Wing "Seagull-2": waiting for the customer

A meeting was held recently in Sevastopol during which the leaders of the country and the armed forces discussed the prospects for the development of the naval fleet. An exhibition of promising samples of various kinds that could be of interest to the Navy was also held. Together with other samples, the country's leadership was shown the ekranoplan A-050-742D "Seagull-2". This development has been featured at exhibitions for many years and receives high marks, but so far has not even reached the test.

Project History

Project A-050-742D "The Seagull-2" in its current form was the result of cooperation of the Central Design Bureau for hydrofoil ships named after R.E. Alekseeva (Central Design Bureau for SEC) and NPP Radar MMS. As part of this cooperation, the Central Design Bureau for the SEC is responsible for the development of the main elements of the ekranoplan, and Radar MMS is working on the creation of a complex of on-board equipment.

Work on the WIG project A-050 Chaika-2 started about ten years ago. Materials for this development were first presented back in 2011, and since then, mock-ups of a characteristic appearance have regularly appeared at major domestic exhibitions. It was argued that if there was an order, the first model of the new machine could be built already in the middle of the decade.

Subsequently, the Central Design Bureau for the SEC introduced several new modifications of "The Seagull-2." A multipurpose model for the Navy could become the basis for a passenger car with the ability to transport up to 100 people at a distance of several thousand kilometers. In parallel, the A-080 ekranoplan with higher technical characteristics was being developed.

In 2017, for the first time, they showed materials on the next modification of the ekranoplan with the designation A-050-742D. The NPP Radar MMS participated in the creation of this project. During the first show, it was argued that the construction of the experimental “Chaika-2” new modification could be completed as early as 2019-2020.

A few days ago, the already known WIG model A-050-742D "arr. 2017 ”was again shown to a potential customer in the person of the military and political leadership of the country. Despite the high ratings and bold plans of the development organizations, the real prospects of the sample have not been determined. Moreover, the future of the entire direction of ekranoplanes remains unclear.

Features of the project

WIG A-050-742D "The Seagull-2" is a machine of characteristic appearance, capable of solving a wide range of tasks. It is positioned as a service traveling, transport, sanitary, etc. facilities. In fact, we are talking about a platform with the ability to install various equipment for different jobs. The ekranoplan is proposed to be used on lakes and reservoirs, as well as in coastal areas of the seas. Use on flat snowy areas is not ruled out.

The proposed ekranoplan design is very interesting. All projects of the A-050 line offer the use of an aerodynamic scheme of a biplane with wings of various shapes. The lower plane should have a slight sweep, while the upper one is straight and has a shorter chord length. The tail unit is made in the form of two keels with a slight collapse, on which a stabilizer is installed.

It was previously mentioned that Chaika-2 should receive a set of four engines - two starting and two marching. In the nose of the fuselage, it was proposed to place two turbojet R-195s used for dispersal and take-off from the water. On the side pylons, at the cockpit level, gondolas with turboprops TV7-117CM, which are responsible for the flight, are placed.

According to the project, the machine has a length of 34,8 m with a wingspan of 25,35 m. The total displacement / take-off weight is 54 tons. The carrying capacity is set at 9 tons. When flying at the screen, the cruising speed is 350 km / h, and when climbing higher - 450 km / h The maximum range when using the screen is 5 thousand km. Take-off and landing are possible at a wave height of up to 1,5 m; flight - without restrictions. If necessary, the machine can fly at altitudes of up to 3 km, but in this case, the benefits associated with the use of the screen are lost.

Plans and reality

The ekranoplan “Chaika-2” has been demonstrated at exhibitions since 2011, and the development organization constantly talked about its advantages and great prospects. It was noted that such a model of equipment may be of interest to the Russian armed forces and civilian structures, including commercial. Other states were also named as potential customers. Negotiations with potential buyers from third countries were even mentioned.

However, over the past years no fundamental changes have occurred. The model of the A-050-742D product is shown at exhibitions and give it high marks, but the construction of a real ekranoplan has not yet begun. Moreover, it is not clear to the end whether it will be possible to launch it in the near future. The prospects for the project as a whole are still vague and leave a lot of questions.

The reasons for all this are obvious. The military department and various civilian structures do not yet see the need for urgent purchase and implementation of ekranoplans. The technique of this class is distinguished by its specific appearance, and also has characteristic pros and cons. As a result, its implementation in existing structures can be complex and far from always advisable.

However, the possibility of developing, building and adopting new ekranoplanes is not completely ruled out. A few years ago it became known about the plans of the Ministry of Defense to study the topic of ekranoplanes with missile weapons. However, the implementation of such projects was planned for the distant future - not earlier than 2020. The indicated dates have already come, but no new messages have been received on this topic. It is possible that the direction of ekranoplanes again refused.

Thus, Russian structures, considered as potential customers, have not yet shown real interest in the entire direction of ekranoplans. Because of this, new projects are shown year after year at exhibitions, but do not reach full implementation. So far, this fully applies to the joint project of the Central Design Bureau in the SEC and Radar MMS A-050-742D Chaika-2.

Opportunities "Seagulls-2"

However, despite the lack of interest from customers, the developers of new technology continue their activities and improve their projects. Based on the available data, one can imagine what Chaika-2 can do in case of receiving an order and launching mass production.

In the proposed form, the A-050-742D ekranoplan is a multi-purpose vehicle capable of taking on board various payloads. It can be considered as an alternative or addition to transport (military transport) aircraft or small displacement ships. At the same time, the ekranoplan according to different characteristics has advantages both over ships and over airplanes.

The main task of ekranoplanes of the A-050 line should be the transportation of people or cargo over considerable distances. Such functions may interest military or civilian structures. It is possible to install various monitoring equipment, which will allow the ekranoplan to conduct patrols in the interests of the Navy or to carry out scientific monitoring. Last fall, domestic media reported on the possibility of using "Seagull-2" in the space sector. So, during launches from the Vostochny cosmodrome, part of the trajectory of rockets and ships should lie over the Pacific Ocean. WIG can be involved in search and rescue operations.

Reasons for optimism

The domestic industry, represented by several enterprises at once, is working on the creation of new ekranoplan projects. However, the main customers, state and commercial structures, are not in a hurry to order such equipment. As a result of this, a whole series of promising projects, such as A-050-742D Chaika-2, has so far been implemented only in the form of models and does not advance beyond exhibitions.

