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.
Author:
Photos used:
Central Clinical Hospital for SPK / ckbspk.ru, Bastion-karpenko.ru
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

106 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. rocket757 14 January 2020 05: 29 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    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.
    1. SOVIET UNION 2 14 January 2020 09: 23 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      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!
      1. rocket757 14 January 2020 10: 17 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: SOVIET UNION 2
        And what is badly combined there?

        Our similar "ships" were assigned to the fleet! ANCHORS WAS 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.
      2. EvilLion 14 January 2020 10: 33 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        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.
        1. SOVIET UNION 2 14 January 2020 11: 35 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          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? laughing
          Hydrofoil ships do not crash, and there would be a demand, they would be made
          1. EvilLion 14 January 2020 12: 17 New
            • 4
            • 1
            +3
            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.
      3. Akuzenka 14 January 2020 11: 33 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        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.
      4. Angelo Provolone 15 January 2020 11: 10 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        350km / h on the river - easy. It would fit into the turn, but the diapers should not be forgotten by the passengers to dress normally. Without diapers, the name "Seagull" will begin to be justified: the contents of passengers will fall overboard just 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 !!!
        1. SOVIET UNION 2 15 January 2020 11: 18 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          But how do high-speed trains fit into turns? The solution to the issue was not resolved !? wassat
          1. Angelo Provolone 15 January 2020 11: 31 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            do not need these emoticons. I, fans of ekranoplanes, represent you.
            Trains may fit in, but they are trains.
        2. abc_alex 17 January 2020 02: 01 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          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?
    2. NEXUS 14 January 2020 15: 59 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      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.
  2. Mavrikiy 14 January 2020 06: 53 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    This development has been featured at exhibitions for many years and receives high marks, but so far has not even reached the test.
    Probably expected to evaluate the development of "partners" because of the puddle or its implementation in China.
  3. Sarduor 14 January 2020 06: 56 New
    • 3
    • 8
    -5
    Marine landing would be ekranoplans. Judging by the performance characteristics, a landing in the United States may become a reality.
    1. Vita vko 14 January 2020 07: 24 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      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.
      1. bessmertniy 14 January 2020 08: 38 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        And among civilian potential consumers, too, enthusiasm is not observed. And there are no customers - it makes no sense to deploy production.
        1. Professor 14 January 2020 09: 40 New
          • 9
          • 3
          +6
          There are no customers since no one needs this type of transport. Not a plane or a ship. It would have flown alright, then the rules of civil aviation (echelons, corridors and further on the long list) were applicable to it. Well, or "sailed", then the rules of navigation. And so it’s not a plane or a ship that goes at a speed of 350 km / h, it’s not clear where and how it is not clear.
          1. dzvero 14 January 2020 12: 03 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            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. Professor 14 January 2020 12: 20 New
              • 1
              • 4
              -3
              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.
              1. dzvero 14 January 2020 12: 31 New
                • 3
                • 1
                +2
                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.
                1. tlauicol 14 January 2020 13: 28 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  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
                2. Professor 14 January 2020 13: 50 New
                  • 3
                  • 1
                  +2
                  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.
                3. Alexey RA 14 January 2020 18: 57 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  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. smile
                  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).
              2. abc_alex 17 January 2020 02: 11 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                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, it flies! It comes off the screen and flies like an airplane, a bastard. This is called "off-screen mode." Because he, to be exact, ekranolet. What was the "Eaglet".
                wink
                So if something happens, it will fly over.
            2. SOVIET UNION 2 14 January 2020 19: 47 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              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. hi
      2. Freeman 14 January 2020 11: 32 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        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.

      3. ccsr 14 January 2020 12: 47 New
        • 7
        • 2
        +5
        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 - it is impossible to race “Formula 1” pilots on highways if ordinary motor vehicles move along them. But if the movement along the northern sea route is established, then perhaps such devices will interest those who will service it.
      4. abc_alex 17 January 2020 02: 03 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        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?
      5. Filosoff 18 May 2020 18: 11 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        And what to bring down?
  4. parusnik 14 January 2020 07: 22 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    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 ..
  5. Pike 14 January 2020 08: 45 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Cyril, you are always meticulous in technical descriptions, but the Seagull is still an ekranolet.
  6. Efreytor 14 January 2020 09: 16 New
    • 3
    • 6
    -3
    On a fig, we have ekranoplanes, if we have oil and gas?
  7. Maks1995 14 January 2020 09: 39 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    that is, and nafig nobody needs, and in general, even no tests .....

