Rostec handed over to the Russian Aerospace Forces another modernized AWACS aircraft

The Russian Aerospace Forces received another updated A-50U AWACS aircraft. The transfer of the "flying radar" to the troops on the eve was carried out by the concern "Vega" and TANTK them. G.M. Beriev (both enterprises are a structural unit of the state corporation "Rostec").

It should be noted that this is the seventh aircraft received by the Russian Aerospace Forces within the framework of the program for the renewal of the AWACS aircraft fleet. The next A-50U, according to plans, will be ready by 2023.

As for the winged aircraft itself, thanks to the modernization carried out, its functionality has reached a new quality level. Now, according to the developers, the aircraft is capable of effectively detecting fundamentally new types of air objects, as well as tracking a larger number of targets.

In addition, the upgraded "flying locator" received the latest flight and navigation system, and thanks to the A-50U being equipped with modern electronics, including high-resolution LCD monitors, the working conditions of the tactical crew were significantly improved.

Finally, one more important detail. Due to the fact that the modern equipment installed on the aircraft has less weight, the time and range of combat missions have increased.

Recall that the Russian AWACS A-50 aircraft first took to the air in 1978. The Flying Locator was built on the basis of the Il-76 and was mass-produced until 1991.

Comments

[Barberry25]

Small trifle, but nice

[PROXOR]

Nefiga yourself "little"! There, half of the plane was shoveled on a new element base.

[Trapp1st]

Small trifle

For our VKS this is not a trifle at all, there are not as many of these aircraft as we would like.

[Barberry25]

Sarcasm, have you heard of this term?)

[vargo]

We heard that, but you obviously did not succeed in sarcasm.

[Alex777]

It's unpleasant that a trifle, but better than nothing ...

[Flooding]

One per year.
In July 2020. wrote that it was decided to build the second A-100 "Premier" with delivery in 2024.
This means that by the end of 2024 there will be 9-10 A-50U and 2 A-100.
If nothing has changed about the Premiere.

[PROXOR]

100ka requires IL-76-90 for itself. And they have just begun to be built.

[Glagol1]

Well, like 7 pieces. 76-90 are expected for 2022, then 10 per year. Not bad.

[bayard]

Quote: Flood

One per year.

Not ! One at a time in 2 - 2,5 years !!
And there is absolutely no reason to be proud of such a pace!
The modernization program began in 2008, and since then, together with the head, 7 units have been modernized.
And the next one will not be earlier than the end of 2023. So by 2024 there will be no more than 8 pieces. modernized.
But at the beginning of modernization, the Air Force / VKS had about 20 pieces. A-50 and in the intervening time it was possible to completely modernize all these sides, and not really straining. But the MoD decided not to strain at all. And this is not hyperbole. They managed to SO organize financing and the very signing of contracts so that a significant number of such aircraft in no case would be in the troops.
Exactly .
First, they decided to conclude a contract for the modernization of EACH A-50 separately. Moreover, each next contract was concluded only AFTER (!!!) the delivery of the previous one. And since the modernization involves first dismantling the old equipment, then the glider's fault detection, ordering the contractors a set of equipment for the modernization (which will not scratch with production ahead of time and without payment), and only after the contractors deliver the ordered equipment (and it takes at least a year), the plant is starting to install new equipment. Then complex tests, fine-tuning, delivery.
As a result, the period of modernization of each such AWACS aircraft cannot be less than 2 years !!!
It is with such an approximately periodicity that they enter the troops - after 2 - 2,5 years, 1 piece. !!!
And to launch modernization on a stream, so that at least one aircraft a year can be issued ... it is impossible. For there is simply NO contract for the following aircraft. And the plant doesn't know if there will be.
And the contractors will not lift a finger to produce the next set of equipment without a contract and prepayment.
Cunningly thought up?
SLEEP ...
And as a result, today there are ONLY 7 units in service (together with the newly arrived one) of such aircraft.
Is it possible with so many AWACS aircraft to wage a war in the air with at least a more or less powerful enemy?
Which has a modern air force and a sufficient number of such aircraft?
Not !
Only a local conflict in a limited theater of operations.
And who (!!?) Planned this for us?
Who in our country not only deprived the Armed Forces of such a critically important component of combat command and control, but also with an absolutely disorderly policy of orders and financing brought the Taganrog plant into its present ... depressing state?
In a normal Country, this qualifies as a CHANGE OF THE HOMELAND!
But who in our country will give such qualifications to "respected people"?
We don't throw their own under the tanks.
Respected people are not given responsibility.
Therefore, we will, as ordered, rejoice in what we have.

Quote: Flood

2 A-100.

In 2024 there will be only one, and an experienced one. And only Ahura-Mazda knows how much he will succeed in so successfully failing almost all tasks, "Vega".
And we still have to live up to 2024.

[Streamil]

Thank you for the detailed analysis, I agree with your opinion, I will add - you also need to take into account that the "youngest" glider is 30 years old, the oldest is 40. And here several questions arise:
1. What is the remaining resource of those entering the modernization?
2. Does the modernization include work on the airframe and engine that extend the resource thereof?
2.a If yes (although I have not heard), how much?
Hence the final question: with the current rate of modernization (1.5-2 years per board), how many of the existing A-50s will remain to be modernized, which will not, because ... has no sense because of the small residual resource and this very rate of modernization?
My opinion is that they will be limited to no more than 10 pieces.
If so, I would like to hope that such a decision was made initially focusing on the serial production of the A-100 based on the serial production of the new Il-79-60

[Osipov9391]

It is difficult to say what they are doing about the airframe and its resource, because the manufacturer's plant is located in Tashkent and, in fact, has long ceased to exist.
In the KB, of course, there is documentation, recommendations for extending the resource are being developed.
But without factory repairs, it is very difficult to extend the service life of such age-old machines.
Then Taganrog never made these planes, Tashkent made them and now Ulyanovsk makes them.

