Military Review

"I sit high, I look away." When there are no planes ...

23
The helicopter as a carrier of the radar is noticeably inferior to the aircraft: it has less loading capacity, internal volumes, flight duration, and speed. But he does not need an airfield!


"I sit high, I look away." When there are no planes ...


The first AWACS helicopter was made, of course, by the Americans, and the helicopter was, of course, Sikorsky. In 1957, the AN / APS-20 radar was installed on the largest in the then America Sikorsky HR2S helicopter. Even for two helicopters, which became HR2S-1W and decorated with nose cones. However, the vibration so worsened the work of the radar that the idea was not developed, and it was decided to transfer the long-range radar coverage for marine corps naval deck aviation.



The British, who had eliminated their carrier fleet by the end of 1970, had no one to pass on these tasks, and the Falkland War showed that the AEWS at sea (and not only) was important and necessary. In emergency mode, two Westland Sea King HAS.2 anti-submarine helicopters were refined by installing a searchwater radome on the starboard side. This radar was not too superior to the AN / APS-20 by combat characteristics, but it was much lighter and more compact and somehow managed to cope with the detection of air targets (although, based on its name, it was “sharpened” to search for surface targets , and could not follow the high-speed aircraft). Ersatz was named Sea King HAS.2 (AEW) and was hastily transferred aboard the aircraft carrier to Falkland - but he did not have time to go to war. In 1985, Invincible-class cruisers, in addition to the Sea Harrier vertical take-off and landing fighters, launched Sea King AEW.2 AFLO helicopters, also converted from HAS.2, later several Sea King HAS.5 underwent a similar modification of AEW.5 steel.

A normal DRLO helicopter capable of actually detecting attack aircraft and enemy cruise missiles was only received by the British in 2002, as a result of the Cerberus project, during which the previously built “Sea Kinga” DRLOs were upgraded by installing the Searchwater 2000EW radar in the AEW.7 modification (they are also ASaC .7). It is expected that by the 2016, they will be replaced by an AWRL helicopter based on AW101, and the radar and electronics on it will be the same.

In the USSR, interest in early warning airborne aviation systems also arose after the Falkland War, and the design of the corresponding aircraft (which ended in nothing) and helicopters began. And here, on the whole, they went along the British route - they supplied the Ka-801 transport helicopter, which in turn was based on the anti-submarine Ka-29, with a powerful E-27 “Eye” radar with a phased array. The result was called the Ka-31, the antenna in the parking lot is in the folded state under the belly of the helicopter, its combat panel rotates to provide a circular view (while the chassis does not interfere, is tightened).



In the combat position of the radar, the helicopter should either be hovering or move at low speed (it was possible to stabilize the helicopter in motion at speeds up to 100 km / h with such a “suspension” with great difficulty): the antenna has no fairing. Yes, it is meaningless with such dimensions, and the dimensions of the antenna largely provide good radar performance: detection of sea targets at distances up to 250 km, air fighter class - about 150. Plus an automatic data transmission line to the ship and the possibility of using a helicopter for over-the-horizon target designation of cruise missiles. Of course, this cannot be compared with the capabilities of Hokaya, but thanks to the combination of a fairly powerful radar and a perfect carrier, the Ka-31 is by far the best DRLO helicopter. Despite this, there are no such vehicles in service with the Russian fleet (although the experienced ones flew from Admiral Kuznetsov at one time), since there is no money to purchase them.
But India and China, who actively buy such helicopters, have the money; other foreign customers are also asking for it. However, after concluding a contract on the Mistrals, the domestic military decided to purchase several Ka-31 for them, but in a slightly modernized form.

The French AEW helicopter made its way for a long time. Back in 1986, the Orchidée radar was installed behind the ramp of the Aérospatiale SA 330 Puma helicopter. The system was intended, however, for ground use in the interests of ground troops and the Orchid was sharpened to work on ground targets (and low-flying air, for example, helicopters).



In flight, the rotating antenna was extended below the helicopter's body, and with the issued antenna (much lower than that of the Ka-31), the flight speed could reach 180 km / h. The helicopter transmitted data to the mobile command and control station.



The program was closed in 1990 (partly due to the inability to achieve the desired results in range), but the experimental complex was sent to the “Desert Storm”, where its capabilities turned out to be very much in demand by the troops. As a result, the program was resumed, and the French army received four DRLO helicopters - but this time the base for them was AS.532UL Cougar, equipped with an advanced radar program Horison. The full deployment of a complex of four helicopters and two ground command posts was carried out in 2002, but already in 2008, the Horison system was decommissioned to reduce costs.

