"UAC" gave the military an experienced production director of interference "Chopper"

"United Aircraft Corporation" handed over to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation an experimental aircraft IL-22PP (based on IL-18) "Beater", designed for jamming and passing intelligence, reports bmpd with reference to the message of the company.

The first three aircraft of jamming and passing intelligence IL-22PP "Cutter" in the hangar of OAO "VM Myasishchev Experimental Machine-Building Plant"

The machine is designed "Experimental Machine-Building Plant them. V.M. Myasishchev. The main feature of the complex is “frequency selectivity, which ensures the preservation of the combat readiness of domestic radio electronic systems.”

According to the report, “the complex’s equipment allows it to effectively deal with long-range radar detection and control aircraft, air defense systems, as well as manned and unmanned aviation».

In November of this year, it is planned to hand over to the military two more “Cutter”

Help bmpd: “The work within the framework of the ROC“ The Feller ”to create a prototype of the jamming aircraft and the associated intelligence Il-22PP was carried out by the EMR. V.M. Myasishchev under the State Contract of November 8 of 2009 of the year. The state joint tests of the complex were launched in the 2014 year and completed in the 2015 year. ”

Comments

[Hubun]

In my opinion, I even guess where he’ll interfere now, gaining experience

[siberalt]

While in Syria have not been tested - the tests are not finished.

[jjj]

I like the new creative trend in the names of weapons: "Gardener", "Chopper". We must wait for "Woodcutter", "Mower", "Thresher". These are echoes of the legend about the "peaceful Soviet tractor"

[Hapfri]

I suggest "Lawnmower"))))) some kind of fireman to call

[Fregate]

Quote: jjj

"Mowing"

And "Caesar"))

[Letnab]

Or add "Castrator"? ))))

[Damir]

Electronic warfare equipment is good, it's absolutely good, and with such capabilities !!!! only interesting are the "boards" themselves new ??? or overhaul ??? they managed to make a jammer who doesn't hammer himself with disturbances ...

[Tusv]

Quote: Damir

only interesting are the "boards" themselves new ??? or overhaul ???

Is there a difference? The goal is not to dazzle with its splendor, but stupidly strangle AWACS .. And on what medium the equipment is hung, it does not matter. Yes, even for corn

[Landing Station6]

And what kind of media the equipment is hung on is not important. Yes, even for corn

"The command of the air forces wanted to get an electronic warfare complex based on newer technology, but none of the modern aircraft available met the requirements for flight characteristics, primarily for flight duration."

[Titsen]

Quote: Damir

only interesting are the "boards" themselves new ??? or overhaul ???

IL-18 - a passenger aircraft for medium-haul airlines, made according to the scheme of a four-engine turboprop low-wing with a single-tail plumage. One of the first Soviet turboprop airliners.
It was mass-produced from 1958 to 1978.
Military Operators:
- Russia: Aviation of the Navy of the Russian Federation - one Il-18D, as of 2016.
- DPRK: Air Forces of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea - two Il-18s, as of 2016.
Civil operators:
- Russia: NPP Mir - two IL-18D (flying laboratory).
- Sri Lanka: Expo Aviation - one plane.
- Somalia: Jubba Airways - two aircraft.
- DPRK: Air Koryo - one plane.
- Ukraine: Air Sirin - one plane.

On the new does not pull in any way.

And as a conclusion, it's a rather strange choice ...

[rotmistr60]

The new one does not pull in any way ...

No one spoke about the new one. But over the course of almost 60 years, it has more than once been modernized to meet army needs and has proved its vitality. Serves excellently in naval aviation so far.

[Zaurbek]

He is not strange. There is simply no choice ..... Unless SuperJet .... but he has a high flight speed for these needs, and they will not allow us.

[alcor]

How can they be new, IL-18? In general, it is a disgrace, of course, to put on the IL-18, honored old men, new complexes. Immediately you think that there cannot be many such complexes, because very few of them remained, beautiful Soviet cars .... For 30 years they could not create the simplest carrier on a modern technical base, even a piston one. Better of course a turboprop with a flight duration of 20 hours.

[x.andvlad]

I agree. A disgrace.
We begin to make convulsive movements when the situation is almost critical. Let's hope that we will get out of this pit in the coming years. "Cooperation" with the independent and sanctions are pushing for this.

[Iline]

Quote: x.andvlad

I agree. A disgrace.

The glider is a reliable, easy-to-maintain aircraft, not demanding on the quality of the runway. What else is needed?
On the old man An-12PP (PPS), interference stations were also installed at one time, since there was enough space for them.
And the fact that there is little IL-18 left, and such aircraft do not need much. The same An-12PP was only 27 pieces throughout the USSR and was considered enough. Yes, and you need to think about money - why invent a new glider for such tasks if there is a suitable option?

