Military Review

Preparing for a fight with F-35B and F / A-18E. "Upgrade" of the advanced brother Yak-141 and the problems of narrow profile Su-33

45



The observed trend towards a global aggravation of the military-political situation right up to pre-escalation situations, caused by the reluctance of Western regimes to switch to a fundamentally new (multipolar) world order system, is increasingly pushing the defense departments, as well as private and state corporations of regional and world superpowers, to implement projects of promising types of military -sea armament, where far from last place are aircraft carriers. After all, this particular class of surface component fleet provides the most flexible opportunities for maintaining the combat stability of our own and friendly KUG in the far sea zone; It provides direct support to marine corps units on enemy territory through deck-mounted IAPs, and also allows you to quickly install an air “umbrella” of A2 / AD air defense (create a layered no-fly zone) on virtually any stretch of the World Ocean.

The most serious developments in the development of aircraft carriers and the development of deck multipurpose fighter jets of the transition generation “4 ++” to ensure superiority over American AUGs and “deckers” belong today to the People's Republic of China, in particular, the Chinese state shipbuilding corporation CSIC (China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation) with shipyard in Dalian, as well as the aircraft manufacturer Shenyang. The first developed and launched the second advanced aircraft carrier, the 001A Shandong, which has a great constructive resemblance to the Soviet heavy aircraft carrying missile cruisers, 1143.5 and 1143.6, but it is equipped with the latest radar equipment and the radar fill, as well as the promising combat information control system. by the system.

In particular, the first one is the multipurpose dual-band 4-sided on-board radar Type 346A (also installed on the Type 052D EM URO). Each of the four AFAR antenna canvases is divided into 2 groups of transceiver modules, one of which operates in decimeter S-band, the other - centimeter C-band, which determines the station’s highest noise immunity, the ability to work steadily on low-visible surface anti-ship missiles, as well as ensure simultaneous illumination of targets for rockets from PARGSN (the C-band array is responsible for this) and from ARGSN (both C and S-bands are used here). Recall that the domestic Mars-Passat radar complex developed for these TAKR projects, unfortunately, turned out to be not so successful and does not provide for the detection and tracking of targets on the 120 passage provided for by tactical and technical objectives of air targets. As for the combat information and control system of the aircraft carrier Type 001A "Shandong", it uses the HUSB H / ZBJ-1, which is a modification of the H / ZBJ-1 adapted for aircraft carriers (the latter is also the base for the Type 052D destroyers). It should be immediately noted that in view of the hardware similarity of the RLK and BIUS of the Liaonini and Shandong aircraft carriers to these Type 052C / D destroyers systems, the AUG of the Chinese fleet is distinguished by the same network-centric level as the American aircraft carrier strike groups, whose system linkage is based on base "Ajis".

Shenyang Support Deck aviation a component of the Navy of the PRC at the proper level, not inferior in capabilities to the fighter aviation regiments deployed on American nuclear aircraft carriers. For example, such a machine as the J-15S carrier-based multirole fighter, which was developed by this company with the support of the 601st Institute, draws much attention to itself. Despite the fact that the glider of the J-15S multi-functional fighter is a modified double copy of the prototype of the domestic T-10K (Su-33) sold by the Ukrainian side in 2001, its avionics are many times greater than the electronic equipment that they are equipped with today our Su-33, which are part of the 279th separate naval fighter regiment named after twice Hero of the Soviet Union Boris Safonov.

For example, if obsolete Cassegrain H001 airborne radars that do not differ in multi-mode (there is no possibility to work on surface targets), high noise immunity and range (125 km on aerial targets with 5m2 EPR) are still installed on our marine “Dryings”, then Chinese J-15S have long received AFAR-BRLS, allowing the pilot and operator of systems without third-party designation to perform anti-ship, anti-radar tasks both on the marine theater and on the ground. Moreover, the shock operations can be performed in parallel with the conquest of air supremacy due to the integration of the radar operating modes. Due to the high-speed electronic control of the X-band beam and the ability to distribute functions between separate AFAR arrays, both ground and air objects can be simultaneously accompanied. Energy qualities, bandwidth, target channel and other features of the J-15S radar remain under the veil of secrecy, but based on the parameters of modern active phased arrays, it is known that the synthetic aperture (SAR) and GMTI modes are present here at 100%. What additional technical options for "hardware" got our Su-33? That's right, only a special high-performance computing subsystem of the SVP-24-33 "Hephaestus".