    Come on only money ...
    1. SOVIET UNION 2 14 January 2020 11: 47 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      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?
      1. Alexey RA 14 January 2020 18: 46 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        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?
        1. SOVIET UNION 2 14 January 2020 19: 26 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Yes, even before, even after. The man was a fanatic of his business and moved his idea.
          1. Maks1995 15 January 2020 10: 02 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Flies separately, cutlets separately
            1. SOVIET UNION 2 15 January 2020 10: 49 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Flies separately, cutlets separately
              Here I am, too, about too!
  8. EvilLion 14 January 2020 10: 30 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    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.
    1. SOVIET UNION 2 14 January 2020 11: 44 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      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? belay
      1. EvilLion 14 January 2020 16: 49 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Airplanes beat much less often the same cars. In the sky, it’s just hard to encounter anything. You did not know?
        1. SOVIET UNION 2 14 January 2020 19: 24 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          Yes, airplanes do not collide very much in the sky, although this happens. But accidents during take-off and landing often.
          1. EvilLion 15 January 2020 01: 02 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            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?
            1. SOVIET UNION 2 15 January 2020 10: 48 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              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!
              1. Angelo Provolone 15 January 2020 13: 17 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                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.
                1. SOVIET UNION 2 15 January 2020 13: 40 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  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?
                  1. Angelo Provolone 15 January 2020 14: 40 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    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.
  9. Winnie76 14 January 2020 10: 30 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    The main thing is not written. How protection against collisions with steamboats is implemented. At such a speed of 350 km / h
    1. tlauicol 14 January 2020 10: 35 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      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!
      1. SOVIET UNION 2 14 January 2020 11: 38 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        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! wassat
        1. Winnie76 14 January 2020 11: 49 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          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
    2. SOVIET UNION 2 14 January 2020 11: 41 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +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! what
    3. Freeman 14 January 2020 11: 45 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Winnie76
      The main thing is not written. How protection against collisions with steamboats is implemented. At such a speed of 350 km / h

      It’s elementary. Have pancakes ever been baked?
      - Well, the principle is the same. wink
      1. Winnie76 14 January 2020 11: 55 New
        • 2
        • 3
        -1
        How does this Seagull know when to make a pancake? And by the way, how are you going to dodge gulls?
        1. Freeman 14 January 2020 12: 28 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Quote: Winnie76
          How does this Seagull know when to make a pancake?


          And what, radar has not yet been invented? what


          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 there aren’t many gulls in the open sea (they’re mostly hanging out at landfills now) laughing )
          1. Cympak 14 January 2020 12: 37 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            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.
            1. Freeman 14 January 2020 13: 02 New
              • 4
              • 1
              +3
              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.
              1. alstr 14 January 2020 18: 15 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                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.
                1. Freeman 15 January 2020 07: 24 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  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 "narrownesses" and bends, the SEC will simply slow 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.
                  1. alstr 15 January 2020 09: 03 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    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.
          2. Winnie76 14 January 2020 12: 53 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            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 aren’t many gulls in the open sea (they’re mostly hanging out at landfills now)

            Talk about coastal areas. That's where they hang out
            1. Freeman 14 January 2020 13: 07 New
              • 3
              • 2
              +1
              Vinnie76 (Alexander) Today, 12:53

              It is on the basis of your doubts that the answer is received, why this “pepelats” is not in demand among potential customers either as a “workhorse” or as an “expensive toy”.
              hi
            2. abc_alex 17 January 2020 02: 36 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              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? wink
              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 an airplane’s turbine, it will also not be sour. Yes, take Google, hammer in a “plane-bird collision” and see related pictures. Their sea. But it never occurred 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.
              1. Winnie76 17 January 2020 18: 11 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                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
                1. abc_alex 19 January 2020 19: 22 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  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.
                  1. Winnie76 19 January 2020 21: 30 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    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 laughing
                    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.
                    1. abc_alex 20 January 2020 02: 08 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: Winnie76
                      That is, the collision of cars, planes, cyclists, skaters can be imagined, but on ekranoplanes the fantasy crashes

                      I can not imagine such moving objects that would be guaranteed against a collision. Therefore, I consider your objections to "may face" simply far-fetched. 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?