[Mama_Cholli]

Do we have many IL 18? If there is a lot left, then why should they rot on airfields? Let them fly and blind the enemy. Can carry equipment and that's good. In addition, he can land on airfields where others will not land. Or maybe our retirees need to fold again to build new planes? Why, or a lot of money or what?

[Nitarius]

you surprise me .. the fact that the glider is still alive, then in the trash that it? Do your parents get old, what's in the graveyard right now? Of course not ....
1) For the director, speed is just not needed, he needs to hang over the zone for work, so where is the LOGIC?
2) current electronics fit into the dimensions .. so IM still work and work!

[Ka-52]

If you take all the issued IL-18/20/22/38 from 1957 to 1985, then on
storage in the ranks of the Air Force of the Navy and Strategic Missile Forces - there were 25 aircraft at the beginning of 2016 ?! , and 79 were flying or were in conditionally flying condition. So the stock was small.
And by the number of the first plane RA-75903 :

operator: Russia (USSR) Air Force since 2011 (5 years 10 months)
in operation: flies since 1979 (37 years 10 months)

I guess the next 2 have numbers RA-75902 and RA -75904

Data taken from the site:

http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Ilushin/Il-18/
20/22/38

[Stas157]

Quote: alkor

In general, it is a disgrace, of course, to put on the IL-18, honored old men, new complexes.

"I have no other plane for you." Stalin.
There will be IL-112 in 2019, but it is half as much.

[Zaurbek]

Maybe the size of the electronics by that time will become smaller. And plus, they will master the engines and electronics, you can upgrade the IL-18 or make the IL-118. It will be easier and cheaper if you have serial components.

[donavi49]

Well, in the west, year-olds fly on the basis of Elektra and they have norms.

The problem is simple. It is possible to hang on the SSJ or the Carcass - however:
1) The flight parameters, which barrage low-speed flight, are normal for Il, but not for reagents.
2) The duration of the flight, again, IL wins.
3) Well, in this case, it is still possible resistance to one's own and others' interference, Il is a cast-iron board, there is no particular need to rack one's brains with shielding 100500 electronic systems. But if pairing occurs on which CSF / Carcass, then you can fall.

[stas]

You shouldn’t be so, the IL-18 is a very reliable machine, capable of reaching the base on one engine.

[ferdiperdozzz]

And why is it bad? It is by the way not piston, as far as I know.
Or does the current generation of iPhones need a new iPhone / airplane?

[alcor]

Yes, nothing IL-18 is not bad. But a lot of them you will not lift into the sky, even if they are full in the coffers of the Motherland. The more you lift, the more spare parts during the operating time, and this is not one year. Now tell me where to get parts that have not been manufactured for a very long time. What is there will end sooner or later. And the more Ilov will fly, the faster they will end. And how many such complexes are needed for our country over the entire vast territory, plus expeditions to distant countries?

[alcor]

Let’s assemble the Muscovites 412 from all over the country, because they are unpretentious, we’ll deliver the ATGMs and be proud to have created a light anti-tank brigade. Then, on an alert, we’ll leave the checkpoint and get up to the stake, because it turns out that apart from pride in the car, there are no spare parts, but what is worth its weight in gold and it’s still used. But used is also used. Until the first kipish.

[Zaurbek]

It’s just that technology has already reached new, more powerful and economical engines.

[rotmistr60]

Generally this is a disgrace

Why a shame? The aircraft is adapted for certain functions, with which it copes well, what else is needed. Or you need supersonic, invisibility and other bells and whistles for everything. You look at the purpose and the tasks being performed. The Americans also have "old people" flying and they are not going to write them off yet.

[andranick]

What a successful IL-18 aircraft was at one time!

[AlexTires]

IL-18, in the entire history of the service, fell only once with the death of the crew, if I am not mistaken. According to the feedback of flight technical personnel, the machine is very reliable and easy to pilot and operate. I think years 20 still serve ...

[andranick]

On board, in the foreground of the first photo in the article:


source: http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Ilushin/Il-18/
20/22/38


source: http://russianplanes.net/reginfo/34779
there are more photos of the board

[NEXUS]

Quote from rudolf

N-yes ... Without IL-18, nowhere. And the successor is not visible on the horizon. Though you start production again!

Rudolph, welcome!
"The chopper" is an antipode to Avaks, his counterpart. And in the air it will be clear whose guts are thicker. As for the receiver ... it is not clear why all this electronic warfare equipment is not put on, say, IL-76 or IL-86.

