# Source Registry — Material Comparison

## Source #1
- **Title**: Ukrspecsystems SHARK-M UAS Official Page
- **Link**: https://ukrspecsystems.com/drones/shark-m-uas
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2025 (continuously updated)
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Military/government UAV buyers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: SHARK-M specs: 14.5 kg MTOW, 3.4m wingspan, 7h endurance, catapult launch + parachute landing, Silvus radio modem 180 km range. No fuselage material specified.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ1

## Source #2
- **Title**: Ukrspecsystems PD-2 UAS Datasheet (PDF)
- **Link**: https://www.unmannedsystemstechnology.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/PD_2.pdf
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2021
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Military/government UAV buyers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match (PD-2 is predecessor, same manufacturer)
- **Summary**: PD-2 features "fully composite airframe" with "absence of large metal parts" for "low radar visibility." Composite construction confirmed. No specific composite type named.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ1

## Source #3
- **Title**: Wikipedia - Ukrspecsystems Shark
- **Link**: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrspecsystems_Shark
- **Tier**: L3
- **Publication Date**: 2023
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: General public
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: Shark UAV specs, catapult launch + parachute landing, 12.5 kg weight, 3.4m wingspan. No material info.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ1

## Source #4
- **Title**: Carbon Fiber UAV RF Shielding — KSZYTec Antenna Design Guide
- **Link**: https://kszytec.com/uav-aerospace-antenna-design-survival-guide/
- **Tier**: L2
- **Publication Date**: 2026
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: UAV engineers, antenna designers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: Carbon fiber is "pretty much opaque to 2.4GHz radio waves" with shielding effectiveness exceeding 30-50 dB. Acts as Faraday cage. Lethal to embedded signals.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ3

## Source #5
- **Title**: Carbon Fiber RF Shielding — Drones StackExchange
- **Link**: https://drones.stackexchange.com/questions/283/how-much-does-mounting-an-antenna-near-a-carbon-fiber-frame-degrade-signal-recep
- **Tier**: L4
- **Publication Date**: 2020
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: UAV builders/hobbyists
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: Carbon fiber blocks RF rather than generating noise. Antennas must be positioned to avoid obstruction by carbon structure.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ3

## Source #6
- **Title**: Radio-Transparent Properties Comparison of Aramid, S-Glass, and Quartz Fiber Radome Composites at 900 MHz
- **Link**: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40033-023-00602-7
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2023
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Aerospace engineers, materials scientists
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: S-Glass composites show good radio transparency at 900 MHz; better than aramid. Quartz fiber best. S-Glass used in radomes, antenna windows, fairings.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ3

## Source #7
- **Title**: Fiberglass Pultrusion for Aerospace & Defense — Tencom
- **Link**: https://www.tencom.com/blog/fiberglass-pultrusion-for-aerospace-defense-lightweight-structural-components
- **Tier**: L3
- **Publication Date**: 2024
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Aerospace/defense engineers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: GFRP is inherently dielectric and transparent to RF/radar waves. Minimizes electromagnetic interference. Used for antenna housings, sensor fairings. 20-30% weight savings in some drone configurations.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ3

## Source #8
- **Title**: EM Shielding of Twill Carbon Fiber — IEEE
- **Link**: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10329805/
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2023
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: RF engineers, materials scientists
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: CFRP shielding tested across UHF, L-band, S-band. Continuous carbon fiber composites achieve up to 52 dB shielding effectiveness.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ3

## Source #9
- **Title**: Fiberglass vs Carbon Fiber UAV Comparison — Ganglong Fiberglass
- **Link**: https://www.ganglongfiberglass.com/fiberglass-drone-vs-carbon-fiber/
- **Tier**: L3
- **Publication Date**: 2024-12
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: UAV builders
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: Carbon fiber ~40% lighter than aluminum, ~50% lighter than fiberglass. Carbon fiber is brittle under impact (cracks); fiberglass is flexible (bends/absorbs). Carbon 5-10× more expensive.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ4, SQ5