Thanks to the use of modules such as the specialized SRNS-24 radio navigation system, the CB-24 on-board special calculator, and the information generation unit (BFI) in Hephaestus, the accuracy of bombing with conventional free-falling bombs is increased more than 3 times. At the same time, the pilot has the opportunity to reset the same OFAB-250 from a free maneuver and at an altitude of more than 5 km. This completely eliminates the need for the carrier to enter the zone of destruction of self-propelled air defense systems such as Roland, Avenger, etc. As for the opportunities to achieve superiority in the air, here SVP-24 “Hephaestus” is absolutely useless. Su-33 with radar H001 and weapons control system SUV-27K, not adapted to the use of URVB P-77 / RVV-SD, absolutely nothing to oppose to the staffing F / A-18E / F "Super Hornet" or French "Rafal", equipped with the latest ANA / APG-79 and RBE-2 AFAR radars (will find out “Drying” at a distance of 170 - 190 km), as well as long-range air-to-air missiles with active radar self-targeting AIM-120D and MBDA “Meteor” c integral rocket-ramjet engine. A further air battle will be lost with a probability of 80 - 90%.

The situation could be changed by the deep modernization of “Flanker-D”, which consists of installing the H011 Bars or HNNUMX Irbis-E radars on the vehicles, as well as the prospective C-035 radio station from NPP Polyot for exchanging telecode information with other units over secure radio channels of the decimeter band (108-0,96 GHz); A similar station is included in the Su-1,215С avionics. The maneuverability could be improved by installing the AL-35F41С TRDDF with an all-curving vector thrust system.


At the MFI of the Gefest system, the process of obtaining target designation from the Admiral Kuznetsov TAVKR


However, in the command of the Navy, apparently, it was decided to limit the installation of the Gefest to the Su-33, and then only on a part of the sides. The main focus is now on such carrier-based fighters as the MiG-29К / KUB. Firstly, these machines have much higher functionality and flexibility of application in a complex tactical environment, which is achieved thanks to the multi-mode Zhuk-ME on-board radar with a slit antenna array with a diameter of 624 mm. Target detection range with an effective dispersion surface of 3 sq. m is for this radar of the order of 95 km, and when working with surface targets, several modes can be used (from ordinary relief mapping to “focused synthesized aperture” modes and tracking GMTI moving land and sea objects).

In long-range and medium-range air combat, missiles RVV-AE and RVV-SD are used with simultaneous firing of the 6 VTs (Su-33 is capable of simultaneously intercepting only one target using P-27EP / EM and the H001 or 2-3 radar - with the use of missiles P-73 or P-27ET depending on the spatial position of the targets and the response of the pilot). Also "Falkruma" more compact and occupy a much smaller area on the deck and in the internal hangar of the aircraft carrier. As for updating the MiG-29K / KUB radio electronic “stuffing”, this procedure doesn’t “cost a pretty penny” neither RAC MiG nor the fleet, since the multiplexed data exchange channel MIL-STD-1553B, which has an open architecture, has been introduced for a long time. Consequently, the integration of the promising Zhuk-AME radar with AFAR (represented by receiving-transmitting modules based on substrates of low-temperature co-fired ceramics) will be carried out according to a simplified procedure.

The “Zhuka-AME” installation, integration of elements with radio-absorbing materials into the airframe design, as well as equipping with optical-electronic means such as VS-OAR and NS-OAR (the attack stations of the attacking SAM / URVB, as well as those launched by the enemy PRLR and OTBR of the upper and the lower hemispheres) and OLS-K for tracking and capturing targets on the surface (similar to the MiG-35 type), will allow the deck KUB to surpass F / A-18E / F, as well as deck radioelectronic fighters F / A-18G "Growler". But according to two important criteria, these machines will continue to give way to the 5 generation of the USSC F-35B.

We are talking about a radar signature, which can be reduced from 1 to 0,05-0,2 м2 only by changing the airframe design, where, in addition to radio-absorbing elements, angular airframes play a crucial role, X-ray camber of vertical stabilizers, "diverting" most of the electromagnetic radiation into the space (on F / A-18E / F and F-35B / C such a constructive option is already available), as well as a flashless lantern with a minimum image intensifier. We are also talking about today's extremely popular flight-technical features - shortened take-off and vertical landing (in English STOVL, Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing). It can complement any carrier strike grouping with unique operational tactical capabilities. In particular, in the shortest period of time from the deck of an aircraft carrier can 3, 4 or even more of a USVP / VTOL (with a normal take-off mass) rise immediately, which is absolutely unrealizable when using standard steam and electromagnetic catapults. This, in turn, greatly increases the saturation of the airspace near the carrier strike group with deck tactical aviation units, which makes it possible to respond to the enemy’s actions more quickly and efficiently: operations to gain air supremacy in the ocean of theater operations and intercept those approaching the AUG. noticeably more productive.