[Tusv]

Quote: NEXUS

it’s not clear why they don’t put all of this electronic warfare equipment on, say, IL-76 or IL-86.

And why does the REB complex have excessive carrying capacity? For such birds, the main thing is to peck the brain of the heap longer.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Tusv

And why does the REB complex have excessive carrying capacity? For such birds, the main thing is to peck the brain of the heap longer.

For the "Cutter", I think it is important not only to "extinguish" Avaks, but also to fight the electronic warfare by countering the foe. Indeed, for sure, the same mattresses have boards similar to the Cutter. And therefore the question arises about the large volumes of equipment that the same IL-86 has.

[NEXUS]

Quote from rudolf

Hello Andrey! IL-86/96, IL-76 are heavy for such purposes, and operation is not cheap. But the Tu-204 would probably fit quite well. But ... Save.

I repeat, Sailor will work in the same harness with the A-50. And surely the mattresses Avaxy also will not fly in splendid isolation. And here the question arises of the struggle not only with Avaxs, but also with adversary’s EW aircraft. Therefore, I say that the volume of IL-76 is capable of accommodating all the required equipment both in countering Avaxs and in fighting against similar enemy sides.

[NEXUS]

Quote from rudolf

Andrey, why should he work in the same harness with the A-50? This machine is just a jammer, no more and no less. Flying hemorrhoids for operators of receiving equipment.

Because Avaxam in this case needs cover from such sides ... while our A-50s need such protection from Western choppers. That is, there must be protection against opposition. And electronic warfare systems are increasingly becoming an offensive active weapon. And the effect of electronic warfare systems is already comparable in damage to the action of precision weapons.

[NEXUS]

Quote from rudolf

Using it to suppress the enemy’s electronic warfare is somewhat problematic, since this electronic warfare will work in our frequency ranges.

Rudolph, now is the time for wave weapons. If you want, then this weapon is the future. No need for missiles, bombs, etc. ... almost most of all weapons, and especially high-precision high-tech, stuffed with electronics. It’s cheaper not to invent, say, the same anti-missile, a carrier for it, and so on, but to create an electronic warfare system that will surely “intercept” such targets without needing to recharge. At the same time, this complex will be completely indifferent to what purpose: whether it is a CD, a UAV of any size or an aircraft.
And the ranges ... so we can say with confidence that this is a new type of weapon and it has only just begun to gain momentum in development. Yes, there were electronic warfare systems before, but they have really been engaged in the development and evolution of such systems in recent years.

[NEXUS]

Quote from rudolf

If we interfere with our frequencies, then we simply perform the electronic warfare of the enemy.

I understand what you are talking about ... but we can say this by hitting the areas with this radiation, and then your statement is true, but it can be narrowly targeted if you want to accurately irradiate certain targets. Example Lever.

[NEXUS]

Quote from rudolf

EW is a good thing, but it is not a panacea and its possibilities are limited. We now have electronic warfare, it’s a direct fix idea. Something like that we already went through. In Soviet times, the creation of EW divisions was seriously discussed. Divisions! Then they thought better of it in time.

And I'm not saying that EW is a panacea. But you must admit that now guns and missiles cannot win the war. Of course, we need both the Kyrgyz Republic and the RCC and the North-West District, etc. ... but the topic of electronic warfare is becoming more and more demanded, not only in land and aviation matters, but also in your navy, which you cannot deny.

[twviewer]

Quote from rudolf

Well, how can I tell you, Andrei ... For example, there are anti-ship missiles - the most formidable anti-ship weapon today and this anti-ship missile has its own avionics, active seeker, external target designation, etc. But how many did you hear that the air defense of the ship would be based on electronic warfare? Alas! Purely air defense systems. It is only in the statements of KRET representatives that beautiful umbrellas are drawn, but in practice ... Well, then, for the technically advanced opponent of electronic warfare, this is not always a problem, sometimes it’s help, because it is a source of a powerful own signal that can be easily detected and which can serve as a beacon.

That week, only Americans fought off Yemenis, including with the help of electronic warfare. The power of the own signal can be regulated by the source and not stand out against the general background, only for this a high processing speed is needed and complex algorithms, and since oil will not be changed for IT technologies and specialists for a long time, it’s time to change your mind and change the approach to the economy inside the fatherland. Then the equipment will unexpectedly decrease in size and opportunities will increase, and for that reason a medium-range aircraft recently needed to fit on a drone that can rotate for days, in general, a lot of things can be done, but it is not really necessary to see it, and then it may be too late. However, where only ours did not disappear.

[Kibalchish]

And it seems to me that for the break-in of the equipment, while they put it on something easier, and there, if it goes well, the normal carrier will grow up.

