Su-17 bomber and fighter
Projects and the first copies of experimental jet aircraft with variable wing geometry appeared during the Second World War: in our country, a project of such an aircraft was developed by V.V. Shevchenko, and in Germany, the company "Messerschmitt" even built an experimental aircraft R.1101, which went to the Americans as a trophy. On its basis, Bell created two experimental X-5 aircraft that take into account the requirements of the US Air Force for an attack aircraft. The first X-5 built for the first time took off on July 20, 1951. Two years later, on May 19, 1953, another prototype aircraft with a variable geometry wing, the Jaguar XF10F-1, proposed by Grumman, took off in the United States. American the fleet. The tests confirmed a significant improvement in the flight performance of the aircraft through the use of a variable geo-metric wing, but the final results of the flight tests were negative. And only eleven years later, on December 21, 1964, the XF-111A aircraft with a variable geometry wing, developed by General Dynamics, adopted in 1967 by the US Air Force, made its first flight.
experimental aircraft R.1101
Jaguar XF10F-1
The advantages of the moving wing were not ignored by British aircraft designers: in 1950-1958. The Vickers-Armstrong company was developing a project for the original supersonic Suolou bomber. The results of these works were analyzed by Soviet specialists. In 1961, the chairman of the State Committee for aviation P.V.Dementyev told the deputy chairman of the Council of Ministers D.F. Vickers firms) ...
Su-17
An assessment carried out at TsAGI showed that such an arrangement represents great design difficulties at modern flight speeds ... In addition to the technical difficulties of creating a variable sweep wing, it has several other drawbacks - a significant deterioration in the stability and controllability of the aircraft, which will change not only due to the shift of the average aerodynamic chord of the wing due to its rotation. Calculations carried out at TsAGI showed that this deterioration will be 2 - 3 times as large as on an ordinary plane, which will lead, respectively, to large losses in lift and quality ... "
TsAGI not only analyzed foreign developments, but also conducted a search for the optimal aerodynamic layout of a variable geometry wing, which would minimize its inherent drawbacks.
The scientists of the institute found an effect that allows keeping the position of the wing focus almost unchanged when its sweep changes: it was observed near the wing with a developed influx in the root part and the position of the axis of rotation of the console in a certain place. TsAGI actively promoted the results of its research by aircraft design bureau. The proposal of Professor P.P. Krasilshchikov was supported by P.O. Sukhoi: in May, the 1965 of the OKB together with TsAGI began to develop an experimental C-22I or Su-7IG aircraft (variable geometry). The experimental machine did not turn the entire console, but only its outer part, located behind the main landing gear. This wing layout provided improved take-off and landing characteristics with an increase in aerodynamic quality during subsonic flight modes. The choice of the Su-7B as a prototype for the experimental machine was justified: this is the only serial supersonic front-line fighter with a swept wing produced in large series and, if successful, the car got a second wind: a relatively inexpensive modernization of the wing turned it into a multi-mode aircraft.
The development of the experimental C-22I aircraft was carried out under the direction of the chief designer Nikolai Grigorievich Zyrin. The first studies of the layout of the new machine were performed by the deputy chief of the brigade of general types A.M. Polyakov. After selecting the main parameters of the new wing, the specialists of the wing brigade, V. Krylov, B. Vakhrushev, B. Rabinovich, and R. Yemelin, proceeded to a detailed study of its design.
The modified wing of the wing was structurally divided into two parts: the stationary (NCH) and the movable (PTS) docked to the fuselage. At the same time, both parts had a single aerodynamic profile, which provided a continuous flow around the root part, which favorably influenced the work of the tail. The sweep of the modernized wing with maximum sweep increased by 0,7 m, and the area - by 0,45 м2. In the landing configuration, with a minimum sweep angle, the wing area increased by 4,5 and 2, or by 13,2%, and the relative thickness of the FSS profile increased from 7 to 12%. In combination with three-section slats installed on the PKhK and rotary flaps, as well as sliding flaps on the NCHK, this contributed to a significant improvement in the take-off and landing characteristics. The improvement of the bearing properties of the modernized wing had to be paid by reducing the capacity of the wing fuel tanks caissons on the 440 l, increasing the wing mass by 400 kg due to the rotation mechanism (hinges, hydromechanical drive, synchronizing shaft and hydraulic system elements), complicating the wing design (introducing more advanced mechanization and the location of the power elements on the outer surface of the hollow compartments of the LFC). Such a slight increase in mass of the structure was achieved by combining the functions of the structural elements: the outer end edge of the LFC was edged by a power aerodynamic partition that prevented the flow from flowing along the wing span and worked as a power rib. As a result of the modernization, the mass of the empty experimental machine was 9480 kg.
