[video of explosions in the report]

<https://mil.in.ua/en/news/jet-drones-begin-attacking-russia/>

On the night of July 14, a jet drone of an unknown type crashed in the
Kursk region.

The Russian media reported about the incident.

Around 00:30 a.m., an explosion blasted out in the city of Kurchatov, Kursk
Region. An unknown UAV flew at a low altitude with a specific sound, which
made the locals confuse it with an airplane.

According to local residents, the unknown drone hit the top of a tree and
fell near one of the houses.

The wreckage of the drone scattered over a large area, some of it fell into
a local reservoir.

According to the fragments of the drone found at the site, it was an
aircraft-type UAV with a wing made of composite material. However, based on
the available photos, it is difficult to estimate the approximate
dimensions of the UAV.

Traces of burning can be seen on the wreckage, indicating the presence of
fuel tanks and, accordingly, an internal combustion engine.

Debris found at the crash site of the unknown drone, were later identified
as a Kingtech K-210G jet engine. The turbine is made in Taiwan and is sold
on the civilian market for $3,000.

The manufacturer’s website states that the engine weighing 1.7 kg is
capable of providing a thrust of 21 kg, and its consumption is 590 g of
fuel per minute. It means that for a flight lasting 1 hour, an aircraft
with one turbine must have 28 liters of kerosene.

To ensure the flight, the thrust of the aircraft must be at least 30% of
its mass, so it can be assumed that the weight of the drone did not exceed
50-60 kilograms. This estimate also correlates with the size of the
fuselage fragments.

If the reports about the drone falling due to crashing into a tree are
true, then the drone is not equipped with an optical station. This means
that, above all, the UAV was controlled by an inertial control system with
corrections based on GPS signals. Thus hitting a tree can be explained by
the wrong choice of flight height.

The absence of an optical system clearly indicates that the unknown drone
was not used for reconnaissance and was probably created as a kamikaze
drone, carrying a combat unit on board.

--
Spike

On 15/07/2023 09:13, Spike wrote:
> The manufacturer’s website states that the engine weighing 1.7 kg is
> capable of providing a thrust of 21 kg, and its consumption is 590 g of
> fuel per minute. It means that for a flight lasting 1 hour, an aircraft
> with one turbine must have 28 liters of kerosene.
>
> To ensure the flight, the thrust of the aircraft must be at least 30% of
> its mass, so it can be assumed that the weight of the drone did not exceed
> 50-60 kilograms. This estimate also correlates with the size of the
> fuselage fragments.
>
Utter bollocks. The *static* thrust is almost irrelevant to the ability
to fly a plane.
A glider can fly almost indefinitely with no thrust at all. A typical
lift to drag of a well designed aircraft is somewhere in the 10-30 ratio
so no more than about one tenth of the planes weight is need as
*dynamic* thrust to *keep it airborne*.
Since the exhaust velocity of a turbojet is way above the planes flying
speed it (dynamic thrust) is virtually the same thrust as static thrust.
More is needed to climb out of sink etc, but really not as much as you
might think.

> If the reports about the drone falling due to crashing into a tree are
> true, then the drone is not equipped with an optical station. This means
> that, above all, the UAV was controlled by an inertial control system with
> corrections based on GPS signals. Thus hitting a tree can be explained by
> the wrong choice of flight height.
>
That sound relatively reasonable. Although there may be other reasons. A
relatively underpowered drone might hit a downdraught or wind shear at
low altitude and be unable to climb out. Or it might have simply run out
of fuel.

> The absence of an optical system clearly indicates that the unknown drone
> was not used for reconnaissance and was probably created as a kamikaze
> drone, carrying a combat unit on board.
>
Not really. It could be simply there to locate the positions of
anti-aircraft radar and anti-aircraft weaponry. To test a route that a
Storm Shadow will use next week, or spot radar installations using a
UK/US Rivet Joint patrolling beyond te boirders at extreme height...we
know that the so called counter offensive is just shaping operations so
far, and its main purpose is to attrite Russian combat power and
logistics supply lines using artillery and missiles without exposing
Ukrainian troops too much.

Such an aircraft is ideal to do medium range penetration to see if it
gets shot down or lights up enemy radar positions. It could easily carry
a starlink modem to transmit data to the internet from any sensors it
may or may not have.

