Indigenous engines would be preferable, yes, but curiously enough very few successful UAVs can rely on domestic propulsion – MQ-9/TPE331 is about the only noteworthy exception. Virtually all piston-powered US and all Israeli UAVs are fitted with non-US/Israeli engines (and outside these two market leaders the picture is no different), so that Altius requires partially non-Russian power plants is not that critical a shortcoming IMHO. Especially as it’s primarily the propulsion system that sets it apart from the competition – replacing the Diesels with something else for the sake of import substitution is going to rob Altius of its most significant edge.
As for the MiG-35, I concur absolutely – a classic example of the waste of resources that Russia can ill-afford if it wishes to keep pace with the deeper pockets of the US, China and Western Europe. Past experience gets you only so far, and if you choose to antagonize everybody and his dog on the international stage with the result of having sanctions slapped on you, money only becomes even tighter. Efficiency becomes utterly essential: identify where you get the most bang for your buck and ruthlessly exterminate less promising alternatives – if you absolutely must subsidize someone through a dry spell, do so by funding useful projects which return a reasonably competitive end-product. No more Il-76MD90s or An-148s or MiG-35s or Il-114s or civil Il-96s or Tu-204SMs or Su-30M2s or… If you absolutely have to keep MiG around (blasphemous though it sounds to let them die, their decline was largely of their own doing), the Skat UCAV seemed like a fairly competent design that would have given something internationally creditable to show for the investment.
Chinese have widely exported unmanned systems and are building factories in several countries. I havent seen that they are unreliable. The rest you wrote is not worthy of comment.
Sign In