One of six fighter-bombers Su-7BM Polish Air Force
C-22I was actually assembled from two cars, so the statement that it was finalized from Su-7BM is only partly true. From the Su-7BM for the new car used the nose of the fuselage and the chassis, from the Su-7BL - tail, and the wing was made anew.
Su-7BL
After assembly, the C-22I was transported to the aerodrome at the Flight Research Institute (LII), where they began to prepare it for flight tests. The LII Institute Methodological Council, chaired by the well-known test pilot of the Hero of the Soviet Union, Mikhail L. Gallai, having reviewed the materials presented by the OKB, gave permission for the first flight. 1 August 1966. During high-speed taxiing with the wing set to the minimum sweep angle, the chief-pilot of the design bureau, VS Ilyushin, made the first approach on an experimental aircraft. The next day, the weather did not correspond to the high spirits of Sukhovets gathered at the airfield: low clouds hung over the runway and it was raining. The desire to see C-22I outweighed the weather forecast, and Vladimir Sergeevich performed the first 20-minute flight in a new car. During the successful implementation of the test program at the airfield in Vladimirovka, the “branded” testers E.S. Soloviev, E.K.Kukushev and military pilots from the Air Force Institute S.A. Mikoyan, A.S. Devochkin, E.I. Knyazev, V.G. Ivanov, A.A. Manucharov, N.I. Korovushkin and G.A.Baevsky. The Soviet cosmonaut No. 2, G.S. Titov, performed several flights on a new plane. The Leading Engineer of the Sukhoi Design Bureau for C-22I flight tests (or Su-7BI - they called the experimental aircraft and so) L.M. Moiseychikov worked closely with the head of the test team of the SRI Air Force S. Bytko. The use of the minimum sweep of the wing made it possible to reduce the run-up of the new aircraft as compared with the SU-7BM by half and reduce the landing speed by 100 km / h.
Su-7IK
In the spring of 1967, the plane was returned to LII and began to prepare for an air parade in honor of the 50 anniversary of Soviet power at Domodedovo airport. On the 9 parade of July 1967, the new car was effectively demonstrated in flight by EK Kukushev.
The result of the successful completion of the C-22I test program was the release of 18 in November 1967 by a government decree on the development of the Su-17 fighter-bomber with variable wing geometry and its launch into serial production at the Far Eastern Machine-Building Plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur. After a year and a half, the first prototype of the C-32-1.1 aircraft on July 1969 was rolled out of the gates of its assembly shop. The test pilot of the OKB EK Kukushev first lifted him up from the factory airfield. Until the end of the year, four more C-32s were manufactured at the factory.
The prototype of the aircraft externally differed from the experimental machine: on a fuselage extended on the 0,8 and a fuselage appeared a constant section from the cabin to the keel, the moving part of the lamp was opened by turning relative to the horizontal hinge back up. The aircraft was completed with new systems: navigation, which gave the pilot current information - the azimuth and range to the beacon, and the landing with a zero indicator; both of them could work in conjunction with the automatic control system SAU-22, replacing the autopilot AP-28I-2.
The C-32 cab was equipped with more advanced ejection seat KS-4-С32 with two stabilizing parachutes with an area of 0,1 and 1 м2, placed in the headrest, and a rescue - with an area of 50 м2. The rescue system ensured the safe escape of the aircraft from the takeoff to the landing: from 140 to 1200 km / h and in the entire altitude range.
In connection with the increase in the take-off weight of an empty aircraft to 9800 kg, a larger KT106А wheel was installed on the front landing gear — because of this, a vyshtampovka appeared on the doors of the niche, like in Su-7БКП. The airborne antenna comb SRO-2М (3 range) was moved from the front landing gear niche closer to the air intake. They dismantled the "Sudov" dust-proof jet protection system of the engine air intake that was not justified in operation. In memory of the Su-7BL and Su-7BM, the C-32 has two characteristic long gargrotas on the upper surface of the fuselage for laying communications and a braking parachute container. On the fixed part of the wing they placed two additional armament suspension units, bringing their number to six.
Compared to Su-32BKP, the C-7 wing has become much more complicated not only in design, but also in manufacturing technology. Monolithic spars appeared, a hinge assembly, a support rail with a wing turning mechanism, a hollow compartment of the LCC formed by two three-layer glued dural panels with a honeycomb core. Factory specialists in a short time mastered a new technology for the enterprise.
The production of honeycomb panels and the necessary modern equipment.
