Jump to content

Drone aérien


Recommended Posts

Est ce que quelqu'un connais les définitions et les sous-genre des Drones, en Français et en Anglais Svp ?

UAV - Unmaned Air Vehicle

UCAV - Unmaned Combat Air Vehicle

MALE - Moyenne Altitude Longue Endurence + charge utile de 100 KG

HALE - haute altitude et longue endurance

Strike UAV - ???

Recce UAV - Drone de reconaissance

un UCAV peut etre un MALE ?

Strike UAV c'est different d'un UCAV ? tir d'opportunité ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

exemples: le RQ-1/MQ-1 est suivant les versions seulement un Recce UAV ou alors un Recce/Strike UAV et dans tous les cas est un drone MALE. le RQ-4 est un Recce UAV, mais cette fois HALE. un strike UAV est un drone capable de faire des missions d'attaque au sol ciblées comme le Predator RQ-1. un Tatical UAV est un petit drone de reco tactique souvent lancé par des rampes et utilisés par les armées de terre pour surveiller le champs de bataille. (pas totallement sur). Actuellement, les UCAV, neuron, X-45, etc. ne sont que des démonstrateurs technologiques. On est encore loin d'appareils de combat sans pilote. Les RQ-1 peuvent faire de l'air-sol de manière limitée (du genre élimination à la manière CIA...), mais je ne crois pas qu'on les qualifient d'UCAV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...



UAVs, Strikes and Deconfliction

The next issue of Defense Technology International will have an unmanned-vehicle focus, including a look at the challenges of operating UAVs in airspace that is shared with other traffic. Potential solutions to the problem abound - the trouble is that none has yet been proved, and that civil aviation regulators are charged with keeping the public safe rather than facilitating UAV operations.

The missing technology is already crimping UAV operations in the US (such as flight test and training). For other countries which don't have as much military-owned sky as the US, the problem is more severe:  the Reaper and Predator share the distinction of being the only RAF aircraft that have never operated in UK airspace, and nobody much expects that to change soon.

Last week at the IQPC Defense conference on UCAVs in London, Lt Col Dave Heideman of the USAF's LeMay Center for Doctrine Development and Education looked at some of those issues and showed a couple of videos, which don't seem to have been widely disseminated.

Here's the first, showing imagery from a UAV (probably a Predator) as a B-1 releases weapons on coordinates provided by the UAV:

Starting at 0:08, two CH-47 Chinooks blunder merrily into the scene. The state of mind onboard can only be imagined, not to mention the state of trousers.

In the second video, another UAV (looks like a lower-altitude Army bird) is doing street reconnaissance in an urban environment...

...when an AH-64 Apache cuts across its bows, seconds from a mid-air collision. As it is, the UAV hits the helicopter's rotor wake and pitches down, out of control - representing a small but potentially lethal bomb dropping randomly in a civilian-populated area.

In both cases, not everyone had the means to know who was in the airspace. Even if the B-1 had a Sniper pod, which it probably did not, its soda-straw view would not have detected the CH-47s as they ran into the bombing area. The same would go for the UAV operators.

In the Apache case, the UAV may simply have been too small to be easily detected by the helicopter crew. The UAV's only sensor was pointed downwards and forwards and the conflict had already taken place when the helicopter was first seen.

A Lancaster University professor working with BAE Systems, Dr Plaman Angelov, presented a novel approach to the "sense and avoid" problem at the conference. It is based on the fact that all objects emit a small amount of millimeter-wave radio-frequency energy.

The system is designed to determine the bearing and elevation of any MMW source, and to alert the crew or operator if the signal meets the three criteria for a collision course:  constant bearing, constant elevation and increasing strength.The techno-nifty feature: it can sort out threats with a low false-alarm rate without measuring range, which is hard to do with a passive system. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites


An unmanned surveillance aircraft has gone down on the outskirts of al-Kut city in the southern Iraqi province of Wasit which borders Iran.

A local police source, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Voices of Iraq news agency that the drone crashed on Friday close to the Delta Base of American forces. The base is situated seven kilometers (5 miles) west of al-Kut.

