Military Review

Russian Air Force will receive the third modernized aircraft A-50U

117

The third modernized long-range radar detection and control aircraft A-50U will be handed over to the Air Force of the Russian Federation, Interfax-AVN reports with reference to the spokesman for the Russian Air Force, Colonel Igor Klimov.


“The flight, cabin and engineering staff of the Center for Combat Use and Retraining of Ivanovo Flight Command departed for Taganrog aviation scientific and technical complex G.M.Berieva for receiving a modernized A-50U long-range radar detection and control aircraft, ”I. Klimov said.

According to him, military pilots will check the performance of power plants on the ground, in various modes, and the readiness of the aircraft to perform the flight. In addition, the aircraft will perform three flights at medium and high altitudes, during which, the operability of the radio engineering complex, communications equipment, the passage of commands in an automated mode aboard the fighter, the system for receiving and processing information will be tested.


“After successful inspections, the plane will fly to the center of combat use and retraining of flight personnel in Ivanovo to the Severny airfield,” said I. Klimov.

Aircraft A-50U is designed to detect air and surface targets, targeting fighter crews to targets, transmitting information to radar stations and ground control points. The basis of A-50U is a powerful and modern radar complex "RM".
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/
117 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Victor
    Victor 31 January 2014 10: 02
    +11
    Here are the goodies, we will wait when it lands.
    1. Orel
      Orel 31 January 2014 10: 06
      +29
      The good news is that AWACS aircraft are precisely those machines that will make it possible to use the Air Force’s potential to the full, and not as it is now, only limited to on-board systems of combat combat aircraft. Like it or not, and the AWACS aircraft sees orders of magnitude farther and better than the most powerful fighter radar.
      1. AVV
        AVV 31 January 2014 14: 19
        +4
        Quote: Orel
        The good news is that AWACS aircraft are precisely those machines that will make it possible to use the Air Force’s potential to the full, and not as it is now, only limited to on-board systems of combat combat aircraft. Like it or not, and the AWACS aircraft sees orders of magnitude farther and better than the most powerful fighter radar.

        More such equipment is needed in the troops !!!
      2. Zordan
        Zordan 31 January 2014 20: 31
        +3
        This is very very very good news !!!
    2. ShturmKGB
      ShturmKGB 31 January 2014 10: 08
      +31
      Three is not enough, but it's not bad ... we are waiting for the new A-100 ...
      1. Russ69
        Russ69 31 January 2014 12: 19
        +1
        ShturmKGB
        Three is not enough, but it's not bad ... we are waiting for the new A-100 ...

        And when the A-100 will be, who knows?
        1. VAF
          VAF 31 January 2014 18: 50
          +4
          Quote: Russ69
          And when the A-100 will be, who knows?


          When there are enough AN-124s or "manage2 to reduce the" equipment volume "to the size of the IL-476 recourse
        2. APASUS
          APASUS 31 January 2014 19: 12
          +1
          Quote: Russ69
          And when the A-100 will be, who knows?

          By 2016, a new ultramodern A-100 long-range radar detection and control aircraft (AWACS) will appear in Russia. This was stated by the Air Force Commander of Russia Colonel-General Alexander Zelin.
          Read more: http://www.arms-expo.ru/049057054048124050052053055050.html
    3. Civil
      Civil 31 January 2014 11: 19
      +2
      It’s unclear here whether to modernize all roofing felts, toli to wait and 100
      1. FID
        FID 31 January 2014 11: 27
        +13
        Quote: Civil
        It’s unclear here whether to modernize all roofing felts, toli to wait and 100

        The A-100 will appear when the IL-476 is put into operation (in 1,5-2 years, I think). They fly around the IL-476 BTA, then they will blow up the antenna on it and in a year and a half ... Therefore, they will upgrade what flies.
        1. Gregazov
          Gregazov 31 January 2014 16: 40
          +3
          I am very happy about this news (A-50U), but with regard to the A-100 it is not clear why to step on the same rake. Highly located stabilizer closes the possibility of reception and transmission to the rear hemisphere by 45 degrees. This is a big loss in the field of view. We flew on the same unit in the 80s, tried to paste over the stabilizer with absorbing material. The result was unsatisfactory. It is necessary to change the media, this will give a gain in the field of view. The keel of the American E-3A also reduces the field of view, but only by 10-15 degrees.
    4. Lord of the Sith
      Lord of the Sith 31 January 2014 13: 05
      +14


      Radar data

      Range detection of air targets:
      torches of ballistic non-strategic missiles: 800 km (optical means)
      bombers: to 650 km
      fighters: 300 km
      cruise missiles (EPR = 1 m²): 215 km
      Range detection of ground targets:
      single-target missile launcher type: to 300 km
      group goal of the “column of tanks” type: to 250 km
      Detection range of marine targets (with EPR 250 m²):
      to the radio horizon

      Number of air targets followed: to 300
      Frequency range:
      electronic intelligence: 0,5 ~ 18 GHz
      radio intelligence: 50 ~ 500 MHz

      Number of guided fighters:
      command guidance: 12
      side guidance: 30
      1. aviamed90
        aviamed90 31 January 2014 13: 26
        +4
        Lord of the Sith

        Have you provided data for which modification of the A-50?

        For radar or SAZO? In what mode (auto tracking, semi-automatic tracking)? In which guidance mode on the CC?

        By A-50 (simple):

        The target support group includes the 2 OS and the 1 senior OS (tracking operator). The management group includes 2 SHN and 1 senior SHN (guidance navigator).

        We take it to the maximum (with a senior OS and SN, since they can connect during work):
        - OS serves 5-6 targets in semi-automatic mode and 10-15 targets in the machine
        - SHN provides 8 guidance in the machine, maximum 4 during normal voice guidance (at the maximum level of training SHN)

        Total we get:
        - tracking 3x6 = 12 targets in semi-automatic mode and 3x15 = 45 targets in auto tracking mode
        - pointing 3x8 = 24 targets in automatic mode and 3x4 = 12 targets in normal voice guidance
        1. Lord of the Sith
          Lord of the Sith 31 January 2014 14: 03
          +1
          Yes, unfortunately did not fit. I’m just asking for data old or fresh on the A-50U.

          I provided the data and wrote a question below.
      2. Mairos
        Mairos 31 January 2014 14: 08
        +2
        May the Dark Side of the Force be with you !! wink
      3. jjj
        jjj 31 January 2014 15: 19
        +1
        In the picture in such a projection - das ist fiction
      4. Gregazov
        Gregazov 31 January 2014 16: 51
        +3
        [quote = Lord of the Sith]
        The above characteristics are not much different from the characteristics of the A-50

        Guidance 40 * 40 was carried out in 85 on state tests.
        1 m ESR seen at 150 km at heading courses
        ships were seen in the same way, the convoy of tanks from the ship is not much different.