For C-32, the OKO Sukhoi Design Bureau developed an original device that allows it to operate the aircraft in the event of the enemy’s disruption of the main runways. The takeoff from the unpaved dirt runway or rolled snow was carried out on the ski landing gear: skis were installed on the main stands instead of wheels. Unlike skiers on the Su-7BLK, who worked together with the main wheels, reducing the ground pressure, the new skis were more complex in design: to reduce the friction resistance when sliding under the replaceable titanium ski sole, liquid lubricant was applied; stability of movement during the run-up run was provided by special keels on the bottom surface; holding the aircraft at the start before take-off, taxiing into the parking lot and emergency braking were carried out using special swiveling brakes of the bucket type with pneumatic actuator. At the same time, the movement from the stationary shelters to the start of the spare runway was carried out in tow by the towing vehicle or on its own engine using quick-detachable taxiing towing carts that were attached to the wing consoles and forks of the ski chassis. The creation of a ski chassis for a supersonic fighter is the result of many years of work carried out at the PO O. Sukhoi design bureau since the end of the fifties. Then the Design Bureau together with the USSR Academy of Sciences on the basis of the IL-28 bomber created a mobile laboratory L-28, which investigated various forms of skis and materials of their soles for wear resistance, determined resistance coefficients for different soils, evaluated the effect of fluid injection into the working area to reduce friction. In 1959, the tests continued on the C-23 - Su-7 fighter with a ski landing gear. After numerous taxiing test pilot VS Ilyushin performed on the C-23 several take-offs and landings on the ski chassis. In the future, the finishing chassis continued on the laboratory C-23. One of the results of this work was the adoption by the X-NUMX of the Su-1965-BKL fighter with the wheel-ski chassis.
By the spring of 1970, the Far Eastern aircraft builders produced an installation batch of 12 machines: the first two, C-32-1 and C-32-2, were transferred to state tests, and the rest were sent to the Center for Combat Training and Retraining of Flight Personnel in Lipetsk to prepare them for work on the topic “Crystal” - a demonstration of a new * aviation equipment to the leaders of the state at the airfield of the Scientific-Research Institute of the Air Force in Akhtubinsk N.K. was appointed the head of the C-32 state testing brigade at the Air Force Scientific Research Institute. Yaroshenko. But the 1970 show scheduled for September, due to the cholera outbreak in the south, was postponed to another time.
A spectacular demonstration of the capabilities of the C-32 to the country's leadership took place only in May of the 1971, and in October of the same year the 523 of the Red Banner iap of the Far Eastern Military District was the first to start the development of the Su-17 - this was the official name assigned to the serial C-32.
By this time, the plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur completely changed the production of Su-7BL to Su-17, producing 95 Su-17, including 30 machines in 1970 and 60 in 1971.
The main task of the fighter-bomber is the operational destruction of visually detectable targets on the battlefield, which requires a good view from the cockpit. In 1971, the Air Force Research Institute conducted tests of the Su-17 with a besprepletnym visor cockpit. Testing pilots A.D. Ivanov and N.I. Mikhailov, who conducted the work, noted in conclusion that visibility did not improve significantly, but when flying at low altitudes there was a feeling of psychological discomfort from the possible consequences of a collision with large birds.
The expansion of the nomenclature of means of warfare on the Su-17 was not only due to the adoption of new types of conventional ammunition. The achievements of the scientific and technological revolution in the middle of 1960 and the changes in the views of military theorists on the role of aviation in support of combat operations of the ground forces contributed to the emergence of fundamentally new types weapons. On the eve of the May Day holidays in 1965, the government issued a resolution on the development of the X-23 guided tactical missile. And four years later, the next resolution of the USSR Council of Ministers planned to equip this rocket along with other aircraft and Su-17. In the spring of 1970, the design bureau of the Kaliningrad Machine-Building Plant (KMZ) presented the X-23 rocket (68 product) for state flight tests. Two years later, Su-17 aircraft took part in these tests. In total, the MiG-23 and Su-17 under the pre-armament program carried out 20 launches, the results of which for missilemen due to revealed defects in the X-23 design were not brilliant. The rocket had a radio command guidance system that required the pilot's constant participation in the process — right up to the rocket meeting with a target.
MiG-23
After elimination of defects in the missile control system, test pilot of the Air Force Scientific Research Institute E.Kolkov completed three more launches of the X-23 with jewelry accuracy, which were remembered by the test participants. In the first approach, the two rockets delivered by a row were moved apart by the explosion of the missile’s warhead, and in the next two, he destroyed them with direct missiles. The X-23 rocket was adopted by the front-line aviation in the autumn of 1974, and the combat pilots began to develop a new type of weapon on the Su-17, and later on the Su-17M and Su-17М2.