And it makes Russian defence look like crap, which is good propaganda.

It sounds like a typically ingenious model aircraft equipped with a
model jet engine, GPS and auto pilot cobbled together by Ukraine. Or in
fact a Russian aeromodeller.

Who knows?

--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)

Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.

On 15/07/2023 09:13, Spike wrote:
>
> [video of explosions in the report]
>
> <https://mil.in.ua/en/news/jet-drones-begin-attacking-russia/>
>
> On the night of July 14, a jet drone of an unknown type crashed in the
> Kursk region.
>
>
> etc etc

"A bad choice of altitude caused it to crash in to a tree"

On 15/07/2023 12:33, GB wrote:
> Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
> effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.

It depends upon what you want from an engine. Jets provide more power,
but also use more fuel. With propellers, you also need to consider prop
tip speed, which limits the speeds the aircraft can achieve. So, an ICE
is a good choice for long range, but a jet is better for high speed.

--
Colin Bignell

GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote:

> Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
> effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.

It’s much easier to reduce the radar signature of a powered air vehicle if
it has a jet engine rather than a propeller. If designing for low radar
signature against ground-based systems, the engine can be buried in a duct
on top of the airframe that ground radar can’t ‘see’.

In this context the use of composite materials in the drone’s structure is
interesting, as they can be tailored for signature control.

This drone made it all the way from an unknown start point to the city of
Kurchatov, only to hit a tree, so it had something going for it.

--
Spike

On 15/07/2023 12:33, GB wrote:
> Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
> effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.
>
>
You ought to be able to get > 200mph cruise with a model jet.

That is the only advantage I can see.
--
“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that
the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt."

- Bertrand Russell

On 15/07/2023 13:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 15/07/2023 12:33, GB wrote:
>> Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
>> effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.
>>
>>
> You ought to be able to get > 200mph cruise with a model jet.
>
> That is the only advantage I can see.

Which could be important if, as you suggested as a possibility, the
purpose was to test air defences. There has been more than one air
defence system that was unable to track fast moving aircraft.

--
Colin Bignell

On 15 Jul 2023 at 13:58:08 BST, "The Natural Philosopher"
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 15/07/2023 12:33, GB wrote:
>> Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
>> effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.
>>
>>
> You ought to be able to get > 200mph cruise with a model jet.
>
> That is the only advantage I can see.

The jet engine only weighed a few pounds. What would a 4 cylinder ICE weigh?

--
"People don't buy Microsoft for quality, they buy it for compatibility with what Bob in accounting bought last year. Trace it back - they buy Microsoft because the IBM Selectric didn't suck much" - P Seebach, afc

Am 15/07/2023 um 08:13 schrieb Spike:
>
> [video of explosions in the report]
>
> <https://mil.in.ua/en/news/jet-drones-begin-attacking-russia/>
>
> On the night of July 14, a jet drone of an unknown type crashed in the
> Kursk region.
>
> The Russian media reported about the incident.
>
> Around 00:30 a.m., an explosion blasted out in the city of Kurchatov, Kursk
> Region. An unknown UAV flew at a low altitude with a specific sound, which
> made the locals confuse it with an airplane.
>
> According to local residents, the unknown drone hit the top of a tree and
> fell near one of the houses.
>
> The wreckage of the drone scattered over a large area, some of it fell into
> a local reservoir.
>
> According to the fragments of the drone found at the site, it was an
> aircraft-type UAV with a wing made of composite material. However, based on
> the available photos, it is difficult to estimate the approximate
> dimensions of the UAV.
>
> Traces of burning can be seen on the wreckage, indicating the presence of
> fuel tanks and, accordingly, an internal combustion engine.
>
> Debris found at the crash site of the unknown drone, were later identified
> as a Kingtech K-210G jet engine. The turbine is made in Taiwan and is sold
> on the civilian market for $3,000.
>
> The manufacturer’s website states that the engine weighing 1.7 kg is
> capable of providing a thrust of 21 kg, and its consumption is 590 g of
> fuel per minute. It means that for a flight lasting 1 hour, an aircraft
> with one turbine must have 28 liters of kerosene.
>
> To ensure the flight, the thrust of the aircraft must be at least 30% of
> its mass, so it can be assumed that the weight of the drone did not exceed
> 50-60 kilograms. This estimate also correlates with the size of the
> fuselage fragments.
>
> If the reports about the drone falling due to crashing into a tree are
> true, then the drone is not equipped with an optical station. This means
> that, above all, the UAV was controlled by an inertial control system with
> corrections based on GPS signals. Thus hitting a tree can be explained by
> the wrong choice of flight height.
>
> The absence of an optical system clearly indicates that the unknown drone
> was not used for reconnaissance and was probably created as a kamikaze
> drone, carrying a combat unit on board.
>
>