Unmanned US drones on a regular basis venture the Iraqi air space to apparently track down insurgents and also save American lives in conflict-plagued Iraq.

Pentagon officials say that these remotely piloted planes have become one of the US military's favorite weapons despite many technical shortcomings resulting from the rush to get them operating.

American Air Force officials acknowledge that more than a third of their unmanned Predator spy planes which are 27 feet long, powered by a high-performance snowmobile engine, and cost 4.5 million dollars apiece have crashed, mostly in Iraq and Afghanistan.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Image IPB

Image IPB

Image IPB

Image IPB


Il descend du drone civil SeaScan élaboré par le constructeur Insitu qui était utilisé pour la collecte de données météo et pour aider les pêcheurs à traquer les bancs de thon.

Il a été conçu comme drone portable et économique de surveillance du champ de bataille et il est déployé en Irak depuis 8/2004.

Le ScanEagle est équipé d'une gamme variée d'optiques dans les rayons visibles ou infrarouges embarquées sur une plateforme à stabilisation inertielle.

Il peut assurer des missions de 20 heures ou plus sur 100 km de rayon d'action à une vitesse de 120 km/h. Le record est un vol de 22h 8mn réalisé sur le terrain d'essai de Boeing à Boardman (Oregon). [1]

Le ScanEagle ne nécessite par d'aérodrome. Il utilise un lanceur pneumatique appelé "SuperWedge" et breveté par le constructeur Insitu. Il est récupéré avec un système "SkyHook" composé d'un crochet en bout d'aile qui attrape une corde tendue sur des piquets à une hauteur de 10 à 15 m. Cette récupération est possible par des dispositifs GPS couplés sur l'appareil et sur les piquets. La corde est élastique pour amortir le choc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


American drone strikes are finding their targets in Pakistan through a series of infrared homing beacons, Al Qaeda alleges in a new online publication.

The American and Pakistani intelligence services credit U.S. unmanned aircraft with decimating the ranks of terrorist and insurgent operatives in Pakistan. “Very frankly, it’s the only game in town in terms of confronting and trying to disrupt the Al Qaeda leadership,” CIA director Leon Panetta said in May. The unmanned aircraft have supposedly carried out 28 attacks on suspected militants, just since the start of the year. Hundreds have been killed, including as many as 45 more people in a series of strikes today.

But how the killer drones find their targets has been a matter of some dispute. Local Taliban commander Mullah Nazir, himself an occasional target, says they’re guided by SIM cards, installed in militant cell phones. Area tribesman talk of homing devices, planted by informants, that are capable of signaling American aircraft. In The Ruling Concerning Muslims Spies, an internet-distributed book written by self-styled theologian and emerging Al Qaeda leader Abu Yahya al-Libi, warns readers of American infrared devices which he claims directs the attacks on Al Qaeda and its allies.

“These result in the firing of the murderous and destructive missiles whose wrath is inflicted on the Mujahedeen and the weak,” he writes. Then he provides “photos of some of the devices the spies painstakingly transport to the targets they are assigned by their infidel patrons.”

The pictures of the “chips with 9 volt batteries” provided in the book (see photo, above) bear a sharp resemblance to the Phoenix and Pegasus models of infrared flashing beacons made by Cejay Engineering. The devices are used by the U.S. military, among others, to identify friend from foe, mark drop zones, and outline perimeters.

The gadgets use LEDs, powered by a 9 volt battery, to emit beacons of infrared light that are visible only through night vision equipment. A six-second memory can be programmed to flash in Morse-type codes and other sequences. The lights can be seen at “distances of over five miles and can also be seen through clothing and underwater,” according to one distributor. from a distance of up to five miles. They can weigh as little as a half-ounce, are as small as an inch-and-a-quarter, and have a battery life of nearly 100 hours. The Phoenix family of infrared beacons have been in use since 1984, making them the “the most widely used electronic Combat ID system in the world.”

