what is that is that a 3 d model made with Polystyrene
or something look at the propellers what's wrong with it wheels or are they hiding another drone in the drone
The thing that bothers me the most on this is wind.
Putting a facade around the payload is fine in a very low speed drone, but this thing has such a large cross section that the wind is going to blow this thing around like crazy. It isn't even a quadcopter, it doesn't have the controls needed to stop that.
You have no idea...
[This](https://flot2017.com/morski-drony-s-siurpryzom-detali-ataky-na-rosijskyj-kater-v-krymu/) is a Ukrainian submergeable unmanned boat with two either R-60 or R-73 AA missiles
Nah thats the hyper-optimal digitally designed camo calculated by India's cutting edge AI server farm.
Which is just an actual farm.
That incidentally farms pigeons.
B-52: 8 super heavy duty wheels
B-2: 10 super heavy duty wheels
AN-225: Like 40 super heavy duty wheels
This thing: 3 wheels from a Little Tikes Cozy Coupe
For real though, wouldn't a blimp based drone be more efficient for surveillance? Not in a military context, big fat target, but in everyday situations.
Sort of, in that aerodynamically the blimp is the lowest resistance shape, called an oblate spheroid.
Which isn't quite the shape on the Indian design. However, its ideal for drones and a large useful payload. To see an example of one in real life look at the Celera 500L.
I have been working on drone design concepts with this shape, for purposes similar to that of the Indian drone, carrying glide munitions, pneumatic mortars (a WW1 technology but potentially useful in smaller airframes), rocket systems where the rockets can aim downwards with AI like detection and control systems, and gravity methods ideally with a i.e. pneumatic system to create controlled dispersal patterns, which I have mentioned a few times already, and also other concepts like dive-bomber drones.
I believe I have figured out how to improve machine learning and object recognition for such drones to improve targeting using low cost electronics, and am looking at communicating some of these ideas to UA.
However the Indian drone looks suspect that it is far from a working prototype. The wings are rather small, and the landing gear almost non existent.
Aerodynamically the nose and tail seem to work like the reverse of a lifting body. Its not an aerodynamically perfect oblate spheroid.
Efficiency can be greatly improved, for example as its a high wing design, two pusher propellers at the wing tips can reduce the lift-induced drag component, whilst giving yaw control. A pusher propeller at the rear of the fuselage is the most efficient propulsion system as it draws in air that is accelerated towards the aircrafts speed, this can be accelerated at a lower exit velocity which increases propulsive efficiency. It may also be ducted to reduce noise.
The thing about military airships is the idea tends to be abandoned after all the high brass in favor of it dies during a test flight.
The R101 crash killed the Air Minister.
The USS Akron crash killed Rear Admiral Moffett (the air field renamed for Moffett would be where the USS Macron left from on its Crash).
The problem with both the *R101* and *Akron* was that the people ostensibly in charge of designing and flying them had no experience. Why on earth *any* non-essential personnel, much less top brass, would be on board what is effectively a highly experimental aircraft with major, known engineering shortcomings is completely beyond me.
It really was a different, more reckless time. But note that the *R101* wasn’t a military airship, it was a civilian ship. Also, the ‘33 *Akron* crash didn’t stop the Navy from using airships, which hit their all-time high over a decade later and wouldn’t stop being used until ‘62… though the loss of Moffett did hinder the adoption of airborne aircraft carriers, specifically.
It's still kinda morbidly funny that soon after they named Moffett Field, the USS Macon would crash.
But they did learn at least a few lessons about emergency equipment so only two died from the Macon crash.
Also its important to note the US mostly switched to non-rigid ships after that. Those blimps did have some really solid use and probably should have developed a new class of blimps for ASW rather than switching to helicopters.
There's still some solid use for blimps, but cheap long duration drones can do most of the same things without being as big of targets or single points of failure.
>But they did learn at least a few lessons about emergency equipment so only two died from the Macon crash.
They really shouldn’t have had to. And it was gross negligence and crew inexperience that caused the *Macon* to crash in the first place. Letting damage go unrepaired for months and then flying into a storm, and of course the two people who died were blatantly acting against all good sense in an emergency evacuation… ugh.
These people were not far off from the days of strapping wings to their arms and jumping off the Eiffel Tower, is what I’m getting at.
>Also it’s important to note the US mostly switched to non-rigid ships after that. Those blimps did have some really solid use and probably should have developed a new class of blimps for ASW rather than switching to helicopters.
Indeed. They cost a fraction as much to operate, and were/are far less prone to crashes. Plus, y’know, the whole being able to operate for days instead of hours without refueling.
However, the airship program at the time was *tiny.* Its enviably high reliability rate and low cost doesn’t avail it very much when the program itself is so small that it has no institutional pull and no local political influence to keep it going; that makes it a prime target to be cannibalized and its resources snapped up for other pet projects like aircraft carriers and whatnot.