[bayard]

Quote: FreamiL

1. What is the remaining resource of those entering the modernization?

As for the glider itself, I think there is a residual resource and a decent one, because these planes flew a little in their lives, they stood more. So when carrying out flaw detection and major repairs, with updating the avionics and replacing engines, it will still be able to fly for a long time. After all, these are transport aircraft, basically, they serve for a long time.

Quote: FreamiL

Hence the final question: with the current speed of modernization (1.5-2 years on board)

No, upgrading each side takes 2 to 2,5 years. The fact is that the modernization program began in 2008, when the lead aircraft A-50U was tested and presented. And for 13 - 14 years they were able to modernize only 6 boards.

Quote: FreamiL

how many of the existing A-50s will be upgraded

There are few of these remaining with the A-50 4 or 5 units. , and taking into account that in 2024 they promise to present the first A-100, they will continue not to modernize, but to build new ones.
So one or two A-50s will still have time to modernize.
That is, in total, the A-50U can be in service no more than 8 - 9 pieces.

Quote: FreamiL

IL-79-60

IL-76MD90A.
Guessing about the possibilities and upcoming labor exploits of "Vega" and the Taganrog ASZ is a thankless task - both one and the other have failed tasks more than once.

[Streamil]

Yes, of course, 76-90, a mistake. As for the quantity, I asked: unfortunately, less than we thought .. at the moment there are 7 A-50U, 2 A-50 in service, and one is in the process of modernization

[Osipov9391]

There is a nice little AWACS complex "Oko" that stands on Ka-31 helicopters.
I don’t understand why it is difficult to slightly modify it and install it on the Il-112/114 type aircraft? Or, again, a scourge in the absence of mass production of a platform for such an AWACS?
For me, from the point of view of electronics and energy, there seem to be no problems - although the power of the TV3-117VK engines of the Ka-31 helicopter (read Ka-29) is not enough, there is a small APU that works when the radiation is at maximum power.

There will be no such problems in the Il-112/114 airplanes. Just modify the antenna and so on in little detail.
After all, the helicopter has an insignificant radius and operating time, a small ceiling.
And even a small plane will have enough of such characteristics in abundance.

[bayard]

Quote: Osipov9391

I don’t understand why it is difficult to slightly modify it and install it on the Il-112/114 type aircraft?

The main difficulty is that these planes do not exist in nature. So it's too early to make plans for them as a base.

Quote: Osipov9391

There is a nice little AWACS complex "Oko"

It has already become obsolete and was created for a helicopter and should work in hover mode (mainly. with a "board" on the back.

And if there is a desire to make an AWACS aircraft in similar dimensions, then it makes sense to immediately design a deck boat, a la Yak-44. The technical documentation in the design bureau should be preserved, and we will take / order the engines for them after the liberation of Zaporozhye, such engines were also installed on the An-70. Such engines, according to calculations, could ensure the takeoff of the Yak-44 even without a catapult - on the same engines from the springboard. There was enough power.

[Osipov9391]

It should work not only in hover mode but also in helicopter flight.
Well, let it be outdated. And what, the N001 and N019 on which the Su-30M2 and MiG-29SMT fly are not outdated? Khmelnytsky then production. If it is not advisable there is something else.
Then such machines as the Il-112/114 in speed do not greatly surpass helicopters, and therefore an AWACS complex with similar characteristics would be suitable.

Now (even already 15 years ago) Brazil, Spain, Sweden, Israel and others are making similar light-class AWACS aircraft.
And Russia is not - there is no platform. And for BTA it is also absent in this sense.

[bayard]

Quote: Osipov9391

such machines as Il-112/114 do not greatly surpass helicopters in speed and therefore an AWACS complex with similar characteristics would be suitable.

And at a cruising speed of 450 km / h to drag an antenna uncovered by a fairing? Better "board" on the back - though not all-round visibility, but better than nothing.

[Osipov9391]

A privately developed "trotter" could come up with this very "board" on the back. But the project was abandoned because it is not one of its own, but there it came out with engines.

[bayard]

With engines, we have a total byaka, it's a common thing.
And as a light AWACS aircraft, the IL-114 is better, when the UAV AWACS matures.

[Osipov9391]

Private traders made the platform "Rysachok", they even transferred it to GLITs for testing. But the engines ... They are imported.
There are no Russian (Ukrainian) theaters of this class. They are also absent for the Il-112/114.
There are helicopter conversions.
But fishlessness and cancer ...
If there were domestic gas turbine engines for the Ka-226 helicopter, then they could be adapted to the Rysachok. But they don't exist.
And private traders do not deal with engines - there is no such base. And frames.

[tralflot1832]

The trend is like this today, everything is 50, and when it will be 100. I, in the sense of AWACS, will give 100.

[Barberry25]

taking into account how much fuss there is and in general with the pace of construction ... I would rather raise the question of the supply of AWACS aircraft to the Tu-204 base and AWACS UAVs

[NKT]

Tu-204/214 is even better to use as a PLO aircraft

[Barberry25]

I agree, the point is that we can build a lot of them, but with Ilami everything is sad

[NKT]

Yes, besides, now more than a dozen Tu-204s are in storage. For a long time it was possible to redeem and begin to re-equip.

[Barberry25]

In general, either in the summer, or last year, there was information that on the basis of the carcass, a project of the PLO and AWACS aircraft is being developed

[Glagol1]

10 is not enough, and you can buy everything in 5 yards, or even less

[tranquil]

Quote: Barberry25

I agree, the point is that we can build a lot of them, but with Ilami everything is sad

Why is everything bad with IL?