It is worth noting the fact that the development and promotion of the North-Eastern Aircraft Command / VTOL aircraft to update the deck fleet aviation can open up new horizons for shipbuilding enterprises and the Russian Defense Ministry in terms of mass production of medium-sized aircraft carriers designed to house 30 — 50 light decker fighter aircraft UHF / VTOL and operational their transfers to numerous parts of the oceans. And the prerequisites for such ambitious programs already exist.

In particular, November 2017 of the year was remembered for a significant information surge regarding the revival of the domestic aircraft carrier fleet in the 20s of the 21st century. For example, 11 in November, the resource “FlotProm”, citing a source at the Krylovsky State Scientific Center (KGNC), announces the start of the development of a promising multi-purpose aircraft carrier with a displacement of more than 40 thousand tons. At the same time, the new class of aircraft carriers will not be a substitute for the advanced heavy aircraft carrier of the 23000 "Storm" project, designed for more than 90 aircraft, but will be its supplement. The construction of the first ship of the new type should begin in the first half of the new decade "at the gates" into the Sea of ​​Azov, - on the basis of the facilities of the Shipyard Zaliv (Kerch). More importantly, the implementation of the project of a new "low-tonnage" aircraft-carrying platform will take significantly less time than going down from the stocks of the Storm. Let us hope that our economy will draw such a number of new programs in parallel with the development of the frigates of the 22350М and MAPL Ave. 885M "Yasen-M" frigates.

Against the background of the above information, it is worth noting the growing interest of Russian news and analytical resources to the possibility of resuming work on the creation of a new multi-role vertical take-off and landing fighter, which should become the main enemy of the American F-35B STOVL. Moreover, the Deputy Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation Yuri Borisov also announced the transition to this type of deck aircraft on November 11 this year. The interlocutor of RIA Novosti and a specialist in the field of naval technology and aviation, Vadim Saranov, on December 15, 2017, said that the most difficult "critical" technology for the revival of a promising VTOL fighter could be a rotary nozzle, which requires the involvement of specialists from the Soyuz AMNTK, who developed at one time lift-sustainer engines R-27V-300 and R-28V-300 for VTOL Yak-36M / 38 / 38M, and are well acquainted with the smallest technical subtleties of these complex units.

As V. Saranov stated, “people with practical experience in creating these engines cannot be found; competence lost. " At the same time, it is worth noting that all is not so critical. First, the documentation, and hence the technological reserve for the VTs Yak-141, has been preserved almost in full. About the features of the lift-marching turbojet dual-circuit afterburner engine with OVT P-79 (thrust 15500 kgf) everything is known, exactly as about the twin turbojet lifting installation RD-41 with a total thrust 8520 kgf. These data may well serve as a basic element for the design of a power plant of the prospective VTOLS / AELS.

Nevertheless, the modern conditions of network-centric wars and the tactical capabilities of the F-35B will certainly force our manufacturers to change the old design of the Yak-141 powerplant. For example, two lifting TRDs RD-41 will have to be abandoned due to high fuel consumption, which limited the range of the 690 620 Freestyle X-NUMX km, while the current F-35B combat radius reaches 865 km. It is logical that the use of a lifting fan, driven by a main lift-marching TRDDF compressor through a powerful cardan drive, in economic terms will be more expedient (as demonstrated by the F-135B fighter F600-PW-35). For the manufacture of the transmission unit of the moment to the fan, the use of high-strength and light alloys will be required, as well as the development of a new technological base, which was not previously embodied "in iron". There may be some difficulties, but given the final phase of development and the first tests of the 2 Stage IHT “30 Product” onboard the T-50-2, it can be assumed that we will cope with the development of a new promising product.


TRDDF F135-PW-600


As for the airframe of the new machine, the Yak-141 deep copying has absolutely no prospects, since it did not have the ability to conduct highly maneuverable melee due to the small wing area (31,7 м2), which with a normal take-off weight of 16 tons gave a specific load on wing in 504 kg / m2; The thrust-weight ratio at such a mass was only 0,96 kgf / kg. The wing of the new machine should have a significantly larger span and area, as well as nodules at the root. You don’t have to forget about maneuverability, because the naval F-35C for the Navy and the USMC is much more "fidgety" than the F-35B (their wing area is 36,5% more than in A / B versions).

