Chinese engines and UAV's
08-26-2011, 07:24 PM
#51
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
I do not want to quickly equate RC engines to UAV engines. They have totally different requirements. A UAV engine could be an electric motor, a turbine engine or a piston engine of more than 100 HP. All are not comparable to our RC gas engines. If you want the UAV to carry a high payload and to have a long range, the turbine engine probably is the first choice.
08-26-2011, 07:32 PM
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Egg Harbor City,
NJ
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
Ralph,any idea on who owns zenoah now,last I saw it was so an so/zenoah,not komatsu,And I think Husqvarna owns red max or maybe both,Still no awnser on G20 origin?
08-26-2011, 07:39 PM
#53
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
ORIGINAL: nonstoprc
I do not want to quickly equate RC engines to UAV engines. They have totally different requirements. A UAV engine could be an electric motor, a turbine engine or a piston engine of more than 100 HP. All are not comparable to our RC gas engines. If you want the UAV to carry a high payload and to have a long range, the turbine engine probably is the first choice.
I do not want to quickly equate RC engines to UAV engines. They have totally different requirements. A UAV engine could be an electric motor, a turbine engine or a piston engine of more than 100 HP. All are not comparable to our RC gas engines. If you want the UAV to carry a high payload and to have a long range, the turbine engine probably is the first choice.
Negative. Only if it has very high altitude capability. Turbines are terribly inefficient at altitudes below 18,000'. They prefer to be above 25,000'. Some extremely good, to some of the best optics can be found on low altitude, small UAV's. They have highly specific capabilities, making them ringers for RC sized engines.
For this discussion we can eliminate electric motors which are used in very small UAV's and recip engines above 300cc. The very large (300cc+) recip engines made by RC engine manufactirers are generally specific to unmanned commercial/military uses but are periodically used for RC purposes. 50cc and up is now, and has been, pretty much catering to commercial/military unmanned as well.
08-26-2011, 10:44 PM
#54
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
Ralph,
Remember when I mentioned an all aluminum, no paint, naval vessel a few weeks ago?
Here she is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RgfwrXevNU
Remember when I mentioned an all aluminum, no paint, naval vessel a few weeks ago?
Here she is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RgfwrXevNU
08-27-2011, 04:57 AM
#55
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
ORIGINAL: Tired Old Man
Negative. Only if it has very high altitude capability. Turbines are terribly inefficient at altitudes below 18,000'. They prefer to be above 25,000'. Some extremely good, to some of the best optics can be found on low altitude, small UAV's. They have highly specific capabilities, making them ringers for RC sized engines.
For this discussion we can eliminate electric motors which are used in very small UAV's and recip engines above 300cc. The very large (300cc+) recip engines made by RC engine manufactirers are generally specific to unmanned commercial/military uses but are periodically used for RC purposes. 50cc and up is now, and has been, pretty much catering to commercial/military unmanned as well.
ORIGINAL: nonstoprc
I do not want to quickly equate RC engines to UAV engines. They have totally different requirements. A UAV engine could be an electric motor, a turbine engine or a piston engine of more than 100 HP. All are not comparable to our RC gas engines. If you want the UAV to carry a high payload and to have a long range, the turbine engine probably is the first choice.
I do not want to quickly equate RC engines to UAV engines. They have totally different requirements. A UAV engine could be an electric motor, a turbine engine or a piston engine of more than 100 HP. All are not comparable to our RC gas engines. If you want the UAV to carry a high payload and to have a long range, the turbine engine probably is the first choice.
Negative. Only if it has very high altitude capability. Turbines are terribly inefficient at altitudes below 18,000'. They prefer to be above 25,000'. Some extremely good, to some of the best optics can be found on low altitude, small UAV's. They have highly specific capabilities, making them ringers for RC sized engines.
For this discussion we can eliminate electric motors which are used in very small UAV's and recip engines above 300cc. The very large (300cc+) recip engines made by RC engine manufactirers are generally specific to unmanned commercial/military uses but are periodically used for RC purposes. 50cc and up is now, and has been, pretty much catering to commercial/military unmanned as well.