[Streamil]

Quote: NKT

Tu-204/214 is even better to use as a PLO aircraft

It is, of course, better because AFAR ... but it was mastered only in 2018, and at the moment, it is in small-scale production for many reasons. And in such conditions of a quantitative shortage, first of all, it is logical to put them on dagger carriers - MiG-31K, Su-57 ... well, and Su-35S, as the best fighter in gaining superiority at close and medium distances IMHO, and with AFAR and P- 37M at 200 km, nothing but EPR, which many consider a full-fledged characteristic, considering it as a spherical horse in a vacuum, no worse than the F-22

[Streamil]

(We consider intensive DB on a large-scale theater of operations with a commensurate enemy)
It is more logical that
1. Range of detection of air cells in A-50u from 200 to 600 km depending on altitude / speed / RCS
2. Must be under the cover of air defense / missile defense, because each extra fighter accompanied by is minus a fighter on the front line
3. The loss of 1 AWACS, if we rely on its target designation, this is the loss of targets for 10-12 fighters.
PS: Why am I all about fighters? Because strategists are self-sufficient and their targets are determined by satellites and "maps", and are at ranges greater than the AWACS can afford. Well, bombers (su-34) are the second stage ... The main air superiority.

[Glagol1]

204 stands in naval aviation as a long-range PLO and reconnaissance aircraft. Possible in version 204-300.

[Streamil]

As a PLO, I agree, but for the destruction of naval targets, the existing target designation capabilities with their (ships) number, speed, maneuverability and size, taking into account the speed of Zircon for long-range theaters and the possibility of using SBS, is much greater than for aircraft

[Flooding]

Quote: tralflot1832

The trend is like this today, everything is 50, and when it will be 100. I in the sense of AWACS 100 will be transmitted.

this has its own logic
first increase the capabilities of the existing fleet
oven A-100 like pies still won't work
this is almost a piece work in its complexity

[SovAr238A]

Quote: Flood

Quote: tralflot1832

The trend is like this today, everything is 50, and when it will be 100. I in the sense of AWACS 100 will be transmitted.

this has its own logic
first increase the capabilities of the existing fleet
oven A-100 like pies still won't work
this is almost a piece work in its complexity

Summer 2017 news.
Deputy Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation Yuri Borisov noted that the first deliveries of the A-100 Premier aircraft to the Russian Armed Forces are scheduled for the first quarter of 2019

[Sidor Amenpodestovich]

Quote: tralflot1832

The trend is like this today, everything is 50, and when it will be 100. I, in the sense of AWACS, will give 100.

Already unbearable, and until NG is still two whole days, so no, no. Here are the nerves and play pranks.

[YOUR]

After they learned that the frigate had been under construction for 8 years, it is not surprising to spend a year or even more on modernizing the aircraft.

[Barberry25]

the key problem is the terms of the contract ... they are not designed to intensify modernization

[YOUR]

The key problem is economics. How many seafoods have been in my lifetime, 2 - 3 months and you will receive the product.

[Barberry25]

well, here we are talking about kapitalka, there the plane to the skeleton is disassembled and assembled

[YOUR]

Speak nonsense.
But if so. Does one person work there? If at such a speed they do

[Barberry25]

everything is simple - in order to carry out accelerated repairs, you need to hire / train personnel, and then ensure their work. The problem is that the contract is drawn up on the basis of labor costs + 20% + 1% maximum. Those. intensification is not included in the project ... and even if the plant recruits personnel to make capital faster, the MO will not go to a meeting and conclude a contract for new cars ... the history of the su-34 showed this very well

[YOUR]

A total of 31 aircraft were produced. It took 13 years to release them. Slightly less than 3 aircraft per year. Yes, not modernization but release from scratch.
You write about the contract, that you were present at this, is your signature there?
Can you reveal the truth of what contract was concluded for the construction of a burnt-out corvette if it was built for 8 years. Americans in less time built an aircraft carrier

[Barberry25]

So the Americans invest in the cost much more than ours, and the terms of the contract have long been no secret - they are regulated by supervised acts

[YOUR]

Those. blurted out for the sake of meaningfulness and a catchphrase.
Do you know how much money do not pour into the project if economically, technically there is no way to execute it will not help

[Barberry25]

I have already written more than once, I can repeat - to ensure production, you need personnel, competence and a conveyor principle, personnel need to be trained and offer high salaries, competence requires orders of the same type, conveyor - large orders of the same type for 10-15 years in advance with the possibility of prolongation due to new ones The problem is that the Ministry of Defense refuses to pay for the intensification of production of each board / ship, as well as to order a large batch .. Which ultimately gives such a result that ships / planes are built / repaired for a long time.

[YOUR]

Quote: Barberry25

to ensure production requires personnel, competence and conveyor principle

those. what we don't have

[Barberry25]

Well, for this to be needed finance, the simplest scheme: restructuring debt obligations of enterprises of the military-industrial complex, state. investments in the renovation of enterprises, a separate line for the recruitment and training of personnel to intensify production and a firm contract that ensures work for the next 15 years with the obligations of the Ministry of Defense to buy additional products in case of early delivery. in 8,5 billion rubles, and the net profit was in the region of 60 million rubles. Although according to the same government contracts, the ASZ supposedly should receive 2-3 billion in net profit from each ship, but it’s not even possible

[YOUR]

As one of the respected deputies said, over 20 years, gas and oil have been sold for an amount that allows building 3 Russia in zero.

[Barberry25]

Here the key problem is that the military-industrial complex is the military, and they are used to working according to the principle of giving a command, execute it .. That is why the military very often DOES NOT make smart businessmen or officials

[YOUR]

Well, I have never met such illiteracy. The military-industrial complex is research and production enterprises engaged in the development, production, storage, putting into service of military and special equipment, ammunition, ammunition, etc., mainly for state power structures, as well as for export.

[Barberry25]

and most of whose enterprises are civilians without guarantees of employment and security, which leads to sad situations when enterprises deliver products to the customer for tens of billions of rubles a year, but make ends meet, and they smile sadly when asked whether there will be modernization. .and those enterprises that set up production and fulfill the order ahead of schedule are forced to send employees on unpaid leave or fire .. This is reality, and not a reprint of Wikipedia that you, Vladimir, have now depicted. you ascribe to me.

