Military Review

American target aircraft and air defense breakers based on decommissioned fighters

73

In the 1950s, the remote control system for unmanned aerial vehicles was developed so much that it allowed not only to take off and maneuver in flight, but to land after completing a flight mission.


In the first post-war decades, air targets were required to imitate as closely as possible the aircraft at the disposal of a potential enemy, to fly at transonic and supersonic speeds at medium and high altitudes. Transition tactical and deck aviation to operations at low altitudes led to the need to have targets capable of simulating fighter-bomber maneuvers at low altitude and performing bombing using vertical maneuvers.

To simulate air targets in industrially developed countries, special unmanned aerial vehicles were designed, and the practice of re-equipping frankly outdated or out-of-date combat aircraft has also become widespread.

American aerial targets based on jet fighters



The first American remotely controlled air target with a turbojet engine, the QF-80, was created by re-equipping the P-80 (F-80) Shooting Star fighter.

American target aircraft and air defense breakers based on decommissioned fighters

The unmanned QF-80 took off at the commands of the ground control station. In the air, the target was directed by the operator, who was in the cockpit of a DT-33 two-seat jet gunner (built on the basis of the T-33 TCB).

Later this practice became widespread. Many retired US Air Force jet fighters have been converted into radio-controlled targets.


Radio-controlled targets QF-100

In trials of the new weapons, in the process of combat training of air defense missile systems and interceptor crews, radio-controlled ones were widely used: QF-86 Saber, QF-100 Super Saber, QF-9 Cougar, QF-8 Crusader, QT-33 Shooting Star, QF-102 / PQM-102 / QF- 106 Delta Dart.


QF-106 Delta Dart

Usually, machines taken from long-term storage were converted into targets. Due to physical and moral obsolescence, these aircraft had no further prospects for their intended use, but at the same time they still possessed a certain reserve of the resource of the main units and the airframe.

During the Cold War, the most famous and numerous American fighter that was in service in the air force, in the US naval aviation, as well as supplied and manufactured under license in a number of allied countries, was the supersonic F-4 Phantom II.

Phantoms of various modifications were used as fighter-interceptors, fighter-bombers, radar hunters and reconnaissance aircraft. From 1958 to 1981, a total of 5 195 aircraft of this type were built.

In the 1980s, the American F-4 Phantom II began to be replaced by 4th generation fighters.

All naval squadrons providing air defense of aircraft carrier groups were re-equipped with F-1980A carrier-based interceptors by the mid-14s. In the attack deck squadrons, the F-4S were finally supplanted by the F / A-18A / B Hornet fighter-bombers in 1986.

Until 1992, fighter-bombers and reconnaissance aircraft were operated in the US ILC aviation. The Phantoms served in the US Air Force fighter wings until 1990.

The last war between 24 American "radar hunters" F-4G and 6 reconnaissance RF-4Cs was the anti-Iraqi operation "Desert Storm". The use of Phantoms was a forced step. At that time, the F-4G in the US Air Force did not have another specialized combat aircraft designed to suppress ground-based air defense. At the same time, the RF-4C was the only tactical reconnaissance aircraft equipped with high-resolution side-view cameras. Until 1996, Phantoms flew in the Air Force of the National Guard, which is the active reserve of the US Air Force.

In parallel with service in combat units, F-4 aircraft were used in various research programs. So, in the late 1960s, the F-4A fighter, taken out of service, accompanied the Kh-15 rocket plane at the initial stage of flight. Several times "Phantoms", accelerating to supersonic speed, filmed the launch vehicles launched from the Canaveral cosmodrome. In the first half of the 1980s, disarmed F-4Cs were used in the course of biomedical research, which clarified the effect of various kinds of overloads on the human body.

Like many others that have exhausted their resource or hopelessly outdated combat aircraft, the F-4s of early modifications were converted into radio-controlled targets. In the 1970s-1980s, Phantoms, thanks to their high flight speed, thrust-to-weight ratio and large practical ceiling, could imitate not only manned aircraft, but also cruise missiles.

Thanks to a real thermal and radar portrait, the use of fighters converted into radio-controlled targets makes it possible to increase the reliability of tests. In addition, the target based on "Phantom" made it possible to reliably assess the damaging factors of the warheads of various missiles during contact and distance detonation, since the F-4 fighters had a considerable margin of safety and good survivability, which was repeatedly confirmed in battle. The decommissioned Phantoms were used to test land and sea missiles, as well as new air-to-air missiles.


Tests of the UR AIM-54 Phoenix in 1983

The Navy and Air Force independently transformed early F-4s into radio-controlled targets, but there was no single standard for aircraft conversion.

After the final decommissioning "Phantoms" of later modifications, which had a large flight resource and had further prospects of use, were too valuable to shoot them. The planes were handed over to the Allies or sent to storage at the Davis-Montan base, located near the city of Tucson in the state of Arizona. The dry climate and solid soil make it possible, after carrying out certain conservation measures, to store aircraft here in the open air.


After the collapse of the USSR and the decrease in the degree of international tension, the mothballed Phantoms were forgotten for some time. The American Air Force, Navy and ILC were more than enough of the already built 4th generation fighters, and the "natural" decline in the course of aviation accidents and due to resource depletion was covered by previously concluded contracts.

Using decommissioned "Phantoms" as target aircraft and air defense breakers



The F-4 planes stored in the "graveyard of bones" were remembered after the US Air Force began to run out of unmanned targets QT-33 and QF-106 - converted from training aircraft and supersonic fighter-interceptors.

By the beginning of the XNUMXst century, in the allied countries, where there were "Phantoms", they began to be replaced with modern combat aircraft, and it became clear that there were no prospects of returning obsolete fighters, but still quite suitable for further use, to service, and it was pointless to keep them further. ...


In 2005, there were about 500 Phantoms of various modifications on conservation. They decided to convert the most recent F-4E fighter-bombers, F-4G air defense fighters and RF-4C reconnaissance aircraft into drones. Early modifications, F-4D fighter-bombers and F-4S carrier-based interceptors, were used as a source of spare parts.


As part of the FSAT (Full-Scale Aerial Target) program initiated by the Combat Aviation Command, the personnel of the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (AMARG) in Davis-Montan brought aircraft to flight condition.

In the process of converting into targets from aircraft, part of the equipment unnecessary for unmanned flight was dismantled: an airborne radar, a 20-mm cannon, navigation equipment of the TACAN system and fuel receivers for refueling in the air. The wing consoles and tail of the target aircraft were painted red to facilitate their visual identification.


In the course of measures to re-equip "Phantoms" in a target, the American system for storing and restoring combat aircraft put into reserve has once again confirmed its effectiveness.


It was possible to return to flying condition about 350 aircraft, produced in the 1960-1970s and stored at the base in Arizona for more than 20 years.


Satellite image of Google Earth: aircraft F-4 Phantom II and F-16 Fighting Falcon at the Davis-Montan air base

The contract for the alteration of the reactivated Phantoms in the target was won by the American branch of the British corporation BAE Systems - BAE Systems North America.

From the Davis-Montan airbase, the planes were ferried to the Mojave airfield in California, where a set of digital remote control equipment was installed on them.


Satellite image of Google Earth: remotely controlled aircraft QF-4 at the airfield "Mojave"

The Mojave airfield is a very interesting object.

Due to the fact that this is the first American airfield licensed in the United States for horizontal launches of reusable spacecraft, there are facilities of private companies that implement space programs.


F-4 aircraft near the BAE Systems Inc hangar at the Mojave airfield

In the same hangars, where, until recently, the Phantoms were refurbished, refurbishment and refurbishment were carried out in accordance with American airworthiness standards for the MiG-29 and Su-27 fighters received from Eastern Europe and the CIS.


QF-4, taking off from the Mojave airfield, civilian airliners in storage are visible in the background.

In the northeastern part of the airfield, there is a site where dozens of civil aircraft that were previously operated by American airlines are stored. These planes are waiting for their turn there for restoration. After refurbishment and painting, they fly to third world countries. Quite a few transport and passenger aircraft taken from storage in the "Mojave" ply the airspace over the former USSR.

Thanks to the installation of the computerized remote control equipment Gulf Range Drone Control (GRDCS), the unmanned Phantom was able to perform rather complex maneuvers that were previously inaccessible to other radio-controlled targets. Takeoff, landing and changing the course and altitude on the route in unmanned mode can be carried out both within the framework of remote control and according to a predetermined program. The aircraft is equipped with a transponder and a satellite navigation system with data transmission to a ground or air control center.