Nevertheless, in this situation there are some reasons for cautious optimism. Central Clinical Hospital for SEC. Alekseeva, Radar MMS and other enterprises continue research and development, due to which they retain the necessary competencies and develop new experience, as well as create various options for promising ekranoplanes. Thus, in the future, when a real customer appears, they will be able to complete the design and start construction at the minimum time. However, the appearance of the customer, and with it the prospects of the entire direction, is still in question.

Comments

[rocket757]

Unfulfilled dream!
In small batches, piece by piece, they do something where ....
Probably an attempt to combine poorly matched does not meet much interest from manufacturers and consumers.

[SOVIET UNION 2]

And what is badly combined there? At one time, hydrofoil boats snooped around like gazelles! We have few settlements on the rivers? There is simply no will. If our partners would produce and sell these! After all, you can release a small party and test them in the national economy. We gain operating experience. Maybe they will come to a catamaran scheme where the wing will be between two hulls? And so the situation is like with the first phones. What the hell are they !? But now there is no life without them!

[rocket757]

Quote: SOVIET UNION 2

And what is badly combined there?

Our similar "ships" were assigned to the fleet! there were anchors on them!
There was a discussion of this topic, more than once, different opinions, incl. that for economic reasons, only the military could afford these ships! went poorly with business needs.
If it combined well, the business would hook on this idea and use it with might and main .... it didn’t grow together then, as it turns out, we’ll see.
Personally, I can’t add anything, not my topic, just watching from the side.

[EvilLion]

The hydrofoil ships do not crash, and there would be a demand, they would be made. And so it’s from the category of development of small aircraft to fly on it to grandmas in dead cities in the taiga, instead of laying a normal road there and developing or evicting people closer to places.

[SOVIET UNION 2]

And did aviation constantly beat us, so it was bent? Our intercity wagons and buses also constantly fought, so they were abandoned? Our ships also constantly fought, so the shipbuilding of Russia was bent? Yes, and our production was of poor quality, so they bent?

Hydrofoil ships do not crash, and there would be a demand, they would be made

[EvilLion]

Aviation is much more functional and the plane does not turn into a pile in seconds if something goes wrong, unlike the ekranoplane, which flies above the water, and dies instantly in any emergency.

[Akuzenka]

They made fun. Where is the national economy? In past. Now capitalism. The capitalist is guided only by the category of momentary profit. Forget about the capitalists looking to the future of the country. This can only be done by the state.

[Angelo Provolone]

350 km / h on the river - easy. I would fit into the turn, but the passengers should not forget to wear diapers and normally. Without diapers, the name "Chaika" will begin to justify itself: the contents of passengers will be thrown overboard on an industrial scale.
A-40 Albatross
10t per 4 km.
"roller coaster", "Seagull-2"
9t per 5 km.
But Albatross has a significant drawback: he flies normally, gains altitude and flies in a straight line. But the gull along the meanders and bends of the rivers, over barges and steamboats. So much fun !! Well!?
yes not her Seagull, forty!
Magpie? Not ... so the grant cannot be beaten out. Magpie is a thief. Winding something unkind ... Seagull ... how much romance !!!

[SOVIET UNION 2]

But how do high-speed trains fit into turns? The solution to the issue was not resolved !?

[Angelo Provolone]

do not need these emoticons. I, fans of ekranoplanes, represent you.
Trains may fit in, but they are trains.

[abc_alex]

Quote: Angelo Provolone

A-40 Albatross
10t per 4 km.
"roller coaster", "Seagull-2"
9t per 5 km.
But Albatross has a significant drawback: he flies normally, gains altitude and flies in a straight line.

Well, since you are such a technology lover, could you suggest why the Seagull is a biplane?
So what did the developers suddenly decide to add another wing to the car, and not just a wing, but a completely different wing ... Why would it?

[NEXUS]

Quote: rocket757

Probably an attempt to combine poorly matched does not meet much interest from manufacturers and consumers.

Nonsense ... the theme of ekranoplanes is not developed at all and there is some kind of debate about whether it’s good to talk badly at all. I recall the creation of an armored personnel carrier in the USSR, when they could not understand where and why it was, and even with such armor ... now armored personnel carriers are in all armies of the world.

[Mavrikiy]

This development has been featured at exhibitions for many years and receives high marks, but so far has not even reached the test.

Probably, an assessment of the development of "partners" is expected because of a puddle or its implementation in the PRC.

[Sarduor]

Marine landing would be ekranoplans. Judging by the performance characteristics, a landing in the United States may become a reality.

[Vita vko]

Quote: Sarduor

Marine landing would be ekranoplans. Judging by the performance characteristics, a landing in the United States may become a reality.

Unlikely. It is too noticeable for over-the-horizon radars, they will quickly detect and intercept. Now, if the ekranoplane was made 90% of radio-absorbing carbon fiber and he could dive to a shallow depth and move silently. But while the military is not interested, so the next 10 years it will be from the realm of fantasy.

[bessmertniy]

And among civilian potential consumers, too, enthusiasm is not observed. And there are no customers - it makes no sense to deploy production.

[Professor]

There are no customers because no one needs such a mode of transport. Not a plane or a steamer. Well, if he flew, then the rules of civil aviation applied to him (trains, corridors, and further along a long list). Well, or "swam", then the rules of navigation. And so it is not an airplane or a steamer that goes at a speed of 350 km / h, it is not clear where and it is not clear how.

[dzvero]

The closest analogue is helicopters and small aircraft. They quite often fly at extremely low altitude. Most likely, the problem will be when linking the flight at a minimum height with ship traffic. But this is also solvable, for example, by shifting the flight path relative to the fairway. So, in my opinion, the main obstacle to Ekranoplanes is economic expediency (in aggregate).

[Professor]

Quote: dzvero

The closest analogue is helicopters and small aircraft. They quite often fly at extremely low altitude. Most likely, the problem will be when linking the flight at a minimum height with ship traffic. But this is also solvable, for example, by shifting the flight path relative to the fairway. So, in my opinion, the main obstacle to Ekranoplanes is economic expediency (in aggregate).

1. How will the Bosphorus pass or the Panama Canal?
2. The fact that it is not profitable becomes obvious.

[dzvero]

1. Through the Bosphorus or as a plane at an altitude of 100-200 m, or as a ship - still a flying boat. Most likely in no way through Suez or the Panama Canal.
2. The only application is delivery on an unequipped coast. Faster than a ship, the load is larger than by plane or helicopter. In my opinion, if the means allow, it is a sin not to build an experimental batch and put into operation. Yes, and to finally decide.