[Diverter]

you can upgrade and do it in a month. Put a block of ZhPS on the old plane and paint it. So much for the modernized apparatus. They do that in the area of ​​404. Or you can disassemble the plane before riveting and then reassemble. There is a difference?

[YOUR]

Could be so. This will take a day. Well, another day for the paint to dry.

[Flooding]

Quote: YOUR

to spend a year or even more on the modernization of the aircraft is somehow not surprising.

for a deep modernization of the AWACS aircraft with the replacement of target equipment, repair and modernization of all units and on-board systems of the carrier itself, this is not a bad indicator.

[YOUR]

You paint as if a new plane is being built.
In real life, dismantle and take out the old equipment. Put a new one, if any. Check the performance and go.
The aircraft itself, replacement of engines, replacement of instruments is generally done at the base airfield by OBATO forces. Routine work.

[Flooding]

Quote: YOUR

You paint as if a new plane is being built.

you write as if modernizing a 30-year-old AWACS aircraft is a piece of cake.
I think that I will not be very mistaken if I write that this is the most expensive bird in aviation.

[Victor Tsenin]

> working conditions for the tactical crew.

Is this written when the importance of the vehicle and its crew is underestimated?

[Sergey Valov]

"Tactical crew" - a meaningless set of beautiful and incomprehensible words familiar to modern journalists. Alas, amateurism is progressing.

[YOUR]

The author has screwed in a buzzword. A tactical mustache, a tactical beard, a tactical knife, tactical trousers, he'll also write about a combat shirt. So they write when they are swimming in the topic, but they want to seem well-versed.

[rocket757]

Rostec handed over to the Russian Aerospace Forces another modernized AWACS aircraft

And it is necessary to modernize and make new ones !!! After all, this is not just a question of security, it is much more important.

[ODERVIT]

Great news.

[faiver]

This means that by the end of 2024 there will be 9-10 A-50U and 2 A-100.

- and this is the largest country in the world with the longest border ...

[yuriy55]

Recall that the Russian AWACS A-50 aircraft first took to the air in 1978. The Flying Locator was built on the basis of the Il-76 and was mass-produced until 1991.

With minor adjustments, the terms of my service ...
May I ask why such euphoria has arisen?

Quote: Barberry25

Small trifle, but nice

Quote: ODERVIT

Great news.

Compared to this:

Such a message looks like a farce. And, the key word in all this "production" is "modernization" ... It looks especially great in the absence of domestic microelectronics.

... and thanks to the equipment of the A-50U with modern electronics, including high-resolution LCD monitors, significantly improved working conditions for the tactical crew.

That's right, now there is no need to add water to the magnifying lenses of the monitors' ray tubes and wipe the glass from condensation ...
But, with the growth of the Russian economy within 1% per year, is anything else possible? The main task is to make the Kremlin apartments rich in gold and provide all 2 officials with new "Aurus" ...
Success, friends! don't be afraid to fly modernized planes from 30 years ago. It's not scary ... And not for long.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: yuriy55

Success, friends! don't be afraid to fly modernized planes from 30 years ago. It's not scary ... And not for long.

* looks thoughtfully at the E-3 Sentry, the last of which was released 30 years ago, after which they were only modernized.
Oh yes, you don't understand, this is different. ©

[yuriy55]

Quote: Alexey RA

Oh yeah, you don’t understand, this is different. ©

If this is for me, then I have long understood the local public, which argues their answers, confirms the words with facts and brings jokes and humor into them ...
I didn't give a damn about your cons! Truth is dearer!

[standan]

Quote: yuriy55

I didn't give a damn about your cons! Truth is dearer!

Where are the facts? Your thoughts are purple to me too, and you won't get proof

[bk316]

Your thoughts are purple to me too, and you won't get proof

So it’s not his thoughts, it’s SLOGS. Fashionable memes. And why should they need proof? If proofs use manuals of 1000 pages will be

[yuriy55]

Quote: bk316

So it’s not his thoughts, it’s SLOGS. Fashionable memes.

Don't think it out for me, no one pulls you into the topic at all. Are there any specific complaints? To the barrier!

[yuriy55]

Quote: standan

Where are the facts? Your thoughts are purple to me too, and you won't get proof

The facts of what? If you went to such a whip - I ask your questions.

[standan]

Please

It looks especially great in the absence of domestic microelectronics.

Will there be any facts of absence?

[yuriy55]

Quote: standan

Will there be any facts of absence?

For a start:
Russia is trying to revive the microelectronics industry: on the opportunity to take a position in the world market
https://topwar.ru/175722-rossija-pytaetsja-vozrodit-otrasl-mikrojelektroniki-o-vozmozhnosti-zanjat-pozicii-na-mirovom-rynke.html

The volume of the Russian microelectronics market is 0.7% of the world, and most of this volume is provided by the military-industrial complex. The largest manufacturer of microcircuits (Mikron) at the end of 2019 had revenues of about 10 billion rubles (160 million dollars or 0.5% of TSMC) and for the first time in ten years (!) Did not turn out to be unprofitable.

https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/130272/
If the words of ministers, specialists involved in the creation of equipment and electronic devices are not authoritative for you, I don’t know what to say.
In Russia, they are still trying to build two factories for the production of modern electronics somewhere near Moscow and ... But is this microelectronics that is produced by the leading companies in South-East Asia, Europe and the United States?

[standan]

Do you think that we cannot manufacture electronics for the military-industrial complex?
https://habr.com/ru/post/134083/
https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/48549/

[Alexey RA]

Quote: yuriy55

If this is for me, then I have long understood the local public, which argues their answers, confirms the words with facts and brings jokes and humor into them ...
I didn't give a damn about your cons! Truth is dearer!

True? Or the thirst for couch fighting against the regime that replaced it?
What is the difference between the A-30 released 50 years ago and modernized from the E-30 released 3 years ago and modernized? Ours, most likely, even less plaque - because of "15 years without kerosene."