American Predator and Reaper unmanned aircraft are both equipped with infrared cameras, making such beacons a natural drone signaling mechanism. And because the devices are relatively simple and cheap — less sophisticated models can be purchased online for as little as $25 each — they can be handed out to informants, without fear of compromising clandestine, sophisticated American technology.

“Transmitters make a lot of sense to me,” former CIA case officer Robert Baer previously told about the general notion of beacons guiding in drone strikes. “It is simply not possible to train a Pashtun from Waziristan to go to a targeted site, case it, and come back to Peshawar or Islamabad with anything like an accurate report. The best you can hope for is they’re putting the transmitter on the right house.”

In April, 19 year-old Habibur Rehman made a videotaped “confession” of planting such devices, just before he was executed by the Taliban as an American spy. “I was given $122 to drop chips wrapped in cigarette paper at Al Qaeda and Taliban houses,” he said. If I was successful, I was told, I would be given thousands of dollars.”

But Rehman says he didn’t just tag jihadists with the devices. “The money was good so I started throwing the chips all over. I knew people were dying because of what I was doing, but I needed the money,” he added. Which raises the possibility that the unmanned aircraft — America’s key weapons in its covert war on Pakistan’s jihadists and insurgents — may have been lead to the wrong targets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...


SOURCE:Flight International

Ground trials start for UK vectored thrust prototype UAV

By Rob Coppinger


Ground trials are underway for a vectored thrust prototype developed under a  £6.5 million ($10.4 million) UK project  to develop technologies for an unmanned air vehicle with no conventional control surfaces.


With a first flight planned by year's end, the 2.7m (8.8ft)-wingspan, 80kg (176lb) jet-powered UAV prototype called Demon is the culmination of the five-year Flapless Air Vehicle Integrated Industrial Research programme (FLAVIIR) funded by BAE Systems and the UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.

BAE System

©BAE Systems

Above: During ground trials in September and October 2009 BAE System's Demon UAV is readied for its maiden flight

Demon uses fluidic thrust vectoring for pitch control, which was tested in 2005 using a Schübeler Vector II model aircraft. Fluidic thrust vectoring involves the use of secondary jets that are aimed into the primary jet stream to vector thrust.

The UAV was designed at Cranfield University with the support of partner institutions. Its assembly was carried out by Cranfield's Composite Manufacturing Centre and BAE apprentices.

BAE's future capability programme director Richard Williams says: "Projects such as Demon have several advantages for BAE Systems. They help to ensure we get the greatest benefit from our invested research money and offer continued benefit from the increase in the capability and competencies of the universities involved."

Led by Cranfield and BAE, the project involved Imperial College of Science Technology and Medicine, Leicester, Liverpool, Manchester, Nottingham, Southampton, War­wick and York universities, and the University of Wales at Swansea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

L'OTAN va acheter une flotte une flotte de huit avions sans pilote RQ-4B Global Hawk.

La France (a ses propres projets), UK (a accès aux ressources US) et la Belgique (plus de sous) ne participent pas.

Quinze pays de l'OTAN ont terminé la procédure de signature de l'accord qui doit permettre l'achat en commun d'une flotte d'avions sans pilote "Global Hawks" pour doter l'Alliance d'un système de surveillance terrestre aéroporté (AGS), un projet souvent retardé mais qui devrait enfin aboutir en 2012, a annoncé vendredi l'OTAN.

Les quinze pays concernés sont la Bulgarie, le Canada, la République tchèque, le Danemark, l'Estonie, l'Allemagne, l'Italie, la Lettonie, la Lituanie, le Luxembourg, la Norvège, la Roumanie, la Slovaquie, la Slovénie et les Etats-Unis. La participation au programme reste ouverte à d'autres allies intéressés, a assuré l'OTAN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

L'OTAN va acheter une flotte une flotte de huit avions sans pilote RQ-4B Global Hawk.

La France (a ses propres projets), UK (a accès aux ressources US) et la Belgique (plus de sous) ne participent pas.