        The main difference is only in optics (detection of ballistic non-strategic missiles) and in intelligence. The rest was old, no significant changes were visible. For example, the ratio of the capabilities of the Su-27 radar and PAKFA, two big differences.
    5. VAF
      VAF 31 January 2014 17: 05
      +5
      Quote: Victor
      Here are the goodies, we will wait when it lands.


      To begin with, it would be necessary to accept and fly around, but now we have huge problems in RO with the "entim case" or don't you look at the zombie box? wink

      Emergency mode, frosts under 25-30, snow, blizzard, etc., were introduced in the RO. etc. And if in Rostov they do something at least somehow, then in the region, it’s better not to tell.
      So we will wait until spring, until it breaks up, although by February 10 they promised warming.

      In the article, the plane is not the one, this is the first production one, but the third one here ... this is a summer photo ... there is no fresh, you know why ... all roads from Rostov are blocked.
      so as will be. then and ... but for now .. "summer" option!

  2. rugor
    rugor 31 January 2014 10: 09
    +5
    Handsome. More hours in the sky, on our defense.
  3. tilovaykrisa
    tilovaykrisa 31 January 2014 10: 19
    +4
    Useful device.
  4. Leshka
    Leshka 31 January 2014 10: 20
    +2
    positive news
  5. ramin_serg
    ramin_serg 31 January 2014 10: 38
    +7
    In the radio-electronic age, such weapons, especially for the Russian army, are vital
  6. killganoff
    killganoff 31 January 2014 10: 41
    +3
    Beautiful car!!! If only the materiel could not fail, otherwise our industry has recently taken on the fashion to hand over equipment that does not even reach Soviet standards.
  7. Alikovo
    Alikovo 31 January 2014 10: 42
    +1
    and when the A-100 will arrive.
    1. mamba
      mamba 31 January 2014 11: 39
      +6
      Quote: Alikovo
      and when the A-100 will arrive.

      In August 2011, the then Air Force Commander, Colonel General Alexander Zelin said that the A-100, equipped with AFAR radar, would fly into the air in 2016, but nothing was known about the real status of the program. The representative of the Russian defense industry commented on the situation: “The process is clearly being delayed, the Vega concern will postpone the completion of the program.” One of the explanations is the lack of an air platform; they plan to put the new RTK on the Il-76MD-90 military transport aircraft (“product 476”).
      The version that is most often heard on the sidelines during meetings on the defense industry and military aircraft industry is technical problems with the radar of the future complex. But the main thing is that the adaptation of the developed radio engineering complex to IL-476 does not become an excuse for the successful closure of the program and for the deployment of new R&D with new financing and new terms.
      15.06.2012/100/2017, the country's leadership in the media announced that the program for creating the A-XNUMX should be accelerated and the first flight is planned until XNUMX.
      More details: http://militaryrussia.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1793
    2. xtur
      xtur 31 January 2014 12: 05
      -3
      A-50 and A-100 based on the same aircraft, though different modifications

      will the upgraded A-50 really be very different from the A-100?
  8. All1
    All1 31 January 2014 10: 44
    +1
    Why are our salads not painted in a protective color?
    It is clear that during the day it will be visible on the trail, but in the evening / night sky the plane can be "hidden" with black paint (and turning off the radar) as the Americans do with their B-52s.
    1. Lissyara
      Lissyara 31 January 2014 10: 57
      +12
      From what? Well, this is not quite a color, or rather not a color at all, but as you can see, "everything is in order."
    2. Lissyara
      Lissyara 31 January 2014 10: 57
      +2
      From what? Well, this is not quite a color, or rather not a color at all, but as you can see, "everything is in order."
    3. lelikas
      lelikas 31 January 2014 13: 17
      +2
      Quote: All1
      Why are our salads not painted in a protective color?
      It is clear that during the day it will be visible on the trail, but in the evening / night sky the plane can be "hidden" with black paint (and turning off the radar) as the Americans do with their B-52s.

      And why then do you need a long-range radar detection aircraft hidden in the sky with the equipment turned off ???
      I never liked gray paint (except in those cases where it is a radar absorbing coating), I am glad with all my heart that it is washed off. Although I don’t understand repainting tanks from camouflage to olivdrab ...
  9. shitovmg
    shitovmg 31 January 2014 10: 49
    +4
    Painted under Serdyukov, now we don’t know how to wash ...
  10. VL33
    VL33 31 January 2014 11: 05
    0
    I wonder when new ones will arrive?
  11. 0251
    0251 31 January 2014 11: 05
    0
    The car is excellent. But three pieces. this is not enough yet. I wish you success organizers and exploited.
  12. upasika1918
    upasika1918 31 January 2014 11: 07
    +2
    I am not special in aviation, and in painting the sides a complete zero, but I wish the crews a clean sky and soft landings.
    1. FID
      FID 31 January 2014 11: 30
      +3
      Quote: upasika1918
      but I wish the crews clear skies and soft landings.

      I don’t know about a clear sky - aviation is all-weather, we want a "light sky" (I will make a reservation right away - I am NOT a FLYER).
  13. Bort radist
    Bort radist 31 January 2014 11: 09
    +1
    Have a good flyby! So that everything works according to the regulations. With this machine, the combat effectiveness of aviation, and not only, increases significantly!
  14. pawel57
    pawel57 31 January 2014 11: 09
    +3
    There was an article about western development of airships. New technologies and opportunities. Probably, along with the AWACS aircraft, it is necessary to use the AWACS airships. A couple of three in the Kaliningrad, Leningrad, Astrakhan, Amur regions, as well as the Primorsky Territory and the Kuril Ridge with Kamchatka. The scope and number of devices is huge.
    1. FID
      FID 31 January 2014 11: 31
      +3
      Quote: pawel57
      There was an article about western development of airships.

      Americans abandoned the use and development of airships for military purposes ....
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 31 January 2014 12: 11
        +4
        Quote: SSI
        Americans abandoned the use and development of airships for military purposes ....

        He meant JLENS balloons. Nobody turned them off, tests go according to plan, financing too.
      2. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 31 January 2014 14: 50
        +1
        Quote: SSI
        Americans abandoned the use and development of airships for military purposes ....

        Hello Sergey, I apologize for being off-topic, but I wanted to clarify the situation with you on the Aviastr, on which the Tu-204 was built and on which the Il-96-300 was produced according to VASO? Maybe you have beguiled, do not exact.
        1. FID
          FID 31 January 2014 15: 35
          +7
          VASO is building two more Il-96 aircrafts 96022 and 96023 for the SLO (special flight detachment of the presidential affairs department), performs the state defense order for the construction of An-148 for the Ministry of Defense (so that they are cut off for commercial orders. An-148 is not available for "citizens" Aviastar is at a crossroads - the military will start paying for the Il-476 from 2016-2017. Aviastar needs to take commercial loans in order to fulfill the SDO. How they will pay later is not clear, since for the state defense order the prices are fixed. Tu-204SM in the UAC is a forbidden topic. There is a hope that Iran will help out - they wanted 40 cars and the purchase of a license to build 60 more, but the KLA, the KLA and again the KLA. They would put someone from there, you see, things would move ...
          1. PLO
            PLO 31 January 2014 15: 43
            +2
            hello Sergey hi

            But what about the contract for the supply of Tu-204CM for Red Wings? like on the MAX was concluded for 10 aircraft
            1. FID
              FID 31 January 2014 18: 28
              +3
              Spit and grind .... While the MAP (Mikhail Aslanovich you know who ..) at the helm, except for the SU brand, in the KLA it is harmful to speak both for health and for career!
              1. VAF
                VAF 31 January 2014 18: 43
                +2
                Quote: SSI
                While the MAP (Mikhail Aslanovich yourself understand who ..) at the helm, except for the SU brand, speaking in the UAC is harmful for both health and career!

