Military Review

Optical fighter "eyes"

The long-standing dispute over where to place aiming complexes on strike airplanes seems to have no end

The discussion on the need for suspended sighting containers for fighters and fighter-bombers of the Russian Air Force began a long time ago and continues to this day. A paradoxical situation has arisen when the Su-34 complex “Platan” is hidden in the fuselage of the vehicle, and on the Su-35 it will be installed in a hanging container.

Suspended Aiming Containers (PPKs) first appeared in the US Air Force during the Vietnam War. They were used to apply aviation bombs with a laser guidance system. The F-10 Phantom-153 fighter-bombers were equipped with the first serial AN / AVQ-23 Pave Knife anti-aircraft guns and the AN / ASQ-4-AN / AVQ-2 Pave Spike that replaced them. The containers included high-resolution optoelectronic systems, as well as a laser illuminating the target for the bomb's homing head (GOS). It is noteworthy that aiming containers did not interact with airborne weapons (AAS) equipped with a television guidance system, for example, with bombs of the GBU-15 family. Therefore, the crew had to choose a target and adjust their flight to the target, using a video picture from the seeker of the ASP itself.

Optical fighter "eyes"

Until the beginning of the 90s, a debate among NATO aviation specialists continued on the need for such systems. If in Vietnam PPK proved to be excellent, then during the Iran-Iraq war, the Iranian air force did not achieve noticeable results using the Pave Knife received from the Americans during the era of the Shah. Sighting containers also showed bad results on US Air Force F-111 Aadvark fighter-bombers that participated in strikes on Libya in April 1986 of the year as part of Operation Eldorado Canyon. Due to the massive failure of the AN / AVQ-26 Pave Tack and related software, only two F-111 were able to hit the targets, while the rest of the machines of this type that participated in the raid, threw the bombs wherever they went. In particular, the fighter-bomber with the call sign "Lyudzhak-24", which struck the airport "Tripoli", because of the failure of the control panel dropped bombs at a distance of more than one and a half kilometers from the target.

But in 1991, during the operation “Desert Storm”, the same F-111 Aadvark and F-15E Strike Eagle with the latest LANTIRN control panels achieved very good results. Suffice it to say that according to statistics, these machines, as well as F-117, accounted for about 95 percent of all precision-bombs dropped by the anti-Iraqi coalition. From this point on, suspended sighting containers have become an indispensable attribute of most fighter and fighter-bombers of the Air Force not only of the NATO countries, but also of India, China, Indonesia, Egypt, Pakistan, and Morocco. Currently, the Sniper-XR control panel is not only installed on the B-1 submarine bomber of the US air force, but is also being tested on the B-52 strategic bomber (Buff). The air operation against Syria, which was planned last year, was to become a kind of “presentation” of the updated Buff equipped with Sniper-XR. It should be noted that the PPK, however, not domestic development, is already included in the sighting systems of the Su-30 multifunctional fighter-bombers of the Air Forces of Indonesia, China and India. It is noteworthy that the revision was carried out at the request of customers.

Optical fighter "eyes"

Do I need a hanging container?

Against the background of a triumphal procession of sighting containers on the air fleets of countries of the world in Russia, the debate about their necessity continues to this day. The Russian Air Force has not yet decided whether they need PPK strike machines or better with the same complexes, but installed directly on the aircraft.

The main arguments of opponents of the PPK are as follows.

Suspended container affects the aerodynamic qualities of the aircraft, increases the weight of the machine. In a military conflict with countries with modern combat aircraft, fighter-bomber will have to act at low altitude, carrying out a low-altitude breakthrough in rounding the terrain. This is the only way to escape from airborne early warning aircraft. In such conditions, installing a container that degrades aerodynamics and increases the weight of the bursting aircraft is simply a crime.

There are more arguments. “To fight the partisans, when the possibility of a collision with a high-tech aviation threat is unlikely, it is possible with a suspended target container. But against a serious adversary, such as the United States Air Force, we need embedded systems that do not degrade the performance of the combat vehicle, ”the head of the enterprise involved in the development of sighting systems and aviation weapons told a VPC correspondent.

According to the publication interlocutor, only two options are acceptable - when the sighting system is installed in the aircraft itself, as has already been done on the Su-34 fighter-bomber, or when the control panel, if necessary, is advanced before striking the target from the plane. In this case, according to the interlocutor, the deterioration of the aerodynamics of the shock machine will be short and minimal.