Quinze pays de l'OTAN ont terminé la procédure de signature de l'accord qui doit permettre l'achat en commun d'une flotte d'avions sans pilote "Global Hawks" pour doter l'Alliance d'un système de surveillance terrestre aéroporté (AGS), un projet souvent retardé mais qui devrait enfin aboutir en 2012, a annoncé vendredi l'OTAN.

Les quinze pays concernés sont la Bulgarie, le Canada, la République tchèque, le Danemark, l'Estonie, l'Allemagne, l'Italie, la Lettonie, la Lituanie, le Luxembourg, la Norvège, la Roumanie, la Slovaquie, la Slovénie et les Etats-Unis. La participation au programme reste ouverte à d'autres allies intéressés, a assuré l'OTAN.

Si c'est l'AGS on s'est retiré.

Trop chère, pas assez de retours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Le drone de mes rêves pour mes fremm et autres FREDA  :P

Boeing A160T Unmanned Helicopter Flies With Foliage-Penetrating Radar in DARPA Tests


17:56 GMT, October 13, 2009 IRVINE, Calif. | The Boeing [NYSE: BA] A160T Hummingbird unmanned helicopter successfully completed 20 test flights from Aug. 31 to Oct. 8 with the Foliage Penetration Reconnaissance, Surveillance, Tracking and Engagement Radar (FORESTER). The tests, conducted at Fort Stewart, Ga., validated the radar-carrying A160T's flight characteristics with more than 50 hours of flying time.

Image IPB

FORESTER is being developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the U.S. Army to provide enhanced coverage of moving vehicles and dismounted troops under foliage, filling the current surveillance gap. The Fort Stewart tests were conducted under a contract with DARPA.

"The success of these test flights points to the operational readiness of this important capability," said Vic Sweberg, director of Unmanned Airborne Systems (UAS) for Boeing. "The FORESTER is a unique radar, and the A160T is a unique helicopter. Together, they make a formidable system."

The 53 flight hours at Fort Stewart pushed the total flight hours for the A160T past the 220-hour mark. The helicopter's longest flight at Fort Stewart was 5.8 hours and its average flight time was 4.2 hours.

The A160T is a turbine-powered unmanned helicopter that can perform numerous missions, including intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, communications, and precision resupply. It holds the world record for endurance for its class (more than 18 hours unrefueled), can hover at 20,000 feet and can carry up to 2,500 pounds of cargo.

The Hummingbird recently was selected to participate in the U.S. Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory's Immediate Cargo Unmanned Aerial System Demonstration Program. Boeing will demonstrate that the A160T can deliver at least 2,500 pounds of cargo from one simulated forward-operating base to another in fewer than six hours per day for three consecutive days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

InSitu, Boeing Introduce New ScanEagle Derivatives

to match specific missions and applications. Two variants unveiled by Boeing at AUVSI 07 were an airborne sensor designed to detect biological hazards and an air-insertable UAV, both based on derivatives of the ScanEagle system. in late 2009 Boeing was awarded a U.S. Navy contract to study the use of a 'magnetically quiet' UAV that could be used for  tracking submarines.

Image IPB


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Je rejoins sur le ScanEagle qui, dans la nuée de drones proposés, est quand même l'une des solutions les plus séduisantes: extrêmement peu cher et pour autant très capable (je pense que l'exposé a déjà été fait sur sa fameuse caméra et sur les upgrades proposés: nighteagle....), le système est surtout logistiquement fabuleux! Un système complet à 4 drones peut être opéré par 12h. C'est sans doute trop tendu en opérations (ScanEagle mobile deployment unit), mais ça veut dire que 15-16h, peuvent parfaitement s'en sortir avec. Et le tout sur un grand maximum de 8 hummers (et encore, j'inclue du ravitaillement: le nombre de véhicules transportant le système, c'est 5: 4 pour les drones et leur soutien, 1 pour un terminal info, 2 si besoin).

Quand on compare à nos RA de la BR qui ont besoin d'effectifs monstrueux pour opérer sur base fixe (ou presque) avec de gros machins mal foutus et peu performants, on se prend à rêver de l'économie.