It is reported that during the conversion of F-4 aircraft into unmanned vehicles, specialists from BAE Systems North America are installing an automatic threat recognition system, which makes it possible to get as close as possible to the combat situation during control and training firing. Suspended equipment with optoelectronic and radar sensors, detecting an approaching missile or radar radiation, automatically selects the optimal countermeasures from those available on board the aircraft, and develops an evasion maneuver.

On QF-4 aircraft, in parallel with the installation of digital remote control equipment, the possibility of a manned flight is retained, which allows for safe ferrying over long distances and expands the scope of application. In particular, manned QF-4s are capable of more active maneuvering than unmanned aircraft, and conduct a training air battle with fighters in service. Regular manned aircraft do not have red-colored wingtips.


QF-4, used for regular manned flights of 82nd Target Squadron

For manned flight, the least worn out converted F-4G Wild Weasel, built in the late 1970s, are used. Since 2005, these aircraft, in addition to "combat" service, regularly took part in various air shows in the United States.


Manned "Phantoms" save the resource of combat aircraft by testing radar systems, training air defense crews and interceptor pilots, without using weapons. As of 2012, 4 Air Force pilots and 6 contract retirees were allowed to fly the QF-10. They are all highly experienced pilots who have flown an F-4 Phantom II for at least 1 hours in the past.

After overflight and control tests, the remotely controlled QF-4 aircraft are transferred to the 82nd Unmanned Target Squadron (82 ATRS), based at Holloman AFB in New Mexico, and to the 53rd Weapon Assessment and Test Group (53 WEG ) at Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida.


QF-4 belonging to the 53rd weapons assessment and testing group

In the past, the Tyndall airbase also underwent evaluation tests of the MiG-23 and MiG-29 fighters received from the countries of Eastern Europe.


Aircraft QF-4 at Tyndall Air Base

The Phantoms were maintained and operated in different ways. At Tyndall AFB, where QF-4s mostly flew unmanned and often “one-way”, less attention was paid to maintaining the entire fleet of targets in flight condition. Specific aircraft were prepared for the flight, often borrowing the necessary parts and components from other aircraft. At the same time, the current repair and maintenance of the QF-4 was carried out mainly by military personnel.

In the 82nd Squadron of unmanned targets, the QF-4 was treated more carefully. At the Holloman airbase, contract retirees, who were just as elderly as the planes, were involved in servicing the Phantoms.


Here, more attention was paid to maintaining the aircraft in flight condition on which manned flights were carried out. At the same time, the smaller (compared to Tyndall airbase) fleet of "red-winged" targets had a higher percentage of aircraft ready for flight.

At Holloman and Tyndall Airbases, various systems are used to control the flight of unmanned aerial vehicles converted from retired fighters.


GRDC ground system operator

Above the Holloman base area, the QF-4 unmanned aerial vehicles are controlled using the GRDC ground system, and two specially converted E-9A aircraft are used when flying in Florida and other parts of the United States. These aircraft were created by Boeing on the basis of the civilian DHC-8 Dash 8 DeHavilland Canada turboprop airliner.


Airplane E-9A

The E-9A has two radars: a side-looking radar on the right side of the fuselage and a search one at the bottom. There is also equipment for remote control of targets and removal of telemetry from tested missiles. During the flight, E-9A operators, using on-board radars, are capable of observing the air situation at a distance of several hundred kilometers and controlling the flight of the target aircraft.

Armed modification of the unmanned aircraft QF-4


In addition to testing air defense systems and radars in manned mode and use as unmanned targets, another application was found for the QF-4.

In January 2008, an AGM-88 HARM anti-radar missile launched from an unmanned aircraft, equipped with a warhead, first hit a high-frequency radiation source at the Nellis training ground.


Foreign sources say that unmanned Phantoms can carry JDAM guided bombs with caliber from 230 kg (500 lb - GBU-38) to 910 kg (2 lb - GBU-000). In this case, it is possible to destroy stationary objects with previously known coordinates. Bombs, equipped with a JDAM kit, are directed to the target with an integrated inertial guidance system paired with a GPS receiver, providing a range of up to 31 km from the drop point. The value of the KVO demonstrated during the tests is 28 meters.

Thus, jet fighters converted into drones demonstrate the ability to suppress enemy air defenses. It is assumed that unmanned aircraft equipped with PRR, corrected bombs and means of electronic reconnaissance, moving in the first wave, are able to take on the main strike of anti-aircraft missiles, identify and partially destroy the unmasked positions of the radar and air defense systems. This, in turn, will significantly reduce the losses among pilots during operations to suppress enemy air defense systems.

The decline of the QF-4 target aircraft career


Currently, there are approximately 60 F-4s remaining at the Davis-Montan storage facility. But these are aircraft that are already unusable for restoration, they will no longer rise into the air and must be scrapped. In this regard, it was announced that the Air Force will no longer order the conversion of F-4 fighters into remotely controlled drones.

The largest number of usable QF-4 aircraft in the US Air Force was in 2011-2012, reaching approximately 200 units. They were used very intensively. Every year, with the participation of remotely controlled targets, several dozen firing sessions took place at the ranges.


In Florida, over the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, test launches of new modifications of AIM-4X Sidewinder and AIM-9 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles were conducted on unmanned QF-120 targets, and at the White Sands proving ground in New Mexico, Lockheed Martin Corporation tested Phantomah "modernized missiles for the Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC-3) air defense system. In 2013, during the tests of medium-range air defense systems MEADS (Medium Extended Air Defense System) at the White Sands missile range, QF-4 and OTR Lance, flying at supersonic speed from different directions, were almost simultaneously destroyed.

But this does not mean that every test with live fire ends with the loss of a target. Thanks to the BAE Systems Common Missile installed on the Phantoms, they often managed to evade missiles with a radar guidance system in 10-20% of launches, and from the AIM-9X Sidewinder with the massive use of heat traps in 25-30% of cases. As a rule, during the tests, missiles with an inert warhead were used, and the destruction of the QF-4 target occurred only with a direct hit. But even in this case, the damaged Phantoms sometimes managed to return to their airfield, where they were repaired and returned to service.


At the end of 2016, the last manned flight of the Phantom took place at the Holloman airbase, after which all available QF-4s were used only in an unmanned version.


Farewell procedure to QF-4 at Holloman airbase

Taking into account that the average annual loss of Phantoms during missile test firing was 10-15 targets in Tyndall and 4-5 in Holloman, as of today, there are no flying Phantoms in the US Air Force. left.


Satellite image of Google Earth: "Phantoms" used as ground targets at the training ground in the vicinity of the Holloman airbase

It is known that as of 2021, the 13 surviving QF-4s in the US Air Force are no longer in service. Control and navigation equipment, electronic threat assessment and jamming systems, valuable components and assemblies were dismantled from these aircraft, technical fluids and fuel were drained from the tanks. After that, the Phantoms were towed to a training ground in the vicinity of the Holloman airbase, where they serve as ground targets for practicing cannon firing and bombing at ground targets.

Replacement of QF-4 Phantom II with QF-16 Fighting Falcon target aircraft



In 2012, it became clear that the F-4 Phantom II aircraft suitable for conversion into targets were running out, and the US Air Force command initiated the creation of drones based on early F-16 Fighting Falcon fighters.

According to senior American officers responsible for combat training, a remotely controlled target, created on the basis of a 4th generation fighter, due to its higher maneuverability and better acceleration characteristics, more realistically simulates modern air targets and allows you to raise the skill level of fighter pilots and air defense missile systems ...

On November 19, 2012, the first QF-16 arrived at Tyndall Air Force Base for testing. As in the case of the QF-4, the aircraft was taken from storage at Davis-Montan and restored by specialists from the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Repair Group.


First QF-16 to land at Tyndall AFB

At the first stage, lightweight QF-16s, with dismantled weapons and radar, were used in a manned version, simulating air targets in missions without the use of real weapons.

The competition for the conversion of 126 F-16A / C / D fighters into drones (worth $ 69,7 million) was won by Boeing. In the future, several more contracts were concluded. According to forecasts of American aviation experts, the number of F-16 fighters convertible into targets and unmanned carriers may exceed 300 units. An indicative fact is that the F-16A fighters have the greatest residual resource, which had a minimum flight time and were quickly supplanted in the combat units by later modifications.


