Military Review

Project Condor: death from heaven

71
Project Condor: death from heaven

As we said earlier in the article "The problem of the high cost of precision-guided munitions and ways to solve it", the Russian special operation in Ukraine revealed the highest need for the armed forces of the Russian Federation (RF Armed Forces) in high-precision weapons. The problem is its high cost, limited volumes and long production cycles.


By creating special kits, a number of unguided munitions can be converted into high-precision ones, for example, such measures can be implemented in relation to free-falling bombs, artillery shells, unguided aviation rockets (NAR) and shells of multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS). Such samples, although inferior to products originally manufactured as high-precision ones, are much cheaper for the armed forces and can potentially be manufactured in larger quantities.

But, as world experience shows, on the basis of unguided products it is possible to create only high-precision weapons of limited range, of the order of fifty and a maximum of one hundred kilometers, and in the face of active opposition from the enemy, whose armed forces are equipped with modern anti-aircraft missile systems (3RK), as well as counter-battery systems combat and high-precision weapons of comparable range (50-100 km), there is a need to saturate the armed forces with inexpensive high-precision weapons, the flight range of which allows them to be used outside the reach of air defense systems and enemy counter-battery weapons.

Let's designate the project of a promising long-range guided gliding munition (UPB-BD) as "Condor".


The Andean condor can soar in the air for hours without moving its wings. Image by wikipedia.org

Guidance and control system


First of all, the UPB-BD "Condor" must be equipped with the most inexpensive guidance equipment, which is guidance using the signals of the global navigation satellite system (GLONASS).


The creation of an independent global navigation satellite system has become one of the most important achievements of the Russian Federation. Image by wikipedia.org

Wouldn't such a high-precision weapon be able to hit moving targets? Yes, but much more expensive cruise and ballistic missiles of the Kalibr and Iskander types do not have such an opportunity.

Can GLONASS signals be jammed by means of electronic warfare (EW)? It is possible, but most likely, only in a very limited area, at least in Ukraine, we cannot “turn off” the American GPS satellite navigation system, the armed forces of Ukraine (AFU) use GPS-guided weapons without any problems.

Will the enemy disable GLONASS satellites? But it will be a completely different war. In this case, we will also disable GPS satellites, and the big question is who will be worse (it will be worse for the United States and its allies, since they are much more tied to high-tech weapons than the RF Armed Forces).

In general, for a huge number of local conflicts, which include the special operation in Ukraine, GLONASS guidance on precision-guided Condor-type munitions is quite enough. And, in fact, there is no alternative to satellite guidance for inexpensive solutions, all other options are either much more expensive or not applicable to long-range precision weapons.


Receiving module GLONASS/GPS 1K-181. Image by wikipedia.org

The guidance and power control system will be powered by lithium-manganese dioxide (Li-MnO2) or lithium-thionyl chloride (Li-SOCl2) batteries, which have a long service life and resistance to low temperatures.

Engine


With the engine, everything is simple - at the UPB-BD "Condor" we will completely abandon it. A turbojet engine (TRD) is very expensive. We either don’t have inexpensive, highly economical small-sized aircraft engines, both gasoline and electric, or there are very few of them, even for reusable UAVs. Spending them on disposable ammo is just wasteful.

How do we then get a range of hundreds of kilometers?

Chassis


The key to obtaining long range in the Condor project is the use of a glide body with a high level of aerodynamic sophistication and a carrier that provides adequate glide range and mass release of glide ammunition.

The planning range is determined by the aerodynamic quality of the aircraft. With an aerodynamic quality equal to 30, an aircraft, planning from a height of 1 kilometer, will fly 30 kilometers horizontally. For example, the American U-2 strategic reconnaissance aircraft has an aerodynamic quality of 28 units, the Soviet Myasishchev M-17 and M-55 aircraft have approximately 30 units, and the German Schleicher ASH-25 glider has as many as 60 units.


Schleicher ASH-25 glider. Image by wikipedia.org

The lift-to-drag ratio shows the glide distance without taking into account the influence of the wind. It can be assumed that in order to obtain a flight range of a gliding munition of the order of 100-200 kilometers when dropped from a height of about ten kilometers, its body must have an aerodynamic quality of at least 30 units.

Presumably, the body of the promising UPB-BD "Kondor", in fact, structurally closer to the kamikaze UAV than to an air bomb, will be a high-wing aircraft with a large elongation wing. The need to transport a large number of UPB-BD "Kondor" will most likely lead to the implementation in its design of drop-down wings, but rather, a rotary monowing that unfolds after the ammunition is dropped.


The concept of UPB-BD "Condor" with a straight rotary wing of high elongation. Image made by the author

The need to minimize the mass and labor intensity of manufacturing UPB-BD "Kondor" involves the use of polymer or composite materials, while the latter usually have a higher cost, but also greater bending strength, a better weight / strength ratio.


This is what the manufacture of a composite body on a radial weaving machine might look like.

Presumably, the optimal solution for the manufacture of plastic skin for the hull and wing of the UPB-BD "Condor" will be the use of injection molding machines and extrusion machines capable of blowing polymer products of complex shape in large quantities. The resulting blanks after minimal machining will go to the assembly site.

It is unlikely that it will be possible to achieve the necessary structural strength only due to the supporting body. Most likely, both the hull and the wing will require an internal frame. The best solution would be to get such a frame in the same way as the hulls and wings - something like spars and / or a honeycomb structure of complex shape. If the plastic does not provide the necessary rigidity, then the solution may be the creation of an aluminum frame, and to reduce the cost, its production can be carried out from industrial solutions (corners, profiles) used in the civilian market.


An injection molding machine (top, left), an extrusion machine (right), and an extruded aluminum profile (bottom, left). Image by wikipedia.org

It must be understood that the UPB-BD "Kondor" is not intended for use from tactical aircraft, this class of weapons requires a specific carrier, which we will discuss below.

Warhead


Of course, in the UPB-BD "Condor" it will not be possible to install a warhead comparable to those that are placed in long-range cruise and ballistic missiles, that is, about 300-500 kilograms. However, as practice shows, high-precision weapons perfectly manage with warheads of a much smaller mass, compensating for the power of the explosion with the accuracy of the hit.