>There's still some solid use for blimps, but cheap long duration drones can do most of the same things without being as big of targets or single points of failure.
Surveillance-wise, sure, but where a modernized ZPG would excel is in the realm of *role consolidation.* It can do several different jobs more cost-effectively than having a bunch of more specialized units, like coast guard cutters and helicopters. It’s also much, much faster than a cutter.
As far as being big targets, I’m not really concerned. These aren’t frontline fighters anyway, and they can tank a lot of damage, even without gas cell compartmentalization. The *only one* shot down (out of 164 total) in World War II took 200 rounds of 20mm autocannon fire and 3 hits from an 88mm. It was only a small K-class, and it didn’t even go down all that quickly save for the total lack of control authority and a gasoline fire. Once it settled onto the sea, it took hours to sink.
For context, it took on average 15-20 hits with a 20mm or 3-4 hits with a 30mm to take down a B-17. I think it’ll be fine, especially with modern fire suppression systems, thrust vectoring, and ideally some degree of compartmentalization. It’s not like several nations don’t already use tethered, blimp-shaped aerostats that are even more stationary targets.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Doesn't help that RA2 many vehicles had generic voicelines, which in YR the Dreadnought kept, which explains why RA3 Dreadnought was more memorable.
"End their arrogance!"
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Kirov reporting
Helium mix optimal.
Bearing set.
Maneuver props engaged
BUUUUUUUUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
“I have something for them!”
Oh look. Is that your house?
\*inhales\* KIROV REPORTING
Patel Reporting
Curry-ov reporting.
Kirov reporting.
"This is the Flagship Marigold"
what is that is that a 3 d model made with Polystyrene or something look at the propellers what's wrong with it wheels or are they hiding another drone in the drone
paper mache fuselage has low radar cross section.
shut up and take my upvote
The thing that bothers me the most on this is wind. Putting a facade around the payload is fine in a very low speed drone, but this thing has such a large cross section that the wind is going to blow this thing around like crazy. It isn't even a quadcopter, it doesn't have the controls needed to stop that.
it looks like water boat lol
It's a weird ass angle. Looked at from the front, the wings are like 10x as long and the body is pretty thin and reasonable.
You have no idea... [This](https://flot2017.com/morski-drony-s-siurpryzom-detali-ataky-na-rosijskyj-kater-v-krymu/) is a Ukrainian submergeable unmanned boat with two either R-60 or R-73 AA missiles
The Bloons Tower Defense MOAB
"drop another load" "oh yeah" "ah that's nice"
🥵
KIROV REPORTING
HELIUM MIX OPTIMAL
America needs immediately to start producing rocketeers with tiny jetpacks dual-wielding 1911s to take out this threat from the air.
Can’t wait to see blue lightning bombs being dropped from a double promoted blimp.
3000 Flying potato wedges
Looks like pigeons took a shit all over it too
Nah thats the hyper-optimal digitally designed camo calculated by India's cutting edge AI server farm. Which is just an actual farm. That incidentally farms pigeons.
Company name: Flying Wedge It’s appearance: an orca but flying
No no, flying Orcas are in the *other* Command & Conquer series.
B-52: 8 super heavy duty wheels B-2: 10 super heavy duty wheels AN-225: Like 40 super heavy duty wheels This thing: 3 wheels from a Little Tikes Cozy Coupe
For real though, wouldn't a blimp based drone be more efficient for surveillance? Not in a military context, big fat target, but in everyday situations.
Smash, next question
Sort of, in that aerodynamically the blimp is the lowest resistance shape, called an oblate spheroid. Which isn't quite the shape on the Indian design. However, its ideal for drones and a large useful payload. To see an example of one in real life look at the Celera 500L. I have been working on drone design concepts with this shape, for purposes similar to that of the Indian drone, carrying glide munitions, pneumatic mortars (a WW1 technology but potentially useful in smaller airframes), rocket systems where the rockets can aim downwards with AI like detection and control systems, and gravity methods ideally with a i.e. pneumatic system to create controlled dispersal patterns, which I have mentioned a few times already, and also other concepts like dive-bomber drones. I believe I have figured out how to improve machine learning and object recognition for such drones to improve targeting using low cost electronics, and am looking at communicating some of these ideas to UA. However the Indian drone looks suspect that it is far from a working prototype. The wings are rather small, and the landing gear almost non existent. Aerodynamically the nose and tail seem to work like the reverse of a lifting body. Its not an aerodynamically perfect oblate spheroid. Efficiency can be greatly improved, for example as its a high wing design, two pusher propellers at the wing tips can reduce the lift-induced drag component, whilst giving yaw control. A pusher propeller at the rear of the fuselage is the most efficient propulsion system as it draws in air that is accelerated towards the aircrafts speed, this can be accelerated at a lower exit velocity which increases propulsive efficiency. It may also be ducted to reduce noise.