[Liam]

Quote: Alexey RA

What is the difference between the A-30 released 50 years ago and modernized from the E-30 released 3 years ago and modernized?

Do not breed demagoguery)
These ships are also the same age ...

[Center]

And one of them too:

Quote: Alexey RA

15 years without kerosene. "

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Liam

Do not breed demagoguery)
These ships are also the same age ...

I can address you with your own words: "Do not breed demagoguery".
The article dealt with the modernized A-50.
Has Kuznetsov been upgraded? Or at least a major overhaul? Our 11435 must be compared not with the A-50U, but with the original A-50, which, moreover, has flown without repair for the last 20 years.

[Liam]

Quote: Alexey RA

I can address you with your own words: "Do not breed demagoguery."

And what's the problem)
It is demagoguery to assert that once airplanes are 30 years old, they are equivalent. And also to assert that the second is even better because it rusted for 15 years without upgrades and the necessary maintenance, while the second went through all the routine procedures on time. So the examples of Kuznetsov and CVN-74 as it is impossible in the subject.

Quote: Alexey RA

about the modernized A-50.

Devices made initially at different technological levels do not equate any modernization, all the more so specific as the Russian one, an example of which can be seen in the unforgettable video about the opening of the black box of the Su-24 shot down in Syria ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Liam

Demagoguery to assert that once airplanes are 30 years old, they are equivalent.

It was not about the equivalence of avionics. It was about flight safety.

Quote: yuriy55

Success, friends! don't be afraid to fly modernized planes from 30 years ago. It's not scary ... And not for long.

That is, the anti-popular regime forces one to fly on old aircraft, released 30 years ago. By the way, just below the author of the post confirms that he meant exactly the resource of technology.

Quote: yuriy55

I have the impression that some state strategists are unfamiliar with SOMETHING. They believe that the equipment can work forever and start a multi-year (approximately 6 years) repair of the Admiral Kuznetsov TAVKR in order for it to serve for another 20 years !!! It is clear that there are older ships in the USA, but there are 11 of them !!!

Hence the question: how does the A-30 released 50 years ago differ from the E-30 released 3 years ago in terms of resource? Or is the anti-popular American regime also building palaces and yachts with money stolen from flight safety?

[Liam]

Quote: Alexey RA

Hence the question: how does the A-30 released 50 years ago differ from the E-30 released 3 years ago in terms of resource?

Technologies .... the very ones due to which satellites, submarines, NKs, airplanes, aircraft engines, automobiles, electrical appliances, asphalt, etc. and so on, fell into disrepair (aka developed resources) several times faster than their Western counterparts.
Plus the build quality, a terrifying difference in terms of the timeliness and regularity of maintenance, industrial and operational culture, adherence to protocols and instructions, the availability of conditions for storage and maintenance of equipment, from bases, berths to hangars, etc., etc.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Liam

Technologies .... the very ones due to which satellites, submarines, NKs, airplanes, aircraft engines, automobiles, electrical appliances, asphalt, etc. and so on, fell into disrepair (aka developed resources) several times faster than their Western counterparts.

In terms of indestructibility, the Boeing-707 and Il-76, PMSM, are equivalent.
Judging by the register on Russianplanes, the oldest flying Il-76 in Russia is 1979. The WG has 1981 boards. Over the past 10 years, only 2 Russian Il-76s have been lost: one - during a rough landing in Migalovo, the second - crashed into a hill while extinguishing fires.

[Liam]

Quote: Alexey RA

РџРѕ неуР± РёРІР ° емости Р'РѕРёРЅРі-707 Рё Р Р "-76, РџРњРЎРњ, СЂР ° РІРЅРѕР · РЅР ° С ‡ РЅС‹

Р Р · 68 РІС ‹РїСѓС ‰ енны С… СЃ 79 РіРѕРЅР ° Р • -3 РЅР ° С… РѕРґСѓ 64.1 СЂР ° Р · Р ± РёР »СЃСЏ Рё 3 РЅР ° Р ± Р ° Р · Рµ С… СЂР ° нения РІ РїСѓСЃС‚С ‹РЅРµ РІ РЎРЁРђ.ОстР° Р» СЊРЅС ‹Рµ Р» етР° СЋС ‚РїРѕ сей день.
Р Р · 31 РІС ‹РїСѓС ‰ енного Рђ-50 РЅР ° 2020 РіРѕРґ РЅР ° С… РѕРґС РІ Р Р¤-9 С € С‚СРє Рё 3 РІ РЅРґРёРё.
The proportions of "indestructibility" are eloquent, I think.

[yuriy55]

Quote: Alexey RA

True? Or the thirst for couch fighting against the regime that replaced it?

Why should I fight the regime and what - a crutch? The only thing that is possible for me is to express my opinion on the actions of this or that "benefit" of the Russian authorities.

Quote: Alexey RA

What is the difference between the A-30 released 50 years ago and modernized from the E-30 released 3 years ago and modernized?

I don't even know how to put it mildly for you ... Yes, in the same way as the T-72BM3 from the T-14 ... In the same way that the Su-24 differs from the Su-57 ... The same as the AK-47 differs from AK-12 ... How does the S-125 differ from the S-400 or S-550 ...
I have the impression that some state strategists are unfamiliar with SOMETHING. They believe that the equipment can work forever and start a multi-year (approximately 6 years) repair of the Admiral Kuznetsov TAVKR in order for it to serve for another 20 years !!! It is clear that there are older ships in the USA, but there are 11 of them !!!
And this is all against the backdrop of cost savings, when only more gold has been sold (exchanged for paper) over the past two years than mined.
This is the truth of the situation ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: yuriy55

I don't even know how to put it mildly for you ... Yes, in the same way as the T-72BM3 from the T-14 ... In the same way that the Su-24 differs from the Su-57 ... The same as the AK-47 differs from AK-12 ... How does the S-125 differ from the S-400 or S-550 ...
I have the impression that some state strategists are unfamiliar with SOMETHING. They believe that the equipment can work forever and start a multi-year (approximately 6 years) repair of the Admiral Kuznetsov TAVKR in order for it to serve for another 20 years !!! It is clear that there are older ships in the USA, but there are 11 of them !!!

