A gas turbine unit for UAVs is being tested in Russia

15

A compact gas turbine power plant for unmanned aerial vehicles is being tested in Samara. The engine, which received the model number MGTD-22 and the name “Hummingbird,” is expected to equip high-speed domestic heavy-duty UAVs.

According to preliminary information, testing of the new model, equipped with an experimental control system, can last up to three months. During this time, the developers intend to confirm that the characteristics of the new engine correspond to the design data under different operating modes.



According to the developers, the unmanned aerial vehicle, equipped with a Hummingbird engine, will weigh about 45 kilograms and will be able to reach speeds of up to 800 km/h, reaching altitudes of up to 9000 meters. Such a drone will fly on aviation kerosene.

At the same time, Samara University, whose specialists developed the Hummingbird, does not hide the fact that work is currently underway to create more powerful MGTD-40 and MGTD-100 engines for domestic drones. They have already received the names “Seagull” and “Eagle”, respectively.

According to Samara workers, their plans include creating a whole series of engines with which it will be possible to produce all-weather cargo drones for various purposes with vertical takeoff and landing on any terrain.
15 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. DO
    DO
    0
    12 December 2023 22: 24
    According to the developers, an unmanned aerial vehicle equipped with a Hummingbird engine will weigh about 45 kilograms


    The author, in the photo, against the background of a gadget with USB connectors, visually it seems that the engine is very small and cannot weigh 45 kg. More like 4,5 kg?
    1. H.J.P.
      H.J.P.
      +1
      12 December 2023 23: 00
      Read more carefully, the entire UAV will weigh 45 kg. The engine weighs a little more than 2 kg.
      1. svoroponov
        svoroponov
        -1
        13 December 2023 00: 23
        By the way, a very primitive engine. I saw something like this in English for aircraft modellers 35 years ago. The resource was not large, but at that time it cost somewhere around 2000 pounds sterling, a little expensive, they said that there was up to 4000. Worked on B-70 aviation gasoline. The sound of the operation was reminiscent of a blowtorch, well, a little louder. Traction - several kg. Started by an electric starter, similar to a drill and powered by a battery. But they said that you can spin it manually at startup. Now, probably, an electric starter with an overrunning clutch is built in for starting. This was not the case then. The combustion chamber is annular. The compressor and turbine are single-stage. performance depended on the fuel supply through the fuel supply device. You had to be able to launch it. I haven't seen the launch process myself. The fuel tank is pressurized from the compressor through a thin tube. The engine speed was adjusted within narrow limits from minimum to maximum. This was such an exhibit.
        1. DO
          DO
          0
          13 December 2023 03: 18
          svoroponov, the weight and cost of a disposable drone are very important parameters. Therefore, the fewer parts, the lighter and cheaper the drone.
          Since the engine of a kamikaze drone is started once in its life for a one-way flight, the question of manual spin-up, or starting with some external electric or gasoline crank, is very interesting. Because then an electric starter would not be needed, and the on-board power supply battery would be lighter and cheaper.
          1. svoroponov
            svoroponov
            -1
            13 December 2023 21: 11
            In combat conditions, a starter on an engine is probably more convenient. Moreover, they are now quite light and relatively simple. I connected some suitable battery just to start and off I went. Started, turned off. Next, the UAV will have its own battery for flight and powering the automation. But it is possible that the starter on the UAV will have a starter (engine) as a generator. After startup, it will switch to on-board electricity generation mode. Similar devices, quite miniature ones, already appeared on airplanes in the USSR in the 70s. Now they are probably not big at all, but powerful. And you need to carry the launcher for promotion with you, otherwise you won’t be able to start it. But probably both solutions have the right to life
            1. DO
              DO
              0
              14 December 2023 00: 59
              svoroponov, yes, the developer knows better.
      2. DO
        DO
        0
        13 December 2023 03: 08
        HJP, if your information is correct, thanks for the clarification.
        However, if you are the author of the material, make a claim. In the phrase under discussion, the “Kolibri” engine is named, but the UAV is not. Instead of such a mysterious design, it would be logical to immediately introduce the mass of the engine.
        Well, since there was such a booze, what kind of UAV is this? 45 kg is the weight of a fully fueled drone with a warhead?
        1. svoroponov
          svoroponov
          +1
          14 December 2023 14: 48
          Usually they write: A taxiway was created with a thrust of up to ..... for a UAV with a total weight of up to ......... or they don’t write about the weight at all. It is set by the UAV developer for which this engine is selected.
  2. savage3000
    savage3000
    0
    13 December 2023 12: 32
    People are already flying these in the USA and other countries)
  3. JD1979
    JD1979
    -2
    13 December 2023 15: 08
    In Russia they made the discovery of the century))) Reinvented the JetCat P300-RX))) Or, as usual? We bought it from an aircraft model shop, repainted it and vo-a-la Made-in-Russia!)))