[tlauicol]

1. Take off only without cargo. And that is not a fact. No one flew so high
2. On an unequipped shore, he does not shine at all - a maximum of pathologies, a slope of 5 degrees, and sand

[Professor]

Quote: dzvero

1. Through the Bosphorus or as a plane at an altitude of 100-200 m, or as a ship - still a flying boat. Most likely in no way through Suez or the Panama Canal.

There is no level 100-200 m above the Bosphorus. Sailed.

Quote: dzvero

2. The only application is delivery on an unequipped coast. Faster than a ship, the load is larger than by plane or helicopter. In my opinion, if the means allow, it is a sin not to build an experimental batch and put into operation. Yes, and to finally decide.

What for? Aviation and now cope.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: dzvero

2. The only application is delivery on an unequipped coast. Faster than a ship, the load is larger than by plane or helicopter.

Yeah ... and then we will unload five tons of cargo on an unequipped coast.
Moreover, the requirements for the coast at the ekranoplane are steeper than at the BDK - simply because the BDK body is much stronger than the fuselage of the plane / ekranoplan (higher strength - higher empty mass - less load).

[abc_alex]

Quote: professor

1. How will the Bosphorus pass or the Panama Canal?

Professor, you will be surprised, but this thing has positive buoyancy! Can you imagine? Can even go by tugboat through the Panama Canal, even under its own power! If only the wings entered the target.
And yet, here's an ambush, he flies! Tears off the screen and flies like an airplane, bastard. This is called "off-screen mode". Therefore, to be precise, it is an ekranolet. What was the "Eaglet".

So if something happens, it will fly over.

[SOVIET UNION 2]

Mooring problems are possible. When parking cars, obstacles cling to each other, and here also the wings stick out. All disputes can only be resolved by operating experience. Osprey's flying. High-speed trains run. Are there any problems? But they decided after all. Another technological issue. Will Russia be able to technologically create such a technique? They purchased rails out of Japan on the Moscow-Peterburg highway, although the product was not technologically sophisticated.

[Freeman]

Quote: Vita VKO

Quote: Sarduor

Marine landing would be ekranoplans. Judging by the performance characteristics, a landing in the United States may become a reality.

... Now if ... he could dive to a shallow depth and move silently.

It was like that in history. The same useless (as it turned out) crap like this ekranolet. / IMHO /

In the USSR on the eve of World War II was proposed flying submarine project - a project never implemented. From 1934 to 1938 the flying submarine project (abbreviated as: LPL) was led by Boris Ushakov.

[ccsr]

Quote: Vita VKO

Unlikely. It is too noticeable for over-the-horizon radars, they will quickly detect and intercept.

In fact, for over-the-horizon radars, this ekranoplan is generally invisible. But it is not difficult to detect it with conventional reconnaissance means, both air and space.

Quote: Vita VKO

Now, if the ekranoplane was made 90% from radio-absorbing carbon fiber

The matter is not in the materials, but in the fact that the speed of the ekranoplane is so huge that it makes no sense to use it in water areas where there are a large number of surface ships, hydrographic and engineering structures, if only because it does not know how to brake quickly. And this is not counting the strong unrest at sea, which in itself will limit its use for military purposes.

Quote: Vita VKO

But while the military is not interested, so the next 10 years it will be from the realm of fantasy.

I think that as the civilian fleet grows, the military will generally lose interest in this project - you cannot race Formula 1 pilots on highways if ordinary vehicles are moving along them. But if the movement along the northern sea route is established, then perhaps such devices will be of interest to those who will serve it.

[abc_alex]

Quote: Vita VKO

It is too noticeable for over-the-horizon radars, they will quickly detect and intercept.

Is it more noticeable than a BTA plane or a helicopter ???
But he flies a couple of meters above the ground, the underlying surface, how does it facilitate detection or interfere?

[Filosoff]

And what to bring down?

[parusnik]

However, the appearance of the customer, and with it the prospects of the entire direction, is still in question.

... If the senior orders, the customer will not refuse .... But ..

[Blanket]

Cyril, you are always meticulous in technical descriptions, but the Seagull is still an ekranolet.

[Efreytor]

On a fig, we have ekranoplanes, if we have oil and gas?

[Maks1995]

that is, and nafig nobody needs, and in general, even no tests .....

Come on only money ...

[SOVIET UNION 2]

that is, and nafig nobody needs, and in general, even no tests .....

Come on only money ...

And if it was read by S.P. Korolev?

[Alexey RA]

Quote: SOVIET UNION 2

And if it was read by S.P. Korolev?

Before he was asked where is the guided missile or government money allocated for it or after?

[SOVIET UNION 2]

Yes, even before, even after. The man was a fanatic of his business and moved his idea.

[Maks1995]

Flies separately, cutlets separately

[SOVIET UNION 2]

Flies separately, cutlets separately

Here I am, too, about too!

[EvilLion]

When you already understand, the ekranoplan is absolutely inoperative and extremely dangerous, due to the low altitude and ease of loss of load-bearing properties, design. Aircraft are effective because they move in an extremely rarefied atmosphere, where there are no obstacles, and do not depend on the terrain under them.

[SOVIET UNION 2]

Aircraft are effective because they move in an extremely rarefied atmosphere, where there are no obstacles, and do not depend on the terrain under them.

In the Crocodile magazine it seems there was a heading - do not pass by! Why then do planes fight so often?

[EvilLion]

Airplanes beat much less often the same cars. In the sky, it’s just hard to encounter anything. You did not know?

[SOVIET UNION 2]

Yes, airplanes do not collide very much in the sky, although this happens. But accidents during take-off and landing often.

[EvilLion]

And now, turn on your head and tie together 2 facts:
1) Take-off and landing, for all their short duration, are the most dangerous airplane flight modes.
2) The ekranoplan the entire flight is carried at high speed above the ground.

Can't see the connection?

[SOVIET UNION 2]

High-speed trains also rush at high speed. But they are developed in other countries with shorter distances. Although the cost of infrastructure is not small! And only in Russia are they economically disadvantageous!

[Angelo Provolone]

I understand your hint. Do you replace trains with ekranoplans?
Are you not the author of the article?
When the article was about space, I was scared for the mental health of the author.

Last fall, domestic media reported on the possibility of using "Seagull-2" in the space sector.

True, there the author quickly moved out to search for astronauts in the abysses of the Pacific Ocean, which greatly rehabilitated him.

[SOVIET UNION 2]

Do not replace the trains with ekranoplans, but solve technical issues. They decided with trains, they decided with missiles, with planes. And then the question is not resolved?

