They called me "Eaglet" in the detachment, the enemies called Eagle
The average air pressure at sea level is 760 mmHg. Art.
The average air pressure at the height of 11 000 meters is much lower - 170 mm Hg. Art.
The aircraft should have the most lightweight design.
The ship, on the contrary, must be strong and heavy to withstand the blows of the sea.
To form an air cushion, an ekranoplane needs to accelerate to 200 and more than km / h - only then the multi-ton monster broke away from the surface and soared gracefully a few meters above the crests of the waves.
In other words:
Water is denser than air 770 times. To gain take-off speed and overcome the resistance force of the aquatic environment, the 300-ton ekranoplane “Lun”, whose float body had a draft of almost 3 meter, required thrust 1 million Newtons.
Extreme performance was achieved by installing eight turbojet power plants, similar to the engines of the Airbus IL-86.
The monstrous appearance of a ground-effect vehicle (EKP) “Lun” with a string of engines sticking out from the front, a body-float and a giant tail tail gave a cumulative effect of increasing the air resistance force during the flight. All the tales about the "high" fuel efficiency of the RPC and the shutdown of some of the engines after entering the screen mode of flight are nothing more than tales for impressionable inhabitants. The length of the flight "Lunya" was only 2000 km - several times less than that of any transport aircraft or bomber-missile
Air Force of those years.
At the same time, the payload of the RPC was smaller than that of any aircraft of similar size.
Is there a great resistance to this "Gusedinorog"?
What did you think? Nature does not tolerate a joke.
The creators of ekranoplanes tried to break all the basic laws aviationbut life quickly put everything in its place. It was not possible to deceive the Earth’s atmosphere: the positive effect of the “screen effect” was completely leveled by the greater force of air resistance at sea level. As a result, the sleek, streamlined IL-86 flew rapidly through rarefied atmospheric layers at a speed of 900 km / h, and the eight-engine Lun barely dragged along the surface, struggling to overcome the resistance of dense air.
Instead of the fabulous "firebird", it turned out to be just a degraded version of a seaplane with castrated LTH and a short range.
At the same time, the field of application of WIG was limited to open sea spaces - unlike airplanes, which, in principle, are indifferent to the relief under the wing (Ural, Siberia, Himalayas ... we fly to any point of the globe).
It does not make sense to compare the “Lun”, like any ekranoplan, with a ship - the ECP is deprived of the main advantage of the sea transport - its carrying capacity. The payload of even the largest and most sophisticated ekranoplans designed by R. Alekseev was insignificant against the background of conventional bulk carriers and container ships.
Sea vessels are what they are! Strong!
In addition, ships are the cheapest form of transport. Most customers prefer to wait an extra couple of weeks, but save millions. And for the delivery of urgent goods there is always a plane.
Against the background of EKP transport aviation, it looked like a bicycle on the background of a Gazel minibus - the Orlyonok transport-combat ground-wing vehicle (EK) took aboard 3-4 times less cargo than the An-22 Antey. Moreover, the elderly "Antey" was in 1,5 times faster than the "Eaglet" and had a greater flight range in 2.
Everything is as usual. An ekranoplan proved to be a useless plane and a bad ship.
The idea of using an EKP as a strike rocket carrier looked equally dubious: the Lun was four times slower than the Tu-22M and, of course, had a smaller combat radius in 2.
The only argument of the ECP supporters is the low flight altitude, which allegedly impedes their detection by the enemy. This would be true only in the absence of long-range radar detection aircraft and aircraft radar with a mapping mode and a search for targets on the background of the surface (radar synthesis of aperture). In reality, any “Hokai”, “Sentry” or A-50 will see a “gusedeinorog” for many hundreds of kilometers with all the ensuing consequences.
The second point is target designation. Unlike a Tu-22M flying at a high altitude, the “Gusedeunorog” does not see anything beyond its nose.
Jet flying boat weapons) Martin P6M Seamaster, 1955 year. According to some reports, it was also tested in the WIG mode. Having received the first results, the Yankees abandoned the project.
