@RepublicofWrightIsles 17 years ahead is still more acceptable than 40 or 50 years ahead. Experimentals means no real reliability, means no sells possible, means no officialisation. So you shouldn't publish a plane but a forum with explanations.
Gemini stated that even your manned version is very advanced for a 1954 manned aircraft, let along drone. You have done nothing right to defend you thought abt drone being absent in our current RP era.
Blud 💀 that a 2040 drone, nowhere near my little drone capable of moving within 95km. You cannot compare. I created the drone specificly as a new vehicle, i didn't slapped it with a flight computer. You're nowhere 1960's capable.
.
You kbow what?
.
Show me a drone like this with ressembling capacities in 1960 that flew. If you find one, i'll give you a pass.
@RepublicofWrightIsles how coherent is it? A flight computer isn't the thing.
It is radar LOS guided, up to 95km only. With a flight computer (modern if i understand right), you can control the aircraft from anywhere he can reach. Or even more.
I take realism, not understandings
@SPWithLizzie i talk about control range, as it is written 300 miles control range in the desc...
.
Control range is like a range from which you can control the UAV's actions, and 300 miles (~480km) is more than some light manned aircrafts, so for cantrol, it is unrealistic. For max ferry range, flying on it's own near the one controling it, from a modified plane made to control it like that, it is more realistic, but again, as it is a drone, and let's say 1960, it is too heavy, too fast, and engines used are just unrealistic...
@SPWithLizzie you should just change wings shapes and make a single engine non-powerful version for a drone. Even with the range, it is still way, way, way too early for a not alr 1960 drone. Nothing realistic :/ if not the range, which is already quite imposing for a drone at our era.
@SPWithLizzie because... uh... well, idk, bcs i didn't saw how the Osprey looks like. I just decided to put a bit of like H-21 from BOSKnight for the RP but with only my game's knowledge, i just put its name for like yk, the game.
.
But dw, it only have 4700hp, not 7000 or 8000 like IRL and modernish ones.
@BOSKnight Radar uses Radio waves, so yea, it be controlled from any bomber modified to have Radio waves monitory and control, and to be able to control, either use IFR or visual, so it doesn't crashes. It is meant to train crew, so is the reason of low price and capacities.
.
And yea, i said to Gemini to tell me how realitic it is for a 1978 drone, and as you see, he concluded it to be lowly realistic for a 1978 drone, way too ahead of 1978, 1978 not 1958. So for 1958, how ahead can we call it? Futuristic.
@BOSKnight if it is a civilian engine (like a cylinder engine, like V4/V6/V12 and co., then you can't achieve doing Loitering while being able to have weapons, and even the range is unrealistic... want me to ask Gemini AND deepseek to explain why to you?
Realism: High. Optical zoom capabilities of this range were certainly available for reconnaissance purposes in 1978. The challenge would be integrating such a system into a drone, providing stabilization, and reliably transmitting high-quality imagery back to a ground station over long distances.
1000 hp engine (approx. 745.7 kW):
Realism: High. A 1000 hp engine (likely a turboprop or small turbofan given the drone's appearance and performance) is a very plausible power output for a drone designed for long endurance and high altitude in 1978.
Cost: $700,000 unarmed, $100,000 armed:
Realism: Moderate to High (for unarmed); Low (for armed delta).
An unarmed cost of $700,000 (in 1978 dollars) for such an advanced, high-performance military drone is plausible. Research and development costs for cutting-edge technology are always high.
However, the additional cost of $100,000 for "armed" (meaning adding two ATGMs, targeting systems, and launchers) seems unrealistically low. The missiles themselves would be costly, let alone the integration and specialized avionics. If "100,000 armed" means the total cost when armed, it would be extremely unrealistic.
Producing starting 1958 (implies 1978 for assessment):
Realism: Low (for widespread production). The very concept and design (reminiscent of the Predator) of such a sophisticated, multi-role UAV being mass-produced and operationally deployed in 1978 would be exceptionally premature. Drones of the 1970s were generally simpler, often used for reconnaissance or as targets, and lacked the combined high-altitude, long-endurance, and precision strike capabilities seen here.