[Angelo Provolone]

so decided already. The result is received:
A-40 Albatross
10t per 4 km.
Seagull 2
9t per 5 km.
And the first is really embodied in metal.
Is the creation of an ekranoplane the principle?
Reminds verses of Vysotsky:

"The triangle will be drunk!
Be it a parallelepiped,
If he is a circle, he is a louse! "

It doesn’t matter why, if only an ekranoplan.

[Winnie76]

The main thing is not written. How protection against collisions with steamboats is implemented. At such a speed of 350 km / h

[tlauicol]

Quote: Winnie76

The main thing is not written. How protection against collisions with steamboats is implemented. At such a speed of 350 km / h

very simple - after such a drink steamers will not remain!

[SOVIET UNION 2]

very simple - after such a drink steamers will not remain!

Well, steamboats have long been gone. Motor ships are relatively recent. But there are Cruisers!

[Winnie76]

Quote: SOVIET UNION 2

Well, steamboats have long been gone. Motor ships are relatively recent. But there are Cruisers!

Fleet Admiral Kuznetsov, aka Kuzya. Destroyers pr 956. Nuclear-powered ships also strictly speaking steamboats

[SOVIET UNION 2]

How protection against collisions with steamboats is implemented. At such a speed of 350 km / h

Well, on roads, collision protection is also not prescribed. But they ride the same!

[Freeman]

Quote: Winnie76

The main thing is not written. How protection against collisions with steamboats is implemented. At such a speed of 350 km / h

Elementary. Have "pancakes" ever been "baked"?
- Well, the principle is the same.

[Winnie76]

How does this Seagull know when to make a pancake? And by the way, how are you going to dodge gulls?

[Freeman]

Quote: Winnie76

How does this Seagull know when to make a pancake?

And what, radar has not yet been invented?

And by the way, how are you going to dodge gulls?

Seagulls are not afraid of a helical airplane - he cuts them into mincemeat.
And in the open sea there are not so many seagulls (they now, mainly, "hang out" in landfills )

[Cympak]

So far, the only niche for ekranoplanes are transportation along rivers and lakes. If the practice of such transportation confirms safety and efficiency, then we can proceed to the transportation of people. Possible they will occupy the niche of hydrofoil vessels, which previously were many on our rivers.
Militarily, I do not see any prospects for ekranoplanes; airplanes are more efficient.

[Freeman]

Quote: Cympak

So far, the only niche for ekranoplanes are transportation along rivers and lakes.

They have no such poverty. In Russia there is no Great Lakes system as in North America, rivers also have bends. Yes, and where to do the usual river shipping?
The only suitable water area is the coastal sea.

[alstr]

How so no? And what about the former SEC route system? There, routes reached up to 500 km (and that could have been more, but the speed and fuel supply were limited).

And where did ordinary shipping go when there was an SEC in Soviet times? And then the SECs themselves often walked and the movement on the rivers was much more intense.

[Freeman]

Quote: alstr

How so no? And what about the former SEC route system? There, routes reached up to 500 km (and that could have been more, but the speed and fuel supply were limited).

And where did ordinary shipping go when there was an SEC in Soviet times? And then the SECs themselves often walked and the movement on the rivers was much more intense.

Speeds and dimensions are not comparable
- 60-80 km / h and 6-10 meters in width (spread of hydrofoils) at the SEC, against 350 km / h and 25 m in width (wingspan) at the ekranoplan.
And if in the "narrows" and bends, the SPK simply slows down, then what should the ekranoplane do - "jump" or "sit on its belly"? But this is an increase in fuel consumption and a decrease in operating efficiency.

[alstr]

Yes, everything is comparable. And it was decided by administrative methods (for example, a ban on flights in the dark or on different fairways - the SEC needs less depth, or as is done in St. Petersburg, where a separate channel on the Neva is reserved for the Meteors during the day and ordinary ships go at night.).

Then, the narrownesses are radiated for Ekranoletov (we will be more accurate) and for ordinary ships they can be completely different. There will be more issues with dams and bridges.

But of course, any track of the Ekranolet requires elaboration. But these are all issues to be resolved.

[Winnie76]

Quote: Freeman

And what, radar has not yet been invented?

Is it installed? Radar decently increase production costs. The radio horizon will be 20-30 kilometers, i.e. to make a decision and maneuver 200-300 seconds. What about stealth / fiberglass boats? Will we drown? And the straits and narrowness how to pass? And under the bridges? What about low-flying planes and helicopters?

Quote: Freeman

Seagulls are not afraid of a helical airplane - he cuts them into mincemeat.

And if in glass?

Quote: Freeman

And there are not so many seagulls in the open sea (they now, mostly, "hang out" in landfills)

Talk about coastal areas. That's where they hang out

[Freeman]

Vinnie76 (Alexander) Today, 12:53

On the basis of your doubts, the answer was received why this "pepelats" is not in demand among potential customers - neither as a "workhorse", nor as an "expensive toy".

[abc_alex]

Quote: Winnie76

Is it installed? Radar decently increase production costs. The radio horizon will be 20-30 kilometers, i.e. to make a decision and maneuver 200-300 seconds.

AND? 300 seconds is 5 minutes. During this time, the car must be raised by 20-30 meters. Do you think this is an impossible task?
A radar now stand on all major ships. Not so expensive.

And if in glass?

Yes, and an armored gull if?
You know, to come up with a stupid accident can be easily for any transport. They say that if you throw something from the window of one car into the glass of an oncoming car, it will not seem like an oncoming one.
If an armored gull is accidentally sucked into the aircraft turbine, it will not be sour either. Yes, take Google, score "plane collision with a bird" and see pictures on the topic. Their sea. But it never occurs to anyone to cancel aviation.

Quote: Winnie76

Talk about coastal areas. That's where they hang out

But move the flight path of the ekranoleta a kilometer or two off the coast. and there won’t be any seagulls that threaten the real probability of a collision. Yes, and not so stupid these seagulls to throw themselves at a whopper roaring with screws.

[Winnie76]

Quote: abc_alex

AND? 300 seconds is 5 minutes. During this time, the car must be raised by 20-30 meters. Do you think this is an impossible task?

And if the ekranoplans fly towards - already 100-150 seconds. And if they both decide to take off?
You know, ships manage to collide at ridiculous speeds, having a ton of time to make a decision, having airborne radars, and well-established shipping rules. And the price of the error there is completely different.

Quote: abc_alex

A radar now stand on all major ships. Not so expensive

And what, collisions of ships stopped?

Quote: abc_alex

They say that if you throw something from the window of one car into the glass of an oncoming car, it will not seem like an oncoming one.

You yourself confirm my words. If we arbitrarily consider the difference in speed between cars 120 km / h and ekranoplan 350 km / h, the impact energy will be (350/120) ^ 2 = 8.5 times more.

