DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[Aniruddha Mulay]

with this, and recent crash,

Rustom-2 // Tapas BH-201 ko...

View attachment 219017

Not happening.
Crashes are a part and parcel of platform development.
Also this crash during an experimental test flight and not during user trials.

 

[Tridev123]

Not happening.
Crashes are a part and parcel of platform development.
Also this crash during an experimental test flight and not during user trials.

A mature observation.
A suggestion.
Why not integrate an parachute deployment system into Tapas.
I believe that the Tapas weighs around little over 2 tonnes.
I have seen small jeeps and even other heavier payloads being para dropped.
An parachute which can support the full weight of the Tapas can come into action in an emergency when a technical malfunction takes place and the situation cannot be redressed.
Of course the parachute can be operated only if the Tapas is at a minimum altitude. If it is too near the ground then obviously no parachute can function effectively.

The advantage we get by having a parachute recovery system is that the UAV(Tapas) can be salvaged with minimal damage and probably can be reused.

The major caveat is that the weight of the Tapas is kept low and a suitable parachute can be designed for a safe descent.

 

[Tridev123]

A mature observation.
A suggestion.
Why not integrate an parachute deployment system into Tapas.
I believe that the Tapas weighs around little over 2 tonnes.
I have seen small jeeps and even other heavier payloads being para dropped.
An parachute which can support the full weight of the Tapas can come into action in an emergency when a technical malfunction takes place and the situation cannot be redressed.
Of course the parachute can be operated only if the Tapas is at a minimum altitude. If it is too near the ground then obviously no parachute can function effectively.

The advantage we get by having a parachute recovery system is that the UAV(Tapas) can be salvaged with minimal damage and probably can be reused.

The major caveat is that the weight of the Tapas is kept low and a suitable parachute can be designed for a safe descent.

An addendum
This suggestion is relevant only when the Tapas is being tested on Indian soil.
If it is deployed on the borders and a chance exists of it straying across the border then obviously no parachute deployment/recovery system should be integrated into the UAV.
We certainly don't want Pakistan or China to get hold of an almost intact Tapas.

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

We certainly don't want Pakistan or China to get hold of an almost intact Tapas.

I doubt forces will fly a male platform in contested airspace ever these will be used for isr at borders at most not in there territory

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

 

[Bhaubai]

Kalyani can't stop winning 🫡

 

[Tridev123]

I doubt forces will fly a male platform in contested airspace ever these will be used for isr at borders at most not in there territory

Yes, the Tapas can be used for ISR purposes near the borders. Probably will stay a few kms inside Indian airspace. The distance maintained from the borders will also depend on how good the sensors are.
But nobody can rule out a sudden technical malfunction happening. With a top speed of around 220km/hour it will take only a few minutes for an out of control UAV(Tapas) to travel a few kms and cross the border into enemy territory/airspace.

So maybe it would be wise to plan for such a scenario and take precautions. One could even have a small stable explosive charge which would detonate if the on board computer senses an imminent ground collision in enemy territory.
Depends on what secret proprietary technologies we have incorporated into the UAV which should not fall into enemy hands.

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

Yes, the Tapas can be used for ISR purposes near the borders. Probably will stay a few kms inside Indian airspace. The distance maintained from the borders will also depend on how good the sensors are.
But nobody can rule out a sudden technical malfunction happening. With a top speed of around 220km/hour it will take only a few minutes for an out of control UAV(Tapas) to travel a few kms and cross the border into enemy territory/airspace.

So maybe it would be wise to plan for such a scenario and take precautions. One could even have a small stable explosive charge which would detonate if the on board computer senses an imminent ground collision in enemy territory.
Depends on what secret proprietary technologies we have incorporated into the UAV which should not fall into enemy hands.

Maybe have something like a kill switch

 

[Lonewarrior]

A mature observation.
A suggestion.
Why not integrate an parachute deployment system into Tapas.
I believe that the Tapas weighs around little over 2 tonnes.
I have seen small jeeps and even other heavier payloads being para dropped.
An parachute which can support the full weight of the Tapas can come into action in an emergency when a technical malfunction takes place and the situation cannot be redressed.
Of course the parachute can be operated only if the Tapas is at a minimum altitude. If it is too near the ground then obviously no parachute can function effectively.

The advantage we get by having a parachute recovery system is that the UAV(Tapas) can be salvaged with minimal damage and probably can be reused.

The major caveat is that the weight of the Tapas is kept low and a suitable parachute can be designed for a safe descent.