                \
                Hello Seryoga! drinks It's like in the days of Simonov ... who "looks badly2 at Su .. count no longer serves and does not fly soldier
            2. VAF
              VAF 31 January 2014 18: 41
              +3
              Quote: olp
              But what about the contract for the supply of Tu-204CM for Red Wings?


              Oleg, hello! Seryoga, "laid out" everything clearly, as always. A contract at MAKS for "creating the value of the amount of contracts" no more. but it will be quite sad compared to the results of "foreign salons"
              In LII'ah they are still standing with Kav Min Vod .. awaiting repairs for the transfer to the Red Wings ... they will surely rot if the Chinese do not take away for .. "a hat of crackers"
          2. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 31 January 2014 21: 09
            +1
            Quote: SSI
            Tu-204SM in the KLA - prohibited topic

            Thanks. It's a pity, it seemed to me that Aviastar was modernized for this car.
            But is the Saratov aircraft factory already, or what?
            1. FID
              FID 31 January 2014 21: 56
              +3
              In Saratov, the plant is completely closed. On the territory is likely to build a public house.
              1. Alex 241
                Alex 241 31 January 2014 22: 11
                +2
                Hi Seryoz Ikea.
                1. FID
                  FID 31 January 2014 22: 14
                  +2
                  Hello Sasha! The brothel is more interesting!
                  1. Alex 241
                    Alex 241 31 January 2014 22: 18
                    +2
                    The deputy director of the factory is engaged in the repair of apartments in Reutovo.
                  2. polkovnik manuch
                    polkovnik manuch 1 February 2014 11: 04
                    +2
                    And Poghosyan there to rule from rule, along with Manturov, there they have aesto.
  15. MolGro
    MolGro 31 January 2014 11: 12
    0
    dlro aircraft in Russia
    25 - A-50
    3 - A-50U
    1. Lissyara
      Lissyara 31 January 2014 11: 19
      +3
      And where does such data come from? And where in the wonderful list of A-50M Delsi?
      1. aviamed90
        aviamed90 31 January 2014 11: 46
        +3
        Lissyara

        Apparently, from here:

        "According to various estimates, the Russian Air Force is armed with 15 to 19 A-50 and three (?) A-50M aircraft. In total, together with the aircraft - the command and measurement points of the Il-76SK (outwardly differs from the A-50 by the presence of a glazed cockpit navigator), built and converted from IL-76MD about 25 machines. "

        (site "worldweapon.ru", "Catalog of world weapons" - "Aircraft AWACS A-50")

        Although it remains a mystery, where does the "IL-76SK command and measurement points" have to do with it?

        Because:

        "... mobile command and measurement complexes that provide flight tests of aviation equipment on long unequipped routes, including providing trajectory and telemetric measurements, collecting, processing and transmitting information in real time, operational control of the flight test, radio control of unmanned aircraft, ensuring security routes, including the elimination of products in emergency situations.

        In 1985-89 LII in the same cooperation created 5 SKIPs Il-76MD ("976 aircraft" or Il-76sk). Outwardly, they are similar to the A-50 and are also equipped with all-round radars, but differ in the presence of a glazed navigator cabin. These aircraft allow you to provide an autonomous solution to all the necessary tasks. testing range in any geographic area. "(site" testpilots.ru ")

        А as part of a separate aviation unit A-50 includes: 2xA-50 and 1xIL-76md (for transportation of ITS, cable management and spare parts).
      2. MolGro
        MolGro 31 January 2014 12: 06
        0
        add not everything I know)
        1. aviamed90
          aviamed90 31 January 2014 13: 05
          0
          MolGro

          What exactly to add?
          About A-50 or IL-76sk?
          1. MolGro
            MolGro 1 February 2014 11: 12
            0
            a-50 m
            specifically searched on this subject
            a-50m - these are modernized a-50
            total a -50 m 26 pcs
  16. aviamed90
    aviamed90 31 January 2014 11: 26
    +5
    By itself, A-50 is only 1 / 3 affairs.
    Those. Aircraft AWACS - this is only part of the AK RLDN system.

    It is accompanied by no less important equipment SPK (command transmission station) on fighters (interceptors) and ground equipment (PPTs "Delta-Sh" (receiving and transmitting center), APN (instrumental guidance equipment) at all levels of command and control, TSORI (processing center RL information) as part of the ACCS).

    What is the situation with such equipment?
    1. Gregazov
      Gregazov 31 January 2014 17: 13
      +5
      A-50, (I haven’t tested A-50U already), passed tests together with PPC. APN, ZORI, PORI, etc. belonged to a specific ACS with which AK RLDN interacted. At the same time, interaction was ensured with the Maneuver and one of the specific automated control systems by choice through the PPC. The PPC not only formed the radio channels, but also converted the radar images to the form adopted in the specific ACS. In addition to the SPK Rainbow, an old Lazur was also used, along which ancient fighters were guided, up to the MiG-21, and the guidance task was solved on board the A-50 both in automatic and in manual mode (voice guidance via radio). Colonel Piskunenko checked the accuracy of the guidance in violation of the flight mission (if memory serves). Vertical maneuver during test flights was prohibited, but he performed it and flew 100 meters from the Tu-16 target. The air was colored with expressions of joy of the Tu-16 crew. During this flight, the test pilot was fired for demobilization.
  17. Lissyara
    Lissyara 31 January 2014 11: 34
    +7
    And how do you like such a beast? SKIP (IL-76SK)
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 31 January 2014 11: 47
      +2
      Lissyara

      No way.

      It can be used only at the test stage and to solve several other problems.

      See the post above.
  18. yanus
    yanus 31 January 2014 11: 49
    +4
    Quote: All1
    Why are our salads not painted in a protective color?
    It is clear that during the day it will be visible on the trail, but in the evening / night sky the plane can be "hidden" with black paint (and turning off the radar) as the Americans do with their B-52s.

    If he flew over enemy positions at an altitude of 500m. and he was shot down from the DShK, then the protective color would not hurt. But he flies far from the enemy’s position, high and on radar screens he's a big spot. So at least paint it in the colors of the rainbow, nothing will change.
    1. Apollo
      Apollo 31 January 2014 11: 58
      +11
      Good day to all hi
      citation-The Air Force of the Russian Federation will be handed over the third modernized aircraft for early warning and control of the A-50U, Interfax-AVN reports with reference to the official representative of the Russian Air Force Colonel Igor Klimov.