“Look at the latest fifth-generation American fighter, the F-35. A special optical-electronic complex, a thermal imager, and a laser for target illumination are installed in his nose in a special container. True, it is not entirely clear whether this container is being pushed or fixedly mounted. But all the same, its placement and dimensions cannot be compared with LANTIRN and Sniper-XR, ”says the head of the company.

For the Lightning-2 created using the Stealth technology, installing a suspended sighting container will worsen not only the aerodynamics, but also its radar stealth.

“The technical solution for installing the Platan sighting system, implemented at Su-34, is now the most optimal solution offered by aircraft manufacturers. In the future, these developments will be used on the T-50 aircraft, ”the interlocutor of the Military-Industrial Courier concluded.

At the same time, not all aviation specialists support such a position on the use of outboard containers.

“If the plane on the outer suspension carries a large number of bombs and missiles, especially if they are mounted on multi-lock holders, there will be no problems at all at either low or medium altitudes,” a TsAGI representative familiar with the problem believes.

True, according to him, if the combat load of a fighter-bomber will consist of only two or three bombs, then the control panel will worsen aerodynamics, but uncritically.

“When a container is wrapped around it, shock waves will arise, it is possible that withdrawal will occur due to an asymmetrically located load. But all this is offset by the introduction of amendments to the aircraft control system. It is enough to perform a couple of flights with the control panel in order to obtain the empirical material necessary for this. Modern fighters have such thrust-carrying capacity that the stool will fly with it. Therefore, there will be no significant problems and loss of speed when piloting an aircraft with a container, ”the TsAGI official stressed.

Support their colleague from TsAGI and aircraft engineers involved in the development of promising samples of aircraft. “I will say this - it all depends on how the plane was created. For example, on the Su-25 attack aircraft, its developers experimented with a large number of overhead containers. The thermal station, the Spear and Dagger containers with radar stations were suspended. No problems with the aerodynamics of the aircraft have never arisen, ”an aircraft engineer involved in the work told a VPK correspondent.

According to the interlocutor, the main problem of the Su-25 is in the absence of the ventral suspension point. True, at present this shortcoming is eliminated.

“Now there are experiments on installation of a container with an overhead radar. At the Su-25 in the bow is set laser station "Maple". There are enough places to install instead of it new optical, thermal imaging and laser systems, and there are no problems with their connection and power supply. Therefore, the radar will stand in a container under the fuselage, and the aiming equipment is traditionally in the nose, ”the aircraft engineer concluded.

It is noteworthy that on the American attack aircraft A-10 Thunderbolt-2, the 2005 of the year was equipped with LANTIRN sighting containers, later replaced with Sniper-XR. True, in the opinion of domestic specialists, for an aircraft that performs direct support to the troops and is often under fire from rifle fire. weapons from the ground, such accommodation is impractical. But because of the GAU-8 cannon located in the nose, American aircraft manufacturers had to confine themselves to a container. Although so far, according to the US Air Force, there has not been a single case of failure, not to mention the destruction of the control panel on the A-10 with the direct support of the troops.

“Until the end of the year, the Su-35 will be put to the test with a Russian-designed CEP suspended sighting container. It will be attached under one of the ventral suspension units. A similar design is being implemented on MiG-29 aircraft. True, due to the smaller overall dimensions and suspension assemblies of the twenty-ninths compared to the Su-27 family, the sighting system will not be installed under the fuselage or wing, but in a conformal container, ”the competent officer of the Air Force believes.

According to the interlocutor "VPK", the tests performed show that in some flight modes PPK create aerodynamic resistance and loss of speed, but these indicators are quite small and almost not felt by pilots.

“The container is the maximum 200 kilograms of weight. Compare with a mass of conventional aviation weapons, for example with the Kab-Xnumx 500-kilogram bombs. But there is also KAB-500. So, in my opinion, all these problems with increasing resistance, loss of speed, inability to perform a flight in the rounding mode of the terrain with a hanging container are “far-fetched”, said the interlocutor of “VPK”.

True, all defenders and opponents of outboard containers converge in one thing - for a promising T-50, an aiming complex similar to that installed on the American F-35 should be installed. Otherwise, there can be no talk about the implementation of radio-electronic stealth at the PAK FA. But now the aviation fleet of the Russian Air Force consists of Su-25 attack aircraft, Su-27, MiG-29, Su-30 and Su-35 fighters and Su-34 fighter-bombers, created not by Stealth technology, therefore the problem with radar inconspicuous for them, in contrast to the T-50, it is not a priority, but the installation of sighting systems integrated into the design of the aircraft requires a significant rework of the machines.