It can be assumed that the mass of the warhead of the UPB-BD "Kondor" should be about 10-50 kilograms, which is approximately in the range of masses of the warhead of a 122-mm Grad MLRS projectile and a fragmentation projectile of 152 mm caliber. Potentially, several sizes of UPB-BD "Condor" can be created, for example, with warheads weighing 10 kilograms, 20 kilograms, 50 kilograms, and so on.


Model of the incendiary warhead 9N510 of the 122 mm caliber projectile for the Grad MLRS. Image by wikipedia.org

Transport and launch container (TPK)


Due to the specific shape of the Condor UPB-BD, it is not rational to use standard cylindrical or rectangular TPKs for its storage, since in this case most of the container will “carry air”.

Presumably, it is better to use not a sealed TPK, but something like an external frame TPK exoskeleton, to which the Condor UPB-BD will be attached during transportation, in order to prevent damage, especially to long and thin wings. In it, it must be dropped from the carrier.


The concept of the UPB-BD "Condor" with a folded (turned along the body) wing in a frame-type TPK. Image made by the author

After the drop, a small parachute opens in the tail section of the TPK, stabilizing it in a position close to vertical. Then the locks are opened, after which the UPB-BD "Condor" falls out of the TPK under the influence of gravity and heads towards its target.

Transportation of UPB-BD "Condor" in TPK-exoskeletons should be carried out in group sealed containers, in rows, on racks.

If practice shows the need for a full-fledged sealed TPK, then, presumably, it can be made of plastic with internal stiffeners or fiberglass winding and will have a square or trapezoidal section.


The concept of the UPB-BD "Condor" with a folded (turned along the body) wing in a sealed TPK. Image made by the author

Weight and size characteristics


What should be the weight and dimensions of the UPB-BD "Condor" for the delivery of warheads weighing 10-50 kilograms?

The maximum mass of the aforementioned German glider Schleicher ASH-25 is 750 kilograms, empty - 478 kilograms, that is, 272 kilograms of payload - this is more than a third of the maximum weight. The ASH-25 is almost nine meters long and has a wingspan of almost twenty-six meters.

For a payload, that is, a warhead weighing 50 kilograms, the maximum mass of the Condor UPB-BD will be about 150–200 kilograms. Proportionately reducing the dimensions, we get a hull length of about two meters with a wingspan of about five meters.

Thus, in the transport and launch container, the UPB-BD "Condor" will have dimensions of 6x0,5x0,5 meters, that is, somewhere at the level of the dimensions of a "real" cruise missile, only it will weigh an order of magnitude less. With a reduction in the mass of the warhead, for example, to 10-20 kilograms, the maximum mass of the UPB-BD "Condor" will be less than 100 kilograms, and the dimensions in the TPK will be reduced to approximately 3x0,25x0,25 meters.

In reality, the mass and dimensions of the UPB-BD "Kondor" may be larger, since the relationship with a change in the mass / dimension of the airframe may be indirect, but by varying the mass of the warhead in the range from 10 to 50 kilograms, as well as the dimensions of the airframe, it is highly likely that to a minimum (weight about 100 kg, dimensions in TPK 3x0,25x0,25 meters) and maximum (weight about 200 kg, dimensions 6x0,5x0,5 meters).

There is a possibility that it will be difficult and expensive to implement folding wings / monowing - there will be failures at the drop and deployment stage. Then a more appropriate solution would be to use a fixed wing - in the warhead mass range of 10–20 kilograms, and with a total width of the wing / wings of about three meters, this is quite acceptable. In this case, TPK as such is not required at all. The UPB-BD "Kondor" will be placed sequentially with a slight offset in special cassettes that will occupy an entire "floor" in the carrier's weapons compartment.


The concept of UPB-BD "Condor" with a clumsy wing. Image made by the author


Depending on the final shape of the hull and dimensions, various options for increasing the density of the UPB-BD "Kondor" in the Il-76B weapons compartment can be considered. Image made by the author

It remains to choose the appropriate carrier for the UPB-BD "Condor".

Carrier


The specifics of the UPB-BD "Condor" excludes the use of tactical aircraft for its release - this product is not intended for high overloads and, most likely, it cannot be placed on an external sling. Yes, and it makes no sense - too little UPB-BD "Condor" will raise the same Su-34 / Su-35S, and the cost of an hour of its flight will largely "zero" measures to reduce the cost of the ammunition itself.

The same applies to missile-carrying bombers - it is impossible to carry on an external sling, it makes no sense to adapt the UPB-BD "Condor" to the internal compartments. We have few missile bombers, let them deliver more serious weapons.

It can be assumed that the best option for dropping the UPB-BD "Condor" will be modified Il-76 transport aircraft, we will conditionally designate them as Il-76B.


Il-76 aircraft have an impressive cargo compartment. Image by wikipedia.org

Of course, transport aircraft of the Il-76 type of the RF Armed Forces are always in short supply, as well as vehicles based on them - tankers and AWACS aircraft. However, at present, new production lines seem to have been installed, on which it is planned to increase the annual production of IL-76 of various modifications to 12 units per year. Thus, it is quite realistic to allocate two to four aircraft for conversion into UPB-BD "Condor" carriers, and if the complex proves itself positively, then eight to twelve aircraft.

What re-equipment of the IL-76 will be required?

The Il-76 transport aircraft has a cargo compartment with dimensions of 20x3,45x3,4 meters (in general, the length of the cargo compartment is 24,5 meters, but from it there is a 4,5 meter ramp), a load capacity of 28–60 tons, a flight range with a payload of 40 tons - 6 500 kilometers. The entire space of the cargo compartment, also known as the weapons compartment, will be occupied by a storage and discharge system, which is a multi-tiered rack with pusher conveyors placed in parallel.

With the dimensions of the TPK 6x0,5x0,5 meters, the converted cargo compartment of the Il-76B will fit 108 UPB-BD "Condor" (six in a row, six in height, three in depth). At the same time, the mass of all 108 UPB-BD "Condor" will be about twenty tons. Even if the mass of equipment for the release and storage of the UAV is the same, it will still be almost a third less than the maximum carrying capacity of the original Il-76.

