Potential aerial recon vehicle

[mmartin798]

Sometimes, reality give us cool toys.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_GL...ased_Lightning

Seems a great fit for 4th edition considering that it is electrically powered.

[RandyT0001]

Two diesel generators (8hp) and 10 electric motors driving props. It would be nice if it used solar power generated electricity.

[stormlion1]

With the sheer number of electric quadcopters with cameras on the civvie market I would think those would be the way to go.

[cosmicfish]

Seems like a decent idea to have a few vehicles like this scattered across the Project... depending on the payload (which I cannot find anywhere)! I agree that Morrow versions would go all-electrics and likely supplement the batteries with wing/fuselage solar panels, but realistically this is a technology demonstrator, not a prototype for a reconnaissance vehicle - anything worthwhile would be based on this, but wouldn't actually be this.

[cosmicfish]

Originally Posted by stormlion1

With the sheer number of electric quadcopters with cameras on the civvie market I would think those would be the way to go.

I agree, if we are talking about tactical reconnaissance near an operating Team. Something on this scale would be used for strategic reconnaissance, operating under Prime Base's purview. The US military has a bunch of small, portable UAV's used at the platoon level, but they also have Global Hawks flying at 60,000 ft! Different tools for different jobs.

[RandyT0001]

How hard would it be to replace the pilot in the Solar Impulse with cameras and a remote control system?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Impulse

General characteristics
Crew: 1
Length: 21.85 m (71.7 ft)
Wingspan: 63.4 m (208 ft)
Height: 6.40 m (21.0 ft)
Wing area: 11,628 photovoltaic cells rated at 45 kW peak: 200 m2 (2,200 sq ft)
Aspect ratio: 19.7
Loaded weight: 1,600 kg (3,500 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 2,000 kg (4,400 lb)
Powerplant: 4 × electric motors, 4 x 21 kWh lithium-ion batteries (450 kg), providing 7.5 kW (10 HP) each
Propeller diameter: 3.5 m at 200 to 400 rpm (11 ft)
Take-off speed: 35 kilometres per hour (22 mph)

Performance
Cruise speed: 70 kilometres per hour (43 mph)
Endurance: 36 hours (projected)
Service ceiling: 8,500 m (27,900 ft) with a maximum altitude of 12,000 metres (39,000 ft)

[cosmicfish]

Originally Posted by RandyT0001

How hard would it be to replace the pilot in the Solar Impulse with cameras and a remote control system?

Who knows? Too many variables for this engineer.

Honestly, though, there gets to be a point where it makes more sense to just take a Predator (or similar large prop UAV) and give it a fusion plant. You're not weather dependent, and the power available translates into a larger payload for sensors and/or weapons.

[mmartin798]

The biggest differentiators for the GL-10 as a platform is the VTOL capability and the low propeller tip speed. As it is designed as a freescale platform, it could be made the size of a V-22 Ospry with a 14m wingspan and corresponding increase in payload. What you end up with is a very quiet platform for research and recon that could carry a multitude of modules from atmospheric analysis, infrared imaging, radiation sensing, chemical sniffing, SIGINT, etc. There was even mention that a full sized version could be used a means to transport personnel.

So while yes, the V-22 could fill the same roles, the GL-10 is purpose built around electric motors.

[cosmicfish]

Some quick, itemized thoughts:

Pros:

(1) VTOL capability. For the Project, this is a pretty big advantage.

(2) Silence. More of a perk, really, as TMP is not likely (as originally planned) to be doing a ton of missions with this platform where noise at ground level is a significant concern. And in those where it IS a concern, there are steps that can be taken to mitigate the problem - the military has been dealing with ground noise for decades.

Non-issues:

(1) Built around electric motors. The cost of modifying any given vehicle to electric motors is just not that big, especially compared to the costs of acquiring the vehicle in the first place and giving it a fusion plant. The modern problems associated with this have more to do with batteries and energy than anything else, and these are non-issues for the Project.

Cons:

(1) This is just a technology demonstrator. The Bell X-1 was the first aircraft to intentionally break the sound barrier, but we never built any more after that because it was just designed to do that one thing. Instead we built other supersonic vehicles based on what we learned from the X-1. Likewise, the GL-10 may lead to superficially-similar vehicles, but they won't be the GL-10! An MPV might be based on the GL-10, but would require a ton of development that could be skipped by using an already-practical platform instead.

(2) Not really flying yet. Just means we don't really know much about it. Might be a terrible vehicle, it can take a lot of post-prototype work to make something practical. And we just don't have a lot of important info, like the actual payload or speed.

(3) Scaling issues. Making something VTOL is a pretty big design constraint, especially if you are going the "light" option like this is. If you want something big enough to have a significant payload you might want up with an enormous aircraft, and that may present problems that VTOL flight doesn't solve. The demonstrator has a 20' wingspan, 16hp, and an unknown payload. The Predator has a 48'+ wingspan, 115hp, and only 750lb of payload... and doesn't have to manage VTOL. Which reminds me...

(4) VTOL. It is an advantage, but it is also a disadvantage. VTOL takes a lot more power than conventional winged flight, which means that the same functional payload is going to require a much bigger vehicle than one which required a dirt runway or a chunk of old highway. And bigger vehicles are not inherently a good thing.