The technology probably came to China (or the Chinese decided to try to copy it themselves). In 2009, photos of the Z-8 helicopter (Chinese version of the French Aerospatiale Super Frelon) appeared, behind the ramp of which there was a certain rectangular container, which resembled a Horizon antenna. The purpose of this helicopter is not reported, but it may be a "ground" system for ground forces, like the French, and "sea" to equip aircraft carriers. However, the decision to acquire the Ka-31 indirectly can serve as proof that so far the progress in developing its own Chinese AEW helicopter is rather modest.



The Chinese are also interested in the deck aircraft of such a destination, in particular, the data on the Yak-44, on one of the Chinese bases something very reminiscent of the American “Hokai” (probably a full-size model) was noticed, but to create something similar to them in the near future is hardly whether succeed. After all, according to Chinese tradition, to begin with, the DRLO deck aircraft (or at least, the deck aircraft of appropriate size) must be bought somewhere, and the United States, the only country producing such, is somehow not going to sell it ...
But many who make ground-based DRLO aviation complexes, about them - next time.
Originator:
http://aviaglobus.ru/2013/07/03/6621/
23 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 14 September 2013 08: 54
    +1
    But it’s interesting, but if you try to install such an antenna on an airship, wouldn’t it be better?
    1. Su-9
      Su-9 14 September 2013 09: 11
      +1
      Hardly. Can you imagine what an airship is based on a warship? And from the point of view of combat stability, the airship is worthless. Rather, a perspective UAV can be based on UAVs.
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 14 September 2013 10: 16
        0
        Quote: Su-9
        Hardly. Can you imagine what an airship is based on a warship? And from the point of view of combat stability, the airship is worthless.

        Raise 30 km and equip KAZ.
      2. svp67
        svp67 14 September 2013 11: 04
        +2
        Quote: Su-9
        Unlikely. Can you imagine what an airship is based on a warship?
        And what other places of basing for them will not be found? The coast, for example ... But the length of stay in the air, cheaper manufacturing and operation, and there will be more places ...
      3. alex86
        alex86 14 September 2013 20: 23
        0
        In terms of combat stability, you are not quite right: for a helicopter and an aircraft, a projectile hit of 30 mm is almost fatal, in any case it will not be detected, for an airship this is some kind of gas leak, which can be compensated with ballast for some time. The speed of 180 km / h as in the French is quite achievable. The duration of the flight is significantly longer.
    2. yanus
      yanus 14 September 2013 14: 56
      0
      Quote: svp67
      But it’s interesting, but if you try to install such an antenna on an airship, wouldn’t it be better?

      Such a system for detecting cruise missiles is being developed in the United States. It should cover the US coast, but the system is now in an uncertain status, although there have already been tests.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Starover_Z
      Starover_Z 15 September 2013 16: 48
      0
      I just thought about this option without reading the comments. But better a balloon, on a leash. That would be an option - no vibration to you and a view of almost 360 degrees "squared".
      It’s strange why they haven’t applied so far ... We are not the most intelligent here.
    5. Nayhas
      Nayhas 15 September 2013 17: 24
      0
      Quote: svp67
      But it’s interesting, but if you try to install such an antenna on an airship, wouldn’t it be better?

      There is an American JLENS system, but there the tethered airships are likely to be the subject of a new article.
  2. zyablik.olga
    zyablik.olga 14 September 2013 12: 31
    +7
    And how much is interesting in the composition of our carrier-based Ka-31 aircraft?
    1. alone
      alone 14 September 2013 13: 17
      +5
      Well, if you believe in the Internet only 2 belay
  3. Oleg123
    Oleg123 14 September 2013 14: 52
    +2
    We do have 2 Ka-31s, but they are not assigned to the 279th regiment located in the village of Severomorsk-3 in the Murmansk region / and it is there that the SU-33 of the Northern Fleet's carrier-based aircraft are based /, but in the city of Yeisk. Accordingly, they do not fly with the Kuznetsov TAVKR!
  4. Svetlana
    Svetlana 14 September 2013 14: 57
    0
    Quote: APASUS
    And from the point of view of combat stability, the airship is worthless

    It depends on what airship. If it is unmanned, equipped with a power plant based on a reactor or microwave, has its own weapons and cover fighters, then it is impossible to approach enemy fighters and missiles to such an airship at a distance of the airship’s defeat - they will be detected in advance by the airborne headlight of the airship and destroyed on the approach to the airship outside the zone shock wave action.
    1. APASUS
      APASUS 15 September 2013 09: 53
      0
      Quote: Svetlana
      Quote: APASUS Yes, and in terms of combat stability, the airship is worthless

      Svetlana copy the quotes correctly, this statement is Su-9  Yesterday, 09:11 ↑
  5. Oleg123
    Oleg123 14 September 2013 15: 03
    +2
    Sorry ..... What reactor?
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 14 September 2013 17: 47
      0
      Quote: Oleg123
      Sorry ..... What reactor?

