Chinese CH-4B drones in Iraqi service racking up quite some kills under its belt.
First known strike in Ramadi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOElaLSQ41g
Some guy's head apparently gets severed by the explosion of the 2nd strike:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7df_1451480438
Night strike and VBIED strike at 0:37:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAGCz5ngdIg
Funny strike; hitting some truck probably loaded with RPGs, going off like firework-rockets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lL62rPvYPY
All for just one million dollars a pop. The laser guided AR-1 missiles cost about a few thousand dollars.
China is growing larger!
>Operated by Iraqis
meh
>>28606477
Let them have their fun with them.
Uncle Sam didnt want to sell them Reapers.
More.
The CH-4B has a SAR radar as well.
>>28606521
>Uncle Sam didnt want to sell them Reapers.
>I want to protect my technology and not sell UCAVs to anyone except U.K
>Chinese hacks the shit out of Lockheed Martin and gets Predator and Reaper designs anyway
This is why US is shit anon and it will always be shit. They just can't stop technological espionage in their countries.
Soviets stole their nuclear technolgy from you
Israel stole their nuclear technology from you
Soviets stole M60 tanks Iran bought as they were on the road for Iraq
Chinese stole nearly all of Lockheed Martin's database
You are one shit ally anon.
i actually prefer those crappy sound effects to silence
>>28606577
The AR-1 missile:
semi-active laser guided, 10km range, weighting 45kg and equipped with a 10kg warhead.
>>28606604
The bomb is called FT-5, which is weird, since the FT-5 is usually a 100kg satellite guided bomb.
This here is a 50kg variant, though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHVedDpaWI8
>>28606459
Tbh, China should get involved in the Middle-east.
They need the experience.
If they sent their military to Iraq they could gain some goodwill from the Iraqi's and Iranians without pissing off the Sunni states.
>CH means "Rainbow"
kek
faggy name for a killer drone.
Might want to troll ISIS, asking them what they think about what lies beneath a beautiful rainbow - a fucking missile with their name on.
>>28606662
comfy
>>28606586
Oh no, cheap UAV designs that first flew 15 years ago
However will the US remain ahead of the curve when China has access to such cutting edge de-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_Avenger
oh
>>28606662
Neat, they have my HOTAS system
>>28606459
Kek them indians went buttblassted to the max when China sold these to Pakistan (and their homegrown UAV project went to shit)
With UCAV's this effective and this cheap the proliferation of drones is going to be insane for the next few years.
>>28606586
>china says we hacked everything pig dog west stand no chance
>USA says they didn't get shit but we don't care anyway
whatever
>>28607017
What?
>>28607049
>effective
Not really.
>widespread
Probably.
Nothing beats a pilot in the plane, yet.
>>28606877
china also can't be accused by european countrys of just being in it to steal the oil because lol not america. also china doesn't have a bush in office so they're practically Teflon.
>>28606586
Soviets didn't steal shit
FDR was a commie lover who put a commie in charge of the nuclear program who handed everything to the soviets.
>>28607076
The CH-4B is just basically a Predator, which has been in service for 21 years. Anon linked to the Predator C / Avenger, which is new, stealthy and designed to have laser weapons integrated.
Wing Loong II soon.
twelve missiles for twelvefold the fun.
>>28606459
Any possible way to map the time/distance run by these fellows? I bet some of them are breaking records.
>China
>does nothing
>gets cheap oil because the conflict helps the Iranian relationship with the world
>sells weapon to everyone
laughingMao.gif
>>28606877
They will have more than enough experience after taking Taiwan.
>>28608097
In some of those shots, there's a datablock right bottom of the screen. Maybe one could decipher the coordinates there.
>>28607089
How are they not effective? From the videos posted ITT they seemed highly effective against insurgents. For the Third World cheap Chinese drones maybe a game changer when fighting rebels.
>>28607126
Dude.
We haven't had a Bush in office for almost 8 years. You really do need to try to keep up.
>>28607960
>Wing-Loong
Seriously, China?
>We have velly, velly good dilone ailplane!
>Wing long, engine good!
>>28606459
>Some guy's head apparently gets severed by the explosion of the 2nd strike:
>http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7df_1451480438
How do you know if any of those dark blobs is a head? And do you mean to the right/upper-right?
In other news, that bright object tumbling to the lower left might be a car mirror.
>>28609251
sweet sour takeout not so sweet anymore since recipient was kebab.
>>28606586
>Israel stole their nuclear technology from you
[citation required]
Israel's nuclear program was developed with the help of Britain, then France when Britain backed out, then together with S. Africa. The United States did not help Israel's program in any way, and they never stole any nuclear anything from the United States.