    2. Moore
      Moore 31 January 2014 12: 13
      0
      What color should it be painted then so that the DShK shooter does not see it at an altitude of 500m? laughing
    3. aviamed90
      aviamed90 31 January 2014 12: 31
      +4
      yanus
      Moore

      Ways to perform b.z. Jsc A-50:
      - patrolling in the designated area (zone);
      - actions to call from the duty on the airfield or in the air (in the HFA);
      - actions in the BP of the aviation provided (patrol escort).

      1 method
      The HFA can be located at D = 50-70 km from the state border in peacetime and at D = 70-90 km from the LF during the road, has a front length of up to 120 km. The flight is performed at H = 6,0 km or 9,4 km. The optimal line of responsibility for detecting TA is 240 km, KR - 80-100 km.

      2 method
      Used during the period of reflection of a massive raid or its threat. Pass time. (from the team to take off in the Goth. No. 1 to fully turn on the RTK in the air) = 1h 10 min.

      3 method
      It is applied at reliable suppression ground defense systems and sufficient fighter cover.

      In the interests of air defense, the A-50 is used as a highly mobile means of HRD and targeting of IA.

      Therefore, he does not need a protective coating. Much more important is the visual similarity with GA aircraft, because, basically, it works in a fairly deep rear, covered by air defense and IA.

      The numbers are for A-50 (maybe for A-50 and A-50 they are different).
      1. Gregazov
        Gregazov 31 January 2014 17: 37
        +2
        The flight altitude for the A-50 is correct. Initially, it was planned to be equal to 6 km and the range of action, respectively, up to 200 km - a radio horizon. Therefore, the pulse repetition rate was approximately equal to 25 kHz, which corresponds to a distance of 6 km - the height of the aircraft. Therefore, the signal reflected from the surface (earth) came at the moment of emission of the next pulse when the radar receiver was closed. The interference from the ground (altimeter interference) was thus cut out. During aircraft testing, the range of the aircraft was increased. To increase the range of the radio horizon, the patrol height was increased to 9,4 km. But the repetition rate remained the same, therefore, to shield the interference from the ground, screens were installed - ears in the lower part of the fuselage, between the wing and the stabilizer (the A-50 aircraft is clearly visible in the video).
        These ears are absent in the video about the A-50U, from here we can conclude that the observation of the test team on the transition from a repetition rate of 25 kHz to 16 kHz after 30 years has been successfully implemented.
    4. lelikas
      lelikas 31 January 2014 13: 20
      +1
      Quote: yanus
      So at least paint it in the colors of the rainbow, nothing will change.

      And what, what if they’ll be taken for LGBT leaders and will not shoot at their own wassat
  19. nail1972
    nail1972 31 January 2014 12: 12
    0
    But how does this miracle machine relate to the discovery of all kinds of stealth? How far does it allow to detect (if it allows ...) can anyone educate?
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 31 January 2014 12: 59
      +1
      nail1972

      I won’t lie about A-50 and A-50 - I don’t know. Apparently, they are higher than the A-50 (simple).

      The detection of targets depends on their image intensifier, N flight of the target, N flight of A-50, reflecting the properties of the underlying surface (land, sea), A-50 maneuver in the HFA, interference environment, etc.

      So I did not find specific numbers.

      But the RTK "Bumblebee" A-50 had approximately the following characteristics:
      - D obn MC with EPR = 7-10 thousand square meters. m = 380-400 km
      - automatic tracking to 40-50 of non-maneuvering ECs at H = 30-12000 m at D = 220-240 km (targets with an EOP type Tu-16) and 200-220 km (targets with an EOP type MiG-23) with P = 0,5 at permissible distribution density of the CC in the VP: 1 CC in the sector 1,5 deg. in azimuth.
      - error in measuring the coordinates of the CC taking into account the errors of the topographic location 3,6 km
      - measurement error of the HVC (depends on their D): 4,7 km at D = 100 km, 2,6 km at D = 100-200 km, 3,4 km at D = 200-240 km.
      - D upd. and the beginning of tracking the VC decreases when they fly over the sea with excitement to 4 points - by 5-10%, above mountains - by 15%.
      - The optimal guidance mode is provided at D = 120-180 km from A-50. Outside this range, P guidance decreases due to large errors in H
      - A-50 RLP provides the removal of the enemy’s NLC detection line by 110-130 km per LF and an increase of the ASUV Front RLP by 90-110 km (makes it possible to determine the beginning of UIA on 7-10 minutes earlier than ground-based radars; towards the enemy at 50 km)
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 31 January 2014 13: 13
        +1
        Quote: aviamed90
        I won’t lie about A-50 and A-50 - I don’t know. Apparently, they are higher than the A-50 (simple).

        The modernization of the A-50 essentially affected only the electronics, the radar is the same. So the detection characteristics of the CC almost remained the same. But due to the use of a new element base, it was possible to find a relaxation corner for the operators, finally you can weaken in the toilet, and not in a bucket ...
        1. aviamed90
          aviamed90 31 January 2014 13: 40
          +2
          Nayhas

          Of course, the main characteristics probably remained the same, but:
          - there was evidence that the problem of shading of the tail and "blind sectors" due to the influence of V sb. minimized
          - reduced the error when measuring H flight of the AC
          - improved characteristics of electronic warfare equipment and SPK
          - increased the depth of field of guidance when using the SSS and SAZO (previously it was 420 km)
          - VICO CRTs were replaced with LCD displays with the best characteristics and ergonomics, the RTK BTS (computer) was replaced, due to which the weight of the aircraft decreased and space was freed up.

          By the way, a rest room on board appeared.
          1. Nayhas
            Nayhas 31 January 2014 15: 22
            +1
            Quote: aviamed90
            Of course, the main characteristics probably remained the same, but:

            If in the know, have the means of communication changed? Data transfer system?
            1. aviamed90
              aviamed90 31 January 2014 15: 43
              +1
              Nayhas

              Not. Do not know.

              But in some places in the media slipped information that these things are also improving.
        2. leon-iv
          leon-iv 31 January 2014 13: 51
          0
          The modernization of the A-50 essentially affected only the electronics, the radar is the same. So the detection characteristics of the CC almost remained the same. But due to the use of a new element base, it was possible to find a relaxation corner for the operators, finally you can weaken in the toilet, and not in a bucket ...

          No, this is not so. A lot has changed there. And the radar also changed. But not all. for I know many operators personally wink
          1. Nayhas
            Nayhas 31 January 2014 15: 24
            +2
            Quote: leon-iv
            And the radar also changed.