"Mercedes" on the background of "Zaporozhets"

“It is impossible to compare the Platan sighting system installed on the Su-34 with the American Sniper-XR. It is the same as comparing the “hunchbacked” Zaporozhets with the brand-new Mercedes. But “humpbacked”, unlike “Planan,” sometimes works, ”said an experienced aircraft engineer.

About the problems with the aiming complex of the newest fighter-bomber Su-34, recently adopted by the Air Force of Russia, the newspaper "VPK" has already written. These problems are well understood by the Ministry of Defense. But if in the case of using PPK it was possible to simply change the container to a more advanced one, as the US Air Force did, changing the LANTIRN to Sniper-XR, then for the stationary Platan to Su-34 you will have to make changes to the aircraft fuselage design.

“Of course, there is a place to install new equipment on the Su-34. But you have to re-provide power, connection. Change the design, conduct strength tests. There is a chance that you have to blow it. Everything seems to be simple, but it’s time and money, ”the aircraft engineer told the MIC correspondent.

It can be argued that the developers of the Su-25 also chose to leave the opto-electronic system, the thermal imager and the laser rangefinder in the bow in place of the old "Maple". But in the case of the Su-34, it will be necessary to redo the mobile part of the “Platan” that is moving out from the bottom of the fuselage. Change not only the complex itself, its components and mechanisms, but also part of the fuselage. Located between the air intakes, “Platan” has limited viewing angles compared to the Sniper-XR suspended on a special pylon, which is very clearly seen when comparing photos of the Su-34 and F-15. Therefore, if foreign buyers have a desire to put a new sight, it will be necessary to open development work, carry out refinements, research, etc.

“In the modern world, customers are buying, in fact, not a turnkey aircraft, but a platform that can be improved during the life cycle through various systems and not necessarily offered by the aircraft manufacturer itself. For example, the Indian Air Force uses for the Su-30 MKI American sighting containers LANTIRN. Therefore, the aircraft, which requires the introduction of changes in the design and modification of the project for the implementation of the complexes chosen by the customer, is unlikely to be in great export demand. There are two options - either to make an aircraft that does not require processing of the project, or to set up an aiming system that does not lose its relevance for the entire service life of the vehicle. But, as we understand, the second option in the modern world of high technologies is generally unrealizable. Therefore, there is such a high demand for PPK in the world, ”says Andrei Frolov, editor-in-chief of the Arms Export magazine.

But one should not assume that such a situation has developed only through the fault of aircraft manufacturers. The enterprises responsible for the development and production of optical-electronic systems are also to blame. “The Ural Optical and Mechanical Plant (UOMZ) has been developing the sapsan sighting container since 1998. It was made both for the Ministry of Defense and for export deliveries not only complete with domestic aircraft, but also separately. Container proudly drove to exhibitions. But alas, neither we nor the Sapsan Air Force of Russia have ever seen them in working condition, ”an aircraft engineer involved in the development of advanced aviation equipment told the MIC correspondent.

In 2010, the UOMZ had legal proceedings with its former employees due to disagreements over the patenting of components and assemblies that were part of the container. It was about the ball bearing, which allows compact devices to be placed on the aircraft suspension. During the trial, according to a number of media reports, the UOMZ management, in its official response to the lawsuit, stated that it had never produced the Sapsan device, that there were no valid samples of such an instrument and had not been tested. According to the UOMZ representatives, at the moment, only a model of the device, which is not a functioning model, has been manufactured.

How the situation with the Sapsan actually evolved is still unknown. But in fact, domestic sighting containers aviation developers have received recently.

“Now we already have a working target container. But in 2000-s, many foreign customers of the Russian aviation technology demanded such devices, and, alas, they were not, ”complained the aircraft engineer.