Please back up your "muh Jews" tinfoil, or else stfu
>>28606459
>unny strike; hitting some truck probably loaded with RPGs, going off like firework-rockets:
I wonder if they were those 107mm Artillery rockets. The individual trails seemed to be double trails in a double helix shape
>>28609633
Holy shit I just realized one of the guys on the left of the car gets flung high up in the air, all the while spinning end over end
>>28606586
>Israel stole their nuclear technology from you
I think you meant to type
>Israel purchased their nuclear technology from France.
Impressive
Truly China knows how to be efficient and effective at the same time. To be as effective as America yet only use up a small amount of resources truly shows that China is wise enough to be left to manage the world.
>>28607089
>Nothing beats a pilot in the plane, yet.
sorry zoomy boi. yer days are numbered in 1k digits.
A.I. has no physical limitations. Next gen drones will blast you from the sky while you say: "sheeiiiittt, muh fugga".
>>28610166
Didn't they also sell it to Pakistan ?
>>28607089
Except when it comes to long-endurance surveillance and strike missions.
>>28607774
Okay. His post didn't make any sense to me.
>3 prototypes produced
Japanese FX-X of the Drones?
I don't see why China rolling out a drone design that the US was flying 20 years ago is a big deal
>it's afraid
>>28608416
And how is it better than a Mig-21?
>>28608151
Not after the US fleet shows up.
>>28608991
He's saying they can intervene without getting shitted on. Unlike Bush.
>>28610309
Well, China's pretty big on drones for the future:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2015/05/10/2003617913
>China planning to build 42,000 drones, report says
>yfw the USN has already said this thing is antiquated
>>28610212
Let me try baiting Americans as well.
Amazing!
Chinese military power much improved over pig dog capitalist. Soon People's Liberation Army will fulfill Mao's vision of worker uprising. Truly Chinese military might will carry glorious communism and Chinese slaves into future!
>>28610309
Because $900,000 is far more attractive to buyers than $4,000,000
This means more proliferation of UAV's, more Chinese influence with developing nations, more reliance on Chinese aerospace engineering, etc.
>>28610309
Are we not allowed to post about military technology and its first active use?
I guess /k/ is just lolis with anime guns, ND's, and KanColle ships now.
>>28610355
And China's Avenger-equivalent is also under research.
FY-E high speed stealth UCAV related
>>28610355
T-that's not a real picture... Or is the censoring that crazy?
>42,000
Doubtful. They don't even have that many pilots. Maybe mini drones but then again those usually aren't autonomous.
>>28610360
>yfw it's just a prototype
It's a prototype so how is it antiquated?
Or do you mean the F-18E? Disagree since we are keeping them till 2030.
>>28610392
It is. You can see that thing on GE.
It is their dual-body BAMS UAV in the same role of the Global Hawk.
Another ASBM targeting asset.
>>28610461
The "Divine Eagle"
>>28610408
USN has said they've learned all they needed from the UCLASS.
They want to move forward to the next iteration.
>>28610480
>>28610461
Pretty majestic
>>28607070
The thing to take from incidents like that is the ultimate outcome. China can pontificate about their military might all day, but when they get a hold of their rival's tech and shamelessly duplicate every last thing, their whole "we are just as good" rhetoric becomes pretty transparent
>>28610536
Yeah, the Chinese make extremely weird but interesting looking UAVs
>>28610480
That's triggering me.
>>28610362
Nah, too obvious. The original one was just subtle enough to seem legit
>>28610501
Have they?
I don't consider something outdated until there's something better than it.
>>28610539
http://defensetech.org/2011/06/08/chinas-military-tech-20-years-behind-u-s/
>Less than a month after Chinese defense officials came out and said that the PLA doesn’t compare to the United States military, the Asian giant’s defense minister quantified that statement, saying that China’s armed forces are about 20 years behind the U.S. technologically.
>In fact, he called the gap “big” and maintained that China is only building up its military to defend its sovereignty and “core interests”. Hmmm, Taiwan, anyone?
>>28610553
Now this looks cool, the other one looks dumb
>>28610480
>>28610553
Both of these designs were first proposed to and rejected by the USAF.
If you want source go read the Jane's Defense articles on them.
>>28606459
>This whole post
>>28610553
They are in their 50's-60's for military tech.
Would be amazing to work out there if not for the Communist government and all.
>>28610539
Considering a Chinese general claimed the PLA is two decades behind the US technologically, I believe you have been taking bait seriously.
Most Chinese are pacifist. It's the hardline commies who want to start shit with Japan, Taiwan, and the Phillipines.