Conclusion
If this drone, with its specified features, were to exist and enter production in 1978, it would represent a highly ambitious and groundbreaking technological leap forward, effectively being several decades ahead of its time.
Overall Realism: Moderate to Low. While individual components (engine, camera, range) were feasible, the system integration of high-altitude flight, long endurance, precision remote control/autonomy, and sophisticated armed capability into a reliable, operational unmanned platform of this design would have been extraordinarily challenging and largely beyond the mainstream capabilities of 1978. It would likely be a cutting-edge, experimental prototype rather than a widely "produced" asset.
It's a fantastic concept for a game, as it pushes the boundarie
Gemini's response when i asked for its realism. But i put it as "20 years ahead", so he talks about 1978 instead of 1958.
Based on the details provided for this drone, let's assess its realism if it were to be "20 years ahead" of 1958, meaning it began production in 1978.
The drone's design strongly resembles the General Atomics MQ-1 Predator, which didn't enter service until the mid-1990s. Therefore, its mere existence with these capabilities in 1978 would already represent a significant technological leap.
Here's a breakdown of the realism for each specified detail in the context of 1978 drone technology:
Realism Assessment for a Drone from 1978
* 2 'Inferno' ATGM-5 missiles:
* Realism: Moderate to Low. While Anti-Tank Guided Missiles (ATGMs) like the TOW and HOT were in service by 1978, their integration onto an operational unmanned platform for precision attack was still highly experimental. Armed drones were not yet commonplace, and precise targeting and guidance from an unmanned aerial system were very cutting-edge. The concept existed, but widespread, reliable operational deployment was still decades away.
* 150 miles of range (approx. 241 km):
* Realism: High. A combat radius or operational range of 150 miles for a drone in 1978 is quite plausible, especially for reconnaissance or strike missions originating relatively close to the target area.
* Loitering time of 5 hours:
* Realism: Moderate to High. Achieving a 5-hour endurance for an unmanned aircraft in 1978 would have been a significant engineering feat. It would require highly fuel-efficient engines and efficient aerodynamic design. While challenging, it's not entirely unrealistic for a purpose-built reconnaissance drone.
* Cruising altitude: 49,000 ft (approx. 14,935 m):
* Realism: Moderate to Low. This is a very high altitude for an unmanned vehicle in 1978. Manned reconnaissance aircraft (like the U-2) operated at higher altitudes, but for an autonomous or remotely controlled drone capable of carrying a payload and maintaining stable flight for hours, this was pushing the boundaries of available propulsion, navigation, and flight control technology. Maintaining precise altitude and stability at this height was difficult.
* Camera zoom 1x-20x:
* Realism: High. Optical zoom capabilities of this range were certainly available for reconnaissance purposes in 1978. The challenge would be integrating such a system into a drone, providing stabilization, and reliably transm
@BOSKnight i am not talking about what his weapons are or the capacity. But the ability to control vehicle from that far requires engineering capacities that are just way, WAY too ahead, even with 20 years of advance. Divide by 2 the loitering time and it is already more realistic, and for ranges, it can't got past 300km as no modern tech are available to us rn. Except if you announce developping new long range control tech. But will need weeks IRL to end up finding what it needs. Anyways. I won't question it anymore, when it goes beyond realism, i can't catch up...
@BOSKnight alright. As what? Government, minister, company?
@BOSKnight can seem. Ik it isn't, so i am not caring much :/
@BOSKnight let's mix. SR-71
@BOSKnight lol, am a company. From germany
Perma Tag requests
PTR:
@DeeganWithABazooka
@Hahahahaahahshs
Special
@RepublicofWrightIsles well, as it is an rp, i should say w is needed to say... but well, i won't go insulting recklessly, so i'll do so. Cya
@RepublicofWrightIsles 17 years ahead is still more acceptable than 40 or 50 years ahead. Experimentals means no real reliability, means no sells possible, means no officialisation. So you shouldn't publish a plane but a forum with explanations.
@BOSKnight what. Da hell.
What dat means???