Reducing the mass and dimensions will lead to a corresponding increase in the number of UPB-BD "Kondor" placed on board the modified IL-76B (non-linearly, since the mass of the storage and discharge system will increase simultaneously due to the larger number of racks).

For a variant with a clumsy wing about three meters wide, with a cassette placement in the Il-76B, approximately 60-120 Condor UPB-BDs will fit, depending on their final dimensions and layout method in the compartment.


This is how the UPB-BD Condor variant with a clumsy wing can be placed, only the rack will be oriented vertically, and the ammunition in it will also be located sequentially. Image by wikipedia.org

The release speed of the UPB-BD "Kondor" will be determined only by restrictions due to the possibility of their collision in the air at the initial stage of the flight. For example, when resetting the UPB-BD "Condor" with an interval of 1-3 seconds, it will take about 2-7 minutes to fully eject the ammunition load.

The transportation and release of ammunition from transport aircraft has been worked out for a long time by various enterprises in various countries of the world.


Presentation of the cruise missile launch system from the Rapid Dragon transport aircraft from Lockheed Martin


This option is quite applicable to the launch of the UPB-BD "Condor". Image from Lockheed Martin presentation

The target coordinates can be programmed using the Zigbee wireless industrial protocol right inside the weapons compartment, and the electronics will be activated after the contacts are mechanically closed when the Il-76B is installed in the weapons compartment.

Price issue


When creating the UPB-BD "Condor", it is necessary to be guided by the minimization of cost and the maximum use of civil and industrial components. This will require the RF Armed Forces to make decisions about what they are willing to sacrifice in order to be able to deliver massive strikes against the enemy at the lowest possible cost. What can you refuse? For example, from storage at low temperatures - yes, UPB-BD "Condor" will have to be stored at temperatures down to -20, or even -10 degrees Celsius. You can refuse resistance to the damaging factors of a nuclear explosion - this is a weapon of local conflicts, from overloads, excessive vibrations and much more.

What do we get in return?

The use of civilian/industrial components will potentially reduce the cost of the Condor UPB-BD to the level of 3–000 US dollars at the current exchange rate. This is an expert assessment based on the cost of civilian UAVs, electronics, information about the possibility and cost of manufacturing polymer products by extrusion, and other factors.

For example, we can consider the use of middle-class smartphones in the design of the Condor UPB-BD - a modern smartphone, even a middle class, is several times more powerful than the on-board computer of the Curiosity rover or the F-22 fighter. Hidden purchase of half a million to a million smartphones at a wholesale price of $ 300 apiece, in some Asian country with a billion people, is quite real.

Then they are disassembled, the marking is removed, the boards are flashed, programmed, installed in a protected case and integrated into the design of the control system as a GLONASS / GPS module and issuing commands to the drive control unit. Such a solution can provide the UPB-BD "Kondor" even with a daytime optical guidance system in the final section (when an additional lens is installed on the built-in camera module).


A modern smartphone is a storehouse of high-tech electronic components. Image by wikipedia.org

Production should be carried out in huge batches - approximately 150-300 thousand products per year or 411-822 products per day. To produce such volumes, a plant with 20-40 robotic conveyor lines will be required, including extrusion machines, machining sections, assembly and much more.

Conclusions


What advantages will the RF Armed Forces have for such a cheap long-range guided munition, manufactured in huge quantities?

The war will turn into a nightmare for the enemy. One or two sorties of four Il-76Bs per day, and more than 800 precision-guided munitions fired from a distance of 100-200 kilometers will fall on the enemy, this is not counting everything else that our armed forces can please the enemy with.

Yes, with the help of the UPB-BD "Condor" it is impossible to hit moving targets, but it is possible to hit stationary and quasi-stationary ones. And by hitting stationary and quasi-stationary targets, it is possible to deprive the enemy of mobile ones: aircraft at airfields, aircraft repair and tank repair plants, up to individual workshops, storage of fuels and lubricants (fuels and lubricants), power plants and electrical substations, gas distribution units, bridges and pontoon crossings, railway junctions . With a huge amount of long-range precision-guided munitions, you can simply keep the enemy from raising his head.

They damaged the railway tracks - an hour later the enemy began repairs, another half an hour later the new "Condor" destroys all the results of the repair, and at the same time the repair team that did not have time to leave, an hour later another "Condor", then another and another - they can simply be sent to one point "just in case" to know for sure that there will be no railway service in this place. The same can be done with power lines (TL), bridges and other similar objects.

The disadvantage of the UPB-BD "Condor" is the low flight speed, which will be less than three hundred kilometers per hour? But stationary targets won't get far. In any case, this is no more than an hour of flight from the moment of launch to the moment of impact.

UPB-BD "Condor" will be easy to bring down the air defense system? Far from a fact, since its effective dispersion surface (ESR) will not be too large due to the widespread use of polymers in the design of the body, the streamlined body, the absence of rotating parts - propellers, engine turbine blades. A portable anti-aircraft missile system (MANPADS) or another air defense system with anti-aircraft guided missiles (SAM) with an infrared guidance head (IR GOS) will not capture it, since there is no “hot” engine in the UPB-BD “Kondor”, you will have to spend something more expensive - with radar guidance.

Most importantly, the probability of hitting the UPB-BD "Condor" with the help of missiles is not important at all - do you want to shoot down? No problem - drop it!

The given cost of the UPB-BD "Condor" is an order of magnitude, or even two orders of magnitude (!) Less than the cost of enemy missiles, especially missiles for air defense systems of NATO countries - there a price tag of one to five million dollars for missiles is quite familiar. As a result, the enemy finds himself in a zungzwang situation - either he allows the UPB-BG "Condor" to destroy his target without hindrance, or knocks him down, in the process of which he spends resources 10-100 times more than the cost of the UPB-BD "Condor", or even more than the object destroyed by the Condor.