All circuits must fully comply with the 5 generation: "4 ++" with EPR in 1 sq. M. m no longer fit. In other words, in comparison with the Yak-141, the airframe of a new product must be radically “reworked”. There is no point in thinking about the avionics of the short / vertical take-off and landing aircraft for the Russian fleet, since in the absence of a TTZ, the future deck tactical fighter can be equipped with almost any AFAR radar from the Beetle-AE / AME family and most of the cockpit information field configurations the pilot present in the fighter generation of transition.

Information sources:
https://www.pravda.ru/news/science/11-11-2017/1352907-aircraft_carrier-0/
https://www.rg.ru/2017/11/12/reg-szfo/shtorm-dopolniat-legkim-avianoscem.html
http://airwar.ru/enc/fighter/yak141.html
Author:
45 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Bongo
    Bongo 21 December 2017 06: 49
    10
    As always, a bunch of abbreviations, it is not clear how related numbers and conflicting conclusions. negative
    1. Alex_59
      Alex_59 21 December 2017 08: 00
      +3
      Quote: Bongo
      As always, a bunch of abbreviations, it is not clear how related numbers and conflicting conclusions.

      But yesterday there was a win with an article about new radars for Busurman destroyers))) Clearly and in the case.
    2. omit
      omit 21 December 2017 08: 29
      +2
      Bongo Today, 06:49 AM
      "As always, a bunch of abbreviations are incomprehensible as interconnected numbers and conflicting conclusions."
      But Damantsev succeeds in lowering Israel perfectly, and let him specialize in this. tongue
      1. KKND
        KKND 21 December 2017 14: 15
        0
        Quote: omit
        But Damantsev succeeds in lowering Israel perfectly, and let him specialize in this.

        Yes, he does not know how to lower Israel. Here you need a special person. George Orwell level propagandist. Work is very delicate needed.
  2. demiurg
    demiurg 21 December 2017 07: 31
    +7
    Still there are people who think that aircraft carriers will fight among themselves? The aircraft carrier in its current form is a Bantustan scarer.
    The last ships of the first or second rank are rapidly aging in Russia. Pikes and loaves are also far from eternal, we cannot launch new diesel submarines in the series. Corvettes and missile boats, previously built by dozens, are now being built almost piece by piece. And we solve global problems, what kind of aircraft carrier we need, and how to saturate its wing.
    1. ZVO
      ZVO 21 December 2017 11: 16
      +1
      Quote: demiurg
      Still there are people who think that aircraft carriers will fight among themselves? The aircraft carrier in its current form is a Bantustan scarer.


      Read Andrei's articles from Chelyabinsk. They are on this resource.
      Just read carefully.
      Stay after each paragraph.
      Analyze what the author tried to convey and why he thinks so.
      1. bayard
        bayard 21 December 2017 22: 12
        0
        I hope that by giving TTZ to the new vertical, the leadership will not bother with the topic of the lifting fan, like the author of this article, because all this is difficult, difficult (in weight) and unreliable. In addition, the glider is inflated in width, the worst aerodynamics. Lifting low-life engines are easier, simpler, more reliable and allow you to maintain the "harmony" of the airframe. In addition, the fuel efficiency of the fan turned out to be a fiction with all the other disadvantages. By building a new device based on the Product-30, you can get a magnificent fighter with flight characteristics of the MiG-29 into which you can stuff any equipment, and not the Beetle, but even the Squirrel. The main thing is not to play too much with the "Stealth" and not bother with the internal suspension of weapons.
  3. Dimmih
    Dimmih 21 December 2017 08: 19
    +2
    Do we need an aircraft carrier? If the war is nuclear, then what good is it? Even if the Russian Federation detonates the available nuclear weapons on its territory, then the end of the world for all is guaranteed. If you fight with furry admirers of gurias and other lads and sisters, it’s also like you don’t need it. All those citizens whom we want to tickle are accessible with the help of rockets. I don’t see any reason to deal with someone’s displacement of an aircraft carrier and blow money into it, which, however, doesn’t mean at all that my opinion is correct.
    1. MadCat
      MadCat 21 December 2017 08: 21
      +1
      Quote: Dimmih
      Do we need an aircraft carrier?

      certainly not needed, especially if there is nowhere to build it.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 21 December 2017 08: 57
        0
        Quote: MadCat
        Of course it’s not needed, especially IF IT AND THERE ARE NO place to build.