As part of the contract, the QF-16 is equipped with a data line for the GRDCS (Gulf Range Drone Control System) control equipment, VAS visual augmentation systems, CTS command telemetry and PCS payload control. For jamming on the external nodes of the suspension can be placed containers with equipment AN / ALQ-188 and AN / ALQ-167.


First unmanned flight of QF-16

In September 2015, QF-16 of 82nd Target Squadron made its first unmanned flight, taking off from the runway at Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida. As in the case of the QF-4, the external identifying features of the QF-16 target aircraft are the red-painted wing parts and the tail unit.


Satellite image of Google Earth: QF-16 towed by a tractor at Tyndall AFB

Mass deliveries of unmanned QF-16s began at the end of 2015, after which it was decided to abandon the QF-4. For some time, the QF-4 and QF-16 aircraft, consisting of 82 ATRS and 53 WEG, were operated in parallel.


Satellite image of Google Earth: aircraft QF-4 and QF-16 at the Holloman airbase

Currently, the US Air Force can have more than a hundred remotely controlled QF-16s, which are mainly used as unmanned targets in the process of combat training and in the course of testing new types of weapons. But if necessary, these unmanned aircraft can also carry weapons and participate in the breakthrough of the enemy's air defense system.

The history and prospects of the use of remotely controlled combat aircraft converted from decommissioned fighters in our country


In the USSR, decommissioned combat aircraft began to be used as radio-controlled targets almost simultaneously with the United States.

In Soviet times, target aircraft based on jet fighters were widely used. In most cases, the re-equipment was carried out at aircraft repair plants.

In particular, the Lviv ARZ has been engaged in alteration of the MiG-15, MiG-17, MiG-21 fighters in the M-15, M-17 and M-21 targets for a long time. Such aircraft were also refitted at the aircraft plant in Tbilisi. The Kazan experimental design bureau "Sokol" transformed the MiG-17 and MiG-19 fighters, as well as the L-29 trainer into targets M-17, M-19 and M-29. In the Yak-25MSh target, the Yak-25M two-seat interceptors were also converted.


Radio-controlled target aircraft Yak-25MSh

To control the target aircraft, mobile ground command posts were used, as well as air command posts based on two-seat aircraft: UTI MiG-15, L-39 and MiG-23UB.

The most advanced air targets M-21 (M-21M) were produced on the basis of the MiG-21. Initially, the MiG-21PF and MiG-21PFM front-line interceptors were used for this. Later, the "twenty-first" subsequent modifications went into action.


Target aircraft M-21

During the conversion to a target, a radar sight, a weapon control system and one fuselage fuel tank were removed from the MiG-21PF / PFM. Instead, they installed an automatic control system with an autopilot, active and passive jamming equipment, including a cassette with IR traps, and equipment for recording the magnitude of a miss and a projectile hit. In addition, a tracer was available for external trajectory measurements. The maximum flight speed of the M-21 (M-21M) was 1 km / h. Service ceiling - 800 14 m. Flight duration - 400 minutes.


Currently, target aircraft based on the MiG-21 are not used and have survived only in museum exhibitions.

After Russia gained "independence", the production of radio-controlled targets, created on the basis of combat aircraft that had exhausted their service life, ceased, although there were all the conditions for this.

In the 1990s – 2000s, the RF Ministry of Defense “utilized” a very significant number of “outdated” interceptors, front-line fighters, fighter-bombers and reconnaissance aircraft.


About 2 combat aircraft were scrapped. These were not only the hopelessly outdated MiG-000, Su-21, Su-7 and Yak-15, but also quite capable Su-28, MiG-17, MiG-23 and MiG-25. "Effective" managers of the RF Ministry of Defense during the "Serdyukovshchyna" era turned aviation equipment storage bases into recycling centers.


Satellite image of Google Earth: cutting the MiG-27 into metal at the airfield of the Lipetsk center for combat use and retraining of flight personnel

In the Lipetsk center for combat use and retraining of flight personnel alone, over a hundred MiG-2008 and MiG-2011 fighters and fighter-bombers were destroyed in the period from 23 to 27.


Satellite image of Google Earth: cutting the MiG-31 into metal at the airfield of the Lipetsk center for combat use and retraining of flight personnel

Sadly, this practice continues to this day.

At present, MiG-31 interceptors are being cut into metal at a military airfield in Lipetsk.

Looking at these satellite images, one involuntarily compares the attitude towards obsolete and exhausted aircraft in the United States and China, where decommissioned fighters are massively converted into drones. Even Vietnam bypassed Russia, which had risen from its knees, in this respect.


In 2020, information appeared that the General Directorate of the Defense Industry under the Ministry of Defense of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, together with the state-owned company Viettel Military Telecommunications Group, began work on the conversion of 35 MiG-21bis and 15 MiG-21UM fighters into UAVs. It is reported that unmanned MiG-21s will be used as targets in air defense exercises and as shock drones.


Decommissioned MiG-29 at Domna airbase

The most promising in terms of converting into remotely piloted vehicles in the RF Aerospace Forces are front-line fighters MiG-29 and interceptors MiG-31. Unfortunately, due to storage in the open air, most of the MiG-29 due to corrosion is not suitable for further operation, although the gliders of far from all aircraft have exhausted their service life.

According to information available in open and publicly available sources, in the Russian Aerospace Forces and in the Naval Aviation in 2020, there were approximately 130 MiG-29 fighters of various modifications in flight condition, and about one and a half hundred aircraft were in storage in varying degrees of safety.


Satellite image of Google Earth: MiG-29 fighters at the airfield of the Lipetsk center for combat use and retraining of flight personnel

According to the same sources, there are about 31 modernized MiG-90 interceptors in service. In experimental combat operation there are also 10 MiG-31K - carriers of the Dagger hypersonic missile. In the near future, about 150 MiG-31s ​​are to be decommissioned, the modernization of which is recognized as inexpedient.

Surely, among the approximately 300 MiG-29 and MiG-31 unsuitable for further service, it is realistic to select several dozen aircraft that can be converted into supersonic drones suitable for use as targets and reconnaissance and strike drones. At the same time, references to the lack of funding are untenable.

Our country, despite aggravated relations with the United States, continues to buy dollars and keep funds in American securities. Assistance in creating a modern control system and the supply of electronic components for its local production on the territory of Russia could be provided by our eastern "strategic partner", which in recent years has switched from the massive purchases of Russian weapons and military equipment to the acquisition of single samples for the purpose of acquaintance.
Author:
Articles from this series:
Military drones based on decommissioned aircraft
73 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. mark1
    mark1 18 November 2021 18: 26
    0
    According to the same sources, there are about 31 modernized MiG-90 interceptors in service. There are also 10 MiG-31K in experimental combat operation.

    Specially went to look for sources - up to 150 MiG-31BM and at least 12 MiG31K (https://aviation21.ru/v-2021-godu-vojska-pvo-poluchat-pyat-istrebitelej-perexvatchikov-mig-31bm/)
  2. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 18 November 2021 18: 53
    +11
    It’s good for the Americans - they print money, and they’re not smart enough to keep airplanes still fit for the knife ...
    1. New Year day
      New Year day 18 November 2021 20: 26
      +8
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      It’s good for the Americans - they print money, and they’re not smart enough to keep airplanes still fit for the knife ...

      Devastation occurs when I start to write past the toilet. Money is not the main thing, the main thing is the brain
      1. victor50
        victor50 18 November 2021 23: 47
        +5
        Quote: Silvestr
        Money is not the main thing, the main thing is the brain

        Both. Recycling planes is money, some of which will go into the pocket of the person concerned. On conversion to a target, this will not work, at best they will fall into the wrong pocket, or into the one but not in quantity. We have been utilizing the country for thirty years.
      2. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 19 November 2021 04: 05
        +2
        Quite a few transport and passenger aircraft taken from storage in the "Mojave" ply the airspace over the former USSR.
        For this alone, you can disinfect your forehead with green stuff!
    2. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 18 November 2021 20: 56
      +11
      The US Air Force launched the X-62A project, Skyborg equipment and software are installed on the F-16 VISTA. It looks like they are being made into full-fledged unmanned fighters, not just targets or strikes like the QF-16.
      https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41779/f-16-testbed-becomes-an-x-plane-ahead-of-work-on-air-forces-skyborg-ai-computer-brain
    3. hohol95
      hohol95 18 November 2021 22: 45
      -7
      Leader, but Leader! drinks
      Tell me on the map of the RSFSR / RF a place similar to the state of Arizona?
      hi hi hi
      1. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 18 November 2021 22: 52
        +11
        If I am not mistaken, the technique is also miraculously preserved in the permafrost.
        Yes, there would be a desire - it would be possible to build hangars with an artificial climate.
        Moreover, it would not be necessary constantly store a large amount of aircraft. Targets are common material.
        Well, since you asked the question where we store aircraft, let me ask you, where do the Vietnamese keep their MiGs?
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 18 November 2021 22: 58
          -6
          Desire or money ...
          Back in the days of the USSR!
          Find money ... gnaw it out from the same land and navy.
          I doubt the availability even in the USSR of funds for such extensive and specific buildings for the Air Force!
          1. Toucan
            Toucan 19 November 2021 04: 34
            +3
            Quote: hohol95
            Find money ... gnaw it out from the same land and navy.
            I doubt the availability even in the USSR of funds for such extensive and specific buildings for the Air Force!

