0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
167 $
JUNE 2020

Russia Is Developing 15 Ton Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles


Russia Is Developing 15 Ton Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles

Anton Denisov/RIA Novosti

Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG is developing combat and reconnaissance unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) ranging in weight from 1 to 15 tonnes, TASS reported on November 14. Test models should be completed in the near future, said MiG spokeswoman Anastasiya Kravchenko at the Dubai Airshow 2107.

“There will be different vehicles for reconnaissance and for combat. Different types of vehicles to fit the task at hand,” Kravchenko said. The test models are expected to be completed “in the near future”, she added while stating that the UAVs will be divided in three classes: from 1 to 5 tonnes, from 5 to 10 tonnes and from 10 to 15 tonnes. She also said that the engines for all the UAVs are being developed in Russia.

Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG originally planned to present Russian Ministry of Industry and Trade with the 5 ton UAV development plans until the end of 2015. Ilya Tarasenko, current CEO of Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG stated that Russian PAK-DP interceptor, which is developed as an alternative to current MiG-31, may serve as a base for the unmanned vehicle.



Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Rodger

    Why stop at 15 tons? It’s not like the mechanics change.

    • Eskandar Black

      why assume they stopped

  • Garga

    It’s not designed by Sukhoi but I’d love to see it’s maneuverability anyway, now that it’s not limited by a human pilot.

    • Tudor Miron

      MIG’s aero is in fact very close to Sukhoy as they are based on the same school of thinking (in terms of aero).

      • Alex

        Quite true, but the su 27 was much more cost effective than mig 29 and that’s why it won the competition.

        • Justin

          I always thought the Sukhoi won because it was long range! The Soviet Union collapsed and the Russians couldn’t afford an agile fighter with less range over a multi-tasked fighter with longer range and bigger payloads!
          I’m quite certain that the mig-29 was and still is the best air fighter in the world in terms of manoeuvrability!

          • Solomon Krupacek


          • Justin

            mig 35 maybe?

          • Solomon Krupacek

            sorry, my no was not for you, i made mistake! i own you 1 beer :)

          • Alex

            Su-35 is best now

          • Justin

            yes with its vectored thrusting it would be!
            I hear that the Mig 35’s (built for the navy” will be vectored thrusting too!
            This might put the Mig’s back onto in terms of manoeuvrability.

  • FlorianGeyer

    This is a new approach by Russia as currently the leadership does not favour armed drones for ethical reasons and the rancor of civilians that death from the heavens can cause after ill judged attacks.

    • Solomon Krupacek


  • Pietro Del Pretw

    the Us global Hawk is about 10 tons so 15 tons is for Russian drones is good

  • Mase fah

    this looks like more or less US RQ-170 which iran electronically captured and landed intact when it was spying over Iran. Iranians already reverse engineering and made the copycat and done flight test, it looks like Russia got that too. Well done

    • Ronald

      The RQ-170 “Lightning Bolt” , yes that was my thought , although the cockpit looks higher . It is difficult to make a good judgement from just one view angle . I believe the Persians also have a larger version . Beautiful design , even if it is American originally .

  • Solomon Krupacek

    copying, copying? :)))

    • Alex

      just like they are copying us and everyone else, salamander

      • Nod

        who is they.

        The Russians who have hyper sonic missiles making the american navy, and its missile defense system as obsolete ..

        so sorry,

        me thinks the yanks think that amount of money spent= inventiveness and effectiveness, which they clearly do not.

    • Nod

      Every invention is a copy of the previous invention.

      • Solomon Krupacek


        • Nod

          flat earther I see….

      • AlexanderAmproz

        North Korea in the Great Nuclear Game

        by Manlio Dinucci

        For Manlio Dinucci, the North Korean Crisis is preventing us from seeing the wood from the trees. To appreciate the true extent of the crisis, we must not be blinkered and focus only on the fact that Pyongyang has the atomic bomb. We must open our eyes to three other facts: 1/ the Great Powers have unbelievable stocks of nuclear weapons; 2/another 35 states are on the point of acquiring them; and 3/confronted by the US strategy, states that possess nuclear weapons are better able to fend for themselves than the parasitic states that do not, where widows and orphans will be bred.