                      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 aircraft that beat, explode, burn, and collide. Trains that roll over and collide, cars that collide with hundreds and thousands. Do not invent entities. If there is economic feasibility, certify.
                      1. Winnie76 20 January 2020 09: 45 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        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 aircraft that beat, explode, burn, and collide. Trains that roll over and collide, cars that collide with 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
                      2. abc_alex 24 January 2020 20: 49 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        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”, you made it up. Composed on the go.
  • bars1 14 January 2020 12: 33 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    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!
    1. ccsr 14 January 2020 12: 50 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      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 14 January 2020 13: 29 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    WIG - an absolutely pointless thing! It combines the shortcomings of both an airplane and a ship and has no advantages.
  • prodi 14 January 2020 15: 09 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I did not understand about his main jamb, in the form of the presence of starting engines. Well, if the "biplane" scheme - why the heck?
    1. abc_alex 17 January 2020 02: 47 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      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.
      "Starting engines" is not a jamb. They are used for take-off from the water and landing. Moreover, when landing, they can, by blowing the wing, provide the machine with flight at speeds close to zero. And when taking off, they help to break away from the water. The thrust-weight ratio of a car by aviation standards is no, there are only marching engines to count. And in flight, the VSU is transferred to the low-speed mode, or is completely turned off.
      1. prodi 17 January 2020 07: 12 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        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
        1. abc_alex 17 January 2020 17: 03 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: prodi
          the upper wing at take-off begins to work like a seaplane immediately


          At low speeds, it will give negligible lift. And blowing with marching engines produces only a small fragment of the root rib. To lift the machine, it is necessary for the specific lower wing of small elongation and large area to work. That’s what the engines of the auxiliary power plant “blow around”.
          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.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. prodi 17 January 2020 17: 31 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              [quote = abc_alex]
              At low speeds, it will give negligible lift. And blowing with marching engines produces only a small fragment of the root rib. To lift the machine, it is necessary for the specific lower wing of small elongation and large area to work. That’s what the engines of the auxiliary power plant “blow around”.
              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
              1. prodi 17 January 2020 18: 17 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                guilty, if not too clear, probably. I’m even stupid, but more sloppy functional than I did not meet in VO
              2. abc_alex 19 January 2020 19: 09 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                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 simply misunderstand the mechanics of the aerodynamic surfaces of the Alekseevskoye ekranoleta 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 a plane, the thrust-weight ratio of a machine is such that it cannot take off in an “airplane way”.
                1. prodi 20 January 2020 09: 39 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  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
                  1. abc_alex 24 January 2020 20: 33 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    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, the biplane, strictly speaking, has no different wing halves. Both "floors" are one wing, it is the same, just broken into two parts for reasons of mechanical strength and compactness. And the winged wings should be exactly different.

                    And you do not compare light aircraft and ekranoplan. I remind you that when you take off, he meets a wave at a speed of tens of kilometers per hour. In normal position, he "lies" on the water with his wing. There the wing is such that the car will beat, water is not air, it requires a fundamentally different mechanical area. :) And the wing mechanization is specific.
  • Korg 14 January 2020 15: 27 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Just another chatter. Like about the lunar station and the space elevator.
    1. bars1 14 January 2020 19: 19 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      From the lunar station and the space elevator much more use.
  • candidate 14 January 2020 19: 01 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Independence from the weather, infrastructure and versatility as a vehicle - all these qualities can be fully realized only if there is a combination of two airbags: static and dynamic. This leads to the "SVP-Ekranoplan" hybrid, the implementation of which will significantly facilitate the exit to the screen mode and exit from it. The transition to electric movement along with the use of fuel cells will make this class of high-speed contactless transport not only cost-effective, but also truly indispensable for habitats remote 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 hybrid "SVP-Ekranoplan", he and the road.

