Pseudo-spacecraft - an unfulfilled revolution in special operations

71
Pseudo-spacecraft - an unfulfilled revolution in special operations
LA-252 "Stork"


High flying birds


Altitudes from 18 to 25 thousand meters are now virtually free. An airplane can climb higher as a record, but this will be a complete exception to the rule. In the 70s, a similar thing was done in the Soviet Union - the record-breaking MiG-25 climbed to 37 meters. According to some classifications, pilot Alexander Fedotov took the plane into near space, the lower limit of which lies at 600 thousand meters.



The authors of this understanding reveal near space as “a space inaccessible to traditional aircraft and spacecraft, at altitudes of 20–100 km.” Currently, among manned aircraft with wings, only the MiG-31 interceptor fighter can reach such near space. According to his passport, his ceiling is close to 22 kilometers. But this is a one-piece machine, and also very expensive.


The European Airbus Zephyr S is one of the most advanced stratospheric aircraft drones

The development of the stratosphere layer of 18–25 kilometers by unmanned vehicles seems to be profitable. A person, taking into account modern technologies, is superfluous - automation is quite capable of handling it on its own. This league is played by so-called “pseudo-spacecraft”, which differ in a number of features.

First of all, these are unmanned products capable of loitering over the control area for an almost unlimited time. It's all about solar panels - the main sources of electricity on board drones. This makes the devices similar to real space satellites, whose orbit lies several hundred kilometers above the Earth. Pseudospace vehicles are practically invulnerable to ground-based air defense systems due to their prohibitive operating altitude and low effective dispersion area.

Suffice it to recall how many problems a Chinese weather balloon caused when it entered United States airspace a year ago at an altitude of more than 25 kilometers. They tried to shoot down the object several times, but they succeeded only when it dropped below 20 kilometers. The weather balloon had previously passed over the whole of America and allowed itself to be shot down only off the east coast of the country. The pseudo-space drone compares favorably with stratospheric balloons in its ability to maneuver and is much smaller in size.
At altitudes of 18 kilometers or more, it is very difficult to suppress devices with electronic warfare systems. Rather, it is impossible. And the stratospheric drone itself can do a lot of useful work.

Although the devices are usually quite light and have serious limitations on payload, they carry synthetic aperture radars, optical-electronic systems with infrared and hyperspectral imaging, and much more. In some cases, the technology allows surface photography with a resolution of 15–20 centimeters. Pseudo-space complexes are very good as repeaters, for example, for manned aviation, which works directly on the battlefield. Not to mention a communications system similar to Starlink.


Observation and relay system based on the Odesseus pseudo-spacecraft

In turn, classical satellites are noticeably inferior to stratospheric ones drones in the promptness of information delivery. Operators on the ground have to wait up to several days for a spacecraft to fly over a given area. In the best case, the wait is reduced to several hours, but this requires a significant increase in the constellation of satellites. Which, of course, dramatically increases the cost of the entire project.

Drones from “pseudo-space” are not without their drawbacks.

Firstly, the technology for lifting ultralight aircraft to altitudes of more than 18 kilometers has not yet been fully mastered. These are quite specific products with an extremely large wing area on which solar panels are placed. Alternatively, a hydrogen energy source can be used.

Secondly, difficulties arise at an altitude of about 15 thousand meters - the prevailing turbulence here can seriously damage a fragile drone. However, with a sufficient level of meteorological reconnaissance, this is a completely solvable problem.

Who is first?


Attempts by foreign companies to create stratospheric drones for military purposes look alarming. As stated in the material “Paradigm change: the creation and use of pseudo-spacecraft as an integral part of the “new space revolution” and the “new unmanned revolution” by candidate of technical sciences N. N. Klimenko (NPO Lavochkina), in the West at least 20 companies are engaged in the development of ultra-high-altitude machines on solar batteries. More than 170 thousand patents have been registered in this area.

You don’t have to look far for examples - the most popular drones are Zephyr, Astigan, Phasa 35, Skydweller, Odysseus, Sunglider, Morning Star, Rainbow, Pathfinder Plus, Helios and many others. The typical and most advanced stratospheric drone at the moment can be called the Airbus Zephyr S. It has several records - for example, two years ago it stayed above the Sonoran Desert in the USA for 42 days at an altitude of about 21 kilometers. The device weighs 75 kg, while carrying 25 kg. The list of equipment includes the most advanced reconnaissance equipment, allowing you to control a square of 20 by 30 kilometers on Earth.