Small/Micro UAV. Wasp Block III - electric motor
Low altitude, long endurance UAV Gnat 750 - Rotax 912 piston flat-four four-cycle engine (85 hp)
Medium altitude, long endurance UAV MQ-1 Predator - Rotax 912UL engine (100 hp),
MQ-9 Reaper - 50-shaft-horsepower (712 kW) turboprop engine.
High altitude, long endurance conventional UAV. RQ-4 Global Hawk - Allison Rolls-Royce AE3007H turbofan engine
Tier III-: High altitude, long endurance low-observable UAV: RQ-170 Sentinel, possibly powered by General Electric TF34
You can see that none of them are powered by gas engines of sizes in RC use today. In fact, the smallest size of piston engines used is Rotax 912 rated at 85 hp (around 1352cc).
InView, one of the commercial aerial surveillance UAVs, does use 180cc gas engine (2x SAITO FG-30). The UAV looks like a 35% towing plane.
08-27-2011, 05:52 AM
#56
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
You are presuming the listing you saw encompasses all the various models? The article is more than extremely limited, in fact, it's missing about 90% of what's currently in use. You only mentioned the Air Force listings. You forgot the listings for Army, Navy, and Marine Corps. Plus that article is at least 5 years out of date. Might want to look into articles coming out of AUVSI, Embry Riddle, University of North Dakota, U. of Alaska, Flight Global, and a great many other open sources.
If you depend on Wiki for accurate and complete information you will be severly limiting your education. The only info they have is what others have provided them, not always researched very well. You could gain a better concept of the scope of UAV's in use through You Tube. At last count there were in excess of 1,100 types of UAV's currently in use.
If you depend on Wiki for accurate and complete information you will be severly limiting your education. The only info they have is what others have provided them, not always researched very well. You could gain a better concept of the scope of UAV's in use through You Tube. At last count there were in excess of 1,100 types of UAV's currently in use.
08-27-2011, 06:47 AM
#57
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
If you check out the models flying by Army, Navy and Corps, they actually fly the same UAVs. So the list presents most commonly used USAF UAVs today and their engine choices are no less than 250cc. You can google these UAVs yourselves. By the way, US share of world UAV market is at 60% or more.
If you want to talk small UAVs that could use small gas engines, then I want to remind you that UT Austin folks fly their experimental research UAVs at our field and guess what types of engine used: electric motors.
If you want to talk small UAVs that could use small gas engines, then I want to remind you that UT Austin folks fly their experimental research UAVs at our field and guess what types of engine used: electric motors.
08-27-2011, 06:57 AM
#58
My Feedback: (149)
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
Hi to all the gurus here & all others, Everyone keeps talking like C&H is DEAD . . . Well I agree that in the past couple of years or so, thats been my experience also . . . but rite now my overweight Honda is getting transformed . . . to include the NEW C&H Ignition which is lighter & smaller that others including Chinese (remember when that couldn't be done?) . . . . I also know that a C&H Ignition is being designed for an Enya 240V twin . . . . & I'm hopeful that my FA182T might also be next on the list (remember when that couldn't be done also?). TOM, why don't you get one from C&H spark guy and start performing test with your UAV's (or models) . . . . I suspect he might even give you one for free
T-man49
Club Saito #723
T-man49
Club Saito #723
08-27-2011, 07:03 AM
#59
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
You are limiting your knowledge by lack of research. After putting more than half a million hours on one of our systems I'm pretty sure I know what it uses for an engine. I've also been personally involved with other deployed systems using DA, 3w, and Herbrandson engines, and viewed up close and personal a lot of others. Don't hamper yourself by believing that what exists and is in use is only what you have seen.