    Find 10 differences)))
    1. svoroponov
      svoroponov
      0
      14 December 2023 15: 00
      Structurally, it was already clear for a long time. Here you don’t even need to invent anything or copy anything. Although yes, that’s what I saw, only the letter series in the name was different and there was no starter in front. There was a cooker. Well, and a slightly different air intake, but that was when.
      But a similar RD was made entirely from our materials and developments, then consider it new. Although between us. Why invent a wheel if it already exists? So it is here. The Chinese were praised for tearing everything apart, so why shouldn’t we, when necessary, use something like this to reduce development time.
      Although I can say that the photo is not necessarily ours. Perhaps they just found a photo somewhere and inserted it, but didn’t show our development. This is often done when there is no photo or something similar needs to be shown.
      1. JD1979
        JD1979
        0
        14 December 2023 17: 23
        Actually I was a little mistaken. "Hummingbird"


        Complete copy of the P220-RXi engine. (Three hundred is more powerful.)

        Thrust: 220N at 117 rpm
        Thrust: 9N at 35 rpm
        Operating speed range: 35 - 000 rpm
        Exhaust gas temperature: 480-750°C
        Jet exhaust speed: 1760 km/h
        Fuel consumption: 725ml/min (at full load)
        Fuel consumption: 130ml/min (idling)
        Weight: 1850g
        Weight: 120g (set of tubes, wires and connectors, control unit (ECU)
        Diameter: 117 mm
        Length: 309 mm
        Fuel: Aviation kerosene of Jet A1 or TS-1 standards
        Oil: 5% AeroShell 500 synthetic turbine oil is added to the fuel

        It’s just disgusting because they “developed” it, what is there to develop? And so it is everywhere. So I have doubts, what is really Russian there? All? Or a sticker and triple the price compared to the original? If everything is your own and the price is comparable, there are no questions - well done. And if in China you can buy 3 for this price, then why bother? But it seems to me that with small turbojet engines they are heading into the wrong steppe. More engines are needed for loads of 100+ kg.
        1. DO
          DO
          0
          14 December 2023 19: 11
          JD1979,

          It’s just disgusting because they “developed” it, what is there to develop?

          This can be said about any standard engine. The theory of engines had long been invented before us; the whole world was working on it. However, this does not negate the need to develop an engine for specific requirements - calculations, modeling, preparation of documentation for various stages of production and operation, testing, modifications, etc. (see relevant GOSTs).

          If everything is your own and the price is comparable, there are no questions - well done. And if in China you can buy 3 for this price, then why bother?

          The price of a product with established mass production and a developed market (Chinese production), and the price of leading samples of a new production (Russian production) cannot be the same, and will always differ significantly.
          And the answer to “why is it” is extremely simple - the production of weapons should not depend on sanctions and problems of the international component market. That is, the production of components should be localized as much as possible.

          But it seems to me that with small turbojet engines they are heading into the wrong steppe. More engines are needed for loads of 100+ kg.

          Both are needed. Both for Geraniums and for drones with a mass of Cubes/Italmas.
        2. svoroponov
          svoroponov
          0
          5 January 2024 12: 12
          For a drone weighing up to 110 kg it will do just fine.
  4. anclevalico
    anclevalico
    0
    26 December 2023 10: 47
    Good news. I wonder if development is taking place at the initiative of the Moscow Region or is 99,9% already there?