Do not spread your thoughts along the tree. A simple question was asked: why is it considered absolutely normal and permissible by safety standards abroad to operate and modernize Sentry-type AWACS aircraft, the last of which was produced in 1992, and for us, the operation of modernized aircraft of the same years of production suddenly becomes unsafe in terms of resource?
Moreover, their "Sentry" all this time did not stand in hangars, but were actively exploited, including going through the wars in Yugoslavia and Iraq. And the "Sentry" are not some isolated relics of the past, living out their term waiting for replacement, but the main AWACS aircraft of the USA and NATO.

[HefeDMB69]

Why are there no AFARs on Sushki? Why is there no Armat? Why is there no AWACS A-100? Why is there no Su-57, MS-21? You can get an element base for prototypes over the hill, but alas, for a series ..

[bk316]

element base

Is it true that you change the training manual or write about gold chtoli toilets.
No need to write about what you don't understand.
I certainly understand that the "element base" is already a meme. But at least the meaning of this meme should be known

[standan]

Quote: HefeДМБ69

You can get an element base for prototypes over the hill, but alas, for a series.

Facts to the studio!

[YOUR]

Quote: HefeДМБ69

Why are there no AFARs on Sushki? Why is there no Armat? Why is there no AWACS A-100? Why is there no Su-57, MS-21?

Here are the facts.

[standan]

Quote: YOUR

Quote: HefeДМБ69
Why are there no AFARs on Sushki? Why is there no Armat? Why is there no AWACS A-100? Why is there no Su-57, MS-21?

Here are the facts.

More specifically, can you?

[YOUR]

But what could be more specific

[standan]

Quote: YOUR

standan (Stanislav) 4 Today, 15:05 New
-1

Quote: HefeДМБ69
You can get an element base for prototypes over the hill, but alas, for a series.

Facts to the studio!

You answered my comment

YOUR (Vladimir) Today, 15:18 New
0

Quote: HefeДМБ69
Why are there no AFARs on Sushki? Why is there no Armat? Why is there no AWACS A-100? Why is there no Su-57, MS-21?

Here are the facts.

So what's next? Where is the evidence of the use of a foreign kit in our military service? Or just what to write? Chukchi is not a reader, is a Chukchi writer?

[YOUR]

Where are the new samples that I have written about? For what reason are they not released? Remind you how many of our ships with Chinese engines go, maybe Agile because of this they have been building for 8 years.

[standan]

You tell me about Thomas, I tell you about Eremu, once again, where is the evidence of the use of a foreign kit in our military service?

[Pan_hrabio]

Please, using the example of a UAV.
https://topwar.ru/190182-neprostoe-buduschee-rossijskih-udarnyh-bpla-o-prichinah-stagnacii-otrasli-zavisimosti-ot-importnyh-komplektujuschih-i-konceptualnom-tupike-nashih-dronov.html

[standan]

For some reason, I thought that apart from this nonsense, it is unlikely that there will be anything. You read the comments to the article, there are adequate ones.

[standan]

Please refer to the specific use of foreign electronic components in military equipment, and not to a garbage article.

[Pan_hrabio]

Oh, already an article of the wrong system. Please, presentation of the manufacturer and developer Orlan:
https://con-fig.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/mihalin.pdf
I bow to this sim.

[standan]

Application
UAV family "ORLAN"
for aerial photography

And where is the use of foreign electronics, cameras?

[Pan_hrabio]

At least Javad TREG3T receiver or G5Ant-42AT antenna. Even if only cameras are the answer to your question. Foreign cameras in a Russian UAV - get it, sign it.
And the "garbage" article above refers to a very specific report:
https://www.conflictarm.com/reports/weapons-of-the-war-in-ukraine/
The ball is on your side, so take me out of my delusion, show specific facts showing that the same Orlan is made only and exclusively from Russian components. For at the moment I see facts proving only the opposite.

[standan]

The data you provided correspond to Orlan-E, the export version. More details here https://army-today.ru/tehnika/bpla-orion

[SovAr238A]

Quote: standan

Please refer to the specific use of foreign electronic components in military equipment, and not to a garbage article.

Those. 100% dependence on foreign element base of our GLONASS system, don't you know?

[standan]

Quote: SovAr238A

Those. 100% dependence on foreign element base of our GLONASS system, don't you know?

https://www.irz.ru/products/12/index.htm
Now you know too

[SovAr238A]

Quote: standan

Quote: SovAr238A

Those. 100% dependence on foreign element base of our GLONASS system, don't you know?

https://www.irz.ru/products/12/index.htm
Now you know too

What are you telling me about the receivers then?
Look for information about why we have not produced GLONASS satellites for many years?
40% of the components were imported. And the production has stopped since 2018

[Romeo]

Due to the ongoing state tests. How many times can you say something

[standan]

It is clear, instead of facts - minus, because there is nothing to answer

[HefeDMB69]

Shpak (Ministry of Industry and Trade) noted that about 60% of Russian electronics are used in Russian weapons and military equipment. It is in serial production !!

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

Why are there no AFARs on Sushki? Why is there no Armat? Why is there no AWACS A-100? Why is there no Su-57, MS-21? You can get an element base for prototypes over the hill, but alas, for a series ..

Maybe just by the fact that in the process of testing deficiencies were identified and they are eliminated ?!

AFAR is put on the new MiG-35 and on the Su-57, if there was a strong need for it, it would be installed on the Su-35.

There is no A-100, probably due to the fact that it is cheaper and faster to modernize the A-50 and get the same aircraft according to its capabilities or very close to it, especially since the Il-76 now arrives in the transport version with a delay, and it will still be the AWACS option will require additional time and resources.