Killat

The biggest problem would be the weight of such system. The typical weight of an Parachute Airdrop System (Cargo) is around 30kg with a payload rating of 1ton. So for something like Tapas you'd be needing two such systems; 60kg. You've a quite limited payload of 350kg on a Tapas and also a relatively smaller fuel tank...so ultimately it becomes quite a tight situation to cut into any of those things to get that 60kg for parachute.

But let's assume we somehow manage to add it, what will happen after it's deployed? Well to put it mildly, something not that different from a crash. This is Tapas...

> long thin composite wings to have high aspect ratio for better efficiency
> wing mounted nacelles with 250kg engines comprising almost 12% of the total weight of the aircraft in a very small area; a dense part
> those four dots near the wing box are structurally the strongest points; best to mount parachute

So the problem starts when you consider what exactly the Air Drop Parachutes are designed for. For a very dense object like a jeep or a container whose majority of weight is concentrated in a very small volume. So when the parachute deployes the "jerk" is easily resisted. But in case of something like Tapas that "jerk" when the parachute would get deployed suddenly would wreck havoc. Because of inertia those two heavy engines would get separated from the plane, ripping the whole wing in the process. So will the tail assembly, though this time it would be drag applying force at the far end of a lever. So ultimately what little you'd recover would just be the central core of the fuselage.

To give you a better sense of what I'm trying to say, here's a real life example
Here's an Il-22M with its four engine nacelles

And here's the same aircraft after it was engaged with a missile. Notice something interesting?

Yup, it's lacking both it's outboard engine nacelles. The aerodynamic forces while tumbling down has effectively ripped them off the plane.

Though what you're saying is technically possible and not just that but actually used by an aircraft company called Cirrus. They have this system called CAPS that's used on all their planes but those planes are quite small with most of their mass concentrated at a very small point in the fuselage, so they're able to use it without any catastrophic structural damage.

 

[Lonewarrior]

An addendum
This suggestion is relevant only when the Tapas is being tested on Indian soil.
If it is deployed on the borders and a chance exists of it straying across the border then obviously no parachute deployment/recovery system should be integrated into the UAV.
We certainly don't want Pakistan or China to get hold of an almost intact Tapas.

Yes, the Tapas can be used for ISR purposes near the borders. Probably will stay a few kms inside Indian airspace. The distance maintained from the borders will also depend on how good the sensors are.
But nobody can rule out a sudden technical malfunction happening. With a top speed of around 220km/hour it will take only a few minutes for an out of control UAV(Tapas) to travel a few kms and cross the border into enemy territory/airspace.

So maybe it would be wise to plan for such a scenario and take precautions. One could even have a small stable explosive charge which would detonate if the on board computer senses an imminent ground collision in enemy territory.
Depends on what secret proprietary technologies we have incorporated into the UAV which should not fall into enemy hands.

Having explosives in any thing increases the hazard associated with it exponentially. As soon as you add the possibility of something going boom, you also add the possibility of it unintentionally going boom.

Now coming to the threat of it landing in enemy territory. Yup, it is a very valid threat as evident by North Korea copying RQ-4 and MQ-9. But the fact it, most of the hardware there is on an UAV is pretty much known to everyone. What's really secretive is the data it has and all the softwares it's been using. And to deal with that UAVs already have a "kill switch" that when activated first roasts (not just delete but literally roasts the circuits with HV current) all the data drives, then flight control softwares and lastly enters a final command to crash. This system can be either activated manually or automatically by things like a set GPS parameter or obstruction in ground control signal.

These were Gen Mark Milley's statement after that MQ-9 was crashed by a Russian Su-27 and the Russian were planning to recover it

Now it's up to you what you deduce by "mitigating measures"

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

 

[FireStar]

So we are making spike-er in india. why not mass-manufacture for the army?

 

[skunk works]

View attachment 218975

Tapas-cels still waiting for baraat but suhagraat has already happened

 

[Fatalis]

Indeginous SONAR for ASWSWC

 

[RedHood108]

China lost a Nuclear Powered Submarine

@mods please move this to appropriate thread if necessary.

 

[thebakofbakchod]

China lost a Nuclear Powered Submarine

View attachment 219133
@mods please move this to appropriate thread if necessary.

is this confirmed? even taiwan numah one is denying it

Chinese submarine crash rumor unsubstantiated: MND - Taipei Times

Bringing Taiwan to the World and the World to Taiwan

www.taipeitimes.com

 

[Tridev123]

Killat

The biggest problem would be the weight of such system. The typical weight of an Parachute Airdrop System (Cargo) is around 30kg with a payload rating of 1ton. So for something like Tapas you'd be needing two such systems; 60kg. You've a quite limited payload of 350kg on a Tapas and also a relatively smaller fuel tank...so ultimately it becomes quite a tight situation to cut into any of those things to get that 60kg for parachute.