In the summer of 1976, aviation exercises were conducted twice the Red Banner Baltic Fleet. To demonstrate the capabilities of guided missile weapons on naval targets, four Su-17 aircraft and eight missiles were identified. The missiles were prepared on the technical position of the Center for Combat Use and Retraining of Naval Aviation in the city of Ostrov of the Pskov Region. In the same place, on the KT-23 complex simulator, sea pilots worked out missile guidance skills. During the exercises, Su-17 was redeployed: the blow was struck from the Chkalovsk airfield in the Kaliningrad region. In two training launches recorded hitting the target. For demonstration to the commander-in-chief of the Navy, S.Gorshkov, three aircraft with missiles were prepared: two main and a third reserve. During a demonstration launch of a lead pilot, a rocket entered the water with an undershoot 30 m and exploded, raising a large water column, while a follower, senior lieutenant Tsymbal, was hit directly.
Sioux 17M
Su-17 improved during mass production. From the end of 1972 until the autumn of 1973, the Su-17 was re-equipped with air-to-air guided P-60 missiles. The aircraft of the first three series had one aerodynamic ridge at the end of the LFC, and one main LDPE boom and an emergency pressure receiver on the right side of the fuselage. Such an arrangement of the rod, as it turned out during the tests, worsened the corkscrew characteristics of the aircraft. In addition, the Su-17 entered into a tailspin without a slight shaking characteristic of the Su-7 as the overload increased to 5 units. Therefore, in the future, two LDPE rods, installed symmetrically relative to the axis of the fuselage, appeared. To improve the longitudinal stability, at large angles of attack, additional aerodynamic ridges were installed on the fixed part of the wing: below — at the trailing edge, and on the upper surface — at the leading edge — opposite each other.
Sioux 17M2
In the first series of Su-17 aircraft for firing of guns and launching NARs at ground and air targets, as well as during dive bombing, a ASP-PF-B-7 sight was used, which worked in conjunction with the SRD-5М radio range mounted under the radio-transparent cone of the air intake and served to automatically determine the distance to the air target, regardless of visibility. Afterwards
ASP-PF-B-7 was replaced with a similar in size, but more perfect aiming ASP-PF-7.
After upgrading the aircraft with the X-23 missiles, the SRD-5М rangefinder, starting with the 23-th aircraft of the 89-series, was dismantled by installing the Delta-N guidance equipment, which was eventually replaced by the upgraded Delta-NM. Two X-23 rockets were suspended on the APU-68U launchers on the outer pylons of the low-frequency gun, the same APU were later used for the C-24 missiles. The X-23 rocket control button - the joystick was placed on the aircraft control stick instead of the autopilot button.
Constant improvements Su-17 led to an increase in mass design of production aircraft from 9950 kg to 10 090 kg, which adversely affected the flight performance of the machine. Therefore, in the 1970, a joint decision was made by the MAP and the Air Force to modify the C-32 (Su-17) aircraft, equipping it with a more powerful modern and economical single-circuit TRD developed in the OKL AM Lyulka for Su-24. In the factory documentation, the upgraded aircraft received the designation C-32M.
Before 1973 in Komsomolsk-on-Amur 225 fired Su-17 aircraft. The last two years it was manufactured in parallel with the Su-17M - this name C-32M received after being put into service.
In 1972, the Arab Republic of Egypt purchased 16 Su-17 airplanes in the USSR, which were used in the Arab-Israeli war in October 1973. Egyptian pilots were retrained by Soviet instructors at the training center at the Belbeys airbase, on which 202 and 204- were based I am a fighter-but-bomber air brigade of the Egyptian Air Force, armed with Su-7BMK and Su-XNUMHUMK fighters.
After the Soviet troops entered Afghanistan, Su-1980 from two squadrons of the 17-th air regiment of fighter-bombers from Kzyl-Arvat landed at 217 air base in Shindand in January. Already in the spring, they took part in the hostilities, during which a number of shortcomings characteristic of the Su-17 appeared: a low thrust-to-weight ratio when taking off in hot weather from a high-altitude airfield, a limited fuel supply and a narrow set of weapons. Therefore, the command of these machines were soon replaced by Su-17MZ, which favorably differed in characteristics, level of equipment and weapons. In addition, the pilots underwent additional training before being sent to Afghanistan, taking into account the specific features of flights in that country. Operation of the Su-17 front-line regiments of the USSR Air Force continued until the middle of the 1980-x.
Information