        Iron logic ! Do not bend! wink
        1. bayard
          bayard 21 December 2017 22: 37
          0
          This logic is bent, because for the average and even if the heavy aircraft carrier wants it, the Gulf, in which Soviet supertankers such as the Crimea were built under the Union, is quite suitable. Another thing is that the shipyard will have to be overhauled. Well, it’s only good. We won’t be able to pull the Storm in the coming years, because so far the largest frigates have not learned how to build anything. But we can fully pull the middle class TAKR, especially since it doesn’t need either a catapult or an aerofinisher, or even a more gentle slope. Many clever people for several years were curious about the uselessness of the Mistrals, until we were deprived of them and the Syrian company began. And how would they come in handy for us now. Your logic bends time to the steering wheel.
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 22 December 2017 02: 12
            +1
            Quote: bayard
            . Your logic bends time to the steering wheel.

            Well, this is not my logic ... I wanted to “put in” the irony in the comment, but judging by your reaction, it wasn’t successful ..... they didn’t understand me!
    2. Cyrus
      Cyrus 21 December 2017 22: 18
      0
      Wrong opinion.
  4. Spez
    Spez 21 December 2017 08: 24
    +4
    The elderberry garden, and the uncle in Kiev. A copy-paste set of ten years ago from experts, seasoned with news from informed sources in the Ministry of Defense.
  5. omit
    omit 21 December 2017 08: 24
    +3
    "Vadim Saranov, December 15, 2017 said that the most difficult" critical "technology for the revival of a promising VTOL fighter can be a rotary nozzle."
    How is it that the Americans tore this knot from the Yak-141, and it works fine. laughing
    1. Fedorov
      Fedorov 21 December 2017 08: 42
      +3
      They did not rip off. And Yakovlev Design Bureau officially worked for the mattress.
      Maybe that's why f-35 can not bring to mind wink Have you set a deadlock vector?
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 21 December 2017 09: 39
        +3
        Vector Yakovlevites set excellent. good
        The F-35B was the first of three options to achieve combat readiness.
        It turned out that despite the more complex engine with drive
        on the fan, the plane had no problems.
        And a short take-off and even a completely vertical take-off, and vertical
        landing - extremely stable. The pilot does not touch the helm or buttons. Process
        fully controlled by computer.
        In the days of Yak and Harrier, such automation was still not possible.
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion 21 December 2017 11: 50
          +5
          So you yourself and take this squalor, and we will somehow be on the Su-57.

          In the days of Yak and Harrier, such automation was still not possible.


          You say this to "Buran" with the EMNIP computers on 64 Kb of RAM.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 21 December 2017 14: 04
            +1
            "So you yourself and take this squalor, and we will somehow be on the Su-57" ////

            So we already took fellow . Although not "vertical" to my regret.
            And you somehow. ...someday.
      2. t7310
        t7310 25 December 2017 18: 35
        0
        therefore f-35 can not bring to mind wink Asked a dead end vector?

        I agree, this extra weight in the belly which, for take-off landing only, makes them almost chicken, but how do you like this scheme? sits on the tail / take off, everything is simple and difficult at all, for good controllability during takeoff / landing four fulcrum is quite enough
  6. EvilLion
    EvilLion 21 December 2017 08: 33
    +8
    Some kind of stream of consciousness.
    And there was no sense in putting a “hephaestus” on the Su-33, simply because they built all 25 machines, of which some were lost, the rest are not distinguished by their resources, sea water is generally unpleasant. These planes did not play any role, and do not play. What was there in Syria checked for them, except that the real capabilities of the aircraft protector to provide sorties, how it ended is known.

    It would be better if they started a new attack aircraft, it certainly will not remain without work either in 10 years or through 50.
    1. max702
      max702 21 December 2017 09: 40
      0
      Quote: EvilLion
      It would be better if they started a new attack aircraft, it certainly will not remain without work either in 10 years or through 50.

      good . But alas, here, as always, by the residual principle ..
    2. ZVO
      ZVO 21 December 2017 11: 36
      +3
      Quote: EvilLion

      It would be better if they started a new attack aircraft, it certainly will not remain without work either in 10 years or through 50.


