Military Review

The flight prototype of the Fregat UAV successfully passed the tests

33
The flight prototype of the UAV of a non-aerodrome-based Fregat successfully passed the tests, confirming the characteristics incorporated in it, and reports RIA News a message from the representative of the developer - Kronstadt company.


The flight prototype of the Fregat UAV successfully passed the tests


“We have proposed an aerodynamic layout of an aircraft with rotary fan propulsion, aimed primarily at achieving a large flight range (in 2-3 times the range of modern helicopters) and high speed (not lower than 500 kilometers per hour). A flying model was created and its flight tests were carried out, which confirmed the fundamental feasibility of high-speed flight with vertical take-off and landing. ”
Said the interlocutor.

According to him, "" Frigate "will be able to carry up to 1700 a kilogram of payload during takeoff," in an aircraft "and up to one ton - during a helicopter takeoff."

It is reported that "the maximum flight altitude will be 8 thousands of meters, the expected duration is about 10 hours, the device will perform a wide range of tasks: from air monitoring to prompt delivery of cargo."

For the first time, the Fregat project was presented at the MAKS-2015 air show in Zhukovsky.
Photos used:
Kronstadt Group
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lieutenant Izhe
    Lieutenant Izhe 10 May 2016 15: 29
    +13
    well, this is already "something more serious" of the "UT aircraft models" in service ....
    1. Chertkov Oleg
      Chertkov Oleg 10 May 2016 15: 41
      +1
      Beautiful "bird"
      1. Dimontius
        Dimontius 10 May 2016 15: 57
        0
        namely, not like American big-headed crooked herons.
        1. 11 black
          11 black 10 May 2016 18: 06
          +6
          Quote: Oleg Chertkov
          Beautiful "bird"

          Quote: Dimontius
          namely, not like American big-headed crooked herons.

          You have strange ideas about beauty laughing ... but if he really can give 500 KM / H and fly away from a ton of cargo at 5000km with vertical take-off, then beauty is 10's business ...
  2. Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov 10 May 2016 15: 35
    -10%
    It is necessary to try against "Donald Cook", to explain it by a technical failure.
  3. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 10 May 2016 15: 41
    +5
    Serious device. Very original aerodynamic design. Practically - a triplane, and the rear wing - reverse sweep. That would be to find out, does it make any sense besides futuristic design and attracting attention (and money)?
    1. RUSS
      RUSS 10 May 2016 15: 48
      0
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Serious device. Very original aerodynamic design. Practically - a triplane, and the rear wing - reverse sweep. I’d like to know if it makes any sense,

      Maybe for maneuverability? request
    2. RUSS
      RUSS 10 May 2016 15: 48
      0
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Serious device. Very original aerodynamic design. Practically - a triplane, and the rear wing - reverse sweep. I’d like to know if it makes any sense,

      Maybe for maneuverability? request
    3. drilled
      drilled 10 May 2016 15: 58
      +3
      Not a new scheme. There were projects when the wing formed a ring around the fuselage. With this form, the wing span is saved (reduced), while maintaining its area, that is, without loss of lift (you will find the PS formula in the internet).
      By the way, a home-made man for a nouveau riche in Tula or something, he put such a scheme on the Yak-12 fuselage. I don’t know whether it flew for a long time.
      I found a photo, I can’t insert it in any way (((
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 10 May 2016 16: 11
        +7
        The guys in Belarus created an experimental model of a ring plan, in view of the lack of funding, things did not go further.
    4. Vadim237
      Vadim237 10 May 2016 16: 05
      +9
      Various design bureaus try on this wing scheme for new airplanes, but so far the issue of iron has not gone for large machines.
      1. CHILD
        CHILD 10 May 2016 16: 51
        +1
        ..obviously .... large wing area ... load distribution on the fuselage .... handling and stability are interesting as a result .... but they probably already blew around ...))))
    5. Aljavad
      Aljavad 11 May 2016 03: 08
      +3
      Mountain shooter RU Yesterday, 15:41
      Serious device. Very original aerodynamic design. Practically a triplane,


      In fact - the bi-plan of the composite era. Span less when equal with the monoplane wing area. and the construction is stiffer - which means that with equal strength, less weight.
      (If I'm lying, let the engineer be corrected) request
    6. Ardein
      Ardein 11 May 2016 16: 16
      +3
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Serious device. Very original aerodynamic design. Practically - a triplane, and the rear wing - reverse sweep. That would be to find out, does it make any sense besides futuristic design and attracting attention (and money)?