I'll leave that debate there and proceed no further with it. I know that a simple Google search on unclass info about UAV's and the follow on sleuthing will provided you with a much expanded comprehension of the subject matter. You might even consider in performing some research into the open information about their propulsion vendors, and there are more than just brand name engine makers. BTW, the electric UAV's are still a joke where mission duration is concerned. They still have a ways to go before they can hold a candle to the other medium to long endurance units.
I know this stuff because I live it, not read about it. The full education of others is up to them, not me. I'll only take them far enough to initiate further research.
I'll leave that debate there and proceed no further with it. I know that a simple Google search on unclass info about UAV's and the follow on sleuthing will provided you with a much expanded comprehension of the subject matter. You might even consider in performing some research into the open information about their propulsion vendors, and there are more than just brand name engine makers. BTW, the electric UAV's are still a joke where mission duration is concerned. They still have a ways to go before they can hold a candle to the other medium to long endurance units.
I know this stuff because I live it, not read about it. The full education of others is up to them, not me. I'll only take them far enough to initiate further research.
08-27-2011, 08:24 AM
#60
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
I am for research and the data driven approach. The space of UAVs is huge and the choice of the engines is not limiting to RC sized. That is my point. BTW, I do not see a reason to post on RCU If the post does not contain useful info.
08-27-2011, 09:49 AM
#61
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Somewhere,
DC
Posts: 9,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
There is so much misinformation floating around on these forums it's hard to TRY not to correct it..Unfortunately some of the misinformation has been around so long it gets taken as gospel...
Like oil
Like oil
08-27-2011, 11:46 AM
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SuffolkSuffolk, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
I don't agree with anything that RAYDAR has said - I'm with T.O.M and aussiesteve when it comes to the question of investment in R&D, quality of manufacturing, longevity of the product, long-term commitment, and so on.
But, in response to
I would say that Laser Engines are something to be proud of. 
But, in response to
ORIGINAL: w8ye
What did the UK do?
What did the UK do?
08-27-2011, 03:13 PM
#65
My Feedback: (10)
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
ORIGINAL: nonstoprc
Here is the USAF classification of UAVs, UAVs in the class and the engine choice. Refer to this Wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle) and links contained-in for detail.
Small/Micro UAV. Wasp Block III - electric motor
Low altitude, long endurance UAV Gnat 750 - Rotax 912 piston flat-four four-cycle engine (85 hp)
Medium altitude, long endurance UAV MQ-1 Predator - Rotax 912UL engine (100 hp),
MQ-9 Reaper - 50-shaft-horsepower (712 kW) turboprop engine.
High altitude, long endurance conventional UAV. RQ-4 Global Hawk - Allison Rolls-Royce AE3007H turbofan engine
Tier III-: High altitude, long endurance low-observable UAV: RQ-170 Sentinel, possibly powered by General Electric TF34
You can see that none of them are powered by gas engines of sizes in RC use today. In fact, the smallest size of piston engines used is Rotax 912 rated at 85 hp (around 1352cc).
InView, one of the commercial aerial surveillance UAVs, does use 180cc gas engine (2x SAITO FG-30). The UAV looks like a 35% towing plane.
ORIGINAL: Tired Old Man
Negative. Only if it has very high altitude capability. Turbines are terribly inefficient at altitudes below 18,000'. They prefer to be above 25,000'. Some extremely good, to some of the best optics can be found on low altitude, small UAV's. They have highly specific capabilities, making them ringers for RC sized engines.
For this discussion we can eliminate electric motors which are used in very small UAV's and recip engines above 300cc. The very large (300cc+) recip engines made by RC engine manufactirers are generally specific to unmanned commercial/military uses but are periodically used for RC purposes. 50cc and up is now, and has been, pretty much catering to commercial/military unmanned as well.
ORIGINAL: nonstoprc
I do not want to quickly equate RC engines to UAV engines. They have totally different requirements. A UAV engine could be an electric motor, a turbine engine or a piston engine of more than 100 HP. All are not comparable to our RC gas engines. If you want the UAV to carry a high payload and to have a long range, the turbine engine probably is the first choice.