      Attack aircraft, i.e. devices of the battlefield - in the near future will not be in the project at all.
      Drones, drones and only drones.
      drones in one word.
      Different sizes, different management and application concepts.
      The development of technology has already reached that level. what allows on the existing technological base - to realize all sane "Wishlist".
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 21 December 2017 11: 49
        +2
        In fact, making an interceptor drone is an order of magnitude easier than an attack aircraft.
        The problem is that the communication channel is equally vulnerable and will remain that way, possibly forever. Accordingly, nothing but counterguerrilla drones is being developed and will not be developed until the creation of a really thinking robot, which, most likely, will not happen in the coming years 100, or the solution to the problem of protecting the communication channel.

        The problem of the robot is that it is not enough to lay down battle algorithms; decisions need to be made based on an understanding of the military-political situation.
        1. ZVO
          ZVO 21 December 2017 13: 22
          +1
          Quote: EvilLion
          In fact, making an interceptor drone is an order of magnitude easier than an attack aircraft.
          The problem is that the communication channel is equally vulnerable and will remain that way, possibly forever. Accordingly, nothing but counterguerrilla drones is being developed and will not be developed until the creation of a really thinking robot, which, most likely, will not happen in the coming years 100, or the solution to the problem of protecting the communication channel.

          The problem of the robot is that it is not enough to lay down battle algorithms; decisions need to be made based on an understanding of the military-political situation.


          Can't make a solution to a big problem in which there are many parameters?
          Break it into many small ones. in which 3-4 parameters are processed simultaneously.
          And realize them.

          Thinking processes of Socrates level are not needed.
          Transfer to the level of instincts. The level of affection, jackal, shark, octopus.

          Make a swarm - lots of cheap kamikaze drones.
          In the memory of which all the signatures of all enemy models of equipment with ranking by priority status are entered.
          Let them be dumped in an inconspicuous container from a huge height 300-400ki from the battlefield and the container calmly reaches the opening point.
          At least in this case, you can be sure that you will get scorched earth.
          At war. like in a war.
          A flock of hares beats a lion.
          There will be no salvation from hundreds of swarms of 20-30 UAV-kamikaze.
          Not a single EW will save.
          1. t7310
            t7310 25 December 2017 07: 27
            0
            A flock of hares beats a lion.

            hares will not attack if they are at least a million, they are natives, they are idiotic hippies, they will run in horror as if a lion is a tsunami with which nothing can be done but you can only escape,
            by the way a little about the lions - even if they attack, even if the dogs
        2. Alex_59
          Alex_59 21 December 2017 13: 28
          0
          Quote: EvilLion
          The problem is that the communication channel is equally vulnerable and will remain that way, possibly forever.

          How is he vulnerable? Put a narrow antenna, encode the signal. And hi.
          1. t7310
            t7310 25 December 2017 07: 02
            0
            How is he vulnerable? Put a narrow antenna, encode the signal. And hi.

            the speech is about the eb that jamming all the radio signals
  7. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 21 December 2017 09: 02
    +1
    / It is logical that the use of a lifting fan driven by the compressor of the main lifting and marching turbofan engine through a powerful cardan transmission will be more economically feasible (as demonstrated by the example of the FD135-PW-600 turbofan F-35B fighter). /
    Why go so far ... right up to Washington? Maybe first get acquainted with the Yak-201 project?
  8. Nikolay R-PM
    Nikolay R-PM 21 December 2017 09: 34
    +3
    //... through a powerful gimbal ... // (quote from the text of the article)

    What kind of cardan is it? Judging by the illustration, a gearbox with a bevel orthogonal transmission is installed there. Cardan can provide an angle between the axes of the shafts of the transmission 6, a maximum of 7 degrees. In addition, at high speeds, it does not work well. For the universal joint, the optimum speed range is up to 3000 rpm. On the fan drive f-35, the shaft speed is clearly higher.
    I do not rummage much in electronics, but I could not get past this blunder.
    1. omit
      omit 21 December 2017 11: 04
      +2
      Nikolay R-PM
      A bevel gear inside the fan assembly, and a cardan (or other coupling) outside to compensate for manufacturing and assembly errors.
      1. Nikolay R-PM
        Nikolay R-PM 21 December 2017 11: 57
        0
        Most likely there are plate or another type of elastic coupling.
  9. NEXUS
    NEXUS 21 December 2017 13: 27
    +2
    As for the glider of the new machine, the deep copying of the Yak-141 has absolutely no prospects, since it did not have the ability to conduct highly maneuverable close combat

    The question is, what highly maneuverable battle can a decker have against a ground-based fighter? There, at the stage of only thought, everything is already clear and the outcome is obvious. As for the air battle of the deck against the deck ... well, during WWII, when the mattress cars fought against the Japanese Zero, this is somehow understandable. And if you look at how many of the same Zero Japan lost while overcoming the AUG air defense, then the numbers will not be very rainbow colored. And this despite the fact that there were neither EW systems, nor missiles of different ranges, and air defense systems are now not at the WWII level.
    As a result, the deck is needed to work on the ground, well, and when covering the KUG, AUG ...
    1. ZVO
      ZVO 21 December 2017 19: 41
      0
      Quote: NEXUS
      As for the glider of the new machine, the deep copying of the Yak-141 has absolutely no prospects, since it did not have the ability to conduct highly maneuverable close combat

      The question is, what highly maneuverable battle can a decker have against a ground-based fighter?