The simplest mathematical calculations show that for total control of the entire territory of Ukraine, about a thousand Zephyr analogues will be required. Total, that is, redundant - not a single information system will be able to digest such a volume of information from drones. This is not required. Much more important is the presence of several dozen stratospheric drones above the front line and at the strategic depth of defense.


The team behind the Owl with the first drone prototype

Russia is noticeably lagging behind in the development of pseudo-spacecraft, but there are still some advances. We are talking about the Owl project from the Foundation for Advanced Research and the Tiber company.

The stratospheric drone made its first flight in 2016. It is impossible to call him a truly pseudo-space reconnaissance officer. The device rose only 9 kilometers and stayed in the air for 50 hours. Quite a worthy result, but this was the only high-altitude flight of the Owl. More precisely, not even a full-fledged “Owl”, but a 1:3 scale model of it.

In the best traditions, the aircraft has a large wing aspect ratio and a multi-fuselage layout. As the developers write, “low weight was achieved as a result of installing synchronized autopilots on all fuselages within the framework of a distributed control system, and to maintain a given deflection of the entire wing, the automatic control system changes the angle of attack and, as a result, the lift force on the required section of the wing.”

The website of the development company contains information about the second prototype with a wingspan of more than 28 meters. This device has already climbed 19 kilometers, which is quite competitive. Only the Owl project was closed in September 2017, and nothing is known about its further fate.




The “Stork” project at NPO Lavochkin was closed or put on a long pause

The fate of two experimental stratospheric drones “Aist” from NPO Lavochkin is also unknown. The prototypes are called LA-251 and LA-252 and use a rigid flat wing, unlike the Owl. The take-off weight of the aircraft is about 120 kilograms with a payload of 25 kilograms. The estimated ceiling is 18 kilometers.

In theory, everything is fine with the machine, but the domestic industry is not capable of producing the required lithium-sulfur batteries with a specific energy output of 400–600 Wh/kg. Available lithium-ion ones do not provide the required flight duration and altitude. Since 2017, nothing has been heard about the development of the Stork project - most likely, it is simply frozen, if not closed forever.

This is a typical example of missed opportunities.

The design school and competence of the developers made it possible to put several models of domestic stratospheric reconnaissance aircraft on the wing. Before the start of the SVO, this was at least five years old. But for inexplicable reasons, the topics of pseudo-spacecraft were closed. The stratospheric revolution in the skies of Ukraine performed by the Russian Army is cancelled.

All that remains is to wait for the enemy to send his devices, against which we have no countermeasures, for testing in combat conditions.
71 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +8
    30 January 2024 04: 07
    It’s difficult to call the Mig-31 a one-off machine; most likely it’s a small series.
    1. Aag
      +15
      30 January 2024 05: 09
      Quote: anatolv
      It’s difficult to call the Mig-31 a one-off machine; most likely it’s a small series.

      How many are left, and what is the remaining resource?
      And this despite the fact that they even officially admit that they are not able to produce new ones...
      1. +3
        30 January 2024 05: 32
        No matter how many of them remain, they will not become piece goods.
      2. +17
        30 January 2024 05: 45
        Quote: AAG
        It’s difficult to call the Mig-31 a one-off machine; most likely it’s a small series.

        How many are left, and what is the remaining resource?