@SPWithLizzie ,-, meow? Poor lil hyuman... pat pat
@SPWithLizzie yea :) fat, like the gap btw irl and this rp tech dev
Perma tag request:
@Hahahahaahahshs
Socket Onion:
@DeeganWithABazooka
No-See Jerry:
@RB107
Kingdom of Pole-Land:
@BigHeadEngineering
Unity Ding-Dong:
@DeutschFELLA
Republic of For-Rants:
@keiyronelleavgeek566
Republic of Kinda:
@aMosquito
Empire of Celestia:
@LunarEclipseSP
No-See Jerry Head of Defense:
@RepublicofWrightIsles
Republic of Next-In-Co:
@Aeromax
Unity Steaks:
@Bugati87
Empire of Your-Pan:
@Technicalstrat
Kingdom of Bell-Lands:
@SPWithLizzie
Republic of Nether-Jim
@AviationLoverGEEK444
Republic of Swisher-Man
@Voytek
Umbra Defense:
@SchmooveBrain
You-Go-Slav-Yeah:
@NotRob119
Gemini stated that even your manned version is very advanced for a 1954 manned aircraft, let along drone. You have done nothing right to defend you thought abt drone being absent in our current RP era.
Blud 💀 that a 2040 drone, nowhere near my little drone capable of moving within 95km. You cannot compare. I created the drone specificly as a new vehicle, i didn't slapped it with a flight computer. You're nowhere 1960's capable.
.
You kbow what?
.
Show me a drone like this with ressembling capacities in 1960 that flew. If you find one, i'll give you a pass.
Perma Tag requests
@RepublicofWrightIsles how coherent is it? A flight computer isn't the thing.
It is radar LOS guided, up to 95km only. With a flight computer (modern if i understand right), you can control the aircraft from anywhere he can reach. Or even more.
I take realism, not understandings
@SPWithLizzie i talk about control range, as it is written 300 miles control range in the desc...
.
Control range is like a range from which you can control the UAV's actions, and 300 miles (~480km) is more than some light manned aircrafts, so for cantrol, it is unrealistic. For max ferry range, flying on it's own near the one controling it, from a modified plane made to control it like that, it is more realistic, but again, as it is a drone, and let's say 1960, it is too heavy, too fast, and engines used are just unrealistic...
@SPWithLizzie you should just change wings shapes and make a single engine non-powerful version for a drone. Even with the range, it is still way, way, way too early for a not alr 1960 drone. Nothing realistic :/ if not the range, which is already quite imposing for a drone at our era.
@SPWithLizzie because... uh... well, idk, bcs i didn't saw how the Osprey looks like. I just decided to put a bit of like H-21 from BOSKnight for the RP but with only my game's knowledge, i just put its name for like yk, the game.
.
But dw, it only have 4700hp, not 7000 or 8000 like IRL and modernish ones.
@SPWithLizzie ? Yes?
Socket Onion:
@DeeganWithABazooka
No-See Jerry:
@RB107
Kingdom of Pole-Land:
@BigHeadEngineering
Unity Ding-Dong:
@DeutschFELLA
Republic of For-Rants:
@keiyronelleavgeek566
Republic of Kinda:
@aMosquito
Empire of Celestia:
@LunarEclipseSP
No-See Jerry Head of Defense:
@RepublicofWrightIsles
Republic of Next-In-Co:
@Aeromax
Unity Steaks:
@Bugati87
Empire of Your-Pan:
@Technicalstrat
Kingdom of Bell-Lands:
@SPWithLizzie
Republic of Nether-Jim
@AviationLoverGEEK444
Republic of Swisher-Man
@Voytek
Umbra Defense:
@SchmooveBrain
You-Go-Slav-Yeah:
@NotRob119
Like, we just make a good prop? Or needs to exists a first variant?
@BOSKnight 10M... alr, then 2 units
Can i get 5 H-21 aircrafts?
@RepublicofWrightIsles why? Depends on drones type and role. See the Ryan Firebee. The exact homologue of my drone.