        The political-media spotlights are directed at North Korea’s nuclear missile tests. Yet the general context in which these test are taking place is completely obscured. What is this context? An arms race that is gathering pace, that while it maintains a nuclear arsenal capable of wiping out the human race from the face of the Earth, points its heads and high tech carriers that are becoming increasingly sophisticated.

        In 2017, the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) considers that North Korea has “fissile material with the potential to produce 10-20 nuclear heads, but there is no evidence available that it has made operational nuclear heads that can be transported by ballistic missiles”. Still going by what the FAS reports, the U.S. has 6,800 nuclear heads of which 1,650 are strategic and 150 are non-strategic, poised for immediate launch. Including the French and British heads (300 and 215 respectively), Nato nuclear forces have 7,315 nuclear heads, of which 2,200 are ready for launch, compared with 7,000 Russian nuclear heads of which 1,950 are ready for launch. Still, going by what the FAS thinks, around 550 US, French and British heads ready for launch, are stationed in Europe in the closest proximity to Russian territory. The analogy would be if Russia had lined up in Mexico a hundred nuclear heads pointed at the U.S. Taking account of the Chinese bombs (270), Pakistani bombs (120-130), Indian bombs (110-120) and Israeli bombs (80), the total number of nuclear heads is estimated at about 15,000. Of course these are approximate figures, almost certainly default. And the race to nuclear weapons continues while the nuclear heads and nuclear carriers are constantly being updated.

        Leading the pack is the United States which is constantly running tests on Minuteman III, its intercontinental ballistic missiles and is prepared to replace them with new missiles (the cost of which is estimated at 85 billion dollars). In 2015, Congress approved a plan (the cost of which is estimated at around 1,000 billion) to fortify its nuclear forces with another 12 submarines for attack (each 7 billion), each armed with 200 nuclear heads, and other strategic bombers (550 million each), each armed with 20 nuclear heads. This is the backdrop for replacing the US nuclear bombs B61, stationed in Italy and other European countries, with the new B61-12, weapons for a first strike. The nuclear forces have also been strengthened by the “anti-missile shield” to neutralize enemy reprisal, such as those lined up by the US in Europe against Russia and in South Korea, not against North Korea but in actual fact, against China.

        Russia and China are speeding up the modernization of their nuclear forces so that they do not fall behind. 2018 will see Russia lining up a new intercontinental ballistic missile, the Sarmat, with an 18,000 km range, capable of transporting 10-15 nuclear heads that, entering the atmosphere at a hypersonic speed (more than 10 times the speed of sound), manoeuvre so as to dodge the interceptive missiles piercing the “shield”.

        In such a situation, where a closed circle of states maintains an oligopoly over nuclear weapons, where the state that possesses them threatens the state that does not have them, it is increasingly probable that other states will seek to obtain them for themselves … mission accomplished. In addition to the nine states that already have nuclear weapons, there are around another 35 states with the capability to build them.

        And yet the newspapers and the news pay no heed to this; they set off the alarm on North Korea, condemned as the exclusive source for the nuclear threat. Also left out of consideration is the lesson that in Pyongyang they say they have learnt: Gaddafi – they recall – had totally renounced every kind of nuclear programme, allowing CIA inspection on Libyan territory. However, this did not save him when the USA and Nato decided to destroy the Libyan State. And so they reason in Pyongyang that if this state had had nuclear weapons, no one would have had the courage to attack it. Such a conclusion can also be extracted from other examples: in the present global climate, it is better to have nuclear weapons than not to have them.

        Meanwhile on the basis of this dangerous logic, the probability of nuclear proliferation increases. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, adopted by the vast majority of the United Nations last July, is ignored by all nuclear powers, by Nato members (Italy included) and by their principal partners (Ukraine, Japan and Australia). Fundamentally, there is a large mobilization for insisting that our country is also a party to the Treaty on the Prohibition on Nuclear Weapons and therefore must remove from its territory the U.S. bombs lined up there. The presence of these bombs also violates the Non-Proliferation Treaty which Italy has already ratified. If you lack a political conscience, then at the very least, your basic survival instinct should be triggered.

        Manlio Dinucci


        • Nod

          twisted sickness huh…