        It doesn’t matter what we call it, one-piece, small-scale, although 520 units were produced. The important thing is that the 31st has been in operation for 43 years, but there are still no analogues to it, not even abroad. The most unique plane!
  2. +4
    30 January 2024 04: 27
    In principle, the idea of ​​pseudo satellites is good, but there is no understanding in the Ministry of Defense of why this is needed and how to apply it.
    In experimental combat use, one could try to patrol over the Donetsk region for the purpose of counter-battery warfare.
    1. +4
      30 January 2024 05: 38
      The information obtained did not always help. The weak point is its processing, and on this basis high-quality solutions.
    2. +1
      31 January 2024 15: 17
      A banal old Buk (even M2) has an interception altitude of 35 km, with a cheap missile with a passive head. In general, this is all that can be said about the workability of the idea.
    3. 0
      4 February 2024 10: 58
      What is there to understand? Generals since the time of Sovka only know how to see what is there over the hill and then set tasks to do the same thing here, but more. This is true for everything from Shuttle-Buran to Caesar-Coalition, f22-su57, etc. The same thing happened with fpv drones, first they were used by barmaleys who were taught by instructors from the West and in Syria, then the same thing in Ukraine and the same thing here, more,, but after. Always only in response, after... Always late. Like with those aircraft carriers that they simply didn’t have time to get to in the USSR. The same will happen with stratospheric reconnaissance aircraft. (There are rare exceptions... this is air defense with a vertical launch or, say, Solntsepek or Agriculture). But first they will try to rivet an analogue of Highmars, an analogue of Starlink... It’s too late, as always, it’s not clear just how critically late... It’s sad
      PS: Roscosmos recently started talking about winged spaceplanes again... Six months before Dream Chaser’s flight. We are waiting for the announcement of the local Starship for some distant years (they will get the “Crown” from the stash, probably changed on paper 10 times)
  3. +9
    30 January 2024 04: 28
    In Russia we have a lot of smart heads, developers and inventors. As well as a huge number of prospects. At one time, it was beneficial for someone to give up, or not from great intelligence, on projects and smart heads. Most went abroad in search of brighter prospects for life rather than existence. This is our omission. We have lost a lot of time and valuable minds of the Fatherland. I really love my Motherland - Russia and am proud that I am Russian and I think we will make up for everything! At least, I really want this and with every fiber of my body I hope for it.
    1. +7
      30 January 2024 04: 50
      Quote: Talisman
      At one time, it was beneficial for someone to give up

      for inexplicable reasons, topics on pseudo-spacecraft were closed.
      Misunderstanding or sabotage?
      1. +10
        30 January 2024 04: 56
        Quote from Uncle Lee
        Misunderstanding or sabotage?

        Democracy and universal values wink
        1. +7
          30 January 2024 05: 00
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          Democracy and universal values

          “Pluralism, openness and acceleration” - this is where it all began! wassat
      2. +10
        30 January 2024 06: 09
        Quote from Uncle Lee
        Misunderstanding or sabotage?

        To understand, there must be a development strategy. She is? How much money is spent on R&D compared to other countries? Very little! And why? Other priorities. Therefore, all questions are directed to those who formulate these priorities.
        1. +10
          30 January 2024 06: 40
          Quote: Stas157
          How much money is spent on R&D compared to other countries?

          First we need to ask, how much money is spent on education? And only then for R&D
          1. +9
            30 January 2024 23: 25
            Quote: Dutchman Michel
            First we need to ask, how much money is spent on education?

            Why ask? wink
            In the Russian Federation, has a strategy of state industrialization emerged with the nationalization of raw materials assets to optimize production chains?
            Why invest government money in the education of specialists for whom there are no jobs and no jobs in sight in the public sector?
            Is everything private? The market will decide on education too.
            Already decided. wink
        2. 0
          7 February 2024 08: 57
          Russia's population and budget are much smaller than the population of, for example, China and its budget, and therefore they can afford to spend much larger sums on R&D than we can. Nui plus in China strive for development, but in our country the current moment is apparently more important.
      3. +1
        30 January 2024 13: 29
        How will you show this bookcase flying very high in the sky at the parade? We were put on reconnaissance because it looks unconvincing, but the A100 with the radar looks fine, but it doesn’t work inside, so who will know?
      4. +2
        31 January 2024 15: 24
        Knowledge of the capabilities of even outdated Ukrainian air defense systems.
      5. +1
        6 February 2024 01: 53
        Quote: Uncle Lee
        Quote: Talisman
        At one time, it was beneficial for someone to give up

        for inexplicable reasons, topics on pseudo-spacecraft were closed.
        Misunderstanding or sabotage?

        The “Kissinger-Sobchak Commission” was (and is) exclusively engaged in the sabotage of the Soviet military-industrial complex and the genocide of the Soviet People.
        1. 0
          6 February 2024 04: 32
          And those present in the photo: Chubais, Nabiulina, Kudrin!
          1. +1
            6 February 2024 13: 28
            And most importantly - Henry Kissinger
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. +2
      30 January 2024 19: 38
      Quote: Talisman
      This is our omission. We have lost a lot of time and valuable minds of the Fatherland

      Pseudo-capitalism with an inhuman face.
    4. +4
      31 January 2024 00: 36
      “...in the West, at least 20 companies are engaged in the development of ultra-high-altitude solar-powered vehicles. More than 170 thousand patents have been registered in this area.
      ...