Will the enemy suppress / distort the GPS / GLONASS signal over the protected objects? So he will have to “close” the whole country - all bridges, railways, power plants, electrical substations and power grids, and this is basically impossible. In addition, to what height will the jamming zone extend - 100 meters, 500 meters? The loss of the navigation signal in the final section can be completely compensated by the flight path of the UPB-BD "Kondor", when it plans a gentle gliding for most of the route, and from a given height, almost above the target, goes into a dive, as birds of prey do. You can even drop and shoot off the wings/mono wing for maximum speed gain before impact. Of course, if the signal is lost, the risk of a miss will increase, but given the low cost of the ammunition, this will not be as critical as when hit by “real” cruise missiles.

The long-range guided munition "Kondor" is potentially 1-2 sorties of four Il-76Bs per day, which together can inflict over 400-800 strikes per day, 2-800 strikes per week, 5-600 strikes per month, 12–000 strikes per year to a depth of 24–000 kilometers from the border or front line.

What country, what economy can withstand such a wave? Is it possible to ensure the deployment and supply of the armed forces in such conditions? How long would Ukraine in general and the Armed Forces of Ukraine in particular last in such conditions?
Author:
71 comment
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 22 September 2022 06: 18
    +10
    The author completely missed the huge dependence of an aircraft with a thin and elongated wing on weather and wind. And dropping from an aircraft with the subsequent deployment of the wing seems to be very problematic. In short, not a turning knot, so the wing itself will turn out.
    1. Shopping Mall
      22 September 2022 06: 34
      0
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      There is a possibility that it will be difficult and expensive to implement folding wings / monowing - there will be failures at the drop and deployment stage. Then a more appropriate solution would be to use a fixed wing - in the warhead mass range of 10–20 kilograms, and with a total width of the wing / wings of about three meters, this is quite acceptable.


      There is a possibility that it will be difficult and expensive to implement folding wings / monowing - there will be failures at the drop and deployment stage. Then a more appropriate solution would be to use a fixed wing - in the warhead mass range of 10–20 kilograms, and with a total width of the wing / wings of about three meters, this is quite acceptable.
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 22 September 2022 07: 30
        +3
        Quote: AVM
        with a total width of the wing / wings of the order of three meters, this is quite acceptable.

        This will not solve the problem of weather resistance, and it's not even about extreme gusts and stuff, it's about controlling the soaring flight! Thermals, a tailwind crosswind - I'm sure that a cheap control system will not cope with this!
        1. Evil 55
          Evil 55 24 September 2022 04: 39
          +1
          I would like to see not concepts, but prototypes of various designs and aerodynamic schemes .. hi
      2. 2112vda
        2112vda 22 September 2022 09: 07
        +3
        It is not a problem to create a single-cylinder portable internal combustion engine for a drone (there are such studies). There will be interest from the relevant departments and there will be technical documentation for the engine. Now, on the issue of internal combustion engines, everything depends on the notorious cost. Wartime laws require a different approach to the organization of production. "Efficient managers" preferred to buy internal combustion engines for "Orlans" from Japan, how it ended is now clearly visible, along the way they closed the small production of their own, Russian engines. Engines will be needed, we will do it.
      3. Genry
        Genry 22 September 2022 13: 09
        +3
        Quote: AVM
        There is a probability

        Author, you are so out of touch with reality that you did not even bother to look for existing analogues of your dreams.

        The X-69 missile (hussars, be silent!) - is already flying successfully and does not violate the laws of aerodynamics, physics and logic.

        https://oborona.ru/product/zhurnal-nacionalnaya-oborona/h-69-novaya-krylataya-raketa-ot-korporacii-takticheskoe-raketnoe-vooruzhenie-43850.shtml

      4. Mister X
        Mister X 22 September 2022 17: 42
        +1
        Quote: AVM
        There is a possibility that

        Thanks for the interesting content.
        It can be seen that you thought about the topic for a long time, studied the subject, and made calculations.
        1. Bongo
          Bongo 23 September 2022 04: 57
          +3
          Quote: Mister X
          It can be seen that you thought about the topic for a long time, studied the subject, and made calculations.

          Michael, in this case, to put it mildly, this is not entirely true. The author once again engages in projecting and undertakes to write about what he does not understand. No.
          1. Mister X
            Mister X 23 September 2022 07: 43
            +2
            Quote: Bongo
            what is not understood

            Possible.
            But the topics of the Swarm of drones and loitering ammunition are quite relevant.

            In a dispute, truth is born.
            Most of the ideas don't even make it to full size mockups.
            But the absence of a result, or a negative result, is also a useful experience.
            How not to do it.

            I am also a big dreamer.
            But some of my ideas reach their implementation.

            Have you seen the Flying MLRS concept? wink
  2. Horon
    Horon 22 September 2022 06: 36
    +6
    An increase in radio visibility due to wings and a decrease in speed due to an increase in aerodynamic drag in an area saturated with air defense? Large ammunition capable of carrying more than 10 kg of explosives will be shot down by cannons. It will be difficult to overload the saturated air defense and I suspect that the required number of such Condors will approach the cost of more expensive ammunition. Nevertheless, they try to pass the air defense zone either with small, inconspicuous, respectively, and a small warhead ammunition, or pass at high speeds, again with an emphasis on stealth. The long range provided by the large wing puts an end to visibility and muzzle velocity, especially for ammunition with a large warhead. IMHO
  3. Galleon
    Galleon 22 September 2022 07: 04
    +10
    When the calculation of the mass of the device began based on a comparison with the best foreign glider, the degree of design of the project became clear. Author, make a copy of the German glider! Make it serially to understand your technology and fly around it. Then you can apply similar calculations. And then, it is better to turn to the textbook of aerodynamics. And besides, the issue of control and guidance remained open and unresolved. Yes, just leave aside the ammunition - make an autopilot for the glider! Taking into account updrafts and downdrafts, wind, etc. There will be an autopilot - it will be possible to fantasize further.
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 22 September 2022 07: 32
      +3
      Quote: Galleon
      Yes, just leave aside the ammunition - make an autopilot for the glider! Taking into account updrafts and downdrafts, wind, etc.