Lost in three pines

History introduction of overhead sighting containers to Russian aviation technology is amazing. Here there are fundamental disagreements between the military and aircraft technology developers, not only on technical issues, but also on the use of PPK in modern wars and military conflicts, and the mysterious history of the Sapsan that has not appeared yet. Adoption of the Su-34 with an integrated "Plane". Export shipments of Su-30 for the Air Forces of India, Indonesia, China with foreign sighting containers. Plus, the work on the creation of the fifth generation aircraft. For all the absurdities of the situation, the aircraft engineering developers, in particular, the designers Su-25, Su-30 and Su-35, understand what a machine should be in the modern world in order not only to meet the requirements of the Russian Air Force, but also to attract foreign customers. It seems to have appeared and a decent domestic PPK. It remains to hope that the warring parties in the face of apologists and opponents of suspended sighting containers will reconcile and find a reasonable compromise, and the Russian Air Force will receive truly universal and high-tech combat vehicles. After all, the Russian aircraft industry did not always go only along its own unique path, maybe it sometimes makes sense to look back on foreign experience?
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Nayhas
    Nayhas April 9 2014 08: 55
    In a military conflict with countries with modern combat aircraft, fighter-bombers will have to operate at low altitude, making a low-altitude breakthrough in the mode of enveloping the terrain. This is the only way to hide from early warning aircraft. In such circumstances, installing a container that impairs aerodynamics and increases the weight of a bursting aircraft is simply a crime.

    The LANTIRN PPK mentioned in the article is TWO suspended containers. One with sighting optical equipment, the second with a navigation radar providing flight with enveloping the terrain at very low altitudes. The size of the containers and their shape, if they affect aerodynamics, is much less than the example of a 1000 lb PAVEWAY II ...
    1. PLO
      PLO April 9 2014 09: 06
      so this is an article of your idol dolba! @ ba shame)

      only he could think of wondering and comparing survey search engines on the F-35 with Lantirn and Platan)

      and by the way, any containers very seriously limit the ability to maneuver, because a container stuffed with expensive equipment is a much more fragile thing than any bomb, besides, there are serious restrictions on containers for overloads and most importantly for maximum speed (for example, when the Lantirn is suspended, the speed is only subsonic)

      ps interestingly, he himself notices what kind of nonsense he is telling about the location of the Maple on the Su-25 and considering the possibility of a similar layout on the Su-34 request
      1. postman
        postman April 9 2014 15: 35
        Quote: olp
        because this is an article of your idol dolba! @ ba shame)

        Very competent replica

        Quote: olp
        ps interestingly, he himself notices what kind of nonsense he is telling about the location of the Maple on the Su-25 and considering the possibility of a similar layout on the Su-34

        You demand a lot from captain Alexey Ramm (a), psychologist 74th motorized rifle brigade.
        1. PLO
          PLO April 9 2014 21: 10
          say a former psychologist, now resigned to the reserve, so he writes under his real name. earlier this dumbbell annealed in Izvestia under the pseudonym Alexei Mikhailov.
      2. VAF
        VAF April 9 2014 16: 23
        Quote: olp
        and by the way, any containers very seriously limit the ability to maneuver,

        Oleg, hello! +!
        I’ll also insert my 5 cents!
        To the author minus: negative

        1. The Indians on the Su-30 MKI combat use of guided air-to-surface missiles is provided by a container optical-electronic sighting and navigation Litening system from Rafael (Israel).

        2. Only LD and LTPS can be compared fool

        And for you, it doesn’t limit it really seriously .. no more than any external suspension weighing up to 250 kg wink
        The only limitations are only when the container is "working", it all depends on the level and possibility of image stabilization and the "snapping" functions (crosshairs, marks or spots).
        As well as the capabilities of the calculator wassat For example ... with Kaira, it was necessary on the BC (combat course) during aiming and synchronization 5-7 times to "bind" to the target (during "binding", the current values ​​of aerodynamic parameters from the SVS are specified with the issuance to the computer or BCVS. recalculation of ballistic parameters and coefficients), but on the Platan it is done once ... and everything else in the machine wink
        1. PLO
          PLO April 9 2014 16: 47
          hello, Sergey hi

          I’ve read somewhere that illuminating a target with an optical-electronic container of the LANTIRN complex is possible only at subsonic speeds, because the container is not designed for supersonic in operating mode. is it true? and if it’s no secret how are things with us? can the Su-24 or Su-34 induce laser QABs and supersonic rockets?

          ps and if it’s not at all a secret, did the Su-30SM have its own container during testing or not? winked
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. postman
            postman April 9 2014 18: 15
            Quote: olp
            LANTIRN complex is possible only at subsonic speeds, because the container is not designed for supersonic in operating mode