Time to admit Ukraine cannot win this war?

--
Ottavio Caruso

On Saturday, 15 July 2023 at 14:03:51 UTC+1, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 15/07/2023 13:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> > On 15/07/2023 12:33, GB wrote:
> >> Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
> >> effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.
> >>
> >>
> > You ought to be able to get > 200mph cruise with a model jet.
> >
> > That is the only advantage I can see.
> Which could be important if, as you suggested as a possibility, the
> purpose was to test air defences. There has been more than one air
> defence system that was unable to track fast moving aircraft.

.... and many that fail to see slowly moving aircraft (or balloons)
because their returns get filtered out by ground clutter removal software.
John

On 15/07/2023 15:32, John Walliker wrote:
> On Saturday, 15 July 2023 at 14:03:51 UTC+1, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 15/07/2023 13:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 15/07/2023 12:33, GB wrote:
>>>> Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
>>>> effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> You ought to be able to get > 200mph cruise with a model jet.
>>>
>>> That is the only advantage I can see.
>> Which could be important if, as you suggested as a possibility, the
>> purpose was to test air defences. There has been more than one air
>> defence system that was unable to track fast moving aircraft.
>
> ... and many that fail to see slowly moving aircraft (or balloons)
> because their returns get filtered out by ground clutter removal software.
> John

Even before ground clutter removal software, the AA gunners on the
Bismark had trouble targeting Swordfish torpedo bombers because their
sights were not calibrated for anything flying that slowly.

Presumably, you would choose the drone to match, as closely as possible,
the speed of the aircraft you want to get past the defences.

--
Colin Bignell

On 15/07/2023 14:12, Tim Streater wrote:
> On 15 Jul 2023 at 13:58:08 BST, "The Natural Philosopher"
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 15/07/2023 12:33, GB wrote:
>>> Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
>>> effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.
>>>
>>>
>> You ought to be able to get > 200mph cruise with a model jet.
>>
>> That is the only advantage I can see.
>
> The jet engine only weighed a few pounds. What would a 4 cylinder ICE weigh?
>

The Shahed is quite a big drone, but you can get model aircraft ICEs
that are very light, yet pretty powerful. I was thinking that range
would be a big issue, so fuel economy might be the primary concern.

And you believe this? I think I'd only start to worry if they came equipped
with time delay explosives or some kind of nuclear material.

Brian

--

--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Spike" <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote in message
news:khf2ptF5ukiU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> [video of explosions in the report]
>
> <https://mil.in.ua/en/news/jet-drones-begin-attacking-russia/>
>
> On the night of July 14, a jet drone of an unknown type crashed in the
> Kursk region.
>
> The Russian media reported about the incident.
>
> Around 00:30 a.m., an explosion blasted out in the city of Kurchatov,
> Kursk
> Region. An unknown UAV flew at a low altitude with a specific sound, which
> made the locals confuse it with an airplane.
>
> According to local residents, the unknown drone hit the top of a tree and
> fell near one of the houses.
>
> The wreckage of the drone scattered over a large area, some of it fell
> into
> a local reservoir.
>
> According to the fragments of the drone found at the site, it was an
> aircraft-type UAV with a wing made of composite material. However, based
> on
> the available photos, it is difficult to estimate the approximate
> dimensions of the UAV.
>
> Traces of burning can be seen on the wreckage, indicating the presence of
> fuel tanks and, accordingly, an internal combustion engine.
>
> Debris found at the crash site of the unknown drone, were later identified
> as a Kingtech K-210G jet engine. The turbine is made in Taiwan and is sold
> on the civilian market for $3,000.
>
> The manufacturer's website states that the engine weighing 1.7 kg is
> capable of providing a thrust of 21 kg, and its consumption is 590 g of
> fuel per minute. It means that for a flight lasting 1 hour, an aircraft
> with one turbine must have 28 liters of kerosene.
>
> To ensure the flight, the thrust of the aircraft must be at least 30% of
> its mass, so it can be assumed that the weight of the drone did not exceed
> 50-60 kilograms. This estimate also correlates with the size of the
> fuselage fragments.
>
> If the reports about the drone falling due to crashing into a tree are
> true, then the drone is not equipped with an optical station. This means
> that, above all, the UAV was controlled by an inertial control system with
> corrections based on GPS signals. Thus hitting a tree can be explained by
> the wrong choice of flight height.
>
> The absence of an optical system clearly indicates that the unknown drone
> was not used for reconnaissance and was probably created as a kamikaze
> drone, carrying a combat unit on board.
>
>
> --
> Spike