Pour une capacité équivalente de temps sur zone et de capacités d'observations, tant en quantité (permanence) qu'en qualité (possibilités de la caméra), il nous faut combien d'hommes et de drones à l'heure actuelle, là où les utilisateurs de ce système ont besoin de 16h et 4 drones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

J'aimerais quand même qu'on m'explique en quoi la structure actuelle du 61ème RA a la moindre pertinence: 2 batteries de drones rapides obsolètes, 2 batteries de drones lents sous-performants, la mise en oeuvre du tout nécessitant plus de 900 personnels pour une capacité globale d'imagerie qu'on qualifierait difficilement de pertinente.

Le ScanEagle vaut 100 000$ par drone (donc 400 000 pour un système à 4): avec la formation, les licenses nécessaires, les stations, le matériel de mise en oeuvre et soutien et de la rechange, un système complet ne dépasse pas le million de dollars, pour une capacité quintuple du SDTI, et surtout, avec un besoin infiniment moindre en personnel et en véhicules (pas de gros camions notamment), donc aussi en soutien.

Je sais que ça fait partie des technologies qu'on veut pour nous-mêmes, blablabla.... Mais là on parle d'un système low cost terriblement pratique au niveau tactique, pas d'un drone MALE ou HALE tellement stratégique que, pour le coup, on risque d'en acheter aux USA, de ceux là!!!

On notera aussi la pertinence du couple que le ScanEagle fait avec le RQ-7 Shadow, lui aussi un joujou pas trop cher (2 millions de dollars le système) et plus performant que le SDTI (1 à 2h d'endurance en plus, 30% de distance couverte en plus, soutien moindre), censé être dans sa catégorie.

Je signale au passage que l'USMC a 3 VMU squadrons (escadrons de drones) comportant chacun 3 systèmes RQ-7 Shadow (4 drones et 2 stations chacun) et 3 systèmes ScanEagle (4 drones chacun), le tout entièrement projetable en module global ou par task force, et ne dépassant pas 190h. De fait, chacun de ces VMU a plus de capacités que tout le 61ème RA!!!

On n'est pas en train de parler de machins hors de prix ou d'empiéter sur le turf de l'AdA qui se réservera de fait MALE et HALE, mais d'un 61ème RA qui pourrait, à peu de frais, quintupler ses capacités.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sans parler le décupler les capacités de surveillance des A (P?) 69 en les dotant de ce système Scaneagle prévu initialement pour repérer les bancs de thon et d'être récupéré par un Sky hook et donc tout à fait compatible avec ces navires dépourvu d'hélos et pour lesquel le drone marine n'arrivera pas au mieux avant 2020.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

J'allais aussi le mentionner: je trouve que là, les ricains ont trouvé ZE solution Low Tech, qui coûte pas grand-chose. Pour 14,5 millions de dollars, l'US Navy s'est payée une quinzaine de systèmes complets, équipant ainsi 2 VMU directement (la 3ème et dernière est en train de finir sa réactivation et l'acquisition de la bestiole, suivant le plan de remontée en puissance du corps des marines qui va compléter la 3ème MEF) et 3 ou 4 navires à titre d'essai. On imagine que pour moins de 40 millions de dollars (un micro-programme), ils pourraient en équiper quasiment tous les Arleigh Burke à la mer, eux qui se trouvent souvent astreints à de la patrouille en haute mer ou sur zone sensible.

C'est assez sensiblement la même chose pour les RQ-7 d'ailleurs, eux aussi présents sur la flotte.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Il ne ressemble à aucun appareil dévoilé. Mais on sait qu'il est américain.

@+, Arka

La rumeur veut que ce soit un "Desert Prowler"

La question c'est pourquoi un truc secret se montre si "facilement", et pour un truc furtif est nécessaire a Kandahar ... tester les iraniens ? tester les chinois ?

Peut être que les US pense que quelqu'un informe les haut taliban des vol de drone via une surveillance radar ... mystère.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Member Statistics

    Total Members
    Most Online
    Newest Member
  • Forum Statistics

    Total Topics
    Total Posts
  • Blog Statistics

    Total Blogs
    Total Entries
  • Create New...