            If the rocket / bomb is not designed for the regime, then you should not try to launch it. sad
            MIG-25RB with Type: FAB-500TS, FAB-250TS (thick-walled, heat-resistant)

            as well LANTIRN was tested at a pressure of 171 psi (11,72 bar) and T = 253 F (123 ° C), Max = 1,2, altitude 22150 m

            It has a cooling system (heating) of 8500 Btu / hour

            Aerodynamics does not "interfere"

            Note: S. surely can determine the speed of the carrier ... I can not figure out this leapfrog ...
            1. PLO
              PLO April 9 2014 21: 10
              thanks for the reply and video wink
          4. VAF
            VAF April 9 2014 19: 25
            Quote: olp
            I’ve read somewhere that illuminating a target with an optical-electronic container of the LANTIRN complex is possible only at subsonic speeds,

            "Noodles" wassat Almost all sighting systems and complexes in the modern world are designed for use at high speeds (we mean supersonic).
            Basil. this is which the Postman has already painted everything! drinks
            Most importantly, that the ammunition would be adapted to this (another ballistic form, composition of the hull, etc.).

            1. For Su-34 there are no restrictions whatsoever on KABs, and even more so on missiles, KABs can even on GPS.
            2. By Su-24M (almost the same .. here only then the radius of action .. will be small recourse ) all the more there is supersound .. quite small (restrictions on the air intake).
            3. For OPEC (unfortunately we have no navigation) things are going bully
            1. PLO
              PLO April 9 2014 21: 14
              Thank you for the clarification)

              Glad to hear about the container for the Su-30SM
              But is it possible that on new Su-30SM and Su-35S aircraft, the built-in PrNK does not allow flying at low altitudes like on the Su-34?
        2. postman
          postman April 9 2014 17: 00
          Quote: vaf
          I’ll also insert my 5 cents!

          Are you still HERE?
          I thought you were taking part in Operation Clear Sky of Ukraine?
          From the polite air force of an unknown friendly country!

          ================================================== =======

          it’s necessary to somehow react to the stupidity of the Ukrainian police. What do you think?

          March 12, 2014 16:22
          Former head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Yuriy Lutsenko invited the military of Ukraine and NATO to begin military patrols throughout the country. In addition, he invited NATO aircraft to start bombing the Crimea.
          1. VAF
            VAF April 9 2014 19: 27
            Quote: Postman
            Former head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Yuriy Lutsenko

            Vasya. Hello! drinks Do not pay attention - this is a diagnosis! wassat
            1. postman
              postman April 9 2014 20: 54
              Quote: vaf
              Do not pay attention - this is a diagnosis!

              I OFFER YOU TO The World Health Organization.
              you will then quickly PROVIDE MAIDANTS with "universal access to health services"

              Doctors in the US consider it pointless to treat every fifth patient who visited the Maidan
        3. Nayhas
          Nayhas April 9 2014 20: 51
          Quote: vaf
          but on Platan this is done once .. and everything else is in the machine

          Good afternoon.
          Allow a couple of questions.
          1. Can LTPS Platan be used for planting at night and in difficult weather conditions?
          2. If so, how much does the front pillar interfere?
        4. sivuch
          sivuch April 10 2014 09: 02
          If you don’t mind, the question is about Platan. Are the problems with the adjustment resolved? A year ago, they wrote that it is required after several flights
      3. 9lvariag
        9lvariag 24 May 2014 21: 57
        Competently, especially since in the USSR replaceable containers with aiming stations and reconnaissance were even hung on the SU-24. EW equipment and equipment. And the speed with them is subsonic.
  2. melman
    melman April 9 2014 11: 49
    What the hell are these sources for such a "high-ranking officer", "TsAGI employee familiar with the problem," out of his head or what? But most of all, "Here and the fundamental disagreements between the military and the developers of aviation technology, not only on technical issues, but also on the use of PPK in modern wars and military conflicts." The truth is that our military hostages are our own military-industrial complex, so I think they themselves will figure out how and what to use there.
    1. lelikas
      lelikas April 9 2014 12: 14
      We are looking forward to an article on which end to break an egg with - from a blunt or sharp one!
  3. w2000
    w2000 April 9 2014 12: 26
    "There is a paradoxical situation when on the Su-34 the Platan complex is hidden in the fuselage of the vehicle, and on the Su-35 it will be installed in a suspended container."