The significantly higher speed of the RPC compared to the missile cruiser is a useless argument. The cruiser, in contrast to the “Gusedinorog”, possesses a powerful complex of defensive weapons (S-300F, etc.), which makes it a much more serious opponent than the ECP.
Slow, blind, with a small radius of action, without defensive means, but at the same time terribly expensive (what are eight TRDs!) And gluttonous nedosamolet - that’s what the Wunderwaffers were trying to arm the Russian Navy with. R.E. Alekseeva.
Another fun project is a sea rescue EKP based on the Lun missile carrier. I wonder how, then, did this grief-rescuer plan to search for the shipwrecked? With an altitude of 5 meters, at a speed of 300-400-500 km / h - the crew of ECP will simply not see the rafts and people in life jackets swinging on the waves.
Here you need a specialized helicopter - with a radar, a heat finder and powerful searchlights, patrolling a couple of hundred meters above the water and methodically examining tens of kilometers of the sea surface.
And this is another masterpiece, the beloved brainchild of Rostislav Alekseev. Gigantic WIG (also known as the "Caspian Monster").
Having seen this miracle of technology, the military were speechless. "Monster" was set in motion by TEN engines RD-7, taken from a Tu-22 bomber! It is known that only for a set of take-off speed of the CM a lot of 30 tons of kerosene were required.
At the same time, its carrying capacity was not as great as it might seem - 200 ... 240 tons - only 1,5 ... 1,8 times more than that of heavy transport aircraft - C-5 "Galaxy" (the same age as KM) or An-124 "Ruslan ". At the same time, the planes were many times superior to the giant ECP in speed, flight range and economy. And, of course, they could fly over both land and sea — the relief under the wing did not matter to them.
Landing IL-76 on a glacier in Antarctica
It is absolutely pointless to compare CM with sea transport - ocean liner container ship exceeds CM with a load capacity more than 100 times.
It is a pity that such a wonderful designer, who had previously created a series of legendary ships on hydrofoils (“Comet”, etc.), suddenly became carried away with the unrealizable dream of the fabulous “Guseedinorog”. All further creations of Rostislav Alekseev and his colleagues cause, at a minimum, bewilderment. CM, "Orlyonok", "Lun" ...
A-90 "Eaglet" ... The world's first serial transport and combat ground-effect vehicle, released in the amount of four flight-capable samples.
Exactly 20 years ago, in the fall of 1993, at the 11th Caspian base flotilla The Russian Navy held the last ekranoplan flight “Orlyonok” - the flight took place in the presence of many foreign guests from the Pentagon, NASA and American aircraft manufacturing companies, including working group of engineers led by aviconstructor Burt Rutan.
20 years have passed, but no serious work in this direction has been noted - neither here nor abroad. Obviously, the Orlyonok was not particularly impressed by the Yankees with its capabilities ...
The only development within the framework of this subject - the super-heavy EKP Boeing Pelican ULTRA 2700 ton take-off weight was initially unfeasible and unviable project. Work on the "Pelican" was completely curtailed in 2006 year.
So, transport and combat ekranoplan "Eaglet". He was able to carry up to 20 tons of payload on board - the RPC cargo compartment was designed for an 2 armored personnel carrier or an 200 landing force man. The cargo was delivered to a distance of 1500 km with a cruising speed of 400 km / h.
The new ekranoplan looked swiftly and gracefully - instead of the usual “garland” of engines, only one turboprop NK-12 from the Tu-95 bomber. Really this time Rostislav Alekseev managed to make a miracle by building a fast and economical vehicle that uses a “screen effect” when driving?
So, so ... let's carefully examine this miracle of technology. But what is it sticking out in the nose of the economical single-engine "Eaglet"? There is still a couple of engines - turbojet NK-8 from the Tu-154 airliner.
BUT! Not bad for a humble wig?