    https://s30232294060.mirtesen.ru/blog/43969998949/Sormovich-:-sovetskiy-passazhirskiy-korabl-na-vozdushnoy-podushk?desktop=1
    1. Korg 14 January 2020 19: 32 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      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 14 January 2020 22: 55 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Yes, basically it’s ridiculous to read comments from people who are not in the topic .... enta is seagull-2, it seems a smaller version of Pr.904 with a modernized wing and “marching” engines in front, though it’s not possible to see the redan, which’s strange ... there were, if only because it was based on water, refueling on water, etc., and flew over the Caspian Sea from 1980 2-3 times a week, and the option of an over-the-horizon radar made it possible to fly around any ships, the boats cost visually ( "screen" to 5 degrees). A more reliable aircraft simply does not exist, there was one catastrophe with Project 904 (in 1992), after a simultaneous failure of the main and reserve hydraulic systems, the uncontrolled ekranoplan hit the water three times and, after losing speed, threw its wing over the water and rolled over ... hanging out after that 4 hours on the water, out of 11 people on board 1 was killed - a mechanic who was not fastened at the time of the impact, the others broke, but everyone is alive ... The landing ekranoplan (Pr904) could go ashore with a slope of up to 5 g., unload the equipment and the marines through the bow hatch and leave about back into the water with subsequent take-off .. and at an altitude of 100 m and above, this ekranoplane flew, albeit informally (according to the instructions, the maximum flight altitude of 2000 m is limited by the air intakes of the nasal engines), and in the exercises Zapad81 (if I'm not mistaken) in all seriousness, It was planned to transfer ekranoplanes to the Baltic at their own speed .. You can tell a lot about these amazing devices, but their development is now possible only to the detriment of ships and naval aviation, which no one will do because this type of equipment has remained experimental and is not up to Onza mastered ....
    1. abc_alex 17 January 2020 03: 00 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      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 "Eaglet", he talked about 800 meters. And he said that in flight the car required "work on the handle." But if you recall 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 just why is it considered that "to the detriment of the 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 can deliver shipboard anti-ship missiles in the amount of 6 pieces at a speed of hundreds of km / h except for the ekranolet? The ship is slow, the plane will not take so 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 ...
      1. eaglet 17 January 2020 21: 48 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        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 ....
        1. abc_alex 19 January 2020 19: 37 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          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. wink He has from 1,8 thousand tons.
          Of course, I’m not Alekseev, but, I think, Orlyonok-sized cars with 4-6 Onyx or Caliber missiles are what will largely solve the problem of the shortage of naval aviation. Yes, and for the needs of PLO ekranoleta dimension Orlyonka would be very useful.
          1. eaglet 19 January 2020 22: 32 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Project 904 (Eaglet) - 140 tons, Project 903 (Lun) - 400 tons, KM - roughly 500 tons ... so this is with technologies of 60-70 years ... and the promising models developed by Alekseev even included a twenty flying skylight for twenty planes ... in the 90s, if you believe the "old" VO magazine, we seriously considered the creation of an ekranoplane of 5000 tons and claimed that if they had such aircraft, deploying a contingent for a "desert storm" would take less than a month instead the real six months .... for the needs of the PLO, the designated "Seagulls" will suffice, but as a "drummer", all the same, "Lun" is preferable, and the size is larger her, which provides higher seaworthiness - 5-6 points for take-off, this is not 3 points on Orlenka, and the speed is up to 600 km / h versus max - 460 km / h, preferably, plus it can be used as a sea rescue, landing, etc. .
            1. abc_alex 20 January 2020 02: 33 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              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 the PLO, the designated “Seagull” is enough, but as a “striker”, all the same, “Lun” is preferable and larger than that, which provides higher seaworthiness - 5-6 points for take-off, this is not 3 points on Orlenka, and the speed is up to 600 km / h against max - 460 km / h, preferably, plus it is possible to use as a sea rescuer, landing, 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 will not play. Flooded docking scheme too complicated. Eaglet with its airfield base, in my opinion, is preferable. And is the drummer of such dimensions justified now? The Mosquito was almost 10 meters long and weighed 4-4,5 tons. Onyx is one meter shorter and almost a ton lighter. I do not know how to solve the issue of seaworthiness, but I think that a compromise solution can also be found in the dimensions of Olenka.

