Military Review

Take off from the snout


The experience of World War II showed that one of the most vulnerable sides of the frontline aviation are airfields. Even if combat-ready aircraft are preserved in shelters, their use from a destroyed runway becomes impossible. The way to solve the problem was obvious, but the insufficient level of technological development did not allow creating an aircraft that did not need a long runway - the first jet engines, due to their low thrust ratio (the ratio of engine thrust to the mass of the aircraft), had an acceleration of more than a kilometer. But technology did not stand still.

The possibility of creating aircraft with vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL, the English term - VTOL, Vertical Take-Off and Landing) began to be discussed in 1950-s, when the world engine building industry experienced rapid growth. For a vertical take-off, the engine's thrust should have exceeded the weight of the aircraft, but such machines could take off an alarm straight from the hangars or from any unprepared sites. Such a scheme promised exceptional advantages for ship aviation. Projects that recently seemed impossible were actively financed.

In 1957, Ryan's American X-13 Vertijet made its first flight. This unusual car flew up vertically in every sense. Since the direction of engine thrust had to be changed after taking off the ground in order to start acceleration in the horizontal plane, and in 1950's there was no talk about creating a rotary nozzle, the designers decided to start right from the vertical position. The tiny plane was hanging, catching a nose hook on the projection on a special mast, and when the device started to rise, the system uncoupled.

From the outset, it became clear that the usual way to control the aircraft using aerodynamic surfaces (ailerons, elevators and directions) is completely ineffective at low speeds. The position of the machine “hanging on the engine” can only be done by jet rudders (deflected additional jet micromotors), and the designers, having touched about forty designs, managed to develop such a system. Vertijet successfully flew, and during the demonstration flight even landed near the Pentagon, however, the difficulty in controlling made the plane inaccessible to pilots of average skill, and the program was closed. Numerous projects of other US firms, such as Lockheed and ConVair, also did not reach mass production.

From the “table” to the “moon”

We dealt with this topic on the other side of the ocean - in the USSR and Great Britain. To test and debug new technical solutions, various experimental stands were built, such as the British TMR and its Soviet counterpart, Turbolet. On these vehicles, the turbojet engine was mounted vertically, and the jet rudders were spaced apart on four truss brackets. Because of its appearance, “Turbolet” was called the “flying table”. On the test apparatus fully justified the new concept, showing excellent handling. But if the stand did not require special tactical and technical characteristics, then the combat aircraft should have acceptable qualities and with normal, horizontal flight. For this, it was necessary to develop a new, “lift-marching” engine (PMD), a change in the thrust vector of which was achieved through the use of a rotating nozzle that deflected the jet in the right direction. The first such engine was the English Rolls-Royce Pegasus turbofan.

The design by Rolls-Royce of the new engine proceeded simultaneously with the development of a new aircraft, which Hawker undertook. Sir Sydney Camme himself took part in