For comparison, having a similar carrying capacity, the An-12 aircraft has a range of 3600 km (with a load of 20 tons) at a cruising speed of 550 ... 600 km / h. At the same time, the power of all four of its AI-20 engines (4 x 4250 hp in takeoff mode) is less than the power of one TVD NK-12 in the tail end of the ground effect vehicle.
Trying to find at least one advantage in the Orlyonok compared to an ordinary plane, they often cite as an example the case when one of the machines at high speed “grazed” the stern surface of the water. A powerful blow snatched the entire tail section along with the powerplant marching. Nevertheless, the pilots managed to bring the crippled RPC to the shore using nasal jet engines.
The above “virtue”, on the contrary, is a disadvantage. To understand the meaning of what happened, just ask one question - how did the tail section touch the water? The answer is simple - a ground-effect vehicle is flying just a few meters above the surface. An erroneous movement of the elevator, a sudden decrease in engine thrust, a too high wave, or a sharp gust of side wind — the pilots have no chance to react and correct the error. Unlike a plane flying at a considerable height and usually having a few dozen “holy seconds” in stock to correct the situation.
It is noteworthy that in the 1980 year, under completely similar circumstances, when hitting the water, the Caspian Monster crashed to smithereens.
Three engines and total 20 tons of payload. Flight range 1500 km. Limited scope. Problems of maneuverability and too much turning radius - how to lower the wing console, if water is splashing in 5 meters below?
No, the Eaglet "Eaglet" is completely unsuitable for use in peacetime - neither military nor commercial customers will agree to fly twice as slowly (and only over the sea), while paying for a ticket in 2 times the price compared with the aircraft.
The only more or less adequate scope for the "Eaglet" is a lightning landing of amphibious assault forces at a short range - for example, transferring several battalions of marines from Novorossiysk to Turkish Trabzon. Or land a landing party on the island of Hokkaido (the ECP range will not be enough further).
At first glance, the ground effect vehicle shows some advantages compared with the classic amphibious means:
1. Speed! "Orlyonok" is able to reach the Turkish coast in an hour.
2. The possibility of landing on unequipped coast (gently sloping beach).
3. An EKP is somewhat more resistant to combat damage (although is there a difference? An air-to-air rocket hit will equally destroy any EKP and transport IL-76).
4. The “Eaglet”, unlike the landing ships, is immune from minefields (as well as any aircraft technician).
It would seem a good deal.
However, with a little more detailed study of the situation, an obvious conclusion arises: landing on Turkey or on Hokkaido with the help of the Orlyonok is a cheap profanation.
It's not so much the general illogicality of such an event (attack on a NATO country? Third World War?)
The problem is much more serious - the “Eaglet” is too small carrying capacity - only 20 tons. This is not enough to raise even one main battle tank. Moreover, the tank will require more than one ...
Small troops, deprived of the support of heavy armored vehicles, will be immediately destroyed and thrown into the sea. There is no reason to doubt it - we already had one joker who promised to take Grozny with an airborne regiment.
When conducting amphibious landings, one cannot do without hovercraft - for comparison, the small landing ship "Bison" is able to take on board three main combat tank total mass of 150 tons and up to 140 marines.
Smaller, compared to EKP, speed (100 + km / h) is compensated for by a greater payload and the presence of defensive armament - AK-630 automatic anti-aircraft batteries and MANPADS. For fire support on board there are two systems MLRS caliber 140 mm.
As for the covert outburst of the advanced reconnaissance and sabotage detachment, the ECP is not the case here at all. Such tasks are much more effectively solved by military transport aviation, helicopters and convertible planes - an advantage in speed + the possibility of landing in the depth of the enemy’s territory.
"Orlyonok" again left without work. It is not suitable for carrying out amphibious operations - its carrying capacity is totally inadequate.