      In Russia we have a lot of smart heads, developers and inventors.
      »
      There are dozens of offices and tens of thousands of patents - the system, but we have Kulibins in removable Khrushchev buildings.
      We have very few development engineers and design bureaus, but for 40 years we have been calming ourselves down.
  4. +1
    30 January 2024 06: 15
    I wonder how much it would cost to implement a turnkey project like this.
  5. +1
    30 January 2024 06: 35
    The authors of this understanding reveal near space as “a space inaccessible to traditional aircraft and spacecraft, at altitudes of 20–100 km.”

    These unnamed authors can "assign space" to whatever height they want.
    Officially
    100 km - the official international border between the atmosphere and space - the Karman line, the boundary between aeronautics and astronautics. A flying body and wings starting from 100 km do not make sense, since the flight speed to create lift becomes higher than the first cosmic speed and the atmospheric aircraft turns into a space satellite. The density of the environment is 12 quadrillion particles per 1 dm³[63], the brightness of the dark brown-violet sky is 0,01-0,0001 cd/m² - approaching the brightness of the dark blue night sky[64][58].
    (Wikipedia)

    The US Air Force considers the limit of space to be 50 miles (80,45 km), although NASA maintains an altitude of 100 km.
    But Mr. Fedorov is not alone. Even ̶I̶v̶a̶n̶ ̶I̶v̶a̶n̶o̶v̶i̶ch̶ ̶s̶ ̶I̶v̶a̶n̶o̶m̶ ̶N̶i̶k̶i̶f̶o̶r̶o̶v̶i̶ch̶e̶m̶ Jeff Bezos argued about where space begins and Richard Branson. Details https://meduza.io/cards/gde-nachinaetsya-kosmos
    1. 0
      31 January 2024 12: 01
      Здесь, вероятно, используется еще не устоявшаяся терминология. В русскоязычном разделе Википедии есть раздельчик об "ближнем космосе" (именно в этом смысле - 20-100 км): https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE#%D0%90%D1%82%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%84%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0_%D0%B8_%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B6%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%81.

      Of the officially accepted definitions, we can mention the wording in document RR1.1 from the ITU (International Telecommunication Union):

      1.66A high altitude platform station: A station located on an object at an altitude of 20 to 50 km and at a specified, nominal, fixed point relative to the Earth.

      This concept corresponds to the abbreviation HAPS, which is often deciphered as High-Altitude Pseudo-Satellite, i.e. “high-altitude pseudosatellite.” From here, it seems, both “pseudo-cosmos” and “near-commosos” grow.
  6. +10
    30 January 2024 06: 37
    The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation cannot give birth to anything new in the field of technology. It’s not a general’s job to think in abstract images. but to squeeze out other people’s successes in this field.....then yes....like with garage quadcopter operators, when they became unnecessary before the large infusion of state money into this industry. feed on other people's brains and labor in a difficult moment for the country, and then throw it away like a used condom.....that's our way, the general's way. and with the Lobaev rifle?...the same story.
    The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation seems to have created scientific machine-gun companies that should give birth to smart thoughts. so let them be clever... although judging by the army communications from the times of the Napoleonic wars, counter-battery stations, guns from the time of Ochakov... they are not doing very well.
    young civil groups that managed to create something serious on their own... and even launch it into a small series, need to be supported by action, and not squeeze out someone else’s advanced product at a convenient moment.
    1. 0
      30 January 2024 13: 38
      Quote from moneron
      The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation cannot give birth to anything new in the field of technology. It’s not a general’s job to think in abstract images.

      The Russian Defense Ministry does not need anything; over the past 15 years, at best, they have spent a fraction of the state defense order on drones. There was no need for tanks and infantry fighting vehicles until 2020, artillery, a hundred planes were thought to be enough, reconnaissance is generally on the side, what the General Staff is doing is not clear at all
      Quote from moneron
      Don’t push someone else’s advanced product at a convenient moment.

      What did they squeeze out? Usually they flush everything down the toilet and do nothing
    2. 0
      31 January 2024 11: 54
      Здесь, вероятно, используется еще не устоявшаяся терминология. В русскоязычном разделе Википедии есть раздельчик об "ближнем космосе" (именно в этом смысле - 20-100 км): https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE#%D0%90%D1%82%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%84%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0_%D0%B8_%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B6%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%81.

      Of the officially accepted definitions, we can mention the wording in document RR1.1 from the ITU (International Telecommunication Union):

      1.66A high altitude platform station: A station located on an object at an altitude of 20
      to 50 km and at a specified, nominal, fixed point relative to the Earth.