            On what? If there was a replacement, then Vega would wave it like a flag ... There was no replacement for the radar.
            1. leon-iv
              leon-iv 31 January 2014 17: 14
              +1
              We can be hit on the head for some details now.
              Would you know how you shot the video for the first channel laughing
              And 2 modernized ones are standing on the old sites, but the black plane is already completely inaccessible to ordinary mortal places.
              1. Nayhas
                Nayhas 31 January 2014 20: 55
                +1
                Quote: leon-iv
                We can be hit on the head for some details now.
                Would you know how you shot the video for the first channel laughing
                And 2 modernized ones are standing on the old sites, but the black plane is already completely inaccessible to ordinary mortal places.

                Replacing the radar for any would be accompanied by accompanying "supposedly" unrelated articles about a new generation of airborne radars, all the more so if it was about a radar with AFAR.
          2. Gregazov
            Gregazov 31 January 2014 17: 57
            +1
            The A-50 radar had one BTsVM Vector, designed for digital signal processing of three direction finding pairs simultaneously. During the modernization, according to the results of state tests, it was supposed to introduce three BCMs into the radar (one for digital signal processing in each direction finding pair separately and one more computer for combining the signal processing results in each direction finding channel.
      2. Gregazov
        Gregazov 31 January 2014 17: 47
        +3
        nail1972
        The data you provide contradicts the act of state testing and the act of special testing for high-altitude goals in the direction of reducing the effectiveness of the A-50 complex.
        The accuracy of measuring the height of targets was really unimportant, but it made it possible to intercept VTS on all modern A-50 aircraft (Su-27, MiG-29, MiG-31). Difficulties arose only for the MiG-25 due to the narrow angle of view of the airborne radar. This difficulty was overcome by pointing a pair of MiG-25s, the locators of which had a different field of view in elevation. One "looked" up the other down.
  20. Lissyara
    Lissyara 31 January 2014 12: 30
    +1
    Who cares, read and watch:
    http://voutsen-cv.livejournal.com/265006.html
    http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-599.html
    By Y - only pictures.
  21. Stasi
    Stasi 31 January 2014 12: 33
    -1
    Good news! Of course, slower than we would like, but new equipment arrives at the troops. I would like to know how much the A-50U is superior to its counterparts, such as the American AWACS and E-3 Sentry, reconnaissance and detection aircraft. To what extent can such an aircraft detect stealth type stealth aircraft? The article says that this aircraft is designed to detect air and surface targets and aim fighters at them. But nowhere is it said whether such an aircraft is capable of detecting ground targets, protected by camouflage, and armored vehicles.
    1. RN40Y45
      RN40Y45 31 January 2014 12: 43
      +2
      "Bumblebee" Awax was not superior, but had its own nishtyaki, in the work on the CD, the new version most likely does not surpass the same, but inside it became clearly more comfortable.
      1. Gregazov
        Gregazov 1 February 2014 09: 29
        +1
        Comparative tests of Bumblebee and E-3 no one conducted. Accordingly, the expert estimates are not confirmed by anything.
        I can offer the following nuances for discussion.
        Height measurement. The Bumblebee radar (open name RA) uses a single-pulse method of measuring altitude. By total difference processing, three direction finding pairs are created: in the far, upper and lower zones. Dignity is the parallel receipt of information. The disadvantage is the presence of dead zones between direction finding pairs. The disadvantage leads to a decrease in the accuracy of determining the height of the target. A distinction is made between an accurate (within the same direction-finding pair) mark, coarse (the mark is present in two direction-finding pairs, the average angle between the pairs is attributed to the elevation angle) and super-coarse (the mark is present in three pairs at the same time). Each type of marks is taken into account in the algorithm for measuring height with its own weight coefficient.
        In Avax, the amplitude method is used to measure altitude, i.e., one radar beam. The beam stops scanning in azimuth and starts scanning in elevation. The elevation angle of the target corresponds to the maximum amplitude of the signal. Naturally, such a height measurement reduces the speed of viewing the space and affects the quality of tracking of detected targets. In my opinion, this is why in Avax the guidance problem solved in Bumblebee has not been solved.
        A similar kind of comparative review can be done for each characteristic, or advertising figures can be trusted.
    2. Nayhas
      Nayhas 31 January 2014 13: 52
      +2
      Quote: Stasi
      I would like to know how much the A-50U is superior to its counterparts, such as the American AWACS and E-3 Sentry

      AWACS, or according to their AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) is not a plane, but the purpose of the plane, AWACS in the name of the name ...
      At the expense of excellence ... He is not. The Boeing E-3 Sentry has already undergone its modernization more than once, to the level of Block 30/35 in 2001, and the next one until Block 40/45 passes.
      But the fact is that the Boeing E-3 Sentry is no longer the standard among AWACS aircraft ...
      1. Gregazov
        Gregazov 1 February 2014 09: 03
        +2
        Quote: Nayhas
        Quote: Stasi
        I would like to know how much the A-50U is superior to its counterparts, such as the American AWACS and E-3 Sentry

        AWACS, or according to their AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) is not a plane, but the purpose of the plane, AWACS in the name of the name ...

        According to the name of RLDN AK, the aviation (by belonging) complex of early location patrol (detection and tracking of air targets, i.e. a radar post) and guidance (point of guidance both to air and ground targets.)
        American AWACS guidance in principle does not perform. Target designation is given to fighters. The guidance problem is solved in the onboard computer of the fighter. Therefore, to guide the F-16 was still needed F-15, which solves the task of pointing the F-16 target designation E-3
    3. patsantre
      patsantre 31 January 2014 15: 08
      +1
      Nonsense, fence. There are no invisibles, there are inconspicuous planes. Their whole point is that they are detected at a much shorter distance. Naturally, he can detect "stealth", only at times less than conventional planes.
      1. PLO
        PLO 31 January 2014 15: 38
        +1
        where infa? How were they compared? Are there specific numbers?

        Can you give a definition of a stealth aircraft?

        or again just empty words?
        1. aviamed90
          aviamed90 31 January 2014 15: 47
          +4
          PLO

          "Technologies for reducing the visibility (eng. Stealth technology) - a set of methods reduced visibility combat vehicles in radar, infrared and other areas of the detection spectrum through specially designed geometric shapes and radar absorbing materials and coatings, which is dramatic reduces detection radius and thereby increases the survival of the combat vehicle. It should be noted that significant absorption of radio waves can only be achieved in the centimeter range, and much worse in the decimeter range. Due to the physics of radio wave propagation, making an object inconspicuous in the meter range, when the wavelength is comparable to the object’s own dimensions, changing its shape is basically impossible. Also it is impossible to achieve complete absorption of any radio radiation incident on the object at an arbitrary angle, therefore, the main goal when choosing a shape is to reflect the waves away from the emitter - thus part of the signal is absorbed by special coatings, and the rest is reflected to the side, preventing the radio echo from returning to the observing radar (which is especially effective against combined transceiver stations). "

          (from the unloved VKP)
        2. patsantre
          patsantre 31 January 2014 16: 03
          0
          Infa? You don’t know what profit makes stealth? What are you talking about then? I’m not going to do educational work here. What are the numbers for you? I can give you range numbers for detecting any aircraft after you provide specific data on the detection range Radar A-50.
          1. PLO
            PLO 31 January 2014 16: 27
            +2
            come on, don’t be so nervous, it’s immediately clear that in the exact sciences you are so-so.

            you don’t know the exact numbers anyway, but no one will tell you them.
            just remember that your words need to be justified somehow.

            your idle talk about stealth has the same value as the ravings of news reporters. if you are not even able to give an accurate definition of a stealth aircraft, then all your stupid statements about stealth can be flushed into the toilet.
            there you can merge and your estimates about the fact that a stealth aircraft is detected by the A-50U radar on much less distance.
            I bet you don’t even know in which frequency range the radar installed on the A-50U is working.
            get read for a start at least the info that led aviamed90
            1. patsantre
              patsantre 31 January 2014 17: 00
              +1
              Quote: olp
              come on, don’t be so nervous, it’s immediately clear that in the exact sciences you are so-so.


