 is artificial (by the way, his name is "Berkutenok").
                      1. Intruder
                        Intruder 1 March 2021 01: 08
                        0
                        Are you talking about supersonic or loss of stability?
                        in the context of the project above, of course not, there are subsonic speeds and only ...
                        Only combat aircraft fly at supersonic speed - a very small part of aviation.
                        and then they fly, they are mainly at cruising and below, and supersonic on afterburner directly, use ...
                        And shaking, with a loss of stability, in almost all aircraft (some fall apart) and for the SR-10 is artificial
                        well .., loss of stability, not always - the operating parameter of the aerodynamic configuration of the apparatus !? SR-10, a training vehicle and it needs this parameter, but for combat and other things ..., not always and not in everything it is useful, somehow !?
                      2. Genry
                        Genry 1 March 2021 16: 30
                        +1
                        Quote: Intruder
                        loss of stability, not always - the operating parameter of the aerodynamic configuration of the apparatus !?
                        ...
                        but fighting and other ..., not always and not in everything he is useful, somehow !?

                        How is this not a working parameter?
                        Without knowing the buckling characteristics, you will not know at what speed it is safe to take off and land. And these speeds are the minimum allowable and determine the required runway length, which has a very high construction and maintenance cost.
                      3. Intruder
                        Intruder 1 March 2021 18: 13
                        0
                        How is this not a working parameter?
                        I'm talking about circuitry, you are now talking about threshold values ​​(minimum allowable, that is ...) and not about piloting, in VP-modes, something like that!
                        PS In short: you tell me about the rapids, and I tell you about the roads ... (I hope no offense) !?
                      4. Genry
                        Genry 1 March 2021 18: 45
                        0
                        Quote: Intruder
                        and I tell you about the roads ..

                        You read your comments (clearing your memory a little) and realize that you are writing vaguely, with a lot of parasitic words and signs - this is where the meaning gets confused.
                        Quote: Intruder
                        I hope no offense) !?

                        I wasn't trying to offend you, so ... drinks
                      5. Intruder
                        Intruder 1 March 2021 19: 57
                        0
                        Okay, maybe I climbed the wrong tack on the wrong tack ... drinks
                        But, there is such a small ..., backward sweep (as well as the "aeroelastic wing", however ...) all the same exactly - the aerodynamic scheme, which at the moment, almost nowhere is used in civil and military aviation, only experimental and educational -training maximum, cars !?
  • Genry
    Genry 27 February 2021 19: 57
    +2
    Quote: lopuhan2006
    You probably don't understand.

    But you are completely different.
    Quote: lopuhan2006
    It was originally a manned aircraft, with its initially weighted structure for ekpage.

    Show that in AR-10 is the same as CP-10 (except for the wings).
    Quote: lopuhan2006
    Despite the fact that the glider does not imply a long stay in the air.

    You will freeze him on the ground, and drive him into battle ...
    Quote: lopuhan2006
    Accordingly, under equal conditions, it will lose to the originally created unmanned vehicle.

    This is if you will not use it for flights.
    Quote: lopuhan2006
    And there are nuances with the forward-swept design.

    There are no obstacles, but there are a lot of advantages.
  • iouris
    iouris 27 February 2021 18: 30
    0
    Yes, this is a typical UAV.
  • APASUS
    APASUS 28 February 2021 13: 02
    0
    The reverse sweep of the wing for the UAV does not carry any load, but if we have another complex of UAVs for striking, then I am only FOR