      That's it!
    2. Whowhy
      Whowhy 22 September 2022 08: 00
      +2
      As far as I remember, gliders have an aerodynamic quality of 12-14.
      Due to non-reinforced plastics (and even more so, thermoplastics), it is impossible to achieve the required structural strength and rigidity, and composite products are quite expensive.
      With the declared dimensions and strength characteristics, only an airship can be a carrier. The approach of the airship to the contact line at 30 km is mortally dangerous for it. You will have to throw off from the stratosphere.
      With a mass reset, there will be a problem with the distribution of control radio channels (or again, an increase in price / weight, already at the expense of the equipment).
      You can't hang a lot on such a glider, then what is the purpose of this "miracle"? The elongated wing does not greatly contribute to maneuvering (besides, the dive flatter), after detecting the target, part of the wing will have to be shot off (again, an increase in weight - a decrease in payload).
      Well, etc. etc., - to list everything for a long time ....
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 22 September 2022 08: 19
        -1
        Quote: whowhy
        As far as I remember, gliders have an aerodynamic quality of 12-14.

        Much higher! But due to the long wing and licked surfaces.
        1. Whowhy
          Whowhy 22 September 2022 08: 44
          +2
          I took EC for training gliders (for example, BRO-11), since everything that is more difficult is already too expensive for ammunition. smile
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 22 September 2022 08: 59
            +1
            Quote: whowhy
            I took EC for training gliders (for example, BRO-11), since everything that is more difficult is already too expensive for ammunition

            Very debatable, if only because of the resistance of the fuselage and the poor quality of the finish (the author offers a deliberately high and at the same time inexpensive method).
            1. Whowhy
              Whowhy 22 September 2022 10: 22
              +1
              I already wrote that an inexpensive one (at least, as the author suggests) will not work ....
              1. Vladimir_2U
                Vladimir_2U 22 September 2022 10: 26
                0
                Quote: whowhy
                I already wrote that inexpensive will not work ....

                I agree, but I think that because of the equipment, but not because of the airframe. Because of a glider with such a wing, it is simply not viable. hi
                1. Zaits
                  Zaits 22 September 2022 21: 19
                  +2
                  I think it's because of the hardware.


                  The cost of most of the equipment can be minimized on large volumes. True, not at all as the author suggests.
                  Equipment for night conditions, a high-quality tactical-class inertial system and a good noise-proof duplex radio channel will cost a lot.
                  In principle, a simplified set of equipment, with a commercial-grade inertial system and without other expensive gadgets, can also fit.

                  But all this is clearly not with such a glider as the author suggests. Here I agree with you 100%.
    3. dauria
      dauria 22 September 2022 10: 59
      +7
      Yes, just leave aside the ammunition - make an autopilot for the glider! Taking into account updrafts and downdrafts, wind, etc. There will be an autopilot - it will be possible to fantasize further.

      Well, just the autopilot has already been around for 15 years. They are called flight controllers. Weight - 5 gr, matchbox size and price 10 bucks. The basis is MEMS gyroscopes (small pendulums etched on a substrate with a piezoelectric effect). It looks like a microchip. And a 32-bit microcontroller (often "Atmelovsky"). The software has been developed enormously, free of charge and to choose from.
      It interfaces with a bunch of sensors (GPS, magnetic compasses, altitude and speed sensors of all principles).
      Surprise, but this is a whole industry for amateurs and modellers. And they know how to fly autonomously, even a glider with a load of 30 grams per sq dm, even a rocket without a wing.
      You're a little stuck in the past, just check it out
      The author's projection is already obvious - a bunch of unverified "And if you do it like this ..." Even for a modeler, novelty often ends with the phrase "What a cudgel I am, money and time in the trash"
      1. Galleon
        Galleon 22 September 2022 11: 42
        +2
        I have recently become acquainted with gliders and have become a little crazy about them, for they are as close to the element of air as a sail. They have an interesting principle of flight and climb. Dauria, if it doesn’t make it difficult, throw a link to this autopilot at me, preferably in a personal message, so that we won’t be reproached. I wonder what actuators are connected to this autopilot? There are only handles, legs and cables winked
        1. dauria
          dauria 22 September 2022 12: 54
          +5
          There are only handles, legs and cables

          Lord, a long time ago in telemechanics (from the 70s and the time of Gunther Mil) the standards of electronic control buses were adopted. That old one is now called PWM (PWM). Modern - serial digital (ibus, sbus). They connect (by wires!) the central processor itself, transceivers, servo mechanisms of all kinds, mix the signals of sensors and video cameras.
          It got to the point of absurdity - in aerobatic model competitions right smoking the use of sophisticated electronics. The fact is that it allows you to complete the entire cascade of the most complex figures accurately and without errors, without touching the remote control.
          And to see the flight controller - just type in the search engine, most likely you will get lost in the wilds of quadrocopters (you can’t keep their frenzied flying meat grinders in the air without it at all) The plane below is my construction, weight 150 gr. 12 minutes flight, radius - 1 km.

          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 23 September 2022 04: 06
            +1
            Quote: dauria
            The plane below is my build, weight 150 gr. 12 minutes flight, radius - 1 km.

            You didn’t convince me, because a motor flight is one thing, and a gliding one is quite another!
            1. dauria
              dauria 23 September 2022 12: 32
              +1
              You didn’t convince me, because a motor flight is one thing, and a gliding one is quite another!

              And what did you not convince? Both motor and planning ammunition exist and are used. I don’t believe in the fact that the military will use “thermals”, the updrafts on the slopes from the wind from the word “completely”. Gliding ammunition will only descend with vertical speed. Moreover, the slant range depends only on the aerodynamic quality. Not from speed, not from wing area. To make a wind toy with a small load on the wing - why? A small load on the wing will only reduce both speeds - both vertical and horizontal (and the time of approach to the target), the range will not change.
              It remains - to make the wing of the most decent aerodynamic quality with its minimum area. The one at which the angle of attack corresponds to this quality, and the lifting force is equal to the weight of the projectile. It makes no sense to increase the aerodynamic quality due to an elongation of more than seven - there the increase is already meager, even simply according to a formula that will gobble up stiffness (and naturally weight)
              The wind, both head and tail, lateral drift is just a bad thing, which will have to be taken into account when hovering. And the less time we plan (the faster we fly), the better.
              1. Vladimir_2U
                Vladimir_2U 23 September 2022 16: 57
                0
                Quote: dauria
                Both motor and planning ammunition exist and are used.