            In vain you doubt! In the USSR, in the air defense aviation and in the Air Force, there was a significant reserve of combat aircraft for conservation. The last Il-28 and MiG-17 were disposed of already in the 90s. In our country, quite modern machines are allowed under the knife.
            1. hohol95
              hohol95 19 November 2021 07: 35
              -2
              If you are familiar with the conditions of this conservation, explain to me how the aircraft were stored.
              In hangars with ventilation and heating or under a layer of solid oil in the open air.
              1. Toucan
                Toucan 19 November 2021 07: 58
                0
                I saw those kept in the open air. As for the details, I don’t want to repeat myself. The author of this article wrote in sufficient detail below in the answer.
  3. Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 18 November 2021 19: 16
    +4
    served at the storage and preservation base under the pickle, more than 300 cars, it has long been gone, the Volgograd steppes are roasted in summer and in winter the hammer warmed hands near the exhaust pipe of the apa
    1. hohol95
      hohol95 18 November 2021 22: 42
      -4
      Volgograd steppe is not an Arizona desert!
      hi
      It is much harsher for the "mundane iron falcons and hawks".
      1. victor50
        victor50 18 November 2021 23: 51
        +7
        Quote: hohol95
        Volgograd steppe is not an Arizona desert!

        It is much harsher for the "mundane iron falcons and hawks"

        And what now - to dispose of everything and justify it by the climate ?! Or to do something according to the mind, taking into account the peculiarities, since such a climate for life has fallen out? It is also inconvenient to fly into space from our latitudes - far from the equator, they say.
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 18 November 2021 23: 56
          -6
          Do you have more specific suggestions and calculations?
          Where to store? Who will refit?
          And how much do you have to pay for it?
          1. victor50
            victor50 19 November 2021 00: 01
            +5
            Quote: hohol95
            Do you have more specific suggestions and calculations?
            Where to store? Who will refit?
            And how much do you have to pay for it?

            Ouch! Caught up! Of course not, somehow I did not deal with this problem! But after all, you have all the calculations that this is not profitable, solid evidence that there will be no storage space, that cutting into metal is a pure economic benefit ?! laughing How primitive: like - who, if not GDP ?! You just do not have enough desert, but that would be order! That's the trouble. Taiga all around! And it burns! and is cut down! laughing
            1. hohol95
              hohol95 19 November 2021 00: 07
              -4
              Byada byada ... Taiga is burning, the permafrost is melting ...
              You're right. But I personally do not know the economic component! Not an economist. And not a geographer. And not an Air Force representative. A simple man in the street.
              Ordinary taxpayer.
              I asked the author of the article, but there is no answer yet!
              1. victor50
                victor50 19 November 2021 00: 09
                +2
                Quote: hohol95
                I asked the author of the article, but there is no answer yet!

                Goodnight! Or what time of day do you have? hi
                1. hohol95
                  hohol95 19 November 2021 00: 15
                  +1
                  00.14
                  hi hi hi
                  And you!
  4. knn54
    knn54 18 November 2021 19: 25
    +5
    It's a shame for the state. I just can't find other words.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 18 November 2021 19: 41
      +6
      Quote: knn54
      It's a shame for the state. I just can't find other words.

      The systematic disarmament of the Russian Federation is underway. Money is wasted on useless projects. What is really needed is not funded or is delayed for decades.
      1. New Year day
        New Year day 18 November 2021 20: 27
        +2
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        The systematic disarmament of the Russian Federation is underway.

        And who is doing all this?
    2. Region-25.rus
      Region-25.rus 18 November 2021 20: 39
      -4
      It's a shame for the state. I just can't find other words.
      - "Eh! The British do not clean guns with bricks!" .... normally(((
  5. hohol95
    hohol95 18 November 2021 21: 34
    -3
    Dear author! Here you are grieving about cutting old aircraft into metal instead of converting them into UAVs.
    And where on the territory of the former RSFSR and the current Russian Federation is that place - the climate, as in the state of Arizona?
    This is the place where old cars should be stored! After all, there is no dry weather, no snow, no frost with thaws. Put the cars on open areas and do not cry !!!
    I don’t know such a place!
    And you know rightly. So tell me !!!
    Or maybe you know the amount in rubles required for high-quality preservation of aviation equipment?
    What hangars are required for this, with what microclimate?
    And how many people to serve this infrastructure
    should have been under the USSR or will be under the Russian Federation?
    And in the days of the USSR, probably all the old aircraft needed to be stored in the Karakum Desert?
    Desert. Almost like in the USA ...
    The fact of the matter is that almost ...
    1. Orsis338
      Orsis338 18 November 2021 21: 39
      +4
      Russia has Central Asian allies in the CSTO, where you can find a site for storing aircraft, and create a center for conversion into a UAV. There would be a desire and political will, so you can knock out free rent.
      1. hohol95
        hohol95 18 November 2021 21: 56
        -4
        These "allies" were part of the USSR! And hence their climate and terrain are well known!
        And the summer heat and winter frosts with snowstorms in the Kazakh steppes and the features of other "dry" places on the territory of these "allies".
      2. Bolt cutter
        Bolt cutter 18 November 2021 22: 08
        +4
        find a site for aviation storage
        The local allies will take everything away for non-ferrous metals within about 72 hours. The guards for a small share will be temporarily blind and deaf yes .
    2. KKND
      KKND 18 November 2021 23: 15
      +4
      Indeed, a good question.
      But you have to count the money. The USSR was remaking airplanes into UAVs, and why can't the Russian Federation because of the climate?
      1. hohol95
        hohol95 18 November 2021 23: 28
        -4
        Is it so easy to remake a 4th generation fighter?
        Considering their current technical condition while standing under the "heavenly slabs"!
        Is it worth it?
        I dont know...
        Questions for aviators, electronics engineers and economists!
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 18 November 2021 23: 31
          +3
          It depends on the weather. In the US, the weather allows you to convert to unmanned 4th generation, we do not. Here is such an anomaly.
          1. hohol95
            hohol95 18 November 2021 23: 35
            -3
            Damn damn ...
            We are not only unlucky with the people and the government, but also disagreements with weather phenomena ...
            But the United States is lucky in everything !!!
        2. KKND
          KKND 18 November 2021 23: 32
          +3
          That's exactly what your question and arguments are not about. You need to count. The Americans thought it better to spend their money on education. We decided to "pinch" the money for training the army in this particular case.
          1. hohol95
            hohol95 18 November 2021 23: 39
            -4
            For training what?
            Our Air Force and Air Defense have run out of guided targets?
            Or are there targets, but not from old aircraft?
            1. KKND
              KKND 18 November 2021 23: 44
              +5
              Well, as if the targets from real aircraft will be better. Though more expensive.
              1. hohol95
                hohol95 18 November 2021 23: 54
                -5
                "You fighters want to throw a grenade, but for the country it comes out at the cost of a cow!"
                According to the veteran artilleryman - "One shell is a pair of chrome boots!"
                In our country, paper dollars are not printed!
                And it is not called the United States!
              2. zyablik.olga
                zyablik.olga 19 November 2021 05: 02
                +5
                Quote: KKND
                Well, as if the targets from real aircraft will be better. Though more expensive.

                No, not more expensive. In the USSR, it was not just that they converted outdated aircraft into targets. When creating an unmanned target close to a combat aircraft, the same metal and units for the same purpose are required. All this is already available on a decommissioned aircraft.
    3. victor50
      victor50 18 November 2021 23: 53
      +4
      Quote: hohol95
      What hangars are required for this, with what microclimate?