    There is no paradoxical situation. Su-35 fighter for gaining air superiority and work on the ground for it is the tenth thing, the thing is not at all essential. And it is absolutely correct that this option is being solved by the suspension of external equipment, and not by the development of an optical station for placement inside the fuselage. Moreover, I think that even this is superfluous and is being done only for show in order to meet the requirements of the military for universality. In reality, there is no need to use the Su-35 "on the ground", and most likely it will never be implemented. Su-34 and Su-30 were created for work on land and on ships - this is their fiefdom. And to make all aircraft universal, besides, with the available variety, it is a senseless dispersal of resources.
  4. bvi1965
    bvi1965 April 9 2014 12: 45

  5. EvilLion
    EvilLion April 9 2014 13: 50
    Replacing internal equipment is actually not at all more difficult than external, which is why standardization is also known. From the point of view of electrical, software compatibility, etc., the external does not differ from the internal equipment.
  6. gregor6549
    gregor6549 April 9 2014 15: 39
    Everything is determined by the main purpose of the "eroplan", it seems to me
    If the main task is to gain air superiority, including in maneuverable air combat, then push everything that interferes with such a battle "inside".
    If the same aircraft will sometimes be used to solve other problems, then all additional sensors to the main ones (if required) can be provided with special suspension. containers with a set of sensors optimized for exactly these tasks. It can be not only optical sensors but also, for example, side-view radars. By the way, the picture of the radar data is comparable to that obtained using optics.
    For attack aircraft, the range of targets is usually wider than for fighters and, therefore, requires greater flexibility in the selection of sensors for different ground targets. Moreover, since attack aircraft speeds are generally lower than those of fighter jets, and the combat load is greater then container sensory systems are suitable in general. But even optical / optoelectronic sensors are not always advantageous to carry on themselves if active illumination of the target is not provided, and this is not always possible, because the enemy does not sleep, It is better to suspend an extra superfluous bomb.
    There are no particular problems in terms of power supply of containers. If necessary, an air impeller or its equivalent is placed on the container and the trick is done. The main thing here is not to get carried away with universalization, try to have everything in one bottle and consider that each given type of "litaka" should be able to do everything and with equal efficiency. God is God, and Caesar is Caesar
  7. Ev58
    Ev58 April 9 2014 16: 24
    Took part in the development of one of these containers. I omit the details: for which board, what are the parameters of the equipment located in it. I will say about the main thing: when the prototype was developed, manufactured and configured and it came to flight tests, the aircraft lost its main performance characteristics, nullifying all positive predictions from the implementation of such a constructive solution. All the main decisions should be laid down at the stage of object development, take into account its functional purpose, specificity of application, and not worsen the aircraft aerodynamics.
  8. barbiturate
    barbiturate April 9 2014 17: 43
    A very important topic was touched upon, as according to numerous testimonies and statements of both pilots and aviation experts, the Russian Air Force is practically incapable of delivering high-precision strikes at night or in bad weather conditions on the ground. The Americans, and indeed almost any country that has at least some decent aviation, solves this problem with the help of containers, why and why are we worse? Somehow uncomfortable with such a lag. As a result, our airplanes with excellent aerodynamics on the ground do not work well, or even cannot work at all. How did this lag happen?
    1. VAF
      VAF April 9 2014 19: 37
      Quote: barbiturate
      . according to numerous testimonies and statements of both pilots and aviation experts, the Russian Air Force is practically incapable of delivering high-precision strikes at night or in bad weather conditions on the ground.