I do not want to quickly equate RC engines to UAV engines. They have totally different requirements. A UAV engine could be an electric motor, a turbine engine or a piston engine of more than 100 HP. All are not comparable to our RC gas engines. If you want the UAV to carry a high payload and to have a long range, the turbine engine probably is the first choice.
Negative. Only if it has very high altitude capability. Turbines are terribly inefficient at altitudes below 18,000'. They prefer to be above 25,000'. Some extremely good, to some of the best optics can be found on low altitude, small UAV's. They have highly specific capabilities, making them ringers for RC sized engines.
For this discussion we can eliminate electric motors which are used in very small UAV's and recip engines above 300cc. The very large (300cc+) recip engines made by RC engine manufactirers are generally specific to unmanned commercial/military uses but are periodically used for RC purposes. 50cc and up is now, and has been, pretty much catering to commercial/military unmanned as well.
Small/Micro UAV. Wasp Block III - electric motor
Low altitude, long endurance UAV Gnat 750 - Rotax 912 piston flat-four four-cycle engine (85 hp)
Medium altitude, long endurance UAV MQ-1 Predator - Rotax 912UL engine (100 hp),
MQ-9 Reaper - 50-shaft-horsepower (712 kW) turboprop engine.
High altitude, long endurance conventional UAV. RQ-4 Global Hawk - Allison Rolls-Royce AE3007H turbofan engine
Tier III-: High altitude, long endurance low-observable UAV: RQ-170 Sentinel, possibly powered by General Electric TF34
You can see that none of them are powered by gas engines of sizes in RC use today. In fact, the smallest size of piston engines used is Rotax 912 rated at 85 hp (around 1352cc).
InView, one of the commercial aerial surveillance UAVs, does use 180cc gas engine (2x SAITO FG-30). The UAV looks like a 35% towing plane.
08-27-2011, 03:35 PM
#66
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
Sound like a big statement, but I like to see a solid reference.
Wikipedia is open source of data, information and knowledge. Inaccuracy is possible but will be corrected over times ("commit eventually"). If you are in computer business, you know the power of open-source.
If you do not agree with the list of engine choice cited on wikipedia that I quoted above, please state it and make correction on Wikipedia!
Wikipedia is open source of data, information and knowledge. Inaccuracy is possible but will be corrected over times ("commit eventually"). If you are in computer business, you know the power of open-source.
If you do not agree with the list of engine choice cited on wikipedia that I quoted above, please state it and make correction on Wikipedia!
08-27-2011, 06:09 PM
#68
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: PerthWA, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
ORIGINAL: Super08
The funny part is arguing with a guy that works on them full time for a living. I kind of think T.O.M. knows more about this subject than all the rest of us on this forum combined.
The funny part is arguing with a guy that works on them full time for a living. I kind of think T.O.M. knows more about this subject than all the rest of us on this forum combined.
Not only does he know his subject but he has been & still is at the forefront of it in more ways than some could even begin to comprehend.
T.O.M. has been a magnificent source of advice for many of us out here in "RC land" for a long time now. He has been known to "occassionally" tell us what we don't want to be told but when you analyse his message, I have yet to be able to prove him wrong or even off he mark. Unfortunatley, it is human nature for us to generally want to make our own historical mistakes so we have an innate ability to ignore what later turns out to be good advice. I know that I am one who wishes I took his advice mauch earlier than I did - not only would it have saved me a lot of heartache but I would probably be a better flyer now if I had. Why a better flyer you ask? - because I would have spent less time learning how to get things right and more time practicing my actual flying.