      Wouldn't those who were destroyed in huge numbers, thrown and destroyed after 91 years come?
      1. hohol95
        hohol95 19 November 2021 00: 03
        -3
        And let's dig up those "flight attendants" who ordered to throw and destroy and ask them - is it possible to store used aircraft in those structures?
        And then "bury" them back!
        I think those Soviet facilities were clearly not suitable for storing aircraft.
        And how many of them were equipped with the required ventilation, heating or cooling systems?
        I do not know...
        I have not been to such objects ...
        1. victor50
          victor50 19 November 2021 00: 06
          +5
          Quote: hohol95
          Smoke those Soviet objects were clearly not suitable for storing aircraft.

          As well as schools, hospitals, paramedics, factories, etc. etc. Yes, and in the USSR there was enough chaos. Aggravated only ... very much.
          1. hohol95
            hohol95 19 November 2021 00: 13
            -4
            Many objects were "killed" ...
            In the 90s, children began to give birth less - we converted the kindergarten into a library, the other into an ambulance station.
            They announced the maternity capital - there were suddenly few kindergartens and schools ...
            A kindergarten was built from the House of Creativity ...
            And some of them "warmed themselves" - they spent the capital of the old 8 apartment building with the eviction of the tenants, and after a couple of years it was demolished ...
    4. Topgun
      Topgun 19 November 2021 00: 59
      +5
      maybe it will be a discovery for you, but it is even better to store airplanes in the cold, and much more - the desert is not only dry, but also huge temperature drops
      yes, yes, there is summer in the north, BUT !!!!!!! it is easy to make a hangar with frost in the north (people have been able to make ice for 2000 years even in the desert and without electricity - yachchal)
      but it’s expensive to build hangars and airfields in the north - mother’s economists don’t understand that if you do everything from your own materials, then that money is returned in the form of taxes - you only spend the time of people / specialists, as an example, China builds whole cities in which no one lives, while there is no global construction, it takes builders with such work so as not to go to lawyers - the money will still go back to the treasury for all construction materials and equipment are Chinese
      We don't have Arizona, so we won't do nichrome ...
    5. Bongo
      19 November 2021 03: 00
      +6
      Quote: hohol95
      Dear author! Here you are grieving about cutting old aircraft into metal instead of converting them into UAVs.
      And where on the territory of the former RSFSR and the current Russian Federation is that place - the climate, as in the state of Arizona?
      This is the place where old cars should be stored! After all, there is no dry weather, no snow, no frost with thaws. Put the cars on open areas and do not cry !!!
      I don’t know such a place!
      And you know rightly. So tell me !!!


      Aleksey, I don’t know what kind of education you have and the higher educational institution, but the impression is that you live "on the moon" or in the deep taiga, where the opportunity to use Internet resources appears once a year, and you did not read this publication very carefully request Isn't it really difficult to hammer "aviation equipment storage" or BKHAT into a search engine?

      Apparently, it will be a discovery for you that in the USSR the long-term storage of aviation equipment was well developed and strictly regulated. Moreover, the guidance documents on this topic have been freely available for a long time, there would be a desire to get acquainted with them.

      In Soviet times, there were dozens of BKHAT and BRS, I happened to visit one of them in Khurba. It was visually visible that the joints and hatches of the aircraft in long-term storage were sealed. The tires of the tires were painted white, and the sun canopy was covered with a tarpaulin. According to the schedule, the aircraft was subject to reopening for overflights. What did not prevent frosts, thaws and summer heat.

      On the basis of obsolete combat aircraft in the USSR, hundreds of air targets were created at the ARZ. Even in not too technologically advanced Vietnam, shock drones are being created on the basis of the MiG-21 bis. The program for converting Chinese aircraft into UAVs was described in a previous publication. In China and Vietnam, judging by your logic, is the climate for storing fighters better than in Russia?

      Against the background of our investments in American "securities" and the purchase of cut greens, references to the lack of funds look hypocritical.
      1. hohol95
        hohol95 19 November 2021 09: 46
        -1
        Thank you for your reply!
        VUS 662995-A.
        I don’t live on “Moon”, but “having lost my head there is no trace of crying through my hair”!
        Cutting and continuing to cut not only aviation!
        Neither the PRC nor the DRV had to be.
        From programs like "Around the World" I know that in the DRV the humidity is 100% and the heat!
        If the Vietnamese manage to save military equipment from "decay" - Honor them and Praise!
        Their zeal is due to the scarcity of funds and not a very large amount of available equipment.
        The PRC is a country much larger than the DRV.
        There are plenty of good and different climatic zones.
        And they have a lot to choose from.
        In the USSR and in the Russian Federation, only careful observance of the rules and regulations of conservation, the appropriate siazki and other insulating materials could and did save. And the main thing is the absence of "playful little hands" who disassemble the accounting equipment for spare parts or outright theft of valuable parts and weapons!
        I don’t know how it was in the SA, but in the RA, EVERYTHING was dragged from the storage bases of automobile equipment ... Except the carcasses themselves.
        The union was gone, everyone was abandoned.
        Some rushed to huddle potatoes on 6 acres, others climbed into subordinate warehouses!
        Still others began to buy up factories and military storage bases.
        As "Antibiotic" from "Gangster Petersburg" said - "The generals want to eat too!"
        Therefore, I suggested in one of the comments "dig up the guilty stewardess" and interrogate "her" with passion.
        Also apply these methods to the living economists and retirees with wide stripes !!!
        And regarding the "Lipetsk" cases, ask questions to A. N. Kharchevsky. In 2011, there was a case of extortions from officers! He was in charge from 1997 to 2015.
        And ask Chaga N.I. - directed from 1992 to 1997.
        1. Bongo
          20 November 2021 04: 35
          +2
          Quote: hohol95
          VUS 662995-A

          Electromechanic?
          Quote: hohol95
          Cutting and continuing to cut not only aviation!

          And do you justify it?
          Quote: hohol95
          Neither the PRC nor the DRV had to be.
          From programs like "Around the World" I know that in the DRV the humidity is 100% and the heat!
          If the Vietnamese manage to save military equipment from "decay" - Honor them and Praise!
          Their zeal is due to the scarcity of funds and not a very large amount of available equipment.
          The PRC is a country much larger than the DRV.
          There are plenty of good and different climatic zones.
          And they have a lot to choose from.

          In China, according to expert estimates and satellite images, there are about 1000 combat aircraft in storage, and up to 300 drones converted from fighters are in operation. In your opinion, the coast of the Taiwan Strait is better suited for storage and operation than the average strip of Russia?
          Quote: hohol95
          In the USSR and in the Russian Federation, only careful observance of the rules and regulations of conservation, the appropriate siazki and other insulating materials could and did save. And the main thing is the absence of "playful little hands" who disassemble the accounting equipment for spare parts or outright theft of valuable parts and weapons!

          Those. in the USSR they could establish the protection and storage of equipment at the BKHAT, but in the Russian Federation they cannot?
          Quote: hohol95
          As "Antibiotic" from "Gangster Petersburg" said - "The generals want to eat too!"
          Therefore, I suggested in one of the comments "dig up the guilty stewardess" and interrogate "her" with passion.

          This is already the lyrics. Let's call a spade a spade, without folklore and idioms.
          Quote: hohol95
          Also apply these methods to the living economists and retirees with wide stripes !!!

          What we are talking about, many of the characters responsible for the destruction of aircraft still occupy very bold positions.
          Quote: hohol95
          "Having lost your head, no trace of crying through your hair!"

          What we have lost cannot be returned. But what fundamentally prevents, apart from the lack of will, to convert at least a small part of the aircraft to be decommissioned into UAVs? In peacetime, they can be used as targets, and in the military as reconnaissance and strike drones. Such devices are definitely capable of saving the lives of pilots. Vietnam, China and the United States understand this well.
          1. hohol95
            hohol95 20 November 2021 10: 17
            -1
            I'm not entirely sure that the USSR did not "dismantle" the stored equipment.
            One simple example - I worked with a man who had a passion for radio amateurism, but then he began to sell radio devices containing precious metals.
            Which he pulled out of the radio stations, which, according to him, he had clogged the balcony of his apartment.
            And where did he get so much radio engineering "good" from?
            The methods were different - he could take "written off" by acquaintance.
            I don’t know how they wrote off radio equipment in the SA!
            In residential offices - they bought new telephones for the site, issued them to the site, the old ones were written off the balance sheet on paper and that's it! It is possible to agree and simply pick up the most normal telephone set for personal needs. If a telephone line was connected to the apartment!
            But obviously not in the store, people bought entire radio stations or components containing gold and silver!
            1. Bongo
              20 November 2021 10: 25
              +1
              Quote: hohol95
              I'm not entirely sure that the USSR did not "dismantle" the stored equipment.