      Who has shown you a similar HERB ??? How does night or SMU affect the conditions of combat use using MM. Range ????
      1. barbiturate
        barbiturate April 10 2014 03: 14
        such "heresy" is regularly spoken by pilots and experts in interviews and videos, it is full.
        1. 9lvariag
          9lvariag 24 May 2014 22: 03
          They are not able to inflict them due to the slowness of many pilots and problems with the training of personnel.
    2. Ev58
      Ev58 April 10 2014 09: 52
      The voiced principle "why are we worse?" led to the fact that many solutions began to be repeated as domestic versions. What does this principle mean? It only means that the one who is engaged in repetition of someone else's experience is always lagging behind, following the tracks made by someone. Undoubtedly, advanced achievements deserve attention, but my remark, as a professional instrument system engineer and developer of BO aircraft of various classes and purposes, sounds in defense of domestic promising developments, which are often limited by the nomenclature of existing materials, ERI, coatings and technological capabilities of a domestic manufacturer. We are no worse, we are better, and most of the original ideas, concepts, principles, design solutions, despite the existing limitations imposed by the production capabilities and developed technologies, allow us to create high-class aircraft and compensate for the existing "disadvantages" and "problems" in the construction of a BO ... And versatility is a waste of energy, material and human resources, which does not give the desired effect in the end.
  9. twviewer
    twviewer April 9 2014 19: 15
    I beg your pardon, but how good is it from captured heaven if you cannot use air strikes to hit the ground, and besides, not tied to the time of day or weather conditions, with the right intensity and accuracy ??? In addition to the shield, a sword is also needed; he who has no initiative cannot win.
    PS I think so.
    zzy (why then do su35 if there is a moment31? and air defense)
  10. Igor75
    Igor75 April 9 2014 19: 25
    Quote: w2000
    Moreover, I think that even this is superfluous and is being done only for show in order to meet the requirements of the military for universality. In reality, there is no need to use the Su-35 "on the ground", and most likely it will never be implemented. Su-34 and Su-30 were created for work on land and on ships - this is their fiefdom.

    Before the start of World War II, it was also believed that fighters were being covered, bombers were bombing, attack aircraft were storming. And when there was a threatening situation, then the SB became an attack aircraft, I-153 and I-16 columns were bombed. Therefore, an additional function will never be superfluous!
  11. Nayhas
    Nayhas April 9 2014 20: 34
    The irony in relation to the author (even more than irony) for some reason automatically casts doubt on his fabrications. Moreover, sometimes the author writes articles of praise addressed to the Russian military and military equipment and it is not clear to agree with him in this case or automatically subject him to obstruction.
    In this article, the author touched upon the problem of PEP, albeit rather clumsily. I doubt that anyone believes that we have such a problem. Perhaps on the sidelines there really is a dispute between supporters of integrated sighting systems and pendant systems, but I personally doubt it because this argument is illogical.
    Why precisely suspended. It's no secret that 99% of world aviation comes from the 20th century, while the F-16, for example, comes from the dense 60s (when the formation of the appearance of the car and the concept of application began) when they just started to stutter about the hanging sighting systems, and their capabilities and prospects were rather vague. The dimensions of the machine did not allow to place a rather bulky equipment, while completely unnecessary when performing air defense tasks. The transfer of sighting systems to a hanging container allowed the concept of a universal aircraft to be realized, which, when using the AEC, expands the shock capabilities in terms of target detection and expanding the range of weapons. Until the EPR became an important parameter, the use of PPC was the ideal solution, for 4-generation aircraft this is still true. It is enough to look at the following photo, how much in this case the control panel increases the E-F-16 and spoils the aerodynamics?

    Built-in modern optical IR sighting systems are universal systems designed to detect both ground / surface targets and airborne. The most famous of course is the EOTS on the F-35.

    Agree, it looks better than a combination of IRST21 (top in the pylon) and Sniper XR control panel under the F-15SG?

    Therefore, the installation of the integrated UNIVERSAL IR optical sighting systems is necessary for airplanes with reduced EPR, for the existing fourth-generation aircraft with weapons located on the external sling, PPK is enough.
    1. PLO
      PLO April 9 2014 21: 36
      any fabrications based on false facts are meaningless.
      in almost every article, the author demonstrates his complete technical illiteracy. and it doesn’t matter whether he writes well or badly about domestic technology.

      specifically in this article, the whole problem is completely sucked out of the finger and mixed with statements of varying degrees of delirium.
      no one ever tried to install an integrated optoelectronic system such as Lantirn, Sniper or Platan on fighter jets.