              And the speed ... You know, despite the fact that the main carriers of heavy anti-ship missiles move around the water at a speed of 60-70 km / h, an apparatus doing 460 is already a “fast whirl” :) If there is an apparatus that can carry 6 Onyx with at a speed of 460 km \ h, this will be a nightmare for ship groups.
              1. eaglet 20 January 2020 21: 01 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                I won’t argue much, because I do not believe that in the near future, someone will undertake the implementation of new projects that do not have "obvious" superiority over our sworn "friends" or are replaced by conventional means (ships, aircraft) ... this is in the 70s, Mr. Gorshkov could (for the sake of his dream put the fleet on its wings) give the plant and finance projects to create ekranoplanes and hydrofoil warships ... now this is unlikely, for example, the Europeans have created many options for ekranoplanes, but not a single one, not even the Orlenok level (during largely due to poor funding) ... very int it was interesting to see with what envy their designers and crusaders watched the demonstration flight of Orlyonok in 1993 (for which they paid 300 thousand green), well, the truth was that Orlyonok showed himself - he sat down on 2 meters, well, yes, this is in the past .... and now only if the adversary puts ekranoplans in the service, then maybe our ones will be combed .... after all, helicopters did not interest anyone in the USSR before Vietnam ...
                1. abc_alex 24 January 2020 20: 09 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  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 ...
                  1. eaglet 24 January 2020 21: 30 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    “Climb to the screen” - actually take off from the water and gain a safe speed of 300-320 km / h, because A “screen” is a height of up to 6 m above the surface (for Eaglet), although they usually flew 1-3 meters .... When approaching an un-equipped shore, pedestrian speed (as when taxiing) and the chassis were not released .... how do you imagine chassis wheels in the sand at that weight? - crawled out on the belly, because The eaglet is a punt ..... and interestingly enough, the power of the engines was enough to crawl back into the water ...
                    1. abc_alex 26 January 2020 02: 27 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: Eaglet
                      “Climb to the screen” - actually take off from 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 the Eaglet), although usually 1-3 meters flew

                      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.
                      1. eaglet 26 January 2020 21: 38 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: abc_alex
                        Here the plane has such a parameter as takeoff speed
                        the plane has a take-off speed, this is what you described, but after the take-off, the landing gear and mechanization are removed to quickly disperse the plane .... the take-off speed on Orlenka as far as I remember is 180-190 km / h, but you are in your reasoning, they forgot that the ekranoplan takes off from the water, while this is a lower wing, that is, its wing is sunk into the water and the main task of the nasal during acceleration is to blow water from the front edge of the wing and drive the jet under the wing (for which the nozzles are fully 30 g lowered), reducing the wetted surface of the wing, so that the machine "got out" of the water and you to go to the planing mode, after that the nozzles were lifted and the apparatus was dispersed until separation, and after separation, a set of 2-3 m in height (takes 1-2 seconds, came off and immediately steered away from yourself), ski cleaning, mechanization and acceleration to 300-320 km / h, but only this is not cruising speed, but the speed of flight 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 one works at the ZMG, and they steer the bow ... I myself didn’t go ashore (I just studied, but listened to the stories of “experienced” ones), t .to. by the time I got to the ekranoplanes, except for "normal" flights, they did not do anything ..
                      2. abc_alex 27 January 2020 14: 47 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        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 22 January 2020 14: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What are the advantages of an ekranoplane over an airplane with the same power plant? Cost, range, GP? Price?
    1. eaglet 22 January 2020 21: 14 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      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
      1. Zaurbek 22 January 2020 21: 42 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        And two turbojet engines in the nose are not considered?
        1. eaglet 22 January 2020 21: 48 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          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 ...
    2. abc_alex 24 January 2020 20: 16 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      There is one more advantage. If we talk about the ekranolet as a carrier of missiles, then unlike the aircraft, it is most of the flight hidden from the enemy by the horizon. And for the locator, its detection is complicated by numerous reflections from waves on the surface of the sea. All this dramatically increases the likelihood of reaching the start distance and leaving with impunity. I remind you that an airplane implements its LTH only at a large altitude of over 5 km, against the background of an "empty" sky, that is, in ideal conditions for radar.
      1. eaglet 24 January 2020 21: 57 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Problems with finding ekranoplanes were the most tempting advantage for the Navy ... although AMGs with the same Hokai can detect them at a distance of 400 km ... but new missiles like the same naval Caliber can get a ship from this distance .. .a without guidance from special aircraft, the ekranoplan is invisible not only to ships, but also to aircraft, because target selection against the background of the earth is difficult even for modern radars ....
  • General D 7 February 2020 23: 43 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    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 19 March 2020 18: 05 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    victory in the competition of ekranoplanes is inevitable.
    belay fool no
    PERFECT: http://otvaga2004.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=744&p=11#p1002151
    and comments:
    dear mina just killed a dream in ekranoplans by posted correspondence .... I think those who wish to "walk / fly" ekranoplane will no longer be on the forum ...
    laughing
  • kutuz April 4 2020 22: 38 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "Waiting for the customer" - like Su57, he has to wait a long time