Quote: abc_alex

But move the flight path of the ekranoleta a kilometer or two off the coast. and there won’t be any seagulls that threaten the real probability of a collision. Yes, and not so stupid these seagulls to throw themselves at a whopper roaring with screws.

And also take passengers one kilometer from the coast? They shoot down birds with cars, at 60 kilometers, and here 350

[abc_alex]

Quote: Winnie76

And if the ekranoplans fly towards - already 100-150 seconds. And if they both decide to take off?
You know, ships manage to collide at ridiculous speeds, having a ton of time to make a decision, having airborne radars, and well-established shipping rules. And the price of the error there is completely different.

Faced manage not only the court. Cars, planes, motorcyclists, cyclists, skaters and even pedestrians. Everyone who moves manages to collide! Well I say, you can come up with a lot of stupid situations for clashes. Even trains manage to collide, although in principle they should not.

Quote: Winnie76

And what, collisions of ships stopped?

Could they? I repeat: even trains (!) Manage to collide. There is NO such mode of transport which is guaranteed against collisions. In automobile accidents in Russia, 35 thousand people per year die.

Quote: Winnie76

You yourself confirm my words. If we arbitrarily consider the difference in speed between cars 120 km / h and ekranoplan 350 km / h, the impact energy will be (350/120) ^ 2 = 8.5 times more.

No, I do not confirm your words. I say that you invent unrealistic situations. In general, I have little idea of ​​a situation where two ekranoleta collide head-on. Unless specifically aim.

Quote: Winnie76

And also take passengers one kilometer from the coast? They shoot down birds with cars, at 60 kilometers, and here 350

But this is just the CORRECT QUESTION. Economic models of using ekranoplanes just on this issue always stumble. Movement at low speeds is the most expensive mode for ekrooslet. It is the approach to the coast on a jet thrust that does not allow these machines to reach the level of economic feasibility. Two solutions are proposed: the delivery of passengers on board from the shore by boats. And the equipment of machines with screw propellers for low speed. So you almost guessed.

[Winnie76]

Quote: abc_alex

I say that you invent unrealistic situations. In general, I have little idea of ​​a situation where two ekranoleta collide head-on. Unless specifically aim.

That is, the collision of cars, planes, cyclists, skaters can be imagined, but on ekranoplanes the fantasy crashes

Quote: abc_alex

It is the approach to the coast on a jet thrust that does not allow these machines to reach the level of economic feasibility. Two solutions are proposed: the delivery of passengers on board from the shore by boats. And the equipment of machines with screw propellers for low speed. So you almost guessed.

You did not guess. Talking about economic feasibility makes sense after addressing the security issue. No sane official certifies this miracle of security. Therefore, even trial operation does not threaten this miracle, no one wants to take responsibility. Therefore, the Seagull will remain just a model, a demonstrator of technology.

[abc_alex]

Quote: Winnie76

That is, the collision of cars, planes, cyclists, skaters can be imagined, but on ekranoplanes the fantasy crashes

I cannot imagine moving objects that would be guaranteed against collisions. Therefore, I consider your objections to "may collide" simply far-fetched. If airport dispatching services plant dozens of aircrafts a day on a patch of space, then what can prevent a dozen high-speed vessels from being spread across the water area and high-altitude echelons?

Quote: Winnie76

No sane official certifies this miracle of security. Therefore, even trial operation does not threaten this miracle, no one wants to take responsibility.

"Sane officials" calmly certify planes that fight, explode, burn and collide. Trains that roll over and collide, cars that collide in hundreds and thousands. Do not fabricate essences. If there is economic feasibility, they will be certified.

[Winnie76]

Quote: abc_alex

If airport control services make dozens of boards per day on a patch of space, then what could prevent a dozen high-speed vessels from moving across the water area and high-altitude echelons?

Fine. Those. we come to the conclusion that to start at least trial operation, an entire coastal infrastructure is needed, trained people (by the way, I wonder where). The effectiveness of the infrastructure not yet built is a big question, as far as planes fly at an altitude of up to 10 km, i.e. their radar sees kilometers for 200-300, and ekranoplans at an altitude of 5-10 meters i.e. kilometers for 20.

Quote: abc_alex

"Sane officials" calmly certify planes that fight, explode, burn and collide. Trains that roll over and collide, cars that collide in hundreds and thousands.

Trains, cars, road and rail traffic have been worked out and rolled in for hundreds of years.

Quote: abc_alex

If there is economic feasibility, certify.

There will be no justification, because, as we found out, it is necessary to create an entire infrastructure. Spend money here and now, and the return may be someday

[abc_alex]

Quote: Winnie76

Fine. Those. we come to the conclusion that to start at least trial operation, an entire coastal infrastructure is needed, trained people (by the way, I wonder where). The effectiveness of the infrastructure not yet built is a big question, as far as planes fly at an altitude of up to 10 km, i.e. their radar sees kilometers for 200-300, and ekranoplans at an altitude of 5-10 meters i.e. kilometers for 20.

Ports, seaports, docks, shipyards, hundreds of crews, thousands of workers ...
Airports, dispatch services, service systems with hundreds of employees, hundreds of trained people with the highest salaries ...
Hundreds of kilometers of railways and concrete and thousands of kilometers of asphalt roads, hundreds of thousands of people in the infrastructural structure of rail and road transport services ...
You make up arguments one stranger to another. Even a regular bus requires maintenance by dozens of people and expensive infrastructure.

What radars control high-speed trains? And cars on highways?

Quote: Winnie76

Trains, cars, road and rail traffic have been worked out and rolled in for hundreds of years.

And horse-drawn vehicles have been practiced for thousands of years. Nevertheless, it was replaced by expensive, requiring expensive infrastructure and trained specialists (where to train ???) specialists. Strange, right? By the way, what hundreds years do you speak in relation to aviation? And the railways and cars?

Quote: Winnie76

There will be no justification, because, as we found out, it is necessary to create an entire infrastructure. Spend money here and now, and the return may be someday

No, it’s not "we found out", it’s you invented. Composed on the go.

[bars1]

Well, thank God that the RF Ministry of Defense does not pay attention to this misunderstanding. It would be better to create a new aircraft PLO puzzled!

[ccsr]

Quote: bars1

Well, thank God that the RF Ministry of Defense does not pay attention to this misunderstanding. It would be better to create a new aircraft PLO puzzled!

Indeed, it is much more useful for our armed forces and for the security of the country.

