New massive Calidus B-350 attack aircraft unveiled at Dubai airshow

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
1,161
Interesting comment by Steve Trimble, here.

View: https://twitter.com/TheDEWLine/status/1461264050676023296?t=T_5bpgjbF83EexQimwPYjA&s=19


I'm doubtful. If the plan was to build a pure sensor platform, why a dozen hard points?
The latest sensors give you a tactical advantage over Taliban, bad guys, drug smugglers, etc. It also carries a few weapons because your air force may only be able to afford one type of air frame, or an armed interceptor may be an hour or two away ... far enough away to allow bad guys to cross the border to safety.
Remember that theses sorts of low-tech war planes are meant for poorer countries that can barely afford a handful of small, simple airplanes.
 

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
1,161

Okaaaay... that explains a lot of things about this beast. Hey, they should scale it up again, using an A400M turboprop !

Turboprop Skyraider. Not as good looking as the Skyshark, but that's what I think of when I see it. Especially the image with man standing next to it. That really gives a sense of it's size.
Hopefully with a more reliable turboprop... (not too difficult !) But you have a point, a modern day Skyshark for sure.
Skyraider is a better analogy. Skyshark had twice the power, was as fast as an L-39, but had a better climb rate and higher ceiling than the L-39. It was on par with the first generation of straight wing jets. The jets might have had a bit higher top speed, but the Skyshark could beat them in a climb and had a higher ceiling. A modern Skyshark with the kinks worked out would be a hell of an aircraft.

Scale it up to fit an A400 engine and you'd have twice the power of a Skyshark. More than both engines on a C-27J in fact. Might be - overkill. :) C-27J engine on the other hand....
Careful.
When the airplane grows too big, too heavy and too fast, it can no longer turn in tight mountain valleys.
For comparison, most RCAF Search and Rescue squadrons fly C-130 Hercules because they can carry plenty of fuel and equipment for long searches. OTOH the West Coast CSAR squadrons fly DHC-5 Buffalo twins because they can turn much tighter in steep mountain valleys. Worn out Buffalos are now being replaced by similar-sized CN 235 twins.
 

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,906
Reaction score
1,653
Well if I was the person in charge of a small(er) country with a limited budget, my new "C-12" better be able to drop bombs, since that is probably the pictures that my defense ministry showed me.
 

alberchico

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
124
Reaction score
261
Interesting comment by Steve Trimble, here.

View: https://twitter.com/TheDEWLine/status/1461264050676023296?t=T_5bpgjbF83EexQimwPYjA&s=19


I'm doubtful. If the plan was to build a pure sensor platform, why a dozen hard points?
If this massive platform is being designed simply for surveillance, then it will fail. A UAV can perform the same mission for a longer duration and for a cheaper price point. A few years ago, Qatar commissioned a German firm to develop a purpose built surveillance plane, the QO1. But it looks like they abandoned the project and moved on to something else.


 

Attachments

  • Katar-an-Wildauer-Flugzeug-interessiert_big_teaser_article.jpg
    Katar-an-Wildauer-Flugzeug-interessiert_big_teaser_article.jpg
    42.9 KB · Views: 50
  • Cj096-EUoAI0FVv.jpg
    Cj096-EUoAI0FVv.jpg
    91 KB · Views: 39
  • german-qatar-surveillance_67280.jpg
    german-qatar-surveillance_67280.jpg
    165.4 KB · Views: 53

Desertfox

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
270
Reaction score
120
What can this aircraft do that an AT-6 or Super Tucano can't? Those two are likely to be a lot cheaper in the long run and are known quantities. Two important things for the kind of countries that would be interested in this aircraft.
 