      This concept corresponds to the abbreviation HAPS, which is often deciphered as High-Altitude Pseudo-Satellite, i.e. “high-altitude pseudosatellite.” From here, it seems, both “pseudocosmos” and “near komsos” are growing.
      1. 0
        31 January 2024 12: 02
        Sorry, I inserted my comment in the wrong place. I can’t delete it anymore, please ignore it.
  7. +6
    30 January 2024 07: 23
    With us, everyone is cutting down and strangling everything that is not produced by concerns and corporations! Even if it is many times better, cheaper and more effective, but since it is impossible to master it, then we will be driven away by “inconsistencies”, GOSTs and other dregs. Inventors and bright minds are killed.
    1. +3
      31 January 2024 13: 36
      Arguments about whether GOSTs are dregs smack of pop and superficiality of understanding. Let's grow up already.
  8. +4
    30 January 2024 07: 27
    I've heard about this topic for a long time...
    BUT, I didn’t expect that everything was so sad.
    And again the conclusion arises:
    The “authorities” need to hang the domestic liberals by their balls on poles.
    At least it will be more “fun” this way.
    1. +4
      30 January 2024 20: 25
      They have not been listed as liberals for a long time. They have been in United Russia for a long time. And they propagate “ala-ulya, drive the geese. We’ll throw hats at everyone...” I came across...
  9. +9
    30 January 2024 09: 10
    it seems that someone in Russia is purposefully ruining sensitive scientific developments... there are moles somewhere...
  10. +5
    30 January 2024 09: 27
    It's very strange to read something like this. A huge wing will give an EPR of meters and perhaps even tens of meters. No matter how you experiment with coverings, it will be visible from afar. Air defense missiles cover up to 30 km in altitude. A one-piece expensive complex against the Papuans who do not have air defense??? Then they would shout about cutting and other things like that. It is easier to develop ways to combat such intelligence officers than to work on the intelligence officer himself.
    Going above the tropopause on the wing is expensive. And they will all be shot down using jet propulsion.
    1. +4
      30 January 2024 10: 58
      The huge wing is made of non-metals, so the solar panels on the wing can “glow”.

      Price is a controversial issue. What is more expensive, an air defense missile with an altitude reach of 20 km or a UAV?

      For some reason it seems to me that the order of prices is approximately the same. Well, losing a UAV that can operate from an altitude of 20 km is cheaper than a manned aircraft with the same “operating” altitude.
      1. +5
        30 January 2024 11: 24
        The solar panels will definitely glow on the radar. A UAV capable of reaching 25 km will definitely be more expensive than an air defense missile, and much more so. The tropopause is winds of 30-50 meters per second. A huge wing with such wind loads must be unusually strong. Composites.
        A classic aircraft, albeit without a pilot, is much more durable in the role of a reconnaissance aircraft. And he can run away and fight back.
        1. -1
          30 January 2024 19: 18
          Quote: garri-lin
          The tropopause is winds of 30-50 meters per second. A huge wing with such wind loads must be unusually strong. Composites.

          You can simply sacrifice extra flight time and, on the contrary, strive to reach the highest altitude. For example, if 20-40 minutes are enough for tasks, then wings are not needed at all - a supporting body is enough. The drone itself will then be completely simple and compact - in fact, a gliding case for equipment, without an engine and fuel, which is carried into the sky by rocket.
          1. -1
            30 January 2024 20: 15
            Rave.
            And blah blah blah for the number of words.
        2. +1
          31 January 2024 17: 06
          There are Polymer solar batteries, but we have mastered nanotechnology, and there will be less EPR.
          But in general, it is clear that without a government order, nothing will be done in this direction. And you shouldn’t wait for enthusiasts, since there are now enough orders for more mass-produced UAVs.
      2. DO
        0
        6 February 2024 00: 57
        Quote: VicktorVR
        The huge wing is made of non-metals, so the solar panels on the wing can “glow”.
        This means that Russian science, together with intelligence, needs to set the task of developing, in the shortest possible time, solar batteries that are inconspicuous on mobile radars. And if it turns out that such batteries exist and you can buy them according to some schemes, then you need to buy them until they start producing their own.
  11. 0
    30 January 2024 09: 50
    Airships and balloons would be more effective in organizing airborne radar fields. To control the border to a depth of 350 km, it is enough to raise it to a height of 5 km. And for safety, move it 50-100 km inland. Low flying targets will not be a surprise. And PKA are good for reconnaissance in the optical range directly above the controlled area.
    1. DO
      0
      6 February 2024 01: 23
      Quote: LeSnoi31
      Airships and balloons would be more effective in organizing airborne radar fields.
      The assumption made here by LeSnoi31 (Alexander) is absolutely correct and can be requalified as a statement. Because pseudo-satellites on solar panels + batteries, with reasonable wing sizes of tens of meters on which solar cells are located, will not be able to provide the radar with power with an average power of the order of several kilowatts, and will not be able to lift the radar antenna (AFAR), weighing at least a ton .
  12. 0
    30 January 2024 11: 37
    Wouldn't it be easier to use a UAV without an engine, solving the issue of delivering it to a high altitude?
  13. +1
    30 January 2024 12: 29
    The thing we need most now can potentially give a lot to real-time reconnaissance.
    It is not clear why problems with the production of our own batteries have any effect on these devices - we are not talking about batches of tens of thousands or even thousands. Hundreds of batteries can be purchased through parallel import - the issue will be resolved. These UAVs are not consumables - they are beyond the range of enemy air defenses. It is important to create a design and produce even a small but working batch. The effect will be more than sufficient - and the main thing will be something to analyze whether it is necessary to work deeper and wider in this direction.
    1. +2
      30 January 2024 14: 12
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      These UAVs are not consumables - they are beyond the range of enemy air defenses.