              I respect the opinions of professionals. But if you are not sure about something, then it is better not to talk about it. No.
              Of course, not all aircraft in storage could actually be put into operation, and they were the source of spare parts. But in the BKHAT, until the mid-90s, there was a schedule for flying over and de-mothballing of the aircraft stored there, and the command of the bases carried personal responsibility for safety and readiness. Out-of-the-box theft began to flourish in the 2000s, when storage bases became recycling centers.
              1. hohol95
                hohol95 20 November 2021 10: 37
                0
                By writing my comment, I did not mean only aircraft at all!
                Were there not enough trucks kept in case of war?
                And not just flatbed trucks, but cars with kungs for various purposes!
                And the tanks were not immediately sent under the cutters of the cutters!
                1. Bongo
                  20 November 2021 10: 49
                  +2
                  Quote: hohol95
                  By writing my comment, I did not mean only aircraft at all!
                  Were there not enough trucks kept in case of war?
                  And not just flatbed trucks, but cars with kungs for various purposes!
                  And the tanks were not immediately sent under the cutters of the cutters!

                  We are discussing the planes put on storage, right?
                  I can also say about the equipment of the country's Air Defense Forces. Until a certain moment, the old tube radars and the 1st generation air defense systems removed from the database (S-75, S-125 and S-200) were guarded and protected. The frank mess of EMNIP began in 2002, in the wake of the next redundancies. The equipment that was left without protection was very quickly dismantled, and the boards with elements containing precious metals ended up in the reception centers that bred like mushrooms after the rain. At the same time, the relatively fresh 35D6 and 22Zh6 radars and the S-300PT / PS air defense systems were guarded very carefully. Subsequently, this technique was transferred to our allies in the CSTO; Armenia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Those. the difference is in approach, and it all depends on the will of the leadership.
            2. Bongo
              20 November 2021 10: 32
              +2
              By the way, in the Russian Federation there are also examples of prudent use of aircraft taken from storage. More than 10 years ago, a significant number of fighters built in 27-1986 were brought to the level of the Su-1990SM, which did not take off for several years.
    6. ja-ja-vw
      ja-ja-vw 19 November 2021 18: 28
      +2
      Quote: hohol95
      And where on the territory of the former RSFSR and the current Russian Federation is that place - the climate, as in the state of Arizona?

      the steppe city of Kosh-Agach: no more than 150 mm (as in the valley of death in the Mojave) of precipitation falls per year. In winter, the temperature is -45, summer maximum is +31. There they breed camely people.

      Arizona has a temperature of + 16 ° C from autumn to spring, and in the summer months it can rise to + 52 ° C. There are often frosts at night.
      In July-August, the monsoon season begins with winds, thunderstorms, heavy downpours and floods.
      Annual precipitation is more than 500mm (if not confusing)
      It is much better to store in Kosh-Agach
      1. hohol95
        hohol95 19 November 2021 21: 45
        +1
        Thanks! I'll get a private jet that's where I'll open a hangar for him!
        hi
        1. ja-ja-vw
          ja-ja-vw 19 November 2021 22: 56
          0
          Quote: hohol95
          I will have a private jet

          you are a happy person
          1. hohol95
            hohol95 20 November 2021 10: 10
            0
            Thanks! But it will not be in this life! hi
  6. kytx
    kytx 18 November 2021 21: 35
    +7
    I like phantom
    Although it looks crooked
    "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" © fmd
  7. KKND
    KKND 18 November 2021 23: 20
    +6
    Sergey, hello!
    Great article. Americans are so rich because they know that in order to make money, you need to be able to spend (and save).
    And we are a billion there, a billion here, Russia is a generous soul.
    1. Bongo
      19 November 2021 03: 09
      +4
      Quote: KKND
      Sergey, hello!

      Hi!
      Quote: KKND
      Excellent article.

      Thank you! drinks
      Quote: KKND
      Americans are so rich because they know that in order to make money, you need to be able to spend (and save).
      And we are a billion there, a billion here, Russia is a generous soul.

      The problem is that our management does not bear any responsibility for their affairs.
  8. screw cutter
    screw cutter 19 November 2021 10: 05
    -5
    And it is expensive to store (in our climatic conditions) and to dispose of it is expensive. But it seems to me that converting an airplane into a drone and keeping it later is much more expensive than producing target missiles. But it will eat fuel like an airplane, in two engines and rework hydraulic control I think it is not only difficult, but also expensive. And one more plus in the direction of the target missile, it is smaller, if you hit it, then the plane and even more so.
    1. Toucan
      Toucan 19 November 2021 13: 43
      +3
      Quote: screw cutter
      it seems to me that converting an airplane into a drone and keeping it then is much more expensive than producing target missiles.

      Well, yes, the Americans are stupid and cannot count money.request
      An unmanned aircraft can be used for a long time, and a rocket can only be used once. As a result, a drone turns out to be more profitable than a disposable target. In addition, no missile-based target can match the range of an aircraft. The author spoke in sufficient detail about the prospects for the use of unmanned combat aircraft.
  9. Mustached Kok
    Mustached Kok 19 November 2021 13: 32
    +4
    Here many say that "the Americans are great just because they have a desert where you can keep it all under the open sky, but try it with us." The answer is simple, there is no heat in the desert 24/7. At night, the temperature there can drop to sub-zero. Secondly, technology is ruined not by the environment, but by its variability. Here, tundra and permafrost areas can be used for storage. Due to the low temperature drop and low humidity, aircraft can be stored for a long time. It remains only to cover it with a cover so that the snow does not fly inside. The same Americans, which according to the plan are subject to restoration (for the purposes of the same targets), are also "covered" and "printed", only from desert dust and sand. They do not cover only those equipment that will no longer be restored, but will serve donors. So there would be a desire, there is room.
    1. ja-ja-vw
      ja-ja-vw 19 November 2021 18: 43
      0
      Quote: Mustachioed Kok
      Secondly, technology is ruined not by the environment, but by its variability.

      I do not agree.
      The aircraft receives "variability" at each take-off / landing (on the ground -30 / + 30 10 km below -50 ° C + non-acid aerodynamic effect)
      Corrosion, aging and biodegradation of materials:
      -polymers are destroyed by UV light (half chain degradation)
      -thermal deformation (the near-surface layer always has a higher temperature than the massif)
      -mycelium that develop on polymers, various sealants and chemical compounds. Most dangerous when fungi develop in kerosene fuel tanks and pipelines
      - bacteria (biological film containing microorganisms), which have learned to eat stainless steel
      - fuels and lubricants decompose (yes, drain kerosene, and oils, hydraulics) into fractions
      -amorphic bodies (glass, polymers, gels) are scanty, but "flow down" under the influence of gravity
      Quote: Mustachioed Kok
      ... We can use tundra and permafrost areas for storage

      1.not in every tundra you will sit (and then you will take off)
      2 they won't be dug out of the snow in a year
      3. There is no layer of clay nitrate under the "skin", it will begin to be loaded in a year
      4.moisture and humidity (under 88%)

      moistening on the surface of the part: a water film is formed, in which electrolytes arise, which lead to echo
      ===================
      Atlas Material Testing Technology LLC (ATLAS) - they "ate the dog" on this topic
      1. Mustached Kok
        Mustached Kok 20 November 2021 14: 57
        +2
        Thank you, I didn’t know that we have such drops even in the far north.
  10. Wildcat
    Wildcat 19 November 2021 17: 06
    +3
    hi
    As always, great article!
    Video, how kew eff16 is used (if it is bad with English, you can display "subtitles-translation-Russian")
  11. Wildcat
    Wildcat 19 November 2021 17: 20
    +3
    F15 against KewF4, IMHO, once the target even left "on the traps" from Sidewander amid merry laughter (4:07):
  12. eehnie
    eehnie 20 November 2021 18: 43
    0
    This is an interesting article. In my opinion, the main reason why the last Russian combat aircraft was converted into an unmanned aerial vehicle for use as a target would be that Russia used many types of missiles as targets, which no other country can do, and this practice is likely to continue because it provides more complex and less costly targets in sufficient numbers.