[Mykl]

Quote: alkor

For 30 years they could not create the simplest carrier on a modern technical base, even if it’s a piston one.

But who would let them develop, test? No money was given. But it was nicer for us to buy everything from a potential adversary, from diapers to means of dealing with it, heartfelt.

[donavi49]

So you need a niche. Today, the passenger is covered with twin-engine Boeing / Busi / which Embraers / SSZ. No one will buy 4 propulsion with a long flight on 100 passengers.

They bring the 114 car, but it is half as much.

Reactive ones for such purposes are not very suitable in terms of time and speed data (here, the less, the better).

In the west, Electra, who are even older, is knocked out to the stop. Well, Poseidon (737-800) - but this is a breakthrough in the filling. And Orions, in a number of characteristics, are no worse when compared in this light.

[avg-mgn]

Alive smoking room! Well, if you are ready to fly, the Russian flag is on his keel.
The Americans do not refuse their old man U-2. And ours is worse? Moreover, they did not forget about him when:
aircraft EW IL-20;
Il-22 air command post (issued in 1970 — 1980's about 30 units;
ice reconnaissance aircraft Il-Xnumx;
anti-submarine IL-38.

[exo]

Brutal look. I wonder how much more airframe resource is enough? And after all, there is no worthy replacement. Tu-204 as a forced option.

[Karaul73]

Quote: siberalt

While in Syria have not been tested - the tests are not finished.

Who will he put interference in Syria? Barmaley?

[Fitter65]

And in due time I made contact with the VKP (VZPU) which was on a simple IL-22 ... Yet the IL-18 is really an eternal plane!

[NEXUS]

Quote from rudolf

Well, how can I tell you, Andrei ... For example, there are anti-ship missiles - the most formidable anti-ship weapon today and this anti-ship missile has its own avionics, active seeker, external target designation, etc. But how many did you hear that the air defense of the ship would be based on electronic warfare? Alas! Purely air defense systems. It is only in the statements of KRET representatives that beautiful umbrellas are drawn, but in practice ... Well, then, for the technically advanced opponent of electronic warfare, this is not always a problem, sometimes it’s help, because it is a source of a powerful own signal that can be easily detected and which can serve as a beacon.

That's why I said that the development of electronic warfare systems, tactics, application, counteraction only at the very beginning of the path. 10 years ago no one spoke seriously about lasers, railguns, two or three medium-sized aircraft ... I’m sure that in the near future ships and submarines will be fully equipped with electronic warfare systems (Fortunately, the place allows).
Regarding the advanced adversary ... here is the question of leadership in this area. Why tanks are super-duper if the enemy is advanced in the subject of armored vehicles? Why carriers, if the mattresses have 11 pieces? That is, we are talking about an arms race. And electronic warfare systems are no exception.
With regards to "helping the foe" ... the principles laid down in the operation of the electronic warfare systems are often elementary not clear to the layman, and even to the foe himself. And I'm sure our designers are also working on the issue of this very "help". After all, we equip and arm our army not with the expectation that we will be able to fight the Papuans, but with the thought that a strong and well-equipped enemy will fight against us.

[NEXUS]

Quote from rudolf

Well, it’s not for nothing that I remembered the failed EW divisions. Everything is new, it is well forgotten old. We have already gone through a similar hypertrophic fascination with electronic warfare. It seemed that this was the superweapon of modern war! Alas.

Was that when, Rudolph? In 19 ... a shaggy year, and in the courtyard of the 21st century. Technology has gone a long way, as has electronics and its capabilities.

The essence of electronic warfare, be it air defense systems, communications, AWACS, radar, avionics of aircraft and missiles, GPS, in nine out of ten cases is jamming at the frequencies they use, jamming signals. Extremely rare - signal spoofing.

And the failure of enemy electronics? I say, this type of weapon at the very beginning of its evolution, despite the fact that they began to create it much earlier. But technology does not stand still. I am convinced that this direction of weapons, both defensive and offensive, has a great future, as well as lasers, plasma weapons, etc. ... this is not the future, but the present.

We are starting to make scanners, they make communication two-frequency, frequency hopping, encoded, digital, directional, etc. etc. And jamming everything is unrealistic, we will kill our own radio electronic equipment.

That is why I said that electronic warfare systems today are more effective as precision weapons.

[NEXUS]

Quote from rudolf

Andrei, if EW were so omnipotent, the same military aircraft would die like a class! And not only aviation.