      EOTS on the F-35 is an analogue of our optical-location systems, it cannot be used for guiding missiles and guided bombs with a laser semi-active seeker, and therefore can not replace Lantirn and Sniper
      so the F-35 will also fly with a hanging container

  12. Jedi
    Jedi April 9 2014 22: 27
    I absolutely agree with the aftam ... but I would very much like to clarify .. how much (what specific distance does our invincible and unkillable instant-29 see) and how much is the phantom - 2? and why is he at least 20 years worse than him ???
  13. Nayhas
    Nayhas April 9 2014 22: 38
    Due to the fact that there is an opinion about the built-in e-opt. EOTS guidance system as an analogue of optical-location stations (OLS) installed on domestic combat aircraft, I consider it necessary to provide a brief description of it:
    The built-in electronic-optical guidance system EOTS is designed to detect and identify the target, accurately target the target air-to-ground and air-to-air missiles. The multifunctional optoelectronic sensor used in the EOTS system is based on the proven and proven Sniper XR technology. The EOTS system includes a mid-range infrared sensor, which is a third-generation thermal imager, a laser and a CCD camera. Such a complex provides the detection and clear identification of targets at large, safe distances for the fighter. Also, using the EOTS system, you can perform high-resolution photo and video shooting, automatic target tracking, infrared search, laser target illumination, laser range measurement, and tracking of laser marks delivered by other tracking and pointing systems.

    1. PLO
      PLO April 9 2014 22: 43
      So what)
      and in OLS-35 there is also a laser rangefinder (it was also on OEPS-27 in OEPS-30)

      OLS-35 is designed for the Su-35 aircraft and provides:
      • An overview of the airspace, land and water in the front hemisphere of an aircraft;
      • search, detection, capture and auto tracking, determination of angular coordinates and range to air, ground and surface targets (CC, SC and SC) in average IR (3 ... 5 microns) and visible wavelength ranges;
      • detection, capture, tracking and determination of the angular position of the spot of the external laser illuminator;
      • laser illumination of SC, NEC.

      EOTS is an analogue of IRST21
    2. iwind
      iwind April 10 2014 00: 01
      Quote: olp
      EOTS on the F-35 is an analogue of our optical-location systems, it can not be used to direct missiles and guided bombs

      That's just lockheedmartin, I'm sure that EOTS can aim weapons.
      The Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) for the F-35 Lightning II is an affordable, high-performance, lightweight, multi-function system that provides precision air-to-air and air-to-surface targeting capability
      Quote: olp
      EOTS is an analogue of IRST21

      Completely different things
      1. PLO
        PLO April 10 2014 00: 31
        That's just lockheedmartin, I'm sure that EOTS can aim weapons.

        not quite correctly put it
        the possibility of using laser illumination of a ground target for VZ missiles was announced back in OEPS-30, but for some reason they are not used for these purposes.

        the same EOTS optical system obviously includes 2 mirrors, laser illumination of a target through such an optical circuit is some very interesting solution.
        and in Lantirn and Sniper there is a reason for viewing and aiming systems

        Completely different things

        but more specific?
  14. iwind
    iwind April 10 2014 09: 54
    Quote: olp
    Completely different things
    but more specific?

    I suspect that you are confusing two different F-35 systems, the DAS optical complex for target detection (although it can also launch missiles) and the EOTS is just an aiming system.

    "IRST21 is a passive long-range sensor system that uses infrared search and track technology to detect airborne"
    An infrared detection system and tracking only aerial objects, the IRST21 cannot aim a missile. Personally, my opinion is quite a meaningless thing. Lockheed is trying to sell it to someone now, but somehow I doubt it will turn out to occupy her separate pylon is too much, and if you are promoting it with the PTB, it’s expensive in the event of a PTB reset.
    1. PLO
      PLO April 10 2014 20: 39
      xs maybe you're right, but I still doubt that EOTS can replace Sniper XR
      the layout there is very strange

      video of the use of weapons VZ F-35 has not yet appeared? (I could not find)
  15. iwind
    iwind April 10 2014 21: 15
    Quote: olp
    the layout there is very strange

    There is nothing I can’t say, if I could design such systems as EOTS, I probably would already have a yacht, and maybe not just onebully
    New things always look unusual.
    Quote: olp
    video of the use of weapons VZ F-35 has not yet appeared? (I could not find)

    it is strange that you could not find many of them. There is a photo where they threw a bomb at the tank. In a year, the F-35b will be put on operational alert; now more than 50 pilots are training on the F-35b.

    1. PLO
      PLO April 10 2014 21: 45
      hmm .. really. Thank you for the video.
      It seems I was wrong.
      I wonder if the T-50 will be able to use laser ASPs in this way.
  16. dmitrij.blyuz
    dmitrij.blyuz April 11 2014 14: 54
    Wow! And what are the dots on the fuselage? For targeting our GSh-30? laughing
  17. Kronos
    Kronos 4 June 2014 16: 12
    We need to develop suspended optical systems!