                Damn, I didn't think about bombs! Cut off.
  4. 28st region
    28st region 22 September 2022 07: 13
    +4
    Disabling Glonass and GPS is very, very difficult. If you somehow launch the virus, destroy it physically, but don’t tell me 25-50 thousand km above the Earth, This is how you can demolish them. Discussed ammunition from the realm of fantasy.
    1. KCA
      KCA 22 September 2022 08: 21
      -2
      A GPS satellite may be difficult, but it’s not a problem to distort the readings, it’s unrealistic for the entire front length of 1000 km, but objects can be closed, for example, in the center of Moscow and Sevastopol, GPS receivers show complete nonsense
      1. solar
        solar 22 September 2022 10: 44
        0
        Civilian GPS receivers show complete nonsense. The military has a much higher level of noise immunity. This is what real fighting shows.
        1. KCA
          KCA 22 September 2022 11: 13
          -1
          Especially on ships that complained that Russia distorts GPS signals in the Black Sea
          1. solar
            solar 22 September 2022 11: 20
            +3
            I would not confuse ships with ships.
            Especially "from unofficial sources."
            If it were so simple, then there would be no chance to get on the bridges near Kherson
      2. alexmach
        alexmach 22 September 2022 17: 03
        +1
        Tell that to Antonovsky Bridge in Kherson :).
        Civilian GPS, standing still in the center of Moscow, may be showing nonsense, but with the incoming shells, the mistake came out.
        1. KCA
          KCA 22 September 2022 17: 18
          -4
          So I wrote that it will not work to block the entire front line of 1000+ km, only object-based electronic warfare
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 22 September 2022 18: 03
            +3
            And what does the whole front line have to do with it? Antonovsky Bridge is a point object that has been hollowed out for weeks. And almost the only target regularly fired upon by Himars. They covered his air defense and didn’t guess to suppress GPS at a point target? Do not make me laugh with stories about 1000 km of the front.

            Practice has shown that the miracle REB does not work. Well, that is, it may work, but not at all as magically wonderful as it seems to forum dreamers and others who want to believe in miracles.
            1. KCA
              KCA 22 September 2022 18: 35
              -4
              Do you know what equipment to jam GPS? Mobile, stationary, what conditions are needed for deployment, how long? How much energy does it consume? Yes, how much does it cost, in the end, maybe it has a price like that of 10 bridges, is it unpleasant to catch HARM?
              1. alexmach
                alexmach 22 September 2022 23: 46
                +2
                Do you know what equipment to jam GPS?

                As far as I remember, they reported in Military Acceptance about mobile and fairly compact complexes, noticeably smaller in size than the same air defense systems.
                what time is it?

                The shelling of the bridge was carried out for almost a month, and now the crossing near the damaged bridge is being shelled. But at that moment when the bridge was almost the only goal every day, it was necessary to use it to the fullest.
                maybe she has a price like 10 bridges

                Take more .. like ten Kherson bridgeheads.
                unpleasant to catch HARM?

                It's unpleasant, yes. But if the system cannot be used in combat conditions, moreover, in almost ideal conditions, the war is still with Ukraine, and the object that needs to be protected is known for sure, and the intensity of shelling is low, then it is probably completely useless.
    2. Whowhy
      Whowhy 22 September 2022 08: 32
      +2
      25 - 50 thousand km above the Earth, This is how they can be demolished.

      Ammunition with VEMG.
      1. 28st region
        28st region 26 September 2022 05: 41
        +1
        Cool. how to deliver it closer to them?
        1. Whowhy
          Whowhy 26 September 2022 07: 27
          0
          MIG-31
          The text of your comment is too short and in the opinion of the site administration does not carry useful information.
          1. 28st region
            28st region 27 September 2022 05: 20
            +1
            Oh how! On the MiG 31 into outer space at an altitude of 25 km. Still a great plane
            1. Whowhy
              Whowhy 27 September 2022 06: 38
              0
              In addition to guns, the MIG-31 also has missiles. wink
              MIG-31 practical ceiling:
              up to 30000 m (dynamic)
              up to 21500 m (practical)
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 22 September 2022 07: 34
    +5
    As a certain poet said: "Dreams, dreams - what sweetness! Dreams are gone, left ..."! And yet, the author is "well done"! I also like to "dream-design" ... and I have such "dreamy projects" - a cart and a small cart! But I didn’t think that you could also earn money on this (!) ... yes, most likely, I wouldn’t have succeeded! But the author, yes! He successfully combined business with pleasure (!) ... and dreamed, and earned money on the article! Yes ... there are a lot of dubious statements in the article, but this is a dream ... a project (!), And who was not mistaken at the project level? And in general ... as they say, it’s not harmful to dream, especially in ruble terms! Prosit! drinks By the way, acre of a long, long wing, engineering thought also offers a "biplane-triplane" scheme (they did more in "experimental" samples!)
    1. Whowhy
      Whowhy 22 September 2022 08: 31
      +1
      Do you think that here someone pays for articles? laughing
  7. Dedok
    Dedok 22 September 2022 08: 47
    +2
    again we breed "pink snot (bubbles)", for what?
    To divert attention from problems with the UAV?
    Why such articles? is it published in the magazine - "Technology of Youth"? or in the Military Review?
    What are the developments - should be a secret! but their results are open to you and me! because we see them being used
    but no results!
    So what are these articles for?
    how this Manilovshchina got it!
  8. Dmitriy22
    Dmitriy22 22 September 2022 08: 53
    +1
    But is it really so difficult to develop and produce, in general, low-power electric motors to remove half of the hemorrhoids with a wing and meteorological dependence?
  9. rocket757
    rocket757 22 September 2022 08: 54
    0
    Project Condor: death from heaven
    . Will a new weapon class dominate the battlefield?
    It all depends on what effective countermeasures will be created, how they will show themselves in the field / in the troops.
    Future will tell.
  10. Vladimir Michailovich
    Vladimir Michailovich 22 September 2022 09: 06
    +3
    The very idea of ​​abandoning the engine in favor of a planning design looks like a gamble. The production of small internal combustion engines does not present any problems, as can be seen from the example of Iran. And the question should be posed point-blank - where are the Russian internal combustion engines for UAVs?
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 22 September 2022 15: 18
      +3
      The planning and correction module (IPC) has long been developed!
      As the leaders of Bazalt told at the presentation, there are four basic upgrade options that are different in terms of equipment level. The first option involves equipping the bomb with the so-called "simple" IPC. This is a purely aerodynamic solution that allows self-stabilization of the bomb and wind drift correction - for this, only a simple planning and correction module is installed, which is attached to the bomb body, and electronic control modules are not introduced. In this case, the cost of the IPC kit will not be higher than the cost of the bomb itself. In this configuration, it is possible to use aerial bombs at the same ranges up to 6–8 km, but from extremely low altitudes of 50–100 m, and not from the usual 3–4 km FAB, where the aircraft is very vulnerable to air defense attacks. The second option provides, in addition to installing the IPC from the standard set, also equipping it with a hinged small-sized control unit (INS), which allows the bomb to be stabilized in flight and brought to a given area of ​​application. This option, while maintaining the specified accuracy, will provide a drop range of 12–15 km. The third option is to expand the MPC with INS units, the accuracy of which is relatively low, with additional drives and a GPS and GLONASS satellite navigation receiver. This equipment option will increase the effective launch range to 40-60 km, depending on the mode and speed of the carrier. The accuracy of an ABSP with an MPK in this configuration will be no worse than 10 m. In the fourth version, in addition to the MPK and the control module, it is planned to place a propulsion unit with a pulsating air-jet engine on the bomb, which will increase the effective range to 80–100 km. In Russia, a relatively cheap (compared to the cost of a turbojet engine (TRD)) PuVRD has been developed! (In some cases, solid propellant engines can be used ...) So ... don’t “press”, author! wing consoles ... a folded wing of the "sandwich" type! (In technical history there were also inflatable wings!) I especially liked the proposal to "turn" a smartphone into a GOS! I immediately remembered a certain competition in 2014 like: "Help the army" ... Where they offered, practically the same thing! (AT-rocket with a screwed-on smartphone as a GOS!) But for some reason, the brazen Banderlogs did not carry out! But our author undertakes to complete their work! The only thing the author did not surpass was innovators, I haven’t thought of a bulletproof vest made of plasticine yet!
      By the way, you can compare 2 pictures: the first is the IPC; and the second is one of the author's drawings ...