      Patriots - they have to get it, it seems.
      1. +1
        30 January 2024 16: 16
        Perhaps, but 18 km. up this is no joke, a very narrow sector of destruction will be left and so will the time to react. I don’t really pay attention to new missiles for the patriot; for old missiles and complexes, the destruction altitude was up to 20 km - for this, however, the target should be practically stupidly above them. Also, this data for hitting ballistic targets - will these missiles be capable of hitting aerodynamic and subsonic targets - is a good question.
        Potentially, yes, they can get such a device - in the event of an ambush, for example. But I see the task of such devices not to control the entire territory of Ukraine, but to control individual areas that are of paramount importance to us. At the moment, they don’t have that many “Patriots” and all (or almost all) are connected with the control of stationary objects, the capital - that is, what can be observed and what can be pointed at by standard space means. Atmospheric satellites are valuable because they can observe highly valuable areas for a long time and do not have the disadvantages of satellite reconnaissance. The device itself is not something extremely expensive - empirically, a rocket capable of reaching it from such heights is guaranteed to be much more expensive.
        1. +2
          30 January 2024 16: 49
          Quote: Knell Wardenheart
          The device itself is not something extremely expensive - empirically, a rocket capable of reaching it from such heights is guaranteed to be much more expensive.

          Everything is true, but there are nuances: the payload and power supply are limited, which places high demands on the weight and size qualities of the filling.
          If you use it as a signal translator, then the simplest anti-radar missiles will be suitable for its destruction - as long as they reach it.
  14. 0
    30 January 2024 14: 11
    It’s as usual: the desire for ideality ruined the idea. You don't need an ideal, make a simple flying car. With a simple jet engine! And cheap terrestrial repeaters. Can be disposable...
    They dropped a guided bomb. Send a similar drone after her and above her. The bomb will reach its target and that’s okay. Or an attack drone will take you to the bridge.
    Need relay over the front line? Let the same geophysics run in a chain from Rostov to Minsk.
    Operational communications on the front line? The front hardly moves. Wires and ground-based unmanned repeaters. At the same time, they will serve as bait for chimeras.
    .
    The problem is the lack of electronics. You guys, first make your own router, and then take up the wings.
    For now - wires. Internet service providers should be encouraged, attracted and paid for.
  15. +1
    30 January 2024 16: 35
    It is elementary simple and not too expensive to create a tethered unmanned aerostat with reconnaissance equipment at first. Raised in the rear at a sufficient distance and a decent height, depending on the caliber, and conducted reconnaissance. But I haven't heard anything about it.
  16. +2
    30 January 2024 23: 32
    There is a glider Perlan 2, which unhooked from a turboprop aircraft with an affectionate name for the Russian ear “Grob” at an altitude of 13 m, piloted by two pilots, climbed to a height of 400 meters, breaking the U 23 altitude record.
  17. 0
    30 January 2024 23: 53
    Now there would be some landing gliders, invisible to the radar, like the Hans and American ones, to transport at least a dozen fighters each for deployment to the immediate rear of the enemy in order to create support groups for the main attackers. Otherwise, movement is completely limited and they can’t do anything about it. Aircraft and drones, mines and air defense systems are everywhere.
  18. +2
    31 January 2024 01: 16
    You can launch a paraglider with a rocket without solar panels. Maybe it will really be hard to see on the radar.
    1. +1
      31 January 2024 09: 03
      High altitude drone means
      1 large aspect ratio of an extremely light wing plus its specific profile, that is, it is more difficult for it to take off like an airplane
      2 to rise to a record height, a drone must consume almost 50% of its fuel
      The conclusion is that the drone needs to be launched from another aircraft
  19. 0
    31 January 2024 12: 27
    Any aircraft gets shot down, including a satellite, the question is the cost. Here we are talking about AWACS.
    Since the doctrine of the Russian Federation is defense, i.e. the carrier is not on enemy territory, then the most reliable, effective and cheapest carrier of AWACS is an airship.
    AWACS on a stationary stratospheric unmanned airship, this is several times cheaper than an airplane and a satellite. There is no point in comparing a glider with an airship. Airship with a payload of 60-100 tons. The useful weight is 25 tons of equipment, motors, batteries, solar panels, diesel. fuel, generators, antennas, transmitters, receivers, etc. A set of antennas covering a range from meters to millimeters is installed. Scanning, both mechanical and phase passive, active antenna array, plus optical and thermal radars. Operating altitude above 20 km. The airship can operate either stationary on a cable cable (the height is limited by the performance characteristics of the cable cable) or in free flight. In free flight it can rise to a height of 35-40 km. Continuous operation time at height, 6-12 months (lowered and serviced). The airship is launched to a given point and maintains the given coordinates with electric motors. In the stationary version, the airship is connected to the ground by a cable cable. Via a cable cable (two cores: optical fiber and 2 copper wires for 10 kV), power is supplied to the airship, control is carried out, information is retrieved, etc. On the ground there is a diesel generator, a winch, a control service, receiving and processing information. The cable rope is not load-bearing, it only supports itself (estimated weight of the cable rope is 6 tons). In free flight, power comes from a generator and solar panels. At an altitude of 20 (35) km, the optical visible horizon is 535 (709) km, direct radio visibility is 1000 km. Such an airship - AWACS plus optical and thermal detection, allows you to detect and track any flying object, even an ultra-small drone, an inflated balloon, a bird, and also ground objects. The AWACS on the airship will make it possible to close the holes that the Russian air defense has today. The weather doesn't affect it. It is unlikely to be shot down at such a height. The airship can have air-to-air missiles on board. The disadvantages are the size of the airship, approximately 200 m.
  20. 0
    31 January 2024 15: 21
    “Total control of the entire territory of Ukraine will require about a thousand Zephyr analogues. Total, that is, redundant - not a single information system will be able to digest such a volume of information from drones”