    And for use as targets on land, there is no need to convert to unmanned aerial vehicles, and in Russia there are enough decommissioned auxiliary aircraft of about the same size for this use.

    But even without the need to be used as targets, the write-off was the right decision only in the context of the process of reducing the combat fleets inherited from the Soviet Union, since the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe did not require additional reductions in Russia.

    The total exit of the Be-6/12 and Yak-38, associated with the process of reducing the combat fleets inherited by Russia from the Soviet Union, seems inevitable. It is very likely that there will not be enough time for the IL-38 robotization, the full exit from which may come in a few years.

    The first transformations into unmanned aerial vehicles, but in order to maintain their current combat role, it is very likely that Tu-95/142 and close-air support aircraft and helicopters, Su-25/28/39, Mi-8/9 / 13/14/17/18/19/24/25/35/171/172/177, Mi-28/40/42 and Ka-50/52.

    Of course, the MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 and MiG-23 are aircraft that must remain in place and continue to be in the reserve of the Russian Armed Forces. These aircraft cannot withstand the most advanced fighters, but are still useful and conceptually more modern than other combat aircraft still present in the Russian Armed Forces, which are likely to be fully deployed sooner.

    (Automatic translation from English)

    This is an interesting article. In my view the main reason why the last Russian combat aircraft converted in UAV for use as target, would be the fact that Russia has been using as targets many types of missiles, in a way that no other country can do, and this practice is very likely to continue, because provides more difficult and less expensive targets in enough amounts.

    And for use as targets on land there is not need of conversion into UAVs, and Russia has enough auxiliary aircrafts decommissioned of the same size approximately for this use.

    But even without need of use as targets, scrapping was a right solution only in the environment of the process of reduction of the combat fleets inherited from the Soviet Union because the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe forced not additional reductions in Russia.

    The total exit of the Be-6/12 and the Yak-38, related to the process of reduction of the combat fleets inherited by Russia from the Soviet Union, seems inminent. Very likely there is not enough time for a robotization of the Il-38, which total exit can come in some years.

    The first conversions into UCAVs, but in order to keep its current combat role, very likely can be the Tu-95/142 and the Close Air Support aircrafts and helicopters, the Su-25/28/39, Mi-8/9 / 13/14/17/18/19/24/25/35/171/172/177, Mi-28/40/42 and Ka-50/52.

    Certainly the MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 and the MiG-23 are aircrafts to keep still, and to continue en the Russian Armed Forces in the reserve. These aircrafts can not face the most modern fighters, but are useful still, and remain conceptually more modern than other combat aircrafts present still in the Russian Armed Forces, which total exit very likely will happen before.
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 21 November 2021 00: 04
      +2
      Ask, but you absolutely do not own the information and do not understand what you are talking about. No.
      Quote: eehnie
      Of course, the MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 and MiG-23 are aircraft that must remain in place and continue to be in the reserve of the Russian Armed Forces.
      All Su-7 and Su-17, MiG-23 and MiG-27 have long been decommissioned, and there have never been any export modifications of the Su-20 and Su-22 in the Russian Air Force. No.
      1. eehnie
        eehnie 21 November 2021 07: 21
        0
        I think you need to take into account that the Russian version of my comment is an automatic translation, which may contain some translation errors.

        The notation refers to technology development in general terms and applies well because my comment applied to all technology developments, not just some of the options. Using the designation for all technological development does not mean that all options were in the Russian Armed Forces. I never said that. In fact, my comment would be correct if today in the Russian Armed Forces there were at least one of the variants of each mentioned technological development. And it is important to remember that the materials of the Russian Armed Forces remain the property of the Russian Armed Forces even after decommissioning, until the transfer of property is completed, for disposal, preservation as a monument, demilitarization or for sending to another country. My comments on the full withdrawal refer to this moment when the property is transferred. Until that moment, the Russian Armed Forces can fulfill their wishes, write off, resume ...

        The presence in Russia of technological developments Mig-27, Su-7/17/20/22 and Mig-23 (meaning the presence in Russia of at least one of the options) is very easy to see in very recent images (2021) of the same nature, as used in the article. And, in my opinion, this is positive for Russia.

        (Automatic translation from English)

        I think you need to take into account that the Russian version of my comment is an automatic translation, that can include some mistake in the translation.

        The designations are refered to the technological developments in overall terms, and are well applied because my comment was refered to the entire technological developments, not only to some variants. The use of the designation for the entire technological development does not mean that all the variants have been in the Russian Armed Forces. I never said it. In fact my comment would be right with the presence today in the Russian Armed Forces of at least one of the variants is present of every cited technological development. And it is important to remember that the material of the Russian Armed Forces remain property of the Russian Armed Forces even after the decommission, until the transfer of the property is completed, for scrapping conservation as monument, demilitarization or to go to other country. My comments about the total exit are refered to this moment when the property is transfered. Until this moment the Russian Armed Forces can do their wishes, decommission, recommission ...

        The presence in Russia of the MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 and MiG-23 technological developments (meaning the presence in Russia of at least one of the variants) is very easy to see in very recent images (2021 ) of the same nature of the used in the article. And in my opinion is positive for Russia.
        1. Bongo
          21 November 2021 13: 29
          0
          Quote: eehnie
          The presence in Russia of technological developments Mig-27, Su-7/17/20/22 and Mig-23 (meaning the presence in Russia of at least one of the options) is very easy to see in very recent images (2021) of the same nature, as used in the article.

          You are mistaken, all the types of aircraft you indicated have long been removed from service, and the MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 and MiG-23 aircraft suitable for conversion into drones are no longer at storage bases. No.
          1. eehnie
            eehnie 21 November 2021 16: 07
            0
            One of the things that I follow more closely is the total number of exits, and what material has been completely removed. Many times weapons that were completely decommissioned were included, as at present, in the Russian Armed Forces to make them look more obsolete, and in other cases, more modern weapons, the full withdrawal of which was not completed, until the transfer of property to others. is considered completely obsolete.

            These are all the technological developments that I brought up in my two comments in this article:


            Yak-38
            Be-6/12
            IL-38
            Tu-95 / 142
            Su-25/28/39
            Ми-8/9/13/14/17/18/19/24/25/35/171/172/177
            Mi-28/40/42
            Ka-50 / 52
            Mig-27
            Su-7/17/20/22
            Mig-23

            I do not think that it is necessary to include images of most of them to confirm his current presence in Russia, given that having one of the options makes the presentation a complete technological development.

            The most difficult case that could be seen would be the Yak-38. Most of the objects remaining in Russia are in fact monuments, the exit from which, most likely, was completed before the transfer of property. But, apparently, in Evpatoria there are still 1 or 2 units of this aircraft, annexed to Russia along with the Crimea.

            https://yandex.com/maps/11463/evpatoria/?l=sat&ll=33.389131%2C45.218276&z=19
            https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2183237,33.3885912,138 м/данные=!3m1!1e3
            https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/49190
            https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/35769

            As mentioned earlier, there is no problem finding the MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 or MiG-23 in this kind of images. But this is perhaps enough for one comment.

            (Automatic translation from English)

            One of the things Im following more closely is the total exits, and which material has been completely retired. Many times armament that has been totally retired is included like present, in the Russian Armed Forces, in order to make them to look more outdated, and other times more modern armement which total exit has not been completed, until the point of property transfer to others, is considered totally out.

            These are all the technological developments I cited in my two comments in this article:

            Yak-38
            Be-6/12
            IL-38
            Tu-95/142
            Su-25/28/39
            Mi-8/9/13/14/17/18/19/24/25/35/171/172/177
            Mi-28/40/42
            Ka-50/52
            MiG 27
            Su-7/17/20/22
            MiG 23

            I do not think it is necessary to include images of most of them to certify its current presence in Russia, taking into account that the presence of one of the variants make present the complete technological development.