              Can you justify your attacks?

              Quote: olp
              your idle talk about stealth has the same value as the ravings of news reporters. if you are not even able to give an accurate definition of a stealth aircraft, then all your stupid statements about stealth can be flushed into the toilet.


              Because this is a purely subjective term, there is no scientific definition of the word "stealth aircraft"! For some, the T-50 will be stealth, and someone will compare it to a raptor and say that it is not stealth. And how can you define it?

              Quote: olp
              your estimates about the fact that a stealth aircraft is detected by the A-50U radar at a much shorter distance can also be merged there.
              I bet you don’t even know in which frequency range the radar installed on the A-50U is working.
              get read for a start at least the info that led aviamed90


              In the meter range, of course, stealth loses its advantages. Do you know what disadvantages are associated with radars of such a range, and that modern radars are more focused specifically on the centimeter range?
              Regarding stealth. When reducing the EPR by 16 times, the detection range of the object (for the centimeter range) decreases by 2 times. Compare the Su-35, F-35 and F-22 discussed so hotly here and draw conclusions.
              1. PLO
                PLO 31 January 2014 18: 00
                0
                Because this is a purely subjective term, there is no scientific definition of the word "stealth aircraft"! For some, the T-50 will be stealth, and someone will compare it to a raptor and say that it is not stealth. And how can you define it?

                How interesting lol
                but, in doing so, you make completely unambiguous conclusions and judgments based only on your subjective opinion, and without any clarification, i.e. if you believe what you wrote above
                Naturally, he can detect "stealth", only at times less distance than conventional aircraft.

                then means the detection range of the A-50U radar for various targets directly depends on whether the radar operator considers the intended target to be inconspicuous or not?
                So do you think a well-motivated and ideologically correct radar operator is able to qualitatively improve the characteristics of the equipment?


                In the meter range, of course, stealth loses its advantages. Do you know what disadvantages are associated with radars of such a range, and that modern radars are more focused specifically on the centimeter range?

                the measuring range by itself, but already in the decimeter range, the RPM efficiency decreases sharply, and most survey radars work in this range, in the centimeter range, as a rule, universal radars for detection / tracking / guidance are made.
                so talk about times extremely self-confident.


                Regarding stealth. When reducing the EPR by 16 times, the detection range of the object (for the centimeter range) decreases by 2 times. Compare the Su-35, F-35 and F-22 discussed so hotly here and draw conclusions.

                EPR calculation itself depends on wavelengths
                The ESR, in principle, cannot be the same even for the entire centimeter range, so all these ESRs without indicating the wavelength for which it was calculated do not mean anything, and the fact that you compare there is somewhat pointless
                and all the beautiful numbers in the performance characteristics at exhibitions or in interviews are usually just another banal marketing PR, as themselves do not say anything
                1. patsantre
                  patsantre 31 January 2014 18: 24
                  +2
                  Quote: olp
                  then means the detection range of the A-50U radar for various targets directly depends on whether the radar operator considers the intended target to be inconspicuous or not?
                  So do you think a well-motivated and ideologically correct radar operator is able to qualitatively improve the characteristics of the equipment?


                  If you like, I put it that way for better understanding by other readers. F-22, F-35, T-50 are considered to be inconspicuous, and rafal is not considered as such, although the technologies for reducing visibility are also applied on it.
                  And stop practicing sophism, the EPR operator doesn’t depend on the opinion of the operator. The fact is that there is no clear division into unobtrusive and inconspicuous aircraft. Type everything with an EPR less than 0.1 m2 is inconspicuous, and the rest is not. So for me, invisibility can start with 0.1m2, and for you with 0.5m2, and with respect to the same aircraft, we may have different concepts about stealth, because this concept is not documented. This is your question about the definition of stealth aircraft.

                  Quote: olp
                  the measuring range by itself, but already in the decimeter range, the RPM efficiency decreases sharply, and most survey radars work in this range, in the centimeter range, as a rule, universal radars for detection / tracking / guidance are made.
                  so talking about times is extremely self-confident.


                  And I didn’t say anything concrete. Compared to what, at times, for example. By the way, it’s obvious from your statement that it’s naive to belittle the profit from stealth. Suppose the difference in the detection distance is not so big, but, as you said yourself, Guidance radars operate in the centimeter range and here the stealth will play to the full.

                  Quote: olp
                  EPR calculation itself depends on wavelengths
                  The ESR, in principle, cannot be the same even for the entire centimeter range, so all these ESRs without indicating the wavelength for which it was calculated do not mean anything, and the fact that you compare there is somewhat pointless
                  and all the beautiful numbers in the performance characteristics at exhibitions or in interviews are usually just another banal marketing PR, as themselves do not say anything


                  I agree here.
                  1. PLO
                    PLO 31 January 2014 18: 41
                    +1
                    If you like, I put it that way for a better understanding ..

                    Now I agree with everything, and if you wrote something like that at the very beginning, you would silently put a plus sign and go further good


                    And I didn’t say anything concrete. Compared to what, at times, for example. By the way, it’s obvious from your statement that it’s naive to belittle the profit from stealth. Suppose the difference in the detection distance is not so big, but, as you said yourself, Guidance radars operate in the centimeter range and here the stealth will play to the full.

                    agree
                    In no case should we belittle it, nor should we overestimate it.
                    I’ll just add that even in the centimeter range the difference can be huge: wavelengths from 1 cm to 10 cm, and the thickness of the RPM coating is only a few millimeters.
      2. Gregazov
        Gregazov 1 February 2014 09: 08
        +2
        Quote: patsantre
        Nonsense, fence. There are no invisibles, there are inconspicuous planes. Their whole point is that they are detected at a much shorter distance. Naturally, he can detect "stealth", only at times less than conventional planes.

        Stealth designed mainly to reduce visibility in the 3 cm range. E-3 and A-50 have a range of 7 cm, E-2 and our QUANTUM have decimeters. In these ranges, the effect of stealth technologies will decrease, since it is impossible to reduce ESR in all ranges at the same time.
  22. RN40Y45
    RN40Y45 31 January 2014 12: 40
    0
    A toilet in the A-50 made or again in a bucket, the whole crew go?
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 31 January 2014 13: 51
      +2
      RN40Y45

      He was there from the very beginning.

