Image emerges of Russian Orion UAV

And she looks like a Gnat 750:



The Gnat 750 was the precursor to the Predator:


(reaper, gnat 750 and predator together)

While I am a very strong proponent of 'form follows function' rather than spying, but…hmmm.

Sorry...

I really dont get your angle here.

A UAV, just looks like a small form factor plane.

If we build a UAV.. it will look like a plane..

If they build a UAV.. it will look like a plane..

Planes have a plane shape for a reason.

I dont think this was stolen intel.

Also.. theres looks a bit different.. so.. Im really not seeing your point.

a reply to: Lucidparadox

i think it is just a interesting note as to how similar design ideas follow.

allot of us and russian air frames look similar as they were meant for the same missions not necessarily espionage

a reply to: Lucidparadox

Form follows function; absolutely, but you'd have to be ignorant to not see that as suspiciously close.

UAV,s and aircraft are favourites for 3d modellers..Wouldnt be hard to grab a model online,scale it to full size the slice and dice to flesh out all the technical details internally.CAD Monkeys are a lazy lot LOL..

First high res pic of the Orion UAV:



Quick add: Have to wonder about the wisdom of putting the intake for the engine at the underbelly of the UAV...

a reply to: bra1nwash

Eh, no need to reinvent the wheel. Loiter time is important, but not speed: it's going to have high aspect ratio wings. It's going to be as small and light as possible. Only so many configurations you can chose from for similar requirements.

As someone noted the ventral intake is interesting given the Russians preference for operability off rough fields.

a reply to: RadioRobert

Any speculation on the reasoning behind the intake positioning?

It would seem that many nations rely off American made products to emulate.

This is natural I suppose when it comes to to those looking for scraps at our table.

a reply to: anzha

Not really. Normally you could guess better flow at AoA and cleaner air, but with the sensor ball or other payloads in front of it I'm not sure the later is true, and the former is clearly not a requirement/need. It could be simply something like the way the engine has to sit to put thrust through the centerline, this arrangement lends itself more cleanly or easier/lighter to brace/mount, or it gives slightly better clearance enabling a slightly bigger prop or shorter gear (and shorter gear means less weight, more available volume, etc). Or the guy at Kronstadt was told to put it down there so it looks less like a Reaper.

a reply to: RadioRobert

Looks a lot more like a Gnat, but fair enough.

So anything the wheels kick up likely gets ingested?

Supposedly, the Orion fired its first missile:

www.thedrive.com...

Supposedly doing air to air tests:

www.janes.com...

First combat losses involving the Orion UAV:
defenceaviationpost.com...

a reply to: anzha

once American and Israeli anti air systems come into play there will be no drones flying around.

we can burn the electronics out with their antenna because they can focuses its power to a pin point.