            The most difficult case to see would be the Yak-38. Most of the units that remain in Russia are actually monuments which exit very likely has been completed until property transfer. But apparently there are still 1 or 2 units of this aircraft in Evpatoria, incorpored to Russia with Crimea.

            https://yandex.com/maps/11463/evpatoria/?l=sat&ll=33.389131%2C45.218276&z=19
            https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2183237,33.3885912,138m/data=!3m1!1e3
            https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/49190
            https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/35769

            Like said before, there is not problem to find MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 or MiG-23, in images of this nature. But this maybe long enough for a single comment.
            1. Bongo
              22 November 2021 06: 52
              0
              Quote: eehnie
              One of the things that I follow more closely is the total number of exits, and what material has been completely removed. Many times weapons that were completely decommissioned were included, as at present, in the Russian Armed Forces to make them look more obsolete, and in other cases, more modern weapons, the full withdrawal of which was not completed, until the transfer of property to others. is considered completely obsolete.

              These are all the technological developments that I brought up in my two comments in this article:


              Yak-38
              Be-6/12
              IL-38
              Tu-95 / 142
              Su-25/28/39
              Ми-8/9/13/14/17/18/19/24/25/35/171/172/177
              Mi-28/40/42
              Ka-50 / 52
              Mig-27
              Su-7/17/20/22
              Mig-23

              I do not think that it is necessary to include images of most of them to confirm his current presence in Russia, given that having one of the options makes the presentation a complete technological development.

              The most difficult case that could be seen would be the Yak-38. Most of the objects remaining in Russia are in fact monuments, the exit from which, most likely, was completed before the transfer of property. But, apparently, in Evpatoria there are still 1 or 2 units of this aircraft, annexed to Russia along with the Crimea.

              https://yandex.com/maps/11463/evpatoria/?l=sat&ll=33.389131%2C45.218276&z=19
              https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2183237,33.3885912,138 м/данные=!3m1!1e3
              https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/49190
              https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/35769

              As mentioned earlier, there is no problem finding the MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 or MiG-23 in this kind of images. But this is perhaps enough for one comment.

              (Automatic translation from English)

              One of the things Im following more closely is the total exits, and which material has been completely retired. Many times armament that has been totally retired is included like present, in the Russian Armed Forces, in order to make them to look more outdated, and other times more modern armement which total exit has not been completed, until the point of property transfer to others, is considered totally out.

              These are all the technological developments I cited in my two comments in this article:

              Yak-38
              Be-6/12
              IL-38
              Tu-95/142
              Su-25/28/39
              Mi-8/9/13/14/17/18/19/24/25/35/171/172/177
              Mi-28/40/42
              Ka-50/52
              MiG 27
              Su-7/17/20/22
              MiG 23

              I do not think it is necessary to include images of most of them to certify its current presence in Russia, taking into account that the presence of one of the variants make present the complete technological development.

              The most difficult case to see would be the Yak-38. Most of the units that remain in Russia are actually monuments which exit very likely has been completed until property transfer. But apparently there are still 1 or 2 units of this aircraft in Evpatoria, incorpored to Russia with Crimea.

              https://yandex.com/maps/11463/evpatoria/?l=sat&ll=33.389131%2C45.218276&z=19
              https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2183237,33.3885912,138m/data=!3m1!1e3
              https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/49190
              https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/35769

              Like said before, there is not problem to find MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 or MiG-23, in images of this nature. But this maybe long enough for a single comment.


              All Yak-38, Mig-27, Su-7/20/22 and Mig-23 have long been decommissioned, and those that did not become monuments were basically put in for recycling. Until recently, two-seat training Su-17UM3 flew at aircraft factories and in training and test centers. But at present, they no longer rise into the air. I will repeat myself especially for you once again: Yak-38, MiG-23, MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 are no longer in the Russian Air Force. Also, the storage bases do not have aircraft of these types suitable for recovery.
        2. zyablik.olga
          zyablik.olga 21 November 2021 15: 17
          +1
          Quote: eehnie
          I think you need to take into account that the Russian version of my comment is an automatic translation, which may contain some translation errors.

          The translation is quite correct, and the meaning of your comment is clear.
          1. eehnie
            eehnie 21 November 2021 21: 04
            0
            I usually see the Russian version of my comments translated back into English and see some difference. Feedback from people is very important. I want people to understand well what I want to say.

            If you read my previous answer from Bongo, to the author of the article, if I am not mistaken, you will see evidence of the presence of the Yak-38 so far, and it is not difficult to find evidence of the same type about the MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 and Mig -23. These are all models that ceased production after 1985. This means that among them there are units under the age of 36. Not too old yet.

            On the other hand, there are materials that some sources continue to include as available in the Russian Armed Forces, about the current presence of which there is no evidence as recent as about these aircraft. And this is more or less veteran and less modern weapons. For example, I don't think you can actually trust the presence of Strela-1 SA-9, S-60 57 mm, M-160 160 mm, PM-38 120 mm, B-4 (M) 203 mm, ML-20 152 mm, D-1 152 mm, D-20 152 mm, M-46 130 mm, M-30 122 mm, BTR-50 or BTR-60.

            Other cases are more recent, but none are recent evidence of the presence in Russia of a T-64 Tray, an 2mm 14B82 Tray, or a 9mm SPG-73.

            There is also no more compelling evidence of the presence of GT-MU, AT-T, BM-14, ISU-122 122 mm, BM-13 or BTR-152, which the surviving units may actually be under the tutelage of the museum.

            There is also less evidence of the ZU-23 (/ - 2) 23 mm, such an independent weapon (not attached to the hulls of other weapons), than in the case of the aforementioned aircraft.

            One can doubt more about the T-34, Project 641 and Project 106, but the complete release of the last units from them, with the transfer of property for conservation, may be insignificant if this happened not very recently.

            Even if their overall output may also be insignificant, the presence of Project 1134, Project 613, (M) T-12, Be-6/12, D-30, Project 1204 or T-54/55/62 can be more convincingly confirmed. in fact, like the presence of the Yak-38.

            And there are also more cases where the weapon is technologically weaker, the full output of which could be completed before the release of the MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 and MiG-23. Most veteran weapons have their place in museums or on the front lines, but in the case of these 3 planes, I don't see their journey complete.

            (Automatic translation from English)

            I habitually see the Russian version of my comments translated back to English and I see some difference. The feedback from the people is important. I want the people understand well what I want to say.

            If you read my previous answer to Bongo, the author of the article if Im not wrong, you will see evidence of the presence of the Yak-38 still, and it is not difficult to find the same type of evidence about the MiG-27 , the Su-7/17/20/22 and the MiG-23. All are models which production stopped after 1985. It means there are units under 36 years old of all them. Not too old still.

            In the other side, there is material that some sources continue to include as present in the Russian Armed Forces, about which current presence there is not evidence as recent as for these aircrafts. And it is more or much more veteran and less modern armament. As example, I do not think actually is trustable the presence of the Strela-1 SA-9, S-60 57mm, M-160 160mm, PM-38 120mm, B-4 (M) 203mm, ML-20 152mm, D -1 152mm, D-20 152mm, M-46 130mm, M-30 122mm, BTR-50, or the BTR-60.

            Other cases are more modern, but neither we see as recent evidence of the presence in Russia of the Podnos T-64, Podnos 2B14 82mm or the SPG-9 73mm.

            Neither there is stronger evidence about the presence of the GT-MU, AT-T, BM-14, ISU-122 122mm, BM-13 or the BTR-152, which surviving units can be actually under museum care.

            Also there is lower evidence about the presence of the ZU-23 (/ -2) 23mm like independent weapon (not attached to hulls of other armament), than in the case of the cited aircrafts.

            It can be more doubt about the T-34, the Project 641 and the Project 106, but the total exit of the last units of them, with transfer of property for conservation, can be inminent, if happened not very recently.

            Even if their total exit can be also inminent, the presence of the Project 1134, Project 613, (M) T-12, Be-6/12, D-30, Project 1204 or the T-54/55/62, can be confirmed more strongly actually like the presence of the Yak-38.

            And there are also more cases of weapons technologically weaker, which total exit can be completed before the exit of the MiG-27, Su-7/17/20/22 and the MiG-23. The most veteran armament has its place in the museums or in the frontline, but in the case of these 3 aircrafts I do not see their way completed.
  13. storm
    storm 27 November 2021 20: 45
    0
    In Russia, even the latest combat aircraft in service are not provided with hangars.
    What can we say about the allegedly withdrawn MiGs - 23/27/29, they were first "gutted" for non-ferrous metal, dismantled all the electronics, and now useless gliders are being cut.
    If those responsible for the storage of military equipment were periodically personally forced to take to the air on aircraft stored in conservation, then their condition would be close to ideal ...