      Because number of people in combat calculation (including crew) - 14 souls.

      Flight crew - 4 people
      Calculation of RTK - 10 people (Head, 3 SHN, 3 OS, 4 RTK Engineer)
  23. shibi
    shibi 31 January 2014 12: 54
    0
    beautiful plane.
  24. propolsky
    propolsky 31 January 2014 13: 25
    +3
    In Vitebsk at one time there was a regiment of IL-76 and squad A-50. And when there were joint sorties, people were gossiping that flying saucers were launched from planes, because takes off with a plate on board, and sits down already without it! It was fun.
  25. Lissyara
    Lissyara 31 January 2014 13: 44
    +3
    So that there is no porridge, we build a "hierarchy":
    Initially - AWACS - Airborne Warning And Control Sistem, respectively, a whole set of complexes from different countries of the world falls under this "collective farm", incl. "ours" - Tu-126, A-50, "frozen" An-71 and Yak-44 (144). In addition, there is also an AWACS helicopter (Ka-31).
    "Vines", "Bumblebees", etc. - these are the names of complexes of radio navigation equipment.
    A short list of AWACS-like aircraft can be found here. http://airspot.ru/catalogue/aircrafts/type/%D0%A1%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B5%
    D1%82%20%D0%94%D0%A0%D0%9B%D0%9E?page=1
    The data is not particularly accurate, but how is it gritty "without fish and fish with cancer".
  26. leon-iv
    leon-iv 31 January 2014 13: 48
    0
    By the way, the black plane is awesome. I’ll take a picture at the cottage because they fly every day.
  27. Nayhas
    Nayhas 31 January 2014 14: 25
    -2
    With regards to the A-50U. The modernization of the machine is carried out without replacing the radar, and therefore especially the characteristics for the detection of targets have not changed. BUT. His US counterpart, the Boeing E-3 Sentry, also got stuck in the 20th century; his next upgrade to E-3G also concerns only the ability to process information, communications, etc. to increase network-centric capabilities. + engines, fuselage ... They also have a problem with the fact that the Boeing 707 base aircraft is no longer available. An attempt to make a new E-10 based on the Boeing 757 ended in nothing, turned out to be very expensive. As a result, there was a situation when the exported Boeing 737 AEW & C turned out to be better than the native Boeing E-3 Sentry, there you have radar with AFAR and open architecture and the most modern high-speed data transmission system, and what have already been installed. And of course, a more successful aerodynamic layout without an archaic mushroom over the fuselage. Well, the wonderful Boeing 737 base aircraft is able to land at any airport in the world and receive inexpensive high-quality service due to its widespread prevalence.

    PS: The fact that we were planning to do the A-100 on the basis of the An-124 says only that NPO Vega-M is not capable of creating a modern radar complex in a reasonable size. The fact that the Il-76 was again taken as a base does not mean that they were able to shrink in size, but that they would sacrifice part of the characteristics. It is not even necessary to dream of an AWACS aircraft based on the same Tu-214 ... a domestic computer will not fit ...
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv 31 January 2014 14: 32
      +3
      oh how many mantras)))
      open architecture

      And how is it open?
      state-of-the-art high-speed data transmission system

      VOLP chtol.
      the domestic computer does not fit ...

      um, you tie it up to troll all the digital computers go in the normal form factor.
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 31 January 2014 15: 39
        +2
        Quote: leon-iv
        And how is it open?

        Systems with an open architecture make it possible to develop additional devices for it that expand its capabilities and change the composition of the system.
        Quote: leon-iv
        VOLP chtol.

        Yeah, reaching for the plane ...
        TADIL J or Link 16 otherwise.
        Quote: leon-iv
        hmm you tie it up to troll all the digital computers go in the normal form factor

        And what can be the conclusion after reporting the AWACS aircraft based on the An-124?
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv 31 January 2014 17: 12
          0
          Systems with an open architecture make it possible to develop additional devices for it that expand its capabilities and change the composition of the system.

          To go nuts and what's next. This applies to any modern computer system. And these are just general words that say nothing.
          Yeah, reaching for the plane ...
          TADIL J or Link 16 otherwise.

          If that they have been working for a long time. And the most interesting thing is that it does not need an epic bandwidth. There is another interesting wink
          And what can be the conclusion after reporting the AWACS aircraft based on the An-124?

          So everyone wants to eat)))) + then IL was made in Tashkent.
          But to record this on large digital computers is a litso hand. Somehow on the T-50 it fit a small one. The Su-35 is small. On the S-400 is small, but here ololo ogomny, Do we have alternative physics?
          1. Nayhas
            Nayhas 31 January 2014 21: 22
            0
            Quote: leon-iv
            To go nuts and what's next. This applies to any modern computer system.

            To the modern yes, this most likely now refers to the minimum requirements, but with regards to the E-3 and A-50 which come from the deep (relative to the current generation) 70-80s this is a different level. And if the E-3 is undergoing a second update, then for the A-50 this is the first time.
            Quote: leon-iv
            If that they have been working for a long time. And the most interesting thing is that it does not need an epic bandwidth. There is another interesting

            When the E-3 was created, Link 16 was only a dream. Accordingly, the equipment was "inappropriate". The Boeing 737 AEW & C is the baby of the new generation.
            Quote: leon-iv
            So everyone wants to eat)))) + then IL was made in Tashkent.

            Yes it is. But forgive me, at that moment the An-124 was not made, moreover, they were not made not in Russia ...
            Quote: leon-iv
            But to record this on large digital computers is a litso hand. Somehow on the T-50 it fit a small one. On the Su-35 is small

            I don’t know about the T-50, because it was not previously produced, but the Su-35S was 3 tons heavier than its ancestor, despite the Sukhoi Design Bureau announcing the use of composite materials in the Su-35C design, which was not observed in the Su-27.
            Quote: leon-iv
            On the S-400 is small, but here ololo ogomny, Do we have alternative physics?

            At what height is this huge "ololo"? Physics says that it is impossible to see beyond the radio horizon (with decimeter waves for sure).
        2. Gregazov
          Gregazov 1 February 2014 16: 35
          +2
          [quote = Nayhas] Systems with an open architecture allow developing additional devices for it expanding its capabilities, changing the composition of the system. [quote]
          An open architecture assumes EMVOS compliance (a reference model for the interaction of open systems - a seven-level model). EMVOS (OSI) is widely used to interface commercially available equipment from various manufacturers. For piece goods like AK RLDN open architecture is irrelevant. Rather, on the contrary, due to the specificity of the task, the equipment should not be optimized for openness, but for accuracy and speed. And if a 98-bit or some other channel is required for the transmission of radar data, then it is necessary to do it, and on the ground, where the mass-dimensions and power are not so relevant, to reduce the signals to the required types.
  28. jekasimf
    jekasimf 31 January 2014 15: 47
    -9
    Good target. My personal opinion. Today, such things are already outdated. In the case of a real battle, they will be destroyed instantly. It's time to put everything into space.
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 31 January 2014 15: 59
      +4
      jekasimf

      Read less and watch science fiction.
  29. jekasimf
    jekasimf 31 January 2014 16: 07
    -3
    Quote: aviamed90
    jekasimf

    Read less and watch science fiction.