      1. An annular wing will increase the strength of the bearing surfaces while simultaneously facilitating their weight.
      2. Reverse sweep will give an increase in aerodynamic quality (and most convenient for the ring scheme).
      3. There is a minus - the interference of the wings, but it is mostly reduced by the strong spacing of the wing consoles along the fuselage.
      4. The arrangement of the engines is also classic for the given aerodynamic scheme. One thing is that on the cruising leg of the flight, you get an additional profit in the form of the "propeller in a ring" effect (in the photo in the background there is generally a forced version with the same ring to increase thrust during a vertical start).

      Summary: The aerodynamic design is old, but working. The device looms interesting.
  4. Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 10 May 2016 15: 45
    0
    This can actually be applied practically, for example, for PLO.
  5. fzr1000
    fzr1000 10 May 2016 15: 52
    +2
    As always, one question is whose engines?
  6. drilled
    drilled 10 May 2016 16: 07
    +9
    Here it turned out)))
  7. Pate
    Pate 10 May 2016 16: 33
    +1
    And this is wonderful, there is an answer to NATO drones.
    1. dvina71
      dvina71 10 May 2016 16: 40
      +2
      Quote: Pate
      And that's great, there is an answer to NATO drones

      The answer to NATO drones is electronic warfare and air defense systems.
  8. Verdun
    Verdun 10 May 2016 17: 08
    +2
    The flight prototype of the Fregat UAV successfully passed the tests
    From the successful completion of the test to the launch of the series, years often pass. In addition, in-plant testing is one thing, and testing for adoption is something else. How many prototypes created remain prototypes ...
  9. NordUral
    NordUral 10 May 2016 17: 45
    +1
    Great news, like the circuit of the device itself. To see the issue at a reasonable price in the series.
  10. bad
    bad 10 May 2016 17: 57
    +2
    Quote: Mountain Shooter
    Serious device. Very original aerodynamic design. Practically - a triplane, and the rear wing - reverse sweep. That would be to find out, does it make any sense besides futuristic design and attracting attention (and money)?
    ... with all due respect, colleague, personally, I do not think that the designer made such a scheme for the sake of "creativity" and self-promotion or just a joke for .. too serious characteristics are declared .. I have no doubt that the goals of such a "bird" will correspond hi ..have only produced and purchased, they will find business .. fellow
  11. K-50
    K-50 10 May 2016 18: 18
    +4
    According to him, "" Frigate "will be able to carry up to 1700 a kilogram of payload during takeoff," in an aircraft "and up to one ton - during a helicopter takeoff."

    Interestingly, if this "Frigate" is turned into a manned version, then it will be able to transport 8-10 men quickly and with all the equipment, if, of course, it can land on a helicopter, just in case. winked
  12. godofwar6699
    godofwar6699 10 May 2016 19: 04
    0
    Quote: Mountain Shooter
    Serious device. Very original aerodynamic design. Practically - a triplane, and the rear wing - reverse sweep. That would be to find out, does it make any sense besides futuristic design and attracting attention (and money)?
    1. eskela
      eskela 10 May 2016 19: 07
      0
      reverse wing sweep at subsonic speed is very good for maneuvers, sort of like that)
  13. eskela
    eskela 10 May 2016 19: 04
    +2
    the device will perform a wide range of tasks: from air monitoring to prompt cargo delivery. ”
    by operational cargo delivery, as I understand it, they mean missiles laughing
  14. DenZ
    DenZ 10 May 2016 20: 34
    +3
    From the point of view of aerodynamics, the device is very interesting. Combine the direct and reverse sweep in one aircraft, and even give it the properties of a tiltrotor — for this, a fantasy is also needed.
  15. nazar_0753
    nazar_0753 10 May 2016 21: 12
    +1
    Rather, they would have already switched to combat. And then, in this area, unfortunately, the catastrophic failure crying
  16. nvn_co
    nvn_co 11 May 2016 10: 17
    -2
    That is not! Crap! An articulated wing is certainly good, and stability and controllability .... But here is maintenance, repair, and so on, the cost is finally ... Somehow it looks like money laundering ... And what tests have been successfully passed? Raised in the sky, put on the wing? They blew through a pipe or something and successfully drew three poles ...?  I would not want to offend aviation enthusiasts in any case, but the author simply tore off something into the world .... If it’s flying, then why didn’t you indicate the parameters ... Well, at least the area or the wingspan, there are speeds ... That and on the aviation forums didn’t run about him. Although no! It ran a couple of times once at the exhibition it was shown (a bench model) and asked for money from the state, so let’s say, and we will cut them ... :-)
    Then ... they say that it will carry 1700 (by plane, then, assuming that the target load is 0,21 - 0,23, and with a range of 10 hours and specific fuel consumption, 0,3 if piston or 0,22 - gas-turbine) the relative mass of fuel will be 0,18-0,25, that is, the maximum take-off will be more than 7500 kg, in the range of 7000 - 9000. Well? And the hell is such crap, complex in design, with such masses? Like a combat UAV - Not! A fairy tale is all deception ....
  17. nvn_co
    nvn_co 11 May 2016 10: 21
    -1
    The army needs classics, simplicity, reliability and speed in service !!! And these futuristic sculptures for books like "we build the plane ourselves" ...
    Although maybe as a demonstrator ... then, yes! So write that demonstrator
    1. Ardein
      Ardein 11 May 2016 16: 24
      +1
      Quote: nvn_co
      The army needs classics, simplicity, reliability and speed in service !!! And these futuristic sculptures for books like "we build the plane ourselves" ...
      Although maybe as a demonstrator ... then, yes! So write that demonstrator