[Sahalinets]

WIG - an absolutely pointless thing! It combines the shortcomings of both an airplane and a ship and has no advantages.

[prodi]

I did not understand about its main jamb, in the form of the presence of starting motors. Well, since the "biplane" scheme - why the heck?

[abc_alex]

Biplane, because it’s an ekranolet. That is, a machine capable of flying off-screen. The upper wing is therefore aircraft with a large elongation.
"Starter motors" are not a jamb. They are used for water takeoff and landing. Moreover, during landing, they can, due to the blowing of the wing, provide the car with flight at speeds close to zero. And during takeoff they help to get away from the water. The thrust-to-weight ratio of the car is none by aviation standards, there are only sustainer engines to count. And in flight, the air force is switched to low speed mode, or it is completely turned off.

[prodi]

that’s precisely because the biplane, the upper wing, when taking off, starts working like a seaplane immediately, and additionally is blown with screws, making it easier to exit to the redan and further separation. The thrust ratio of marching engines for this should be quite sufficient, as well as for the modest flying capabilities of the ekranolet

[abc_alex]

Quote: prodi

the upper wing at take-off begins to work like a seaplane immediately

At low speeds, it will give negligible lift. And only a small fragment at the root rib is blown by the sustainer engines. To lift the machine, it is necessary that a specific lower wing of low aspect ratio and large area work. Here it is then "blown" by the engines of the auxiliary power plant.
The upper wing is simply not enough to lift the car. Compare, with a comparable in size Be-200 wing is almost 10 meters longer.

Quote: prodi

The thrust ratio of marching engines for this should be quite sufficient

It's not about engine power. The plane does not lift the power of the engines, but the speed of the air flow running on the front edge of the wing. To the entire front edge. And in Chaika, judging by the images, only a fragment is subject to blowing.

Quote: prodi

as for the modest flying capabilities of the ekranolet

So for a normal flight on the screen and they are enough. But when separated from the screen and at low speed, when the lifting force of the wing is not enough, it is used.

There, the thing is that for an ekranolet you need not an airplane, but a specific wing with very specific mechanization.

[prodi]

[quote = abc_alex]
At low speeds, it will give negligible lift. And only a small fragment at the root rib is blown by the sustainer engines. To lift the machine, it is necessary that a specific lower wing of low aspect ratio and large area work. Here it is then "blown" by the engines of the auxiliary power plant.
The upper wing is simply not enough to lift the car. Compare, with a comparable in size Be-200 wing is almost 10 meters longer.
- seaplanes quite successfully take off even with jet engines (BE-200), the main thing is to go on the redan, and there the lower wing should also be connected

[quote = abc_alex]
It's not about engine power. The plane does not lift the power of the engines, but the speed of the air flow running on the front edge of the wing. To the entire front edge. And in Chaika, judging by the images, only a fragment is subject to blowing.
- If the diameter of the propellers and the power of the marching engines is not enough, then this is a fixable minus

[prodi]

guilty, if not too clear, probably. I’m even stupid, but more sloppy functional than I did not meet in VO

[abc_alex]

Quote: prodi

- seaplanes quite successfully take off even with jet engines (BE-200), the main thing is to go on the redan, and there the lower wing should also be connected

Thrust-to-weight ratio!
For a 140-ton machine, 1 12-ton TVRD and 2 10,5-ton. On take-off, it will give 0,25. The thrust-weight ratio of the Be-200 on take-off is 0,35.
The lower wing of Alekseevsky machines should work from the very beginning, and it works. Mechanization of the wing locks the incoming air flow increasing pressure on the lower surface of the wing.

Quote: prodi

If the diameter of the propellers and the power of the marching engines is not enough, then this is a fixable minus

??? This is not a minus. You just misunderstand the mechanics of the aerodynamic surfaces of the Alekseevskaya scheme. The main one is the lower wing. It provides lifting and holding the machine on the screen. An upper wing has been added to facilitate off-screen piloting. This is not an airplane, the thrust-to-weight ratio of the car is such that it cannot take off by "airplane method".

[prodi]

in general, I understand, you think that in principle it will not work out so well to blow the short half of the biplane wing, so that even just rise from the water in order to use the lower

[abc_alex]

Quote: prodi

in general, I understand, you think that in principle it will not work out so well to blow the short half of the biplane wing, so that even just rise from the water in order to use the lower

No, you misunderstood. :)
First of all, I repeat, BODY WEAPON! Airplanes in the video have powerful motors and low weight, they take off on the engine’s thrust, and not on the wing. Judging by the take-off, there is a thrust-weight ratio of about 1. Give Eaglet a propulsion system with a thrust of 140 tons - it will also take off with an ordinary wing. They worked with blowing wings in Antonov Design Bureau, but really did not get anything.
Secondly, the lower wing of the ekranolet is its integral part. It is thanks to this wing that Alekseevsky machines stand firmly on the screen, and do not tumble like other manufacturers. This wing should be short and wide, the height of the screen depends on its width.
Thirdly, a biplane, strictly speaking, does not have different wing halves. Both "floors" are one wing, it is the same, just split into two parts for reasons of mechanical strength and compactness. And the wings of the ekranolet should be different.

And you do not compare light aircraft and ekranoplan. Let me remind you that during takeoff, it meets a wave with its wing at a speed of tens of kilometers per hour. In a normal position, it "lies" on the water with its wing. There, a wing is such that the car will break, water is not air, it requires a fundamentally different mechanical area. :) And the wing mechanization is specific.

[Korg]

Just another chatter. Like about the lunar station and the space elevator.

[bars1]

From the lunar station and the space elevator much more use.

[candidate]

Independence from weather, infrastructure and versatility as a vehicle - all these qualities can be fully realized only with a combination of two airbags: static and dynamic. This leads to the SVP-Ekranoplan hybrid, the implementation of which will significantly facilitate the transition to and from the screen mode. The transition to electric propulsion, along with the use of fuel cells, will make this class of high-speed non-contact transport not only cost-effective, but also truly indispensable for habitats far from the mainland. If we turn to history, then SVP "Sormovich" with appropriate revision could well become the basis for such a hybrid "SVP-Ekranoplan". The future belongs to the SVP-Ekranoplan hybrid, and the road to it.

https://s30232294060.mirtesen.ru/blog/43969998949/Sormovich-:-sovetskiy-passazhirskiy-korabl-na-vozdushnoy-podushk?desktop=1

[Korg]

It is still unknown how sea worms will react to a combination of two airbags: static and dynamic. If environmental damage is proved, as when operating windmills on land and their impact on earthworms, then the feasibility of implementing such a project will be in question.