## Source #10
- **Title**: E-Glass vs S-Glass: Key Differences — SMI Composites
- **Link**: https://www.smicomposites.com/comparing-e-glass-vs-s-glass-key-differences-and-benefits/
- **Tier**: L2
- **Publication Date**: 2024
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Composites engineers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: S-glass 30-40% stronger than E-glass, 10× fatigue resistance, >5% elongation at break vs 4.7% E-glass. Better impact resistance. Higher cost than E-glass.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ2, SQ4

## Source #11
- **Title**: Impact Damage Resistance of S2/FM94 Glass Fibre Composites — MDPI Polymers
- **Link**: https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/polymers/polymers-14-00095/article_deploy/polymers-14-00095-v2.pdf
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2022
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Aerospace researchers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: S2/FM94 glass fiber composites: cross-ply and angle-ply orientations absorb impact energy effectively with no penetration. Unidirectional fails in shear.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ2

## Source #12
- **Title**: E-Glass vs Carbon Fiber UAV Wing Impact Simulations — Preprints.org
- **Link**: https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202601.1067
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2026-01
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Aerospace researchers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: E-glass composites are tougher and cheaper than CF for impact-resistant UAV structures. CF fails brittlely with delamination. E-glass is a viable cost-effective alternative.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ2

## Source #13
- **Title**: Field Repair of Severely Damaged FG/Epoxy Fuselage — MATEC Conference
- **Link**: https://www.matec-conferences.org/articles/matecconf/pdf/2019/53/matecconf_easn2019_01002.pdf
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2019
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Aerospace maintenance engineers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: Field repair of fiberglass/epoxy structures can be done by personnel with average manual skills. No specialized training or vacuum equipment needed. Restores structural stiffness.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ5

## Source #14
- **Title**: ACASIAS — Antenna Integration in Carbon Fibre Fuselage Panel
- **Link**: https://www.nlr.org/newsroom/video/acasias-antenna-integration/
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2020
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Aerospace engineers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: ACASIAS project: hybrid panel with GFRP "RF-transparent window" and CFRP structural skin + orthogrid stiffeners. CFRP ribs create electromagnetic interaction with antenna tiles. Design must account for RF shadow from CFRP elements.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ3

## Source #15
- **Title**: Fiberglass Radome Dielectric Properties — O'Reilly / Radome EM Theory
- **Link**: https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/radome-electromagnetic-theory/9781119410799/b02.xhtml
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2019
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: RF/radome engineers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: E-glass/epoxy dielectric constant 4.4, loss tangent 0.016 at 8.5 GHz. These values allow reasonable RF transmission with some signal attenuation.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ3

## Source #16
- **Title**: Belly-Landing Mini UAV Strength Study — Scientific.Net
- **Link**: https://www.scientific.net/AMM.842.178
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2016
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Aerospace engineers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: Fiberglass/epoxy composites used in belly-landing UAV design due to favorable specific strength. Belly landings carry risk of disintegration if too fast.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ2

## Source #17
- **Title**: Hybrid Composite Wing Spar Analysis — IJVSS
- **Link**: https://yanthrika.com/eja/index.php/ijvss/article/view/1476
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2024
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Aerospace researchers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: Hybrid composites show similar deformation to pure CFRP with cost savings. Higher damping factors than aluminum or pure CFRP.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ4

## Source #18
- **Title**: UAV Airframe Strength and Structural Optimization — Frontiers
- **Link**: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmech.2025.1708043
- **Tier**: L1
- **Publication Date**: 2025
- **Timeliness Status**: Currently valid
- **Target Audience**: Aerospace researchers
- **Research Boundary Match**: Full match
- **Summary**: Stiffener optimization achieves 60.9% stress reduction and 5.2% mass reduction. Reinforced rib designs with stiffeners provide significant structural benefits.
- **Related Sub-question**: SQ4