08-27-2011, 09:58 PM
#69
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
ORIGINAL: triumphman49
Hi to all the gurus here & all others, Everyone keeps talking like C&H is DEAD . . . Well I agree that in the past couple of years or so, thats been my experience also . . . but rite now my overweight Honda is getting transformed . . . to include the NEW C&H Ignition which is lighter & smaller that others including Chinese (remember when that couldn't be done?) . . . . I also know that a C&H Ignition is being designed for an Enya 240V twin . . . . & I'm hopeful that my FA182T might also be next on the list (remember when that couldn't be done also?). TOM, why don't you get one from C&H spark guy and start performing test with your UAV's (or models) . . . . I suspect he might even give you one for free
T-man49
Club Saito #723
Hi to all the gurus here & all others, Everyone keeps talking like C&H is DEAD . . . Well I agree that in the past couple of years or so, thats been my experience also . . . but rite now my overweight Honda is getting transformed . . . to include the NEW C&H Ignition which is lighter & smaller that others including Chinese (remember when that couldn't be done?) . . . . I also know that a C&H Ignition is being designed for an Enya 240V twin . . . . & I'm hopeful that my FA182T might also be next on the list (remember when that couldn't be done also?). TOM, why don't you get one from C&H spark guy and start performing test with your UAV's (or models) . . . . I suspect he might even give you one for free
T-man49
Club Saito #723
We know all about CH. We've been flying CH or a derivitive from the beginning. CH was the iginiton of choice on our Enya 1.2 four stroke converted to gas when we flew across the Atlantic on about a gallon and a half of fuel in 1994. Yea, we did it before Maynard but we weren't trying to set FAI records. We just wanted to see if we could do it. We were also the reason CH had to cut back quantities to the RC industry. We were buying all they could make at the time.
08-27-2011, 10:17 PM
#70
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
One should figure there are serious discrepancies in a Wiki list provided by the Air Force that forgot to include a small RC engine powered UAV that flew more than 26% of last years' unmanned military flight time. People should go to sites that specialize in the information sought. I would think places like Global Security.org and the AUVSI would be good starting points. From there people could branch off to manufacturer sites.
08-29-2011, 05:20 PM
#71
Senior Member
My Feedback: (8)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Silverdale,
WA
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
ORIGINAL: Tired Old Man
Ralph,
Remember when I mentioned an all aluminum, no paint, naval vessel a few weeks ago?
Here she is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RgfwrXevNU
Ralph,
Remember when I mentioned an all aluminum, no paint, naval vessel a few weeks ago?
Here she is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RgfwrXevNU
However, it is a good thing that it is fast. Hot steel has a way of slicing through aluminum like a hot knife through butter (hence the move toward steel superstructure on the new destroyers).
08-29-2011, 05:26 PM
#72
Senior Member
My Feedback: (8)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Silverdale,
WA
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
ORIGINAL: Tired Old Man
One should figure there are serious discrepancies in a Wiki list provided by the Air Force that forgot to include a small RC engine powered UAV that flew more than 26% of last years' unmanned military flight time. People should go to sites that specialize in the information sought. I would think places like Global Security.org and the AUVSI would be good starting points. From there people could branch off to manufacturer sites.
One should figure there are serious discrepancies in a Wiki list provided by the Air Force that forgot to include a small RC engine powered UAV that flew more than 26% of last years' unmanned military flight time. People should go to sites that specialize in the information sought. I would think places like Global Security.org and the AUVSI would be good starting points. From there people could branch off to manufacturer sites.
(Pat knows I am kidding...)p.s. we need to go fly again soon. I need to show off my fun new plane with one of Bill's Taurus 52cc engines and one of BCCHI's and TKG's ignitions. Can't beat the quality (in fact, all of my ignitions are now C&H)!
08-29-2011, 08:31 PM
#73
RE: Chinese engines and UAV's
A man that knows quailty when he gets his hands on it!
The other site I play on is a bit more sophisticated. About 20% of the people using it are "in the business". Not a whole lot of plane talk since they already know what they are doing, but there's a lot of "spirited" outside conversations. Especially the PG13 freeforall.
The other site I play on is a bit more sophisticated. About 20% of the people using it are "in the business". Not a whole lot of plane talk since they already know what they are doing, but there's a lot of "spirited" outside conversations. Especially the PG13 freeforall.