      About 15 years ago, at the junior courses of the FALT MIPT, this scheme was considered among others. There are pros, there are cons. In the case of UAVs, the pros can outweigh the cons.
      1. nvn_co
        nvn_co 11 May 2016 16: 41
        -3
        Well, first of all, I am not saying that this is a bad scheme - it is good, but for the devices at the ULV meeting in Koktebel. Maybe when Boeing or Airbus get a "passenger" or "transport" from it. But if they haven’t melted yet, but have tried, then it’s even wrong! And this is my opinion. It may differ from others, but I think that it is "crap" to make a car with an articulated wing for a UAV, and even a combat one ... I also considered this scheme 15 years ago for "introduction to aviation", and then every year compared it with others, and on aerodynamics, and on dynamics ..., and on structure, and on strength, and on reliability, and on design ... and so on. So, believe me ... And if you don't believe me, we open Sergei Mikhailovich Yeger or Badyagin or Mukhamedov. They have everything written, why this scheme and why ...
    2. BARKHAN
      BARKHAN 12 May 2016 10: 09
      +3
      Quote: nvn_co
      The army needs classics, simplicity, reliability and speed in service !!! And these futuristic sculptures for books like "we build the plane ourselves" ...
      Although maybe as a demonstrator ... then, yes! So write that demonstrator

      Archery arrows probably said the same thing, when they saw firearms, you need a classic ... Yes, and sailors spat upon seeing ships ... Are propeller-driven airplanes in front of jet ones also a classic?
      No one really knows anything, but the discussion is heated. If they do something, then military secrets will be respected there.
  18. The comment was deleted.
  19. Ardein
    Ardein 11 May 2016 16: 35
    +1
    Quote: nvn_co
    That is not! Crap!

    Normal circuit. Along the way, by placing fans in the ring and even between the wing consoles, they immediately receive two profits - vertical take-off (since the fans are located near the center of mass) and a decrease in the interference of the front and rear wings. Yes, and spread wings for the same.
    "+" schemes in light weight with high structural strength and aerodynamic quality. I strongly doubt that in the case of a UAV, someone will greatly complicate the internal structure of the wings, so that their "maintenance" would cause any problems. In contrast to really full-size aircraft built according to this scheme.
    1. nvn_co
      nvn_co 11 May 2016 17: 00
      -1
      "I strongly doubt that in the case of a UAV, someone will greatly complicate the internal structure of the wings, so that their 'maintenance' would cause any problems. In contrast to the really full-sized aircraft built according to this scheme." Articulated wing design is already a complex combination !!! There will always be problems, just go to the test site and see how the ordinary operation of "simple" UAVs goes. "Along the way, by placing the fans in the ring, and even between the wing consoles, they immediately get two profits - vertical take-off (since the fans are located near the center of mass) and a decrease in the interference of the front and rear wings. And the wings were blown apart for the same.
      "+" schemes in light weight with high structural strength and aerodynamic quality "
      - You yourself understood what you wrote? laughing