Possibly a Trembita, then. Probably using a valveless design rather than the fragile valve system on the original V1. Even cheaper than the already cheap and simple Schmidt-Argus valved pulsejet.
Hopfgeist
joined 1 year ago
Nice soundtrack. Ironically it was a song inspired by Glasnost, when the Soviet Union finally seemed to open up to the west and become more transparent and democratic ("Wind of Change").
I'm afraid it is now also a top target for Russian missiles, out of sheer spite ("If we can't have it, nobody shall have it").
True enough. But it's still quite literally "playing with fire". Maybe necessary, but terribly dangerous to the operators, too; much more so than most "refined" weapon systems. "Weapon Safety" is a thing.
These are brave people. What could possibly go wrong? If they do this often, there are bound to be casualties.
I find "loitering munitions" fine, people should just get used to correct non-sensationalist terminology. Or maybe sacrificial drones, or cruise missiles, although these traditionally have no loiter phase. But Kamikaze has the very strong implication of a human sacrifice, I find equating that with a single use or expendable drone to be in poor taste. Cruise missiles have been "smart" at least since the late 1980s, so that's nothing new, either. Just because this one can fly in circles for a while does not make it more sacrificial than faster, straight-flying ones.
Just my opinion.
I think "loitering munitions" sounds pretty cool, personally.
Why do people keep calling these "Kamikaze"? The point of the Kamikaze was that there was a human pilot inside, who was going on a suicide mission. These are just inanimate things. Drones, cruise missiles, whatever, NOT kamikaze.
Or else I will start calling all bombs, artillery shells, all munitions that destroy themselves at the target, "kamikaze":
"Germany has agreed to send more kamikaze ammunition for the Gepard anti-aircraft systems, along with a number of IRIS-T kamikaze anti-aircraft missiles, and 50 Taurus kamikaze cruise missiles." "The US have announced that they would deliver 15,000 new kamikaze artillery shells to Ukraine."
See how silly that is? /rant
~~Mig~~Su-24 bombers
There's no such thing as a MiG-24. (MiG has only ever used odd-numbered model designations, though I don't know why. But it's one of the reasons why it was a safe bet for Top Gun to use "MiG-28", being sure not to refer to any real aircraft, past, present or (probably) future.
Although I'm a bit late, it is worth mentioning, that the Tu-22M3 is not just a variant of the Tu-22. The Tu-22 was a completely different aircraft, and the Tu-22M retained the name only for political reasons. The Tu-22M3, though, is actually a development of the Tu-22M, most notably with different air intakes.
The Ukrainian version of the much-ridiculed Russian "cope cage"? Is it any better?