Search Results
6/21/2025, 10:26:18 PM
>>63873882
The super tuc would slaughter this boi in every matchup. They're not the same class of aircraft. The shark is an ultralight: you can cut most supertuc specs in half or ¼ here. It's a hobby aircraft now in the process of being armed.
Compare:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_EMB_314_Super_Tucano#Specifications_(EMB_314_Super_Tucano)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark.Aero_Shark#Specifications_(UL)
Upside?
The advantage of using the shark for short-range cUAS air patrol is that it's extremely cheap and plentiful. You need mass in the sky more than you need combat prowess when swatting down a swarm attack. Adaptation of the lightest available aircraft for anti-drone duties has been a good idea so far in Ukraine.
Biggest downside?
Eh. Having seen some of those builds in the flesh, with a couple work-related ridealongs and second-hand experience of the typical shootdowns, my worry has always been unpredictable targets. One day soon, a shahed-like, flying a preprogrammed course, behaving like we've seen a thousand times in the past, will simply use a 20 cent sensor to detect an uncomfortably close aircraft and detonate.
Ukraine has already lost manned aircraft in drone chases, though none so far to reactive behavior from the drones. sUAS already demonstrate evasion in A2A combat with interceptors, ex. vidrel >>63776555 and >>62786928. Sometimes autonomous, sometimes by the pilots.
But the tactical difference in a manned chase is that you don't have to avoid: all you have to do is collide. As a drone, knowing that you're the target of a manned system usually makes your pursuer the highest-value thing you can hit.
The super tuc would slaughter this boi in every matchup. They're not the same class of aircraft. The shark is an ultralight: you can cut most supertuc specs in half or ¼ here. It's a hobby aircraft now in the process of being armed.
Compare:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_EMB_314_Super_Tucano#Specifications_(EMB_314_Super_Tucano)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark.Aero_Shark#Specifications_(UL)
Upside?
The advantage of using the shark for short-range cUAS air patrol is that it's extremely cheap and plentiful. You need mass in the sky more than you need combat prowess when swatting down a swarm attack. Adaptation of the lightest available aircraft for anti-drone duties has been a good idea so far in Ukraine.
Biggest downside?
Eh. Having seen some of those builds in the flesh, with a couple work-related ridealongs and second-hand experience of the typical shootdowns, my worry has always been unpredictable targets. One day soon, a shahed-like, flying a preprogrammed course, behaving like we've seen a thousand times in the past, will simply use a 20 cent sensor to detect an uncomfortably close aircraft and detonate.
Ukraine has already lost manned aircraft in drone chases, though none so far to reactive behavior from the drones. sUAS already demonstrate evasion in A2A combat with interceptors, ex. vidrel >>63776555 and >>62786928. Sometimes autonomous, sometimes by the pilots.
But the tactical difference in a manned chase is that you don't have to avoid: all you have to do is collide. As a drone, knowing that you're the target of a manned system usually makes your pursuer the highest-value thing you can hit.
Page 1