On 15/07/2023 14:12, Tim Streater wrote:
> On 15 Jul 2023 at 13:58:08 BST, "The Natural Philosopher"
> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 15/07/2023 12:33, GB wrote:
>>> Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
>>> effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.
>>>
>>>
>> You ought to be able to get > 200mph cruise with a model jet.
>>
>> That is the only advantage I can see.
>
> The jet engine only weighed a few pounds. What would a 4 cylinder ICE weigh?
>
a few lbs

--
"Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They
always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them"

Margaret Thatcher

On 15/07/2023 19:30, GB wrote:
> On 15/07/2023 14:12, Tim Streater wrote:
>> On 15 Jul 2023 at 13:58:08 BST, "The Natural Philosopher"
>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/07/2023 12:33, GB wrote:
>>>> Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
>>>> effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> You ought to be able to get > 200mph cruise with a model jet.
>>>
>>> That is the only advantage I can see.
>>
>> The jet engine only weighed a few pounds. What would a 4 cylinder ICE
>> weigh?
>>
>
> The Shahed is quite a big drone, but you can get model aircraft ICEs
> that are very light, yet pretty powerful.  I was thinking that range
> would be a big issue, so fuel economy might be the primary concern.
>
>
>
>
I think the smallest ICE I ever owned was a cox PeeWee .020 cu in. There
are smaller. about 0.1cc is the smallest

https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co8438974/model-0-1cc-internal-combustion-engine-model-representation

A typical ICE engine for a large model plane or drone would be into the
10-100cc range.

https://alshobbies.co.uk/engines-petrol

--
"Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They
always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them"

Margaret Thatcher

On Sun, 16 Jul 2023 09:40:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 15/07/2023 19:30, GB wrote:
>> On 15/07/2023 14:12, Tim Streater wrote:
>>> On 15 Jul 2023 at 13:58:08 BST, "The Natural Philosopher"
>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 15/07/2023 12:33, GB wrote:
>>>>> Is a Jet engine sensible in this sort of application? The quite
>>>>> effective Shahed drones use a 4 cylinder ICE.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> You ought to be able to get > 200mph cruise with a model jet.
>>>>
>>>> That is the only advantage I can see.
>>>
>>> The jet engine only weighed a few pounds. What would a 4 cylinder ICE
>>> weigh?
>>>
>>
>> The Shahed is quite a big drone, but you can get model aircraft ICEs
>> that are very light, yet pretty powerful.  I was thinking that range
>> would be a big issue, so fuel economy might be the primary concern.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>I think the smallest ICE I ever owned was a cox PeeWee .020 cu in. There
>are smaller. about 0.1cc is the smallest
>
Many years ago, circa 1957 I had a Mills 0.75cc (0.046 cu.in.) diesel.
Didn't know you could get smaller. https://tinyurl.com/2le4wofs

>https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co8438974/model-0-1cc-internal-combustion-engine-model-representation
>
Jeez! That is small!

>A typical ICE engine for a large model plane or drone would be into the
>10-100cc range.
>
>https://alshobbies.co.uk/engines-petrol

This is apparently home-made. An amazing piece of engineering.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL8HKUpodls

--
Chris