      Don't they remind each other?
  11. Revolver
    Revolver 22 September 2022 09: 23
    0
    Everything is great, of course. And also, if a couple of dozen of these smart munitions are sent at once to one or several nearby addresses, no air defense system will be enough. He will stupidly use up the available supply of missiles and will not have time to reload. True, if the enemy has long-range air defense systems, like the S-500, or even those available on / on the S-200, then the IL-76B will not live long, and whether it will have time to reach the launch line and make this launch, hell knows. And even if he has time, will he be allowed to turn around and leave the zone of destruction of the air defense system?
    That's just why the "partners" do not have this? Didn't think of it? So a few arrivals are enough for them to figure out what is coming. You can believe that in the West there are extruders, and transport aircraft of all different sizes and carrying capacities, and there will be no need to quietly buy a million smartphones in China, they will make specialized electronics, and if necessary, they will buy smartphones. In general, whoever does this first will have at best a year of monopoly, and then others will catch up, maybe even with more cunning things.
    Or maybe they have already thought of it, and experienced it, and decided that the game is not worth the candle. Well, for example, because the transporter is an expensive thing, and the flight will be one way.
  12. vovochkarzhevsky
    vovochkarzhevsky 22 September 2022 09: 29
    +1
    Sorry, this is not a project, but a student's fantasy.
    A simple and much cheaper answer has long been invented that nullifies such a "threat".


  13. Alexander_Dneprovsky
    Alexander_Dneprovsky 22 September 2022 10: 29
    +2
    For a cheap kamikaze, a pulse jet engine is quite suitable.
  14. bk0010
    bk0010 22 September 2022 10: 30
    +2
    There are planning bombs. And how long.
    The use of civil/industrial components will potentially reduce the cost of the Condor UPB-BD to the level of 3–000 US dollars at the current exchange rate.
    This is unlikely.
  15. Pushkowed
    Pushkowed 22 September 2022 10: 41
    +1
    Presumably, the optimal solution for the manufacture of plastic skin for the hull and wing of the UPB-BD "Condor" will be the use of injection molding machines and extrusion machines capable of blowing polymer products of complex shape in large quantities.
    But what about additive technologies? In mass production, they can be even cheaper.

    For a payload, that is, a warhead weighing 50 kilograms, the maximum mass of the Condor UPB-BD will be about 150–200 kilograms. Proportionately reducing the dimensions, we get a hull length of about two meters with a wingspan of about five meters.
    Proportionality doesn't work. because square-cube law. The mass is proportional to the cube of the linear size, and the wing lift and air resistance are proportional to the square of the linear size. However, at decreasing (not an increase) even the best performance characteristics are obtained.

    it is quite realistic to allocate two to four aircraft for conversion into UPB-BD "Condor" carriers, and if the complex proves itself positively, then eight to twelve aircraft.
    Why refurbish? It's easier to create a unified "insert" in the cargo compartment, allowing you to use any Il-76 as a carrier, and after removing it - again as a regular transport.

    Such a solution can provide the UPB-BD "Kondor" even with a daytime optical guidance system in the final section (when an additional lens is installed on the built-in camera module).
    A television guidance system at the terminal section is strictly required. The error of satellite navigation does not allow hitting small targets (namely, such ammunition is needed against such targets).
  16. km-21
    km-21 22 September 2022 12: 08
    +8
    Complete nonsense.
    The gliding aircraft will not fly where the operator needs, but where the wind blows, as well as ascending and descending currents. Even in calm weather (which almost never happens), in order to glide to the desired point, a highly qualified glider pilot is needed, who feels the flight not only with his eyes, but also with his own ass.

    The frame structure of the airframe is an anachronism. It was used in the early days of aviation, when an airplane was a wooden frame covered with percale. Today - only the bearing skin of both the fuselage and the wing.