    wow, what a bold statement about the capabilities of IP. In fact, modern image recognition systems make it possible to process information from hundreds of thousands of cameras with, for example, automatic face recognition. Of course, these are not high-altitude reconnaissance cameras, but the level of technology is not military, but municipal police.
  21. 0
    1 February 2024 00: 23
    Applicable in civilian life, but an absolute dead end for. the author is lying and confused.
    The Chinese balloon flew at an altitude above 30 km - there, indeed, the Ams had nothing to reach them with. The problem was still in the small EPR. But the ball basked well in the sun, and it was perfectly caught by the IR seeker of the missiles, only the Ams have the only such missile - the “Sidewinder”, which is launched from an airplane and is capable of rising no more than 2-3 km above the carrier’s flight altitude.
    Now we look at this aircraft in the steppes... the skies of Ukraine. Such devices have a large area and are quite visible against the sky. The height ceiling of the Ukrainian MiG-29 and Su-27 is approximately 17-18 km, which means that a missile with an infrared seeker can reach up to 19-20 km.
    Ukraine has S-300 air defense systems, the destruction altitude of which is 27 km. Their missiles can also be aimed manually.
    Now let's see how high the pepelats can rise. It uses propellers whose efficiency decreases with increasing altitude. Although the NASA device supposedly rose to 29 km, I think that this was extremely difficult to achieve, and the real maximum flight altitude of a UAV with propellers is 15-20 km. Moreover, in rarefied air it is necessary to create not only thrust, but also lift. The greater the height, the larger the wing area should be, and, consequently, the higher the ESR and the visibility of the device.
    Therefore, such a crazy idea will not last long in the sky with dense air defense.
    Only 3 alternatives are possible:
    1. Aerostat. They really rise above the air defense zone
    2. Drone with a rocket engine (rocket glider). The most practical option is when the pepelats is lifted up by a rocket engine, and then it glides. Something similar is used in the Smerch MLRS.
    3. Aeroballistic missile, Iskander type. It will not live in the sky for long.
    So, rather than build castles in the air, the author would suggest, indeed, high-altitude balloons
  22. 0
    1 February 2024 00: 44
    Perhaps, yes, a balloon would be the best option. You can also combine them into a network and connect them with satellites. Someone here wrote about anti-radar missiles. But they are unlikely to help here. They are designed for much more powerful radar radiation, with a different frequency and signature
  23. 0
    1 February 2024 00: 49
    If there is such a booze, I will still propose a planning reconnaissance unit for the Iskander. It flies at a high altitude over a given area and makes a maneuver to return to the launch area, or to leave for another territory.
    And if you use the Kinzhal with the MiG-31, you can actually shoot the entire 404 and land the reconnaissance officer in Belarus
  24. 0
    1 February 2024 11: 35
    an interesting option and even more interesting analogues in the form of balloons and airships presented by commentators, but unfortunately, like the Arak drones, they are planned, designed and theorized, but not built.
  25. 0
    1 February 2024 11: 44
    Question, comrades, how many aerospace and electronics products are produced annually in Russia and Belarus?