>>28610604
>2011
Also, "20 years behind" still means 1996 level of US military power.
This means a country of similair capability like Saddam's Iraq will be rekt by the PLA quite easily. Which includes basically all of asia.
>>28610643
Are you being triggered by a great /k/ related post with sources and an obvious C&C reference at the end?
>>28610645
>They are in their 50's-60's for military tech.
Yeah, except no. Chinese AESA radars and avionics are already better than what the Russians could ever offer in the next few years, and their UAV technology, while not as great as america's, is already the world's 2nd or 3rd place, after the Jews.
>>28610645
its mainly nationalist 'netuyou' or the chinese equivalent
>>28610661
I was simply addressing his misinformed opinion that the PLA claim they are equal to America. They literally don't.
Also, the Chinese officially want a quiet, peaceful rise. They talk down their relative capability and talk up their absolute capabilities.
Considering America cut its military 2011-2016, and China's grew 50% in budget over that time, the gap definitely closed.
>>28610673
I meant military tech "design".
Designig and trying out new stuff. Throwing it away and learning from it.
>>28610731
Yeah.
Except Japanese have a lot more hate for Chinese than vice versa. Probably because of the number of elderly in Japan.
I just want this /k/ meme that the PLA claims equality with America to end. Too much politics in /k/ threads for Russia, China, India.
>>28610753
Yeah, their military development in China is certainly like back in Cold War era, with quick turnaround times and increased production rate.
Their Airforce and Navy gets the most of it, though.
>>28610331
>And how is it better than a Mig-21?
Way longer endurance, better targeting system, cheaper to operate.
>>28610392
It's not a real picture, but it's a real design.
>>28610612
>Janes has hundreds of thousands of article
>>28610166
Thanks master splinter.
>>28610501
Microwave EMP stealth multi role UCAVs with face lasers and Skynet 1.1.
>>28610815
Makes sense. The PLA ground force is the branch that needs to lose out. Too much corruption and unprofessional officers. They are getting a lot of new stuff though.
Part of the reason the Navy/AF is getti g more attention is because they are starting from behind. Therefore there's not as much entrenched interest to remain bloated and corrupt unlike the ground force.
>>28610822
Chinese J-7 drones related.
>>28610822
Not for a predator. Maybe a reaper.
An F-16 block 60?
>>28610860
Noted.
>>28610860
It is a real picture from its taxi trials.
Here, another shot before its taxi trials.
>>28611002
That image is real, the first one definitely isn't - the grass is clearly not right; it's far blurrier than the jet and it's a gausian / resolution-upscale blur, not a motion blur (otherwise you wouldn't be able to see the individual spindles on the wheels of the jet).
If you zoom in there's weird effects on the shadow of the wing closest to the camera, as well as brush marks all over the runway.
Either this is from a high fidelity flight sim with low terrain settings or it's just a composite image of the real drone with a fake background and (maybe) a fake runway - the runway could also be real but with people / equipment around the jet being (poorly) photoshopped out.
>>28611002
This thing looks enormous
>>28606459
Everything designed in China is shit by nature.
>>28611155
It is.
42.5 meters wingspan and 15 meters length.
Somewhat larger than a Global Hawk.
It will patrol the coastal areas and the West Pacific at an altitude of 25km, near space, and be equipped with multiple L-band AESA radars for 360° coverage.
>>28611002
The first one>>28610355
in no way looked real.
>>28611125
The grass is blurry because the camera was following the taxiing drone. There has been some photoshop, but it was more about the coloring etc.
>>28611192
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War
>>28611284
The second picture of it is real so this is a pointless argument.
>>28611205
Is that to detect missiles and stealth planes early on?
![Jackie-Chan-WTF[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/AiEw4AQ.jpg "Jackie-Chan-WTF[1].jpg")
>>28611284
The wheels move at a faster rate than the grass and they're 10x more detailed than the grass.
Hell, the grass doesn't even have anywhere near the same noise as the runway or jet.
>>28611320
The second picture is obviously real so the argument isn't worth having.
We know the Chinese censor the shit out of their stuff. There's been a number of real pictures of this drone, I just didn't know why the original poster used a censored/fake one.
>>28611309
Yeah, basically a counter-stealth, data-relay, tracking and guidance asset.
Basically a multipurpose satellite, only flying within orbit.
>>28611002
What the fuck China, strapping airliner engine and wings on two bodies that you might already have in service is not how you design a HALE UAV. Airliners have low wing because support structures obviously can't be in the same place with passengers. They're tilted and also flex upwards to reduce the unstablity caused by it. Why the fuck does that piece of shit has airliner nacelle is beyond me.
+Lee, we need HALE UAV.