MS-21 flies with a wing made of Russian composites and with a Russian engine, but we do it for a long time, because they constantly interfere.

Russia is not the richest country and we do not have so many resources, and given the sanctions and pressure from the West, we should be glad that we are doing at least something and supplying the troops.

[standan]

Quote: yuriy55

It looks especially great in the absence of domestic microelectronics.

Will there be proof? Or just to write something. Change the training manual already.

[Rusfaner]

"With the success of you, friends! Do not be afraid to fly on modernized aircraft, released 30 years ago. It's not scary ... And not for long."
You write nonsense and don't flinch!
I fly an airplane, 1974 and what should I rewrite my will every day?
All forms are performed, the SLG is extended - the resource is based on the state.
Before lashing out at the fan, look at the age of the mattress strategists. They fly, after all.

[Denis812]

The AWACS aircraft is a unique thing and the update of 1 piece per year is not encouraging, of course, but in principle it is understandable due to the colossal amount of work. Although, of course, in parallel with them, and to build new ones somehow.

[YOUR]

In the USSR, well, where except for galoshes nothing could be done A-50 was produced for 13 years. In total, at least 31 aircraft were produced.
Those. almost 3 aircraft a year from scratch. Currently, more than a year will be required only for modernization.

[ugol2]

We have a dozen of them for all the Air Force.
And how many of them do you need? How many? 20 ... 100 ... 200, with the current military doctrine?

[YOUR]

Taking into account that the coast of the Arctic Ocean was disarmed, almost all the radars were removed, now they are gradually and slowly building up the grouping, the same one air defense system, one surveillance radar a year, Crimea is a point that is smoking, the border with Ukraine is already on an ongoing basis American intelligence planes fly please and hundreds will be few.

[Diverter]

Much more of these aircraft are needed for the RF Aerospace Forces. This is clear.
Considering how slowly the Il 76 is being produced, it is also clear that it will be difficult to wait for the new A 50U.
So the question arose.
There are a lot of Tu 204/214, which the civilians abandoned because of uneconomics.
But for the Aerospace Forces, this is a great plane. The engines are the same as on the 76th, the equipment is domestic.
Maybe it's worth making AWACS out of them?
Enemies have such mini AWACS.

[yuriy55]

Quote: Saboteur

There are a lot of Tu 204/214, which the civilians abandoned because of uneconomics.

For an AWACS aircraft, you need a reliable aircraft capable of long-term operation in the air and having the most modern electronic filling, and not just LCD monitors.
In the light of today's requirements, you can also take care of the survivability of the board (the ability to repel attacks from surface-to-air missiles) ...
And the best option is a drone.

[Diverter]

from your post it follows that the Tu 204/214 is not a reliable aircraft. You are still talking nonsense. Not a single jet plane has ever landed with its engines extinguished. And the Tu 204 sat down and sat down perfectly.

[yuriy55]

Quote: Saboteur

from your post it follows that the Tu 204/214 is not a reliable aircraft.

You yourself wrote:

Quote: Saboteur

There are a lot of Tu 204/214, which the civilians abandoned because of uneconomics.

I cannot say that high fuel consumption is a virtue. Decide for specialists.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: Saboteur

from your post it follows that the Tu 204/214 is not a reliable aircraft. You are still talking nonsense. Not a single jet plane has ever landed with its engines extinguished. And the Tu 204 sat down and sat down perfectly.

Can you read the history of aviation?
There, in Canada, a plane with extinct engines planned for almost 400 km ...
Don't know this fact?
Maybe because he is ignorant?

After the start of takeoff, another plane with dead engines was able to turn around in New York and gently, ideally, be brought to the Hudson ...
What was generally considered impossible ..
Did not read?
So what do you read then if you write about airplanes?
Manuals?

[Liam]

Add Air Transat 236 over the Atlantic to your list

[grindz]

Give each fighter an AWACS aircraft!

[Constanty]

Two years ago, here, in VO, they wrote about an order for such an aircraft from the Ministry of Defense.
https://topwar.ru/157635-v-vks-pojavitsja-novyj-samolet-drlo-na-baze-tu-214.html

[yuriy55]

A new DRLO aircraft based on the Tu-214 will appear in the VCS

We read ... So then there was still no pandemic and not all were imposed sanctions. Today:

[Diverter]

So I was not the only one with such a question?)
I wonder ..... what if it works out?)

[Diverter]

do you have a result?)

[SSA]

I read that the military is not at all happy with the Tu 214. Not economical, too high speed when loitering. They even sued the manufacturer. They took only 2 previously ordered RTR Tu-214 aircraft and are not going to take any more, they say that for the purposes of RTR, AWACS, PLO, the slow but economical and reliable Il-22 Il-38 is a more profitable option.

By the way, I never understood this, well, well, An is Ukrainian, you can't do anything, but Il is Russian. Well, okay there, the Il-112 does not work, a new machine, but there is a proven Il-20, is it really impossible to resume production for the needs of PLO and reconnaissance?

[Constanty]

not happy with the Tu 214. Not economical, too high speed when loitering

It's a bit strange.
Both Tu-214 and Il-76 have the same engines. -Aircraft engine PS-90. Loitering speed - IL-76 - 750-780 km / h, Tu-214 - 810- 850 km / h Small difference

[SSA]

Why strange? I'm talking about the jet Tu 214, which is less suited to the needs of anti-submarine aviation, radio and photo reconnaissance than the slow and economical Il-20 turboprop.

As for the Il-76 A-50 / 50U / 100, it's all about the carrying capacity. The weight and size parameters of the AWACS equipment of the Soviet period did not allow it to be placed on any aircraft other than the Il-76 without a significant decrease in efficiency. However, the E-3 "Centri" did not come very far in this regard.

But the army needs both the A-50U A-100 and the massive and more economical Il-20/22/38 type, and we have no analogues of the Gulf Stream-type aircraft at all.