[eaglet]

Yes, basically it's funny to read comments from people who are not in the subject .... enta is the seagull-2, it looks like a reduced version of Project 904 with a modernized wing and "cruising" engines in front, though you can't see a redan, which is strange ... were, if only because they provided for basing on the water, refueling on the water, etc., and flew over the Caspian Sea 1980-2 times a week since 3, and the over-the-horizon radar option quite allowed to fly around any ships, the boats were bypassed visually (roll on "screen" up to 5 degrees). A more reliable aircraft simply does not exist, there was one disaster with Project 904 (in 1992), after a one-time failure of the main and backup hydraulic systems, the unguided ekranoplan hit the water three times and, after losing speed, hooked the water with its wing and turned over ... dangled after that 4 hours on the water, 11 out of 1 people on board was killed - a mechanic who was not fastened at the moment of impact, the rest broke, but everyone was alive ... and the marines through the bow hatch and go back into the water, followed by takeoff ... and at an altitude of 904 m and above, this ekranoplan flew, albeit unofficially (according to the instructions, the maximum flight altitude of 5 m, limited by the air intakes of the nose engines), and in the exercises West100 ( if I’m not mistaken) in all seriousness, it was planned to transfer ekranoplanes to the Baltic at YOUR OWN pace .. You can tell a lot about these amazing devices, but their development is now possible only to the detriment of ships and sea aviation, which no one will do due to the fact that this type of technology has remained experimental and not fully mastered ...

[abc_alex]

Quote: Eaglet

at an altitude of 100 m and above, this ekranoplan flew, albeit informally (according to the instructions, the maximum flight altitude of 2000 m is limited by the air intakes of the nasal engines)

I read the memoirs of the pilot of the "Eaglet", he spoke about about 800 meters. And he said that in flight the car required "work on the handle." But if you remember how the avionics complex was assembled for Orlyonok, it is not surprising that it was not stable outside the screen ...

Quote: Eaglet

You can tell a lot about these amazing devices, but their development is now possible only to the detriment of ships and naval aviation

But why is it considered that "to the detriment of ships" is equivalent to "to the detriment of the fleet"? A modern missile-carrying fleet, often the value of a combat unit is determined by the number of "cells". And what will be able to deliver ship-borne anti-ship missiles in the amount of 6 pieces at a speed of hundreds of km / h, except for the ground vehicle? The ship is slow, the plane won't take that much.
And why is the ekranolet bad for PLO functions? If you want from a kilometer, if you want from 10 meters, look for a boat, if you want, get on the water and float. Refueling at sea from a tanker ...

[eaglet]

To the detriment of ships, because, according to Comrade Alekseev, creator of ekranoplanes in the USSR, the larger the ekranoplane, the more efficient ... for example, 1,5 thousand tons (in his opinion) will have maximum utilization efficiency, and this is a plus or minus displacement of almost all the newly built ships of the Navy ....

[abc_alex]

Quote: Eaglet

for example, 1,5 thousand tons (in his opinion) will have maximum efficiency, and this is a plus or minus displacement of almost all newly built ships of the Navy ...

Well, however, the Eaglet was 140 tons. And Lun is 243 tons. Yes, and you brought something. 1,5 thousand tons if the displacement is less than the corvette 20380. He has from 1,8 thousand tons.
I, of course, not Alekseev, but I think that Orlyonok-sized vehicles with 4-6 Onyx or Caliber missiles will largely solve the problem of the lack of naval aviation. Yes, and for the needs of PLO, ekranolots of Orlyonok's dimension would be very useful.

[eaglet]

Project 904 (Orlyonok) - 140 t, Project 903 (Lun) - 400 t, KM - roughly 500 t ... so this is with the technologies of the 60-70s ... and the promising models developed by Alekseev included even a flying aircraft for twenty aircraft ... in the 90s, according to the "old" VO magazine, we seriously considered the creation of an ekranoplan of 5000 tons and argued that if they had such devices, the deployment of a contingent for a "desert storm" would take less than a month instead of real half a year .... for the needs of PLO, the designated "Seagull" is enough, but as a "striker" all the same, "Lun" is preferable, and a larger size, which ensures higher seaworthiness - 5-6 points for takeoff, this is not 3 points for Eaglet, and the speed up to 600 km / h versus max - 460 km / h, is preferable, plus it is possible to use it as a sea rescuer, landing party, etc.

[abc_alex]

Quote: Eaglet

and promising models developed by Alekseev even included a flying aircraft mat for twenty aircraft ...

It was so. Now, in my opinion, Beriev has a similar project. Ekranolet 2500 tons.

But, I'm afraid such projects are not destined to come true.

Quote: Eaglet

for the needs of PLO, the designated "Chaika" is enough, but as a "striker" all the same, "Lun" is preferable, and a larger size, which provides higher seaworthiness - 5-6 points for takeoff, this is not 3 points on Orlenok, and the speed is up to 600 km / h versus max - 460 km / h, it is preferable, plus it can be used as a sea rescuer, amphibious assault, etc.

I'm afraid in this case the economy will play. It is hardly necessary to count on the implementation of several projects. An insignificant series of units of sides will impede. If there is a project, it will be a universal medium-sized platform on which the PLO machine, drummer and landing side will be executed.
And I'm afraid Lun won't play. Too complicated basing scheme with a flooded dock. Eaglet with its airfield base, in my opinion, is preferable. And is a drummer of such dimensions justified now? The Mosquito was almost 10 meters long and weighed 4-4,5 tons. Onyx is one meter less in length and almost a ton lighter. I do not know how to solve the issue of seaworthiness, but I think that a compromise solution can be found in the dimensions of Olenok.

And the speed ... You know, despite the fact that the main carriers of heavy anti-ship missiles move through the water area at a speed of 60-70 km / h, a device making 460 is already a "swift zipper" :) If there is a device capable of carrying 6 Onyxes with speed of 460 km / h, this will be a nightmare for ship groups.

[eaglet]

I will not argue too much, tk. I do not believe that in the near future, someone will take up the implementation of new projects that do not have "obvious" superiority over our sworn "friends" or are replaced by conventional means (ships, aviation) ... this is in the 70s, Mr. Gorshkov could (for the sake of his dream put the fleet on the wings) give the plant and finance projects for the creation of ekranoplans and combat ships on hydrofoils ... now it is unlikely, for example, you and the Europeans have created many variants of ekranoplans, but not a single one, not even the level of Eaglet (in largely due to weak funding) ... it was very interesting to watch with what envy their designers and engineers watched the demonstration flight of the Eaglet in 1993 (for which they paid 300 thousand green), well, the truth and Eaglet showed itself - sat on 2 m waves, well, yes, this is in the past ... but now only if the adversary puts the ekranoplanes into service, then maybe ours will scratch ... after all, helicopters did not interest anyone in the USSR before Vietnam ...