Finale
Regardless of our reasoning, story issued its fair verdict to the ECP and their creators. The ships moving on the border of two environments and trying to break the canons of aerodynamics turned out to be a dead-end branch of technology. Despite all the enthusiasm of designer R.E. Alekseeva and the “golden era” of the Soviet Union, the development of new FPC has almost stopped. For 20 years of work on the creation of machines that use the screen effect while driving, Rostislav Evgenievich managed to build only a couple of actual samples in full size - CM and Orlyonok. After the tragic death of Alekseev in 1980, his followers gave birth to three more flying Eaglet and the new WIG-carrier Lun.
An-74 on the ice base "Barneo", the North Pole area
Those who believe that the Arctic is as smooth as a skating rink, and the wig - the ideal vehicle for the development of the Arctic are greatly mistaken. ECP rips its belly on the first oncoming hummock.
And this is at a time when any ideas received the broadest support at the state level, the USSR did not spare funds for the development of the military-industrial complex!
A dreary ballad about the imperfection of technology in the assembly of EKP and the absence of suitable materials can impress only junior students of humanitarian specialties. “Colleagues” of Rostislav Alekseev - aircraft designer M.L. Milyu and N.I. Ten years were enough for Kamov to “unwind” and switch to the mass production of his wonderful cars - thousands of helicopters dispersed around the world. Without complaints about the imperfection of technology and the lack of suitable power plants.
It's not about power plants. And not in the machinations of opponents R. Alekseev, who wanted to destroy the ingenious designer.
The ekranoplan was unable to demonstrate any convincing advantage, compared with conventional aircraft. Airplane - speed. Helicopter - the possibility of hovering in the air and taking off from limited sites. But what can an ekranoplan? Deteriorated version of the seaplane, capable of flying only over the open sea.
Even in prosperous Soviet times, Alekseev found no military or civilian customers for ekranoplans. The sailors, barely recognizing such monsters and appreciating the prospect of maintenance and repair of ten jet engines in the front-line units (when operating in marine conditions: humidity, salt deposits), completely abandoned their plans to purchase the Unusable Goose. Moreover, no distinct advantages, they did not have - some drawbacks.
But even more surprisingly, the idea of ekranoplanostroeniya adult violent color in modern Russia. Our compatriots like ECP - and nothing can be done about it: the voice of reason is powerless before blind love.
Perhaps nostalgia for the glorious times of the USSR is to blame. The huge roaring monster that flies over the sea, raising clouds of foam and spray, is probably the best interpretation of the feelings of the Russians who yearn for the great achievements of our past.
Postscript
28 of October of this year "Military Review" published an article by a certain Oleg Kaptsov, "They called me" Eaglet "in the detachment, the enemies called it the Eagle."
The author's theses themselves are a rare nonsense arising from Kaptsov’s ignorance of many historical and technical aspects of the domestic ekranoplanostroeniya. In addition, Kaptsov sucked the "facts" about the last (!) Flight of the Eaglet in 1993 that had no place to be.
But I do not know.
Kaptsov did not forget to sign his opus, however, without asking permission and even without specifying the source, he illegally published my author's photos, “borrowed” by him from the network media “Lenta.ru,”.
The author's theses themselves are a rare nonsense arising from Kaptsov’s ignorance of many historical and technical aspects of the domestic ekranoplanostroeniya. In addition, Kaptsov sucked the "facts" about the last (!) Flight of the Eaglet in 1993 that had no place to be.
But I do not know.
Kaptsov did not forget to sign his opus, however, without asking permission and even without specifying the source, he illegally published my author's photos, “borrowed” by him from the network media “Lenta.ru,”.
Oleg Kaptsov brings his sincere apologies to journalist, historian and photographer Dmitry Grinyuk for accidentally getting three of his author's pictures into the photo series of the article “They called me“ Orlyonok ”in the detachment, the enemies called Eagle”
If D. Grinyuk, after reading this material, any constructive arguments have appeared ("rare nonsense" is not), the author (O. Kaptsov) will be happy to see them in the comments to the article or in personal correspondence.
Also, it is interesting to find out what exactly you had in mind when indignant about the facts about the last flight of the Eaglet in 1993? Similar facts can be found at the link indicated in your letter.
Sincerely, Oleg Kaptsov.
Information