      That’s why I’m absolutely sure that the Su-30SM combatant superiority (namely combatant aircraft, with combatant pilots, because court pilots with unlocked EDSU capabilities of their aircraft do not count) before the F / A 18F.
      1. NN52
        NN52 22 December 2017 21: 44
        +8
        Think so further ... Nobody forbids you.
        And if you are not in the subject, better keep silent, you will seem smarter.
        1. ZVO
          ZVO 23 December 2017 10: 47
          0
          Quote: NN52
          Think so further ... Nobody forbids you.
          And if you are not in the subject, better keep silent, you will seem smarter.


          Arguments will be?
          Or in your messages there is nothing but drinking and overheating?
          1. NN52
            NN52 23 December 2017 16: 59
            +9
            ZVO

            Judging by your posts, you have a technical education ... and comment on such topics ...
            And then you have absolute confidence for the pilots, combatant.
            Do you know how many annual fighter pilots are flying now? Level of training? And so on ... Yes, combat pilots do not carry out cobra, and there’s nothing to ..
            I know. I didn’t fly on this type, I’ll say right away. ML brother and classmates on this one.
            And if you call the Russian Knights "court aerobatics", well then you can be called the maslopuzum.
            And your pearl about the unlocked capabilities of the aircraft is a hit, it’s a pity they don’t hear it ...
            Our aerobatics Vityaz fly in production cars, unlike Westerners (lightweight and modernized). And our military firing perform.
            You would be put on aerobatics with an ordinary combat pilot in the rear cockpit, but that would probably have an effect on you (only then would you have to wash the cockpit for a long time)
            And finally, think, in Syria, who flies to see, and on other types? drill or aerobatics ..
            The video can google a lot in Syria .. that is freely available there.
            Unfortunately, I can’t tell you a lot, because you are not in the subject of the word at all ...
            And more careful with such your statements, and answers such as mine will not ...
            1. ZVO
              ZVO 23 December 2017 20: 06
              0
              Quote: NN52
              ZVO
              And if you call the Russian Knights "court aerobatics", well then you can be called the maslopuzum.
              And your pearl about the unlocked capabilities of the aircraft is a hit, it’s a pity they don’t hear it ...
              Our aerobatics Vityaz fly in production cars, unlike Westerners (lightweight and modernized).
              You would be put on aerobatics with an ordinary combat pilot in the rear cockpit, but that would probably have an effect on you (only then would you have to wash the cockpit for a long time)
              And finally, think, in Syria, who flies to see, and on other types? drill or aerobatics ..

              And more careful with such your statements, and answers such as mine will not ...


              Court aerobatics - yes I called the Knights.
              They really have non-combat aircraft.
              As light as possible, completely lacking a navigation, weapon avionics and radar as well.
              And they really have unlocked EDSU.
              Wolf and Kvochur, and Pugachev and Bogdan spoke about this ...
              I believe them much more than you.
              I flew in the rear cockpit, but the guys are cooler than Vityazi.
              Olympic champions in aerobatics.
              They have an airfield at Drakino. training in 2004 and 2005. And after the second flight, it was no longer possible to pull me out of the cockpit. He demanded more and more.
              And I'm not a pilot, I just used to do a lot of things to make such pilots. like Knights .. In another area, about which I also can’t speak out loud ...
              1. NN52
                NN52 23 December 2017 20: 35
                +8
                ZVO

                Well, if you are so cool that after Su 26 you got out of the cab and didn’t take off, and asked for more and more ... HATCHING off ... I just flew to Habakul to Yak 52, where I got a pancake to Su 26 to the second cab ...
                Regarding what the pilots Wolf said, Kvochur (met, but personally do not know), Pugachev - I don’t know ... Regarding Sergey Bogdan, do not LY, believe me ...
                And if you compare the aerobatics of a sports aircraft with the aerobatics of the Su 30cm, we have nothing to talk about with you.
                Well, at least they didn’t touch the combat pilots again, apparently they understood their mistake in the statement.
                1. NN52
                  NN52 23 December 2017 21: 06
                  +8
                  ZVO

                  And here is your statement, "As light as possible, completely lacking a navigation, weapon avionics and radar as well."
                  And how then do they fly then? And recently launched rockets ??????????
  10. Svetlana
    Svetlana 21 December 2017 20: 45
    +2
    Quote: voyaka uh
    And you somehow. ...someday.