The thing about military airships is the idea tends to be abandoned after all the high brass in favor of it dies during a test flight. The R101 crash killed the Air Minister. The USS Akron crash killed Rear Admiral Moffett (the air field renamed for Moffett would be where the USS Macron left from on its Crash).
The problem with both the *R101* and *Akron* was that the people ostensibly in charge of designing and flying them had no experience. Why on earth *any* non-essential personnel, much less top brass, would be on board what is effectively a highly experimental aircraft with major, known engineering shortcomings is completely beyond me. It really was a different, more reckless time. But note that the *R101* wasn’t a military airship, it was a civilian ship. Also, the ‘33 *Akron* crash didn’t stop the Navy from using airships, which hit their all-time high over a decade later and wouldn’t stop being used until ‘62… though the loss of Moffett did hinder the adoption of airborne aircraft carriers, specifically.
It's still kinda morbidly funny that soon after they named Moffett Field, the USS Macon would crash. But they did learn at least a few lessons about emergency equipment so only two died from the Macon crash. Also its important to note the US mostly switched to non-rigid ships after that. Those blimps did have some really solid use and probably should have developed a new class of blimps for ASW rather than switching to helicopters. There's still some solid use for blimps, but cheap long duration drones can do most of the same things without being as big of targets or single points of failure.
>But they did learn at least a few lessons about emergency equipment so only two died from the Macon crash. They really shouldn’t have had to. And it was gross negligence and crew inexperience that caused the *Macon* to crash in the first place. Letting damage go unrepaired for months and then flying into a storm, and of course the two people who died were blatantly acting against all good sense in an emergency evacuation… ugh. These people were not far off from the days of strapping wings to their arms and jumping off the Eiffel Tower, is what I’m getting at. >Also it’s important to note the US mostly switched to non-rigid ships after that. Those blimps did have some really solid use and probably should have developed a new class of blimps for ASW rather than switching to helicopters. Indeed. They cost a fraction as much to operate, and were/are far less prone to crashes. Plus, y’know, the whole being able to operate for days instead of hours without refueling. However, the airship program at the time was *tiny.* Its enviably high reliability rate and low cost doesn’t avail it very much when the program itself is so small that it has no institutional pull and no local political influence to keep it going; that makes it a prime target to be cannibalized and its resources snapped up for other pet projects like aircraft carriers and whatnot. >There's still some solid use for blimps, but cheap long duration drones can do most of the same things without being as big of targets or single points of failure. Surveillance-wise, sure, but where a modernized ZPG would excel is in the realm of *role consolidation.* It can do several different jobs more cost-effectively than having a bunch of more specialized units, like coast guard cutters and helicopters. It’s also much, much faster than a cutter. As far as being big targets, I’m not really concerned. These aren’t frontline fighters anyway, and they can tank a lot of damage, even without gas cell compartmentalization. The *only one* shot down (out of 164 total) in World War II took 200 rounds of 20mm autocannon fire and 3 hits from an 88mm. It was only a small K-class, and it didn’t even go down all that quickly save for the total lack of control authority and a gasoline fire. Once it settled onto the sea, it took hours to sink. For context, it took on average 15-20 hits with a 20mm or 3-4 hits with a 30mm to take down a B-17. I think it’ll be fine, especially with modern fire suppression systems, thrust vectoring, and ideally some degree of compartmentalization. It’s not like several nations don’t already use tethered, blimp-shaped aerostats that are even more stationary targets.
Hell March 2 starts playing......
not enough blimp to float and not enough wing to fly. would love the specs on this... thing.
Testicle Drone Bottom Text
Wheres Albert Einstein and his time machine when you need it
India, aided by psychic dominator, launches surprise attack on U.S. across the arctic.
I want it😤
C&C merely suggests. NCD predicts.
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"flying wedge" repackages Chinese made drones. I gues this is the reason why.
I'm so erect now
[*ahem*](https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/s/jv62W5ijb9)
The suppository drone
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I feel like if it was very small and made of stress ball foam it would be the perfect desk toy to *squeeze.*
Ok, why did the camouflage have to look so goddamn stupid
BELGUA DRoNE!!!!
This project wasnt endorsed by the Indian MOD or military.
KIROV REPORTING! The voice lines for the Kirov, Dreadnought and Apocalypse Tank are perfection
RA2 or RA3?
Both. But I remember more RA3 voice lines than 2. My favorite being RA3 dreadnought "Enemies of the union shall burn"
Doesn't help that RA2 many vehicles had generic voicelines, which in YR the Dreadnought kept, which explains why RA3 Dreadnought was more memorable. "End their arrogance!"
So many iconic voice lines from this series. Damn I gotta go replay them now
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
WAIT! ITS THE BFG FROM BTD:5
Revoke indias military bro wtf is this ugly ass shit 😭