Rudolph, I’m not saying that EW is omnipotent. I say that this is the direction of armament at the very beginning of its evolution. And I won’t be surprised if in 20 years there will be systems capable of destroying the adversary’s electronics over extremely long distances, and not EMP.
20 years ago, would you seriously talk about lasers, space hyper-speed fighters? I think no. And today it is being discussed and developed.
30 years ago there were no mobile phones, but now bluetooth, wi-fi, wireless battery charging, Internet, etc. ... and this did not happen in 100 years, but in just a quarter of a century. Aviation is a little over a hundred years old. One hundred years ago, the first flew on airplanes, and today we are already seriously talking about hyper-fast aircraft. Gagarin was 50 years ago, and today we are already talking about the colonization of Mars.

[NEXUS]

Quote from rudolf

Probably all this will be, of course, but already with me.

This will be even earlier than we think, as progress is clearly accelerating, and in defense it is all twice as fast. It’s easier for a person to create a super modern weapon that can destroy half the world than to create a cancer vaccine.

[NEXUS]

Quote from rudolf

The 21st century is in the courtyard, and still fighting the gunpowder, TNT and internal combustion engines. Everything else is a pleasant surroundings.

I absolutely agree.

Isil is an example of this. Piles of frostbitten morons in urban areas hold entire armies for those same places.

The fact of the matter is that behind the backs of these morons are very specific representatives of those same armies.

I exaggerate, of course, but the real progress is not blaster lasers and space fighters, but a wheel, fire, electricity and nuclear energy. Around them and dance.

What am I singing about? The wave topic is only being studied. It began with the radio, and now, you look at HAARP or Sura and you understand that the field is not plowed there. As well as the topic of quantum cybernetics, engines based on new physical principles, the same laser ... but you never know ... In fact, we Now we are on the verge of a new evolutionary technological breakthrough comparable to the invention of the wheel. Unless, of course, up to this point, we ourselves are not gouging this world with those very military achievements.

[Shuttle]

Quote: Hubun

In my opinion, I even guess where he’ll interfere now, gaining experience

will put
Our "Chopper" for fun
Give you a hindrance
To know where to fly
Your American Army!

[iliitchitch]

Quote: jjj

I like the new creative trend in the names of weapons: "Gardener", "Chopper". We must wait for "Woodcutter", "Mower", "Thresher". These are echoes of the legend about the "peaceful Soviet tractor"

Another flamethrower "Buratino". And what - sounds good. And how it bangs ... ZhZhot.

[Green trumpet]

We would like to see such systems as "Porubshchik" created on the basis of modern aircraft, for example, on the basis of the new SSJ-100 passenger aircraft. The Americans are doing the right thing in this area. They create a successful passenger aircraft and use it as a platform for the creation of aviation combat systems for various purposes. For example, the P-8A "Poseidon" base patrol aircraft based on the Boeing 737-800. Or such aircraft as E-3A / B / C /, KC-135R / RC-135S / U / V and others based on the passenger Boeing 707.

[Ruby]

Quote: Green Trumpet

We would like to see such systems as "Porubshchik" created on the basis of modern aircraft, for example, on the basis of the new SSJ-100 passenger aircraft. The Americans are doing the right thing in this area. They create a successful passenger aircraft and use it as a platform for the creation of aviation combat systems for various purposes. For example, the P-8A "Poseidon" base patrol aircraft based on the Boeing 737-800. Or such aircraft as E-3A / B / C /, KC-135R / RC-135S / U / V and others based on the passenger Boeing 707.

Respected. and you know when you made the first flight of 737 and especially 707 cars?
These are almost the same age as IL18.
If the glider is old, it doesn’t mean anything yet.
Ilyushin laid such a potential on the plane that he could be in demand even after 50 years.
And for barazh’s purposes, no Superjet is even close Il18 not a competitor. In the world there are very few such platforms left. Economical, inexpensive to operate, roomy enough.
In general, I am very happy for the old man. It will also serve to fear the enemies.

[Green trumpet]

The fact that economical is yes, I know. Of course, let it serve for the good of our Fatherland. I agree.

[NordUral]

Do not scare people with this 80% overseas jet. The screw for these purposes is what the doctor ordered.

[NordUral]

Nothing to kill, so to wound or a little crazy mind guidance equipment. But I think that not only powerful impulses work with our systems, but they also use subtle methods. Chatting only needs less about the details, this is bad for business.

[NordUral]

Come on, guys, right away in the matter of debugging in combat conditions. Time does not wait, arrogant Saxons are completely fucked up.

[Vlad5307]

These devices have a "roam where free"! We need to check their work on the CIA communications system and their "kids" in the SAR. Especially during the fighting!

[antikilller55]

AWACS Nibrator

[Lexa-149]

Why didn’t they place equipment on PO-2 ?! What, more modern aircraft in the country left ?!