    And finally - the price of the issue. The statement that the absence of a motor reduces the cost of construction is false. Building a high lift-to-drag airframe is unimaginably expensive. It is much cheaper to build a stool with a Chinese motor that will fly in any way, as Syrian drones of kitchen and garage production have recently proven.
    1. Couchexpert
      Couchexpert 22 September 2022 13: 41
      +3
      I also read up to the engines and then "didn't master it." If we also talk about the price ... "Let's give it up"?
      Does the author know how to "refuse" correctly? Even now, when robotics and software control are not widely implemented around the world, it turns out that a plant with very expensive equipment is more profitable than with very cheap hard workers who turn the nuts by hand. The price to a greater extent depends not on whether you have an engine on the aircraft or not, but on how many people you pay a salary.
  17. Maks1995
    Maks1995 22 September 2022 12: 31
    0
    Uh .... And who will tell you what is the fundamental difference between this and conventional planning bombs?
    Only in size, weight, and therefore prices?

    Let me remind you that the planning bombs dropped by Israel in the THAT incident from a height of 10 km flew 100 km and hit targets in Syria ....
    1. Genry
      Genry 22 September 2022 13: 31
      +1
      Quote: Max1995
      , what is the fundamental difference between this and conventional planning bombs?

      Quote: Max1995
      planning bombs from a height of 10 km flew 100 km

      100 divided by 10, equals 10 is a real number. The author has "zashkvar" for more than 20.
      1. km-21
        km-21 22 September 2022 14: 14
        +1
        If the bomb flew 100 km, then it is most likely equipped with an auxiliary solid propellant jet engine (similar to the Excalibur projectile), which increases the glide range.
        1. Genry
          Genry 22 September 2022 14: 57
          +2
          Quote: km-21
          If the bomb flew 100 km, then it is most likely equipped with an auxiliary solid propellant jet engine

          Such a bean would be called a rocket.

          It was about planning bombs and a range of 100 km from a height of 10 km - a typical characteristic.
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 22 September 2022 15: 55
          +2
          Quote: km-21
          If the bomb flew 100 km, then it is most likely equipped with an auxiliary solid propellant jet engine

          JDAM-ER flies 80 km. And this is just a regular JDAM with an additional block of wings that drop down when dropped.

          With the engine is Powered JDAM. And there we are talking about a range of 500-800 km.
        3. solar
          solar 22 September 2022 21: 48
          +2

          GBU-39 range 110 km when dropped from 10 km, speed can be supersonic. For 130 weights - 100 kg of warheads.
  18. Conjurer
    Conjurer 22 September 2022 14: 14
    +5
    What advantages will the RF Armed Forces have for such a cheap long-range guided munition, manufactured in huge quantities?

    None. Ammunition stored in a greenhouse, transported like window glass and flying like poplar fluff will only deliver hemorrhoids to those who try to use it. Therefore, they won't.
    Many times already here they try to use consumer electronics for military purposes, forgetting that they are stored before use in the field, in the open air, and not in a heated laboratory. It just won't fly. Americans sometimes use products of the automotive standard or the industrial temperature range, having previously tested it in an extended temperature range, in principle, we are not talking about household products.
  19. the same doctor
    the same doctor 22 September 2022 23: 02
    0
    I described similar ideas in the year 2011, and I thought about 20 years earlier.
    A little criticism: "With an aerodynamic quality equal to 30, an aircraft, planning from a height of 1 kilometer, will fly 30 kilometers horizontally." This statement is true only for low altitudes, up to 5 km.
    Second. Better, of course, a condor than nothing, but you can do better for the same price. The passage about the rejection of low-power engines is especially annoying. On the contrary, it is the massive use of light-engine units that can deplete the air defense system. they will shoot down a hundred drones, and out of a thousand they will shoot down the same hundred. The rest will complete the task.
    And the last. You can quite simply improve the accuracy of large-caliber shells at an affordable price.
  20. AC130 Gunship
    AC130 Gunship 23 September 2022 01: 38
    +3
    The condor is born able to find updrafts of air, and the pilot of the glider is trained to do this. A cheap pig - you will not teach.
  21. AlexeyEg
    AlexeyEg 23 September 2022 10: 04
    +1
    The Nazis read your article with gratitude, and the conclusions of the "analysts" Most likely, your imaginary weapon will appear faster in the camp of the enemy. Because there is more motivation. As well as opportunities.
  22. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 23 September 2022 14: 03
    0
    1. IL-76 at 10 km altitude will be a good target for both 100 and 200 km. It is better to launch drones from the ground or from a balloon.
    2. Satellite navigation means that it is necessary to create, maintain and protect a large satellite constellation that is very expensive and accessible to a few countries. For such short ranges, an inertial control system, ground navigation system or telecontrol is better.
    3. Cheap protection is also possible against these drones at high altitude with light training aircraft with machine guns.
    1. Sergey Zhikharev
      Sergey Zhikharev 23 September 2022 20: 44
      0
      Then it is necessary to mass-produce articles about superweapons (we take pigeons, show a map of country 404, feed the birds to the bone, and shove the medicine for diarrhea, and release them into the wild. Pigeons fly to / at 404 and shit there) which the site's analysts will unanimously support, reproach their own MO what it doesn’t do, and a potential adversary will spend time developing this weapon
  23. Valnik
    Valnik 23 September 2022 15: 39
    0
    Gave away all the secrets. The Chinese are now slapping and will sell on Ali as a quadrocopter under the guise of commercial ones.
  24. fiv
    fiv 23 September 2022 20: 13
    0
    Why such fantastic notions? To crackle with special ammunition and proceed to formalize the surrender
  25. NG inform
    NG inform 23 September 2022 20: 13
    0
    It really seems to me that this is the future, and I would be very happy to participate in the development of software for such a project. If everything is done correctly, then no air defense, electronic warfare, etc. will be able to stop a properly configured attacking network. And if you put the printing of components on a conveyor, then they can be produced in millions.
  26. the same doctor
    the same doctor 24 September 2022 00: 56
    0
    There is only one sound idea in the article: high-precision weapons, including UAVs, should be used in hundreds of thousands of pieces. The rest is details and specifics.
  27. Beck69
    Beck69 25 September 2022 12: 42
    0
    Or can you just get by with geraniums for now? Well, to be guaranteed, without cutting?