    How many officers do different military academies graduate annually and how many analysts and debaters like Comrade Klimenko are there in Russia and Belarus???
    Do you suggest something????
    1. 0
      5 February 2024 17: 41
      Now even traditionally technical universities have half of their specialties in economics, law, etc. direction. To earn more money at the expense of students with low passing grades who did not pass into technical faculties.
      1. 0
        14 February 2024 14: 54
        It's a shame, well, capitalism, instead of helping Russia, as the fifth column claims, destroyed it, Comrade Stalin would not have allowed such a deviation from the current incompetent and weak leadership, Putin should simply resign or change his position.
  26. 0
    1 February 2024 17: 12
    This is a typical example of missed opportunities.

    It’s just that our generals are always preparing for the last war. Always. Both in the tsarist army, in the Soviet army, and in modern times. For them, all sorts of new products and the latest technological developments are comparable to incense for the devil. Suffice it to remember recently how they spat and abandoned drones and drones. How to fix it? Don't know. Maybe, perhaps, a complete replacement of the old men of the Arbat Military District with young and zealous ones, with trench officers and generals who actually fought in the current war?...
  27. 0
    5 February 2024 17: 35
    We started and closed, we started and closed, we equipped the solar panel plant and closed. We spent the money down the drain. Billions of money, I would like to say the people’s money, goes away, disappears, melts, burns, and as if that’s how it should be. Oh, what a rich country Russia is. This is worse than sabotage.
  28. DO
    0
    6 February 2024 02: 06
    The issue of creating the required number of “pseudo-satellites” for the RF Armed Forces is relevant today. For there may be an opinion that in a hypothetical direct conflict between Russia and NATO, as a result of military operations, satellite constellations of NATO and Russia working in the interests of the military (the trajectories of which are known and difficult to hide) will be quickly disabled.
    However, in NATO countries, pseudosatellites are being intensively developed and tested for this case, among other systems. In Russia, there is no information here and now about the successful creation of solar-powered pseudosatellites.
    1. DO
      0
      6 February 2024 02: 20
      PS
      Commentators above write that pseudosatellites can be shot down. However, you can shoot down anything that flies.
      And pseudosatellites can turn out to be very effective, at least as high-altitude communication repeaters suspended in their rear. Because a pseudo-satellite repeater suspended at an altitude of 15-20 km is noticeably more effective than conventional UAVs or tethered balloons having an altitude of about 5 km.
      1. DO
        0
        6 February 2024 02: 30
        PS-2
        Most likely, practice will reveal niches for pseudosatellites in military intelligence, where other solutions will be less effective.
  29. 0
    9 February 2024 03: 10
    A man (Evgeniy Fedorov) wrote an introductory and educational article (I’m not in the subject, so it was interesting). And, self-affirming comments on abstract topics began to rush. What's wrong with the site? "Tick-Takers" have arrived in large numbers?...
  30. 0
    28 March 2024 04: 46
    The bumblebee flies against the laws of aerodynamics. To stay in the air for a long time, the device does not have to have the classic shape of a glider or a balloon. You just have to look.