But let's assume we somehow manage to add it, what will happen after it's deployed? Well to put it mildly, something not that different from a crash. This is Tapas...
View attachment 219074
> long thin composite wings to have high aspect ratio for better efficiency
> wing mounted nacelles with 250kg engines comprising almost 12% of the total weight of the aircraft in a very small area; a dense part
> those four dots near the wing box are structurally the strongest points; best to mount parachute

So the problem starts when you consider what exactly the Air Drop Parachutes are designed for. For a very dense object like a jeep or a container whose majority of weight is concentrated in a very small volume. So when the parachute deployes the "jerk" is easily resisted. But in case of something like Tapas that "jerk" when the parachute would get deployed suddenly would wreck havoc. Because of inertia those two heavy engines would get separated from the plane, ripping the whole wing in the process. So will the tail assembly, though this time it would be drag applying force at the far end of a lever. So ultimately what little you'd recover would just be the central core of the fuselage.

To give you a better sense of what I'm trying to say, here's a real life example
Here's an Il-22M with its four engine nacelles
View attachment 219077
And here's the same aircraft after it was engaged with a missile. Notice something interesting?
View attachment 219078
Yup, it's lacking both it's outboard engine nacelles. The aerodynamic forces while tumbling down has effectively ripped them off the plane.

Though what you're saying is technically possible and not just that but actually used by an aircraft company called Cirrus. They have this system called CAPS that's used on all their planes but those planes are quite small with most of their mass concentrated at a very small point in the fuselage, so they're able to use it without any catastrophic structural damage.

Well, you have gone quite deep technically into the issue.
Since you often like to go into the technical intricacies of the matter, I assume that you have an proper engineering background and your knowledge is not just Internet Knowledge.

Coming back to the point, yes, there will be technical challenges to be overcome before an parachute recovery system can be integrated into the Tapas. The cost, feasibility, the effect on the plane's aerodynamics etc are some of the factors to be taken into account.
I would like to point out one advantage of recovering the UAV almost intact. I am sure that it would help maintain the morale of the project team better. Imagine what effect it would have on the team morale if the Tapas had crashed and disintegrated into dozens of pieces and probably even caught fire.

Or maybe we can at least program the plane's software to take the Tapas into a controlled gradual glider/glide flight path to enable the UAV to make a soft descent. Thereby minimising the terminal velocity and limit crash damage.

On a different point, if you indeed have an engineering degree and you are very interested in science & technology, why not establish a defence startup and actually contribute to the national defence manufacturing effort. Even a small contribution will be commendable. Personally I would suggest a drone startup. And I would recommend an kamikaze/suicide drone product line up. I find the idea of a suicide drone very sexy. Pardon the language. The defence business atmosphere in India has changed quite dramatically in recent times. The Armed Forces are open to the idea of buying good useful defence products from even relatively small companies in the private sector. Provided that the products or services meet the quality, performance and cost parameters.

Anyway its up to you. Probably you are already working in a company catering to defence or already have an small manufacturing unit making defence products.

 

[Tridev123]

Having explosives in any thing increases the hazard associated with it exponentially. As soon as you add the possibility of something going boom, you also add the possibility of it unintentionally going boom.

Now coming to the threat of it landing in enemy territory. Yup, it is a very valid threat as evident by North Korea copying RQ-4 and MQ-9. But the fact it, most of the hardware there is on an UAV is pretty much known to everyone. What's really secretive is the data it has and all the softwares it's been using. And to deal with that UAVs already have a "kill switch" that when activated first roasts (not just delete but literally roasts the circuits with HV current) all the data drives, then flight control softwares and lastly enters a final command to crash. This system can be either activated manually or automatically by things like a set GPS parameter or obstruction in ground control signal.

These were Gen Mark Milley's statement after that MQ-9 was crashed by a Russian Su-27 and the Russian were planning to recover it
View attachment 219079
Now it's up to you what you deduce by "mitigating measures"

Yes, there can be many ways to safeguard the technology. A kill switch and high voltage current roasting of the computer internals is possible. Open to any idea that fulfills the objective.

 

[AnantS]

China lost a Nuclear Powered Submarine

View attachment 219133
@mods please move this to appropriate thread if necessary.

Alas US of today wont launch another Project Azorian