[abc_alex]

Can I ask a question? You, as I understand it, can be in the know. :)
You will not tell what is the speed at which the Eaglet climbed the screen. And yet, what is the speed at which the Eaglet could go to the non-equipped gentle beach? Judging by the video, this speed is almost pedestrian, is that so? After all, his chassis is not landing, as I understand it ...

[eaglet]

"To go up the screen" is actually to get off the water and gain a safe speed of 300-320 km / h, because "screen" is a height of up to 6m above the surface (for Eaglet), although usually 1-3 meters were flown .... When entering an unfit shore, the speed is pedestrian (as when taxiing) and the landing gear was not released .... as you can imagine the chassis wheels in the sand at that weight? - crawled out on their belly, because The eaglet is a punt ... and interestingly enough, the power of the engines was enough to crawl back into the water ...

[abc_alex]

Quote: Eaglet

"To go up the screen" is actually to get off the water and gain a safe speed of 300-320 km / h, because "screen" is a height of up to 6 m above the surface (for Eaglet), although usually 1-3 meters were flown

Do not quite understand. Here the plane has such a parameter as takeoff speed. This is such a speed at which the lifting force of the wing fully compensates for the weight. For large aircraft, this is 200-250 km \ h. But Orlyonok had a blow, and, as I understand it, wing mechanization blocked the air under the wing, creating an air cushion. Theoretically, the speed at which the Eaglet was detached from the water should be less. It is clear that for reliable retention on the screen you need cruising. But what was the take-off?

Quote: Eaglet

When approaching a non-equipped shore, pedestrian speed (as when taxiing) and the chassis were not produced .... how do you imagine the wheels of the chassis in the sand at that weight? - crawled out on the belly, because The eaglet is a punt.

Yes, you understand how many times I participated in srach ... I apologize for disputes about ekrooslet, and I always came across the fact that people stupidly do not believe in the possibility of Orlyonok moving at walking speeds due to the marching engine and blowing. I understand that with such a mass, on an un-equipped shore, no chassis can withstand the loads and even get stuck in soft ground. Moreover, in all descriptions it is indicated that the chassis is transportation. And the video is pretty clear. But still I wanted to read the opinion of a man who saw it himself. By the way, I understand that you are one of the pilots, right?

Quote: Eaglet

and interestingly enough, the power of the engines was enough to crawl back into the water ...

Well, as I understand it, nasal engines at full speed created such excess pressure under the wing that they compensated for a significant part of the weight of the car. The wing area is large. Alekseev really created a wonderful car.

[eaglet]

Quote: abc_alex

Here the plane has such a parameter as takeoff speed

the plane has a lift-off speed, this is what you described, but after lift-off, the landing gear and mechanization are removed in order to quickly accelerate the plane .... the lift-off speed on Orlyonok, as far as I remember, is 180-190 km / h, but you are in your the reasoning forgot that the ekranoplan takes off from the water, while this is a lower wing, that is, its wing is drowned in the water and the main task of the bow during acceleration is to blow off water from the leading edge of the wing and drive the jet under the wing (for which the nozzles are completely 30 g lowered), reducing the wetted surface of the wing, in order for the machine to "climb" out of the water and enter the planing mode, after that the nozzles were raised and the apparatus was accelerated to lift off, and after liftoff, a rise of 2-3 m in height (takes 1-2 seconds, pulled away and immediately the helm from itself), cleaning the ski, mechanization and acceleration to 300-320 km / h, but this is not the cruising speed, but the speed in a circle ...

Quote: abc_alex

people stupidly do not believe in the possibility of the movement of Orlyonok at walking speeds

Such a movement is precisely due to the fact that the wing is recessed and, accordingly, creates a lot of resistance ... the marching at the same time works on the ZMG, and they rule with the bow ... I myself did not go ashore (I just studied, but listened to the stories of "experienced") .to. by the time I got on the ekranoplanes, they did nothing except for "normal" flights ..

[abc_alex]

Quote: Eaglet

but you forgot in your reasoning ...

Yes, I did not forget, I just did not know. Thank you for telling me. The take-off procedure is not really described anywhere.
Thanks again.

[Zaurbek]

What are the advantages of an ekranoplane over an airplane with the same power plant? Cost, range, GP? Price?

[eaglet]

Ekranolan Project 904 (Orlyonok), maximum take-off mass 140 tons, after take-off it flies on one marching engine (NK-12 if I am not mistaken), Tu-95 (Tu 142) with a maximum mass of 180 tons flies on 4 NK- engines 12 ... what else to offer in the form of an illustrative example is difficult to say, because it’s very different technique ... an airplane is an airplane, and an ekranoplan is a flying ship

[Zaurbek]

And two turbojet engines in the nose are not considered?

[eaglet]

Two turbojet engines (from IL-62) with rotary nozzles were used only for take-off, after leaving the screen one was turned off, the second was put on the PMG - just in case, if the marching fails, and there were such cases by the way ...

[abc_alex]

There is another advantage. If we talk about the ekranolet as a carrier of missiles, then unlike an airplane, it is hidden from the enemy by the horizon for most of the flight. And for a locator, its detection is complicated by numerous reflections from waves on the sea surface. All this sharply increases the likelihood of reaching the launch distance and leaving with impunity. Let me remind you that the aircraft realizes its flight characteristics only at a high altitude, over 5 km, against the background of an "empty" sky, that is, in ideal conditions for radar.

[eaglet]

Problems with detecting ekranoplanes were the most tempting advantage for the Navy ... although AMG with the same "Hawks" can detect them at a distance of 400 km ... but new missiles like the same naval "Caliber" can reach a ship from this distance .. .a without guidance from special aircraft, the ekranoplan is invisible not only for ships, but also for aircraft, because target selection against the background of the earth is difficult even for modern radars ...

[General D]

Our ekranoplan would be constructed using stealth technologies, there would be no price for such a device. The military would be interested in anyone

[Fizik M]

victory in the competition of ekranoplanes is inevitable.

BEAUTIFUL: http://otvaga2004.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=744&p=11#p1002151
and comments:
respected mina just killed the dream in ekranoplanes with posted correspondence .... I think there will be no more people wishing to "walk / fly" ekranoplan on the forum ...

[kutuz]

"waiting for the customer" - like su57, he has a long time to wait