-Alright, let's strap airliner wings and engine on two main fuselages that we already have. Let's not even bother with optimizing the design. It worked fine before.
+Good idea Lee, you get an extra dead fetus for dinner!
Not that anything wrong with the engine. But why that nacelle..
>>28610355
In order to capture the "motion" of the plen using that focal length that I assume at least 300mm, you need a shutter speed of at least 1/100 and very good hands or possibly a tripod. Now, you've seen a car that is cruising inside a city right? Could you see it's rim clearly? Of course not. According to the photo, those wheels are about the same or slightly bigger and plen is about to take off. And yet the only
Conclusion: The drone didn't fly. Grass is shopped. They tried hard that's why it looks okayish in first glance . However, if you stare at it, you will notice the ugly borders so it looks like a shitty vidya grass and fuckers also forgot to edit the runway. That's why it looks unrealistic.
>>28611342
It actually is. It means it never flew.
>>28612299
>airliner
It is a jet-trainer engine.
>>28612299
>And yet the only
And yet the only things that should move, the wheels, are stationary
Couldn't find a proper photo so have this.
>>28612347
I don't give a single flying fuck about what's inside that nacelle. Everything works. But military planes don't have their engines sticking out like ugly tumors. I can't say what's their reason, or why I should be opposed to them, but it just looks off.
>>28611288
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_War
Superior version coming through. Actually has useful advice and a different way of thinking of military strategy as opposed to China's babby-tier "don't forget to feed your troops! If they have more guys than you, you're probably gonna lose!"
>Sun Tzu
>Relevant
>>28606586
>Lockheed Martin
>Predator and Reaper designs
What was Lockheed Martin doing with those?
>>28610363
Private buyers, not government-backed militaries. $3m difference in unit cost is hardly anything compared to maintenance, crews, deployment, training, etc.
>>28607017
The GEA is a crock of shit, NG's drones are much better.
>>28610662
>being this insecure that you respond to every shitpost
We get it, you're shilling
>>28606521
>Uncle Sam didnt want to sell them Reapers.
This just seems utterly stupid to me. Like, what's the WORST that could happen? Even if the Iraqi government/military goes rogue, it's not like they'll be able to use them against the US or our allies. They need OUR satellites to work. And even ignoring that little detail, they're still pretty much utterly worthless for anything other than COIN.
But Iraq has a greater need for COIN assets than just about anyone right now (except Syria and perhaps Ukraine). Imposing sanctions like this at the same time that we're withdrawing our own forces is literally setting them up for failure and/or pushing them to use more indiscriminate means of dealing with insurgents... like barrel bombs and shit.
Seriously, what the fuck, Congress.
>>28610331
>Not after the US fleet shows up.
All sides went through all kinds of simulations. Even with a 100% kill-ratio. It wouldn't be enough to stop China.
>>28614762
>NG's drones are much more expensive and flashy
FTFY
>>28614918
Tell me, what company's hardware is doing CATOBAR launches off CVs while the other is languishing in a hangar?
>>28613193
Impressive
Americans truly think some European country who lost 2 world wars out of 2 have what it takes to write about winning. Not following SunTzu-sama's works clearly show on the military of America, fat soldiers, not working as intended airplanes, cost inefficient ships and even black people. Absolutely degrading.
>>28615259
The Sea Avenger contract dried the fuck up. Do you really expect a company to build that shit for free?
>>28615533
Sea Avenger is General Atomics, the X-47B is Northrop Grumman.
>>28606459
Those are the most anemic piss weak drone strikes I've ever seen.
>>28606586
Are aware that some of the things you mentioned is made up?
Are you aware that you have no idea how cyber-IS works?
3/10 - do your homework and don't comeback until you've felt bad for being stupid on the internet.
>>28616275
pretty sure the drone is just there to find/mark the targets.
looks to be laser-guided bombs.
>>28606877
I want this to happen because the Command and Conquer Generals Prophesy would finally be complete.
>>28607041
theyve killed lots of militants in pakistan with these chinese outdated uavs. make you wonder how easy it is and maybe uavs are actually overpriced boys toys.
Can someone explain this reticle to me pls... the box around the crosshairs moves independently. What does the box indicate? And what do crosshairs indicate?
>>28621213
Box would be the actual direction of the camera/laser designator, while the crosshair is the cursor as controled by the operators.
>>28621357
And the box also allows for 'lock on' and automatic target following procedures, as it is used for image recognition.
Especially useful for moving targets.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSl72uNBFhU
At about 0:20 one can see the box following a moving target automatically. The crosshairs then can be used to make micro-adjustions for the laser-designator while it is firmly locked within the box.