@BOSKnight bcs i joined in the rp in 1952, idk how you did, but gg
@BOSKnight great
@BOSKnight great to know. Because i never heard abt you putting funds in my company :)
@BOSKnight Radar uses Radio waves, so yea, it be controlled from any bomber modified to have Radio waves monitory and control, and to be able to control, either use IFR or visual, so it doesn't crashes. It is meant to train crew, so is the reason of low price and capacities.
.
And yea, i said to Gemini to tell me how realitic it is for a 1978 drone, and as you see, he concluded it to be lowly realistic for a 1978 drone, way too ahead of 1978, 1978 not 1958. So for 1958, how ahead can we call it? Futuristic.
@BOSKnight if it is a civilian engine (like a cylinder engine, like V4/V6/V12 and co., then you can't achieve doing Loitering while being able to have weapons, and even the range is unrealistic... want me to ask Gemini AND deepseek to explain why to you?
@BOSKnight it is Visual control, from bombers or ground. Radar control, up to 95km range of control. It is written, i changed nothing
@BOSKnight he also said it was realistic for a turboprop, 1000hp
@BOSKnight and the camera is said to be highly realistic. I said nthg about it.
Conclusion
If this drone, with its specified features, were to exist and enter production in 1978, it would represent a highly ambitious and groundbreaking technological leap forward, effectively being several decades ahead of its time.
It's a fantastic concept for a game, as it pushes the boundarie
Gemini's response when i asked for its realism. But i put it as "20 years ahead", so he talks about 1978 instead of 1958.
Based on the details provided for this drone, let's assess its realism if it were to be "20 years ahead" of 1958, meaning it began production in 1978.
The drone's design strongly resembles the General Atomics MQ-1 Predator, which didn't enter service until the mid-1990s. Therefore, its mere existence with these capabilities in 1978 would already represent a significant technological leap.
Here's a breakdown of the realism for each specified detail in the context of 1978 drone technology:
Realism Assessment for a Drone from 1978
* 2 'Inferno' ATGM-5 missiles:
* Realism: Moderate to Low. While Anti-Tank Guided Missiles (ATGMs) like the TOW and HOT were in service by 1978, their integration onto an operational unmanned platform for precision attack was still highly experimental. Armed drones were not yet commonplace, and precise targeting and guidance from an unmanned aerial system were very cutting-edge. The concept existed, but widespread, reliable operational deployment was still decades away.
* 150 miles of range (approx. 241 km):
* Realism: High. A combat radius or operational range of 150 miles for a drone in 1978 is quite plausible, especially for reconnaissance or strike missions originating relatively close to the target area.
* Loitering time of 5 hours:
* Realism: Moderate to High. Achieving a 5-hour endurance for an unmanned aircraft in 1978 would have been a significant engineering feat. It would require highly fuel-efficient engines and efficient aerodynamic design. While challenging, it's not entirely unrealistic for a purpose-built reconnaissance drone.
* Cruising altitude: 49,000 ft (approx. 14,935 m):
* Realism: Moderate to Low. This is a very high altitude for an unmanned vehicle in 1978. Manned reconnaissance aircraft (like the U-2) operated at higher altitudes, but for an autonomous or remotely controlled drone capable of carrying a payload and maintaining stable flight for hours, this was pushing the boundaries of available propulsion, navigation, and flight control technology. Maintaining precise altitude and stability at this height was difficult.
* Camera zoom 1x-20x:
* Realism: High. Optical zoom capabilities of this range were certainly available for reconnaissance purposes in 1978. The challenge would be integrating such a system into a drone, providing stabilization, and reliably transm
publishing
@BOSKnight and MQ-9 Reaper (modern drone exactly like this one) got no more than 50 000ft max reachable altitude
@BOSKnight i am not talking about what his weapons are or the capacity. But the ability to control vehicle from that far requires engineering capacities that are just way, WAY too ahead, even with 20 years of advance. Divide by 2 the loitering time and it is already more realistic, and for ranges, it can't got past 300km as no modern tech are available to us rn. Except if you announce developping new long range control tech. But will need weeks IRL to end up finding what it needs. Anyways. I won't question it anymore, when it goes beyond realism, i can't catch up...