[Constanty]

My mistake. I did not think that we were talking about evaluating the Tu-214 as an PLO aircraft.

As for the Il-76 A-50 / 50U / 100, it's all about the carrying capacity. The weight and size parameters of the AWACS equipment of the Soviet period did not allow it to be placed on any aircraft other than the Il-76 without a significant decrease in efficiency

And the Il-96?

[Sergey Valov]

"Is it really impossible to resume production?" It is not reasonable to master the production of a machine created 60 years ago, it is necessary to create a new aircraft. Another question is that his concept may be similar to the old one.

[SSA]

Today they are creating two-engine transport Il-112, they are already going to produce two-engine passenger Il-114. It means that there is some production capacity. But the military range is 1900 km. (IL-114) is not enough, the military needs a four-engine IL-18/20/22/38 in modern reincarnation, for the needs of PLO / RTR / AWACS, so why not launch an old but modernized aircraft into series? Thanks to the use of a new, more compact element base, avionics, it is possible to increase the flight range, work efficiency, etc.
Taking into account the fact that all modern aircraft, carriers of RTR / PLO / AWACS, as early as the 70s, are rapidly becoming obsolete, I think an order of several dozen such machines should be provided. And this means the economic feasibility of organizing a serial assembly, and not like that ... one or two cars a year.

[Aviator_]

Today they are creating two-engine transport Il-112, they are already going to produce two-engine passenger Il-114.

After the crash of the Il-112, everything is still hanging, because the 114 machine is also equipped with the same engines. It's about "going".

[SSA]

Yes, I read. But one way or another, the engines will be, they have nowhere to go. Already turboprop engines will overpower, I think, the USSR could 50 years ago, now, even more so, they should be able to. Maybe in 2 years or 5 years. They won't be able to do it themselves, so foreign ones will copy it.

[Aviator_]

Of course they will. Only in the USSR there were no managers. If the managers were now sent to cut the forest, then in general everything would be restored instantly. The engine is hi-tech, here you have to work and work, especially on the basis of modern technologies. So far, something else is working out.

[Diverter]

probably not quite able to resume. Because they don't do that anymore. But to rework this design in a modern way. I think they could. Moreover, we got some experience. And so yes Il 18 has unique characteristics.

[Kaw]

Quote: Saboteur

Much more of these aircraft are needed for the RF Aerospace Forces.

What for? As I understand it, this is the command post of fighter aircraft. But in the first place, we have quite a few fighter aircraft, and secondly, it technically lags behind our potential opponents. And if Western AWACS aircraft have the function of illuminating targets for ground air defense, then ours (as far as I understand) have no such function in principle. IMHO

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

An AWACS aircraft is, first of all, reconnaissance of air, ground and surface space, and only then a decision on the use of fighters, ships, air defense systems or tactical missiles.

Well, I think that our AWACS planes also have interaction with air defense systems with ground-based air defense systems and fighters. Otherwise, what's the point in such airplanes ?!

[noname1117]

This is all good, of course, but where are the promised 4 Su-57s?

[Escobar]

And according to the plans, how much should have been? What to compare with?

[Jacket in stock]

TANTK them. G.M. Berieva makes only one board for a whole year. Well this is what overhead costs !?

Interestingly, and "Vega" besides this A50U still produces something, or the maintenance of this plant also hangs on the price of just one aircraft?

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

It should be noted that this is the seventh aircraft received by the Russian Aerospace Forces within the framework of the program for the renewal of the AWACS aircraft fleet.

It's not all bad.

But in my opinion, we could use a smaller AWACS aircraft, something like the prototype of the Yak-44. Small economical and can take off from a small airfield or even an asphalt road.

It could also be used on land from promising aircraft carriers.

[Aviator_]

Was it not his equipment that was stolen from him at the Taganrog airfield in the summer?

[Constanty]

I understand this is ironic?

An Il-80 plane was robbed, if I know correctly.

[Aviator_]

Yes, of course Il-80, I was wrong

[Sergey3]

They found someone to give such work to do - Beriev, they torture each plane for more than 3 years.

[Sergey3]

And something about the A-100 is not heard at all, when it is tortured?

[Vladimir1155]

great news

[Bad_gr]

Recall that the Russian A-50 AWACS aircraft first took to the air in 1978 ...

The first flight of the Soviet AWACS Tu-126 dates from 1961 Mr.

First American AWACS Boeing E-3 Sentry made its maiden flight on October 31 1975 year

[storm]

In total, the seventh A-50U aircraft was updated, and the next one only in 23g.
Even two AWACS planes per military district will not work ...
If it is necessary to provide constant (round-the-clock) radar control of a certain territory, for example, if the situation in the DPR / LPR aggravates for several weeks or months using existing means, the task will not be completed ...
All hope is for heavy-class UAVs, which also exist in single copies and are still undergoing a set of tests and improvements.
Why is everything so slow ...?
To ensure round-the-clock observation / control of a grouping of forces, each military unit must have at least four units. A-50U, i.e. 20 units. on the scale of the Russian Federation without taking into account possible combat losses and technical malfunctions of the sides.
That is, the total number of AWACS aircraft should be in the range of 25-30 units. plus at least the same number of heavy reconnaissance UAVs.

[storm]

The idea of ​​an unmanned aircraft for early warning radar "Helios" looks more interesting and promising. The drone weighing 4-5 tons with the necessary set of radar equipment will be able to completely replace the colossus weighing under 200 tons A-50U or A-100 "Premier" in local conflicts.
At the same time, he will be able to spend several times more time in the air than the A-50U.
It will be significantly cheaper both at the production stage and at the operational stage.
It is clear that a new drone will not be able to replace the A-100 complex by 100%, because it is also an air control center capable of coordinating the actions of fighter aircraft and ground air defense systems on a huge, several hundred kilometers, front. But this may not be necessary without starting a major war.