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,906
Reaction score
1,653
What can this aircraft do that an AT-6 or Super Tucano can't? Those two are likely to be a lot cheaper in the long run and are known quantities. Two important things for the kind of countries that would be interested in this aircraft.
I would assume that the platform has some more endurance and it certainly has more stores stations to work with. Whether or not that is worth the expense is likely to be the debate on its viability. Ironically the Skyraider that this aircraft is compared to had sufficient space, if I recall correctly, to have an electronics suite and operator had they had such things in the 50-70's.
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,979
Reaction score
2,567
I would assume that the platform has some more endurance and it certainly has more stores stations to work with. Whether or not that is worth the expense is likely to be the debate on its viability. Ironically the Skyraider that this aircraft is compared to had sufficient space, if I recall correctly, to have an electronics suite and operator had they had such things in the 50-70's.

There were 2-, 3- and 4-seat versions of the Skyraider, with radars and several different electronic warfare systems.
 

Fluff

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 9, 2019
Messages
756
Reaction score
643
We must be getting close to a solar powered UAV just carrying a EO turret? Even if it needs a catapult or a carrier aircraft to launch it?

So if I was running a cash strapped airforce somewhere, I'd buy some, and some way to airdrop weapons from the back of my old herc or whatever I'm using for my smuggling sideline. Job done.
 

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
1,161
Interesting comment by Steve Trimble, here.

View: https://twitter.com/TheDEWLine/status/1461264050676023296?t=T_5bpgjbF83EexQimwPYjA&s=19


I'm doubtful. If the plan was to build a pure sensor platform, why a dozen hard points?
If this massive platform is being designed simply for surveillance, then it will fail. A UAV can perform the same mission for a longer duration and for a cheaper price point. A few years ago, Qatar commissioned a German firm to develop a purpose built surveillance plane, the QO1. But it looks like they abandoned the project and moved on to something else.


A UAV is cheaper "IF" First World gov'ts will sell you the software. The USAF only trusts a handful of Third-World countries enough to sell them the latest software.
Far more likely that they MIGHT be able to buy de-graded software. Furthermore, that de-graded software will mysteriously go silent if they point it towards the USAF.
Hah!
Hah!

Forward fuselage looks like it was designed by Extra, but the tail looks more like a Diamond light twin.
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,979
Reaction score
2,567
It's a mockup. Making some pylons and fitting mock ordnance doesn't cost much, but may entice a customer to fund development towards weapons integration.

But that suggests that the purpose of the plane is to carry weapons, if only they can find the money to develop it..

If your primary goal was to build a platform to carry an MX-25 EO ball (<300 lbs) and Osprey 30 radars (also <300 pounds with four antennas) , you would not design this behemoth. You'd want something much closer to the Grob 520 -- a plane that can loiter at altitude without a ton of excess horsepower sucking down fuel.
 

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,906
Reaction score
1,653
There are several cash strapped countries who have gone the "cheep and simple UAS" route. Ask Ethiopia how their Chinese UAS are working out. Electronic jamming equipment is even less expensive. Cyber mercenaries are abundant. UAS are a great tool, but not the panacea of warfare.
 
Last edited:

Nik

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
553
Reaction score
203
What would the Philippines want it for ? Smugglers, ship-pirates, fishing-pirates and Spratlys...
 

MihoshiK

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 9, 2007
Messages
245
Reaction score
199
What would the Philippines want it for ? Smugglers, ship-pirates, fishing-pirates and Spratlys...
I imagine that if a few of those hardpoints are capable of supporting tanks, that loiter time would be truly impressive on this.
 

LowObservable

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,232
Reaction score
269

Fluff

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 9, 2019
Messages
756
Reaction score
643
Interesting comment by Steve Trimble, here.

View: https://twitter.com/TheDEWLine/status/1461264050676023296?t=T_5bpgjbF83EexQimwPYjA&s=19


I'm doubtful. If the plan was to build a pure sensor platform, why a dozen hard points?
In that case, why not a PC-12, with a loo and a coffeepot?
I was thinking the same, at least you can stretch your legs, and take a leak, in a PC12.

Also when not on border patrol, you can deliver medicine, bring pregnant women to the hospital etc etc.
 
Top