    For VTOL, multi-section rotary nozzles are used.
    The multisectorality of the rotary nozzles increases the total thrust of the ejector magnifier of the vertical component of the thrust of the rotary nozzles.
    The multi-section rotary nozzles allows you to get rid of moving ailerons and rudders on its wings and tail, reduces the effective dispersion parameter of the VTOL.
    At MAGMA, BAE Systems' new drone, planes are devoid of ailerons.
    MAGMA maneuvers and changes flight direction by distributing and controlling the direction of the exhaust gas flow from its jet engine. Instead of ailerons, there are a number of narrow slots on the trailing edge of the wings of the MAGMA UAV. Part of the exhaust gases of the engine is diverted from the total flow and sent to supersonic rotary slotted nozzles. The exhaust gas flows are distributed along supersonic slotted rotary nozzles at the ends of the wings, they control the thrust vector and change the direction of flight as if conventional ailerons were installed on the wings.
    https://www.dailytechinfo.org/military/9856-magma
    -novyy-bespilotnik-kompanii-bae-systems-ploskosti
    -kotorogo-lisheny-eleronov.html
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 24 December 2017 13: 26
      0
      Thanks, read with interest.
  11. sevtrash
    sevtrash 25 December 2017 12: 54
    0
    Gradually, the realization begins that f35 is not a golimy cut, but a real achievement of the American aircraft industry. However, experts knew this, most likely, a long time ago. As well as about the real role of yak141 in creating f35 - certainly not a copy. The next step - this is also needed. Given that the Americans of his 20 years of output, how many years will it take? And the funds? India will probably not be near.
  12. sd68
    sd68 25 December 2017 14: 40
    +1
    well and mixed.
    The possibilities of the Chinese, frankly, are a big question.
    As for the EPR in 1 m2, is the author writing about the Super Hornets?
    For the Su-27 and its derivatives EPR more than ten times, only the Su-35 could slightly decrease.
    The presence of VTOL aircraft is useful even on an aircraft carrier with catapults as a duty link - you will not always need to keep at least one of the catapults warmed up.
    As for the Yak-141, it makes no sense to try to do something on its basis, the multi-engine scheme with PD and PMD has been tested repeatedly both in the form of calculations and in real constructions by Americans, French, Germans, British, Italians, in the USSR - the result one is unsuitable for use in VTOL, does not provide stable characteristics during take-off and landing, and still has a bunch of disadvantages.
    Actually, Yakovlev himself believed that the Yak-38 should definitely be single-engine, but at that time in the USSR there simply was not a suitable engine.
    The Yak-41 already had an engine, and the task was to build just a single-engine VTOL, then the Yakovlevites could not provide reliable control in a single-engine scheme, and forced to switch to a obviously unsuitable multi-engine with a PD in the form of Y-141, which already clearly showed on the Yak- 38 its complete unsuitability.
    The result was not long in coming — already at the first landing, the plane hit the back of the deck, and soon another instance was completely destroyed in the accident during landing - the plane was poorly controlled.
    and this is with test pilots, to say nothing of combatant.
    Actually, the Yak-141 scheme almost completely repeated the VTOL Mirage 3 of the 60s of the last century, also rejected by the French.
    Only some sectarian can believe in the success of the Yak-141.
    Only two VTOL aircraft - the English Harrier and the f-35, (for which they took PMD with a rotary nozzle from the development of the Americans of the 70s Conveyor model 200) - were successful, both differ in a single-engine scheme, with the front part of the aircraft rising with compressed air, rather than a jet of reactive gases, which fundamentally distinguishes them from all other VTOL designs.
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 26 December 2017 20: 26
      0
      That's for sure. Have you decided to move this "discussion" in the form of your monologue here?
      https://topwar.ru/132057-palubnyy-samolet-vertika
      lnogo-vzleta-plany-minoborony-i-opyt-promyshlenno
      sti.html
      Tell me, do you not participate in the election race of K. Sobchak?