    Such arguments in polemics, for me, are similar to "d_u_r_a_k". There is an opinion, prove, justify.
    1. patsantre
      patsantre 31 January 2014 17: 35
      +1
      Because the task of such aircraft is to detect the enemy before he can detect it, and accordingly cut out everything that is discovered. What do you think they will be destroyed?
  30. jekasimf
    jekasimf 31 January 2014 16: 10
    -2
    bully The site does not allow to print the word "d_u_r_a_k".
    I hope no one will take this as an insult.
  31. Dima
    Dima 31 January 2014 16: 12
    +2
    But I still like the color of the A-50U as a side 33. In a dark gray eggplant color. smile Well, this is a purely personal opinion - in my opinion the car looks more integrated and solid. As for the camouflage of such an aircraft using coloring, in my opinion, for such a machine with modern means of detection, reconnaissance and guidance, this is not relevant. What's on earth, what's in the air. Well, if only we are not talking about basing in the Arctic - and masking with a white top of a traditional color against a snow background or some special radio-absorbing coating. But in this color, his wings are gray. And, once again, the wrong level of detection technology is now in order to help such an aircraft hide the color of the paint, at least against the backdrop of what ... Here I paint the Su-25SM or the new Mi-28, 35, 8AMTS, Ka-52 in gray complete nonsense! These are battlefield machines, and here it is appropriate to take into account visual visibility.
  32. Dima
    Dima 31 January 2014 16: 18
    +1
    In general, it was nice to see the Su-30SM in Domna in traditional camouflage. winked The principle of painting Su-35s new or the same Su-30SM boards 55, 56 for example, I personally do not understand ... what Against the background of what it camouflages and makes the dark gray "top" and the bright blue "bottom" invisible, and even in such a contrasting combination, it is not clear to me ... That is, from the bottom against the background of the sky it should not seem to be noticeable, but from above against the background of the earth - do not care! )
    1. FID
      FID 31 January 2014 18: 33
      +2
      They say that such coloring (in spots) interferes with COMPUTER sights, visual, not radio. How true, I don’t know ...
  33. voliador
    voliador 31 January 2014 18: 29
    0
    Only very long have these modernizations been carried out. Only the third, and the need for them is much higher.
  34. creep: b
    creep: b 31 January 2014 21: 11
    0
    who knows what are the ways to shoot down a drlo plane without entering the detection zone? I wonder how it is protected? Indeed, in case of war, should this be the primary goal?
    1. Gregazov
      Gregazov 1 February 2014 16: 50
      +1
      There is only one way, even if AK RLDN is on duty alone. It is necessary to approach RLDN AK with a minimum radial speed (in a spiral). In this case, the mark from the target will be cut along with the signal from the underlying surface. But this is a bare theory. And the second option. Based on energy, the review speed is approximately 6 reviews per minute. To tie the track you need a minimum of 5 reviews. Those. 1 minute and at least a minute for the decision, the issuance of guidance commands and control of interception from the standby position in the air. Further, the interceptor can intercept the target with the help of its radar. Then there is a minimum of two minutes to intercept AK RLDN. Hence the requirements for the detection range, missile range and fighter speed.
  35. Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 31 January 2014 21: 53
    0
    In the context of realities, badly needed aircraft. Especially in the context of the confrontation between the 4 ++ fighters and the solid five.
    Unfortunately, not in the subject, in the context of the details of the performance characteristics of this center of control of air collisions. But I am sure that you need to pay maximum attention to these funds.
  36. konvalval
    konvalval 31 January 2014 22: 50
    +1
    Dear Aviators! Congratulations from the veteran of the air defense forces of the country.
  37. pvv113
    pvv113 1 February 2014 00: 47
    +6
    THANKS TO THE AUTHOR FOR GOOD NEWS.
  38. Stoyan
    Stoyan 1 February 2014 02: 47
    0
    Good news. Keep it up!
  39. kelevra
    kelevra 1 February 2014 11: 07
    0
    Very good news! I saw such a plane in Krasnodar, the sight of it ... it’s already shivering!
  40. polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 1 February 2014 11: 18
    +1
    We need not one, not three, but at least 23 or 33.A Poghosyan with a friend Manturov (of course it sounds better of course) to Saratov at a closed aircraft factory, to be responsible for their affairs in the under construction brothel. Well, the A-100 will probably appear only by 2018 a year not earlier, in prototypes. Western-style lobbyists are too strong, interfere where they can and as soon as they can.
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 1 February 2014 12: 22
      +1
      polkovnik manuch

      According to the calculations (for A-50 (simple)), to create a continuous radar in the front line, 2-3 SRLDN is required (provided there is a decent ASUV and PPC).

      So consider.
  41. jekasimf
    jekasimf 1 February 2014 11: 47
    -2
    And yet. I'm interested. If such a pipelats detects a low-flying fighter, with a "standard" RCS, at a distance of 400 km. At what distance is he able to detect F 22, Which will be sent to destroy it. Or a low-flying drone, which will be sacrificed for the sake of destroying such a fat target?
    1. Gregazov
      Gregazov 1 February 2014 16: 58
      +1
      The drone has nothing to do at all. With the speed of the drones and their ability to aerial combat to AK RLDN they definitely will not fly. F22 is protected mainly from the three centimeter range. You can not get the same characteristic in the seven centimeter range. If PAKFA sees F22 at a decent distance, then AK RLDN will see it further (big power) ..
  42. ALEXXX1983
    ALEXXX1983 1 February 2014 13: 21
    +2
    Quote: SSI
    In Saratov, the plant is completely closed. On the territory is likely to build a public house.

    there was built a French hypermarket ASHAN sad
    Trade is the only work area in our country.
  43. Eduard_AB
    Eduard_AB 6 February 2014 00: 53
    0
    I thought it was already forgotten. :)

    Quote: aviamed90
    the number of people in combat calculation (including crew) - 14 souls.

    At first, it was planned (5 + 9). Actually, for operation, it was already 15.
    Quote: aviamed90
    Flight crew - 4 people
    However, 5: FAC, 2P, PCs, BI, BR
    Quote: aviamed90
    Calculation of RTK - 10 people (Head, 3 SHN, 3 OS, 4 RTK Engineer)

    Well, it turns out generally 11. :)
    Really 10: KomRTK, 3 SHN, 3 OS, BI RTK, OPRLS, OpKSS.
    9 was without OPKSS. In operation, the latter two were also called BI.
    Rather, for status. (Well, as a Board Technician - A Board Engineer)