      You do not know? Naqwadh reactor.
    2. Svetlana
      Svetlana 14 September 2013 19: 49
      0
      imho is best to use a reactor with a liquid metal lead-bismuth or lead-lithium coolant, but options with a helium coolant or a fly-salt liquid coolant may also be considered.
      1. alex86
        alex86 14 September 2013 20: 31
        0
        Quote: Svetlana
        use reactor

        Excuse me, but to have above you (and most of the time on board the carrier) some variant of a "dirty bomb", which will be "detonated" by any projectile above 20 mm or just an unsuccessful take-off and landing is not entirely successful. And turning the airship into a carrier for an armored reactor means returning to the Hindenburg, only in such an option that no country wants to have even close to its territory - in general, the international community will be very unhappy ...
  6. Akuzenka
    Akuzenka 14 September 2013 20: 23
    0
    Fusion, well, from these, like them, fantastic books ... Oh! I don’t know others for airships.
  7. Zomanus
    Zomanus 15 September 2013 07: 35
    0
    Pancake. Yes, a normal fleet of DRLOU aircraft is needed. And all these perverts with helicopters are purely in case of emergency. I won’t be surprised if the amers soon Hokai at the base of Osprey will marry. That topic will be ...
  8. Svetlana
    Svetlana 15 September 2013 11: 30
    -1
    Quote: alex86
    a variant of a "dirty bomb" that any projectile above 20 mm will "detonate"

    "Nimitz" can also be detonated with a tungsten blank with a diameter of more than 20 mm on hypersound, but the international community is silent and does not express dissatisfaction with its existence. Germany and Japan also closed their nuclear power plants at first, but now they are sober. Well, if the Fukushima syndrome is still worried, then what about the microwave energy of the onboard power plant of the airship with a microwave beam from the destroyer? After all, then most of the time the airship will spend not on board the carrier (there are no carriers of suitable size), but in the air.
    By the way, the USA is slowly riveting and riveting airships-cm.
    http://compulenta.computerra.ru/tehnika/transport/10008905/
  9. Svetlana
    Svetlana 15 September 2013 11: 47
    0
    Quote: alex86
    a variant of a "dirty bomb" that any projectile above 20 mm will "detonate"

    "Nimitz" can also be detonated with a tungsten blank with a diameter of more than 20 mm on hypersound, but the international community is silent and does not express dissatisfaction with its existence. Unlike a hulking aircraft carrier, the airship is faster and more maneuverable, it is easier for it to dodge such blanks. Germany and Japan also closed their nuclear power plants at first, but now they are sober. Well, if the Fukushima syndrome is still worried, then what about the microwave energy of the onboard power plant of the airship with a microwave beam from the destroyer? After all, then most of the time the airship will spend not on board the carrier (there are no carriers of suitable dimensions), but in the air. By the way, the USA is slowly riveting and riveting airships - see
    http://compulenta.computerra.ru/tehnika/transport/10008905/
  10. Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 15 September 2013 16: 06
    +1
    Of course, the aircraft carrier group must have an AWACS aircraft. This dramatically increases the radius of radar control of the area of ​​deployment of ships, allows you to have advantages in the use of strike means. Such means AWACS (helicopters) should be generally in any group of ships located in the oceans. It is unclear why the leaders of the Russian Navy neglect this. Airships as carriers of AWACS radars are significantly inferior in speed of movement, maneuverability. The vulnerability of airships does not hold water.
  11. Svetlana
    Svetlana 15 September 2013 20: 59
    0
    Quote: Ivanovich47
    Such means AWACS (helicopters) should be generally in any group of ships located in the oceans.

    It's right. But the main thing for an AWACS aircraft as part of an aircraft carrier group is to be able to fly high, and not far. In this regard, airships can fly above helicopters, airships are much more economical than helicopters in terms of fuel consumption, stay longer in the air, airships have less vibration, they can accommodate headlights with a much larger aperture. The vulnerability of airships under the cover of an aircraft carrier group is the same as that of the aircraft carrier group itself and even better, because the airship is more maneuverable than the destroyer. The airship has three degrees of freedom, while the destroyer has only two. And besides, some types of airships are actually helicopters.
  12. Realist1989
    Realist1989 24 March 2014 00: 06
    0
    The best perspective for deck-mounted AWACS is the convertiplanes. The range and patrol time are similar to those of airplanes, while using the main feature of helicopters - vertical take-off / landing. The fleet and shipbuilding industry are freed from a headache about the need for catapults on an aircraft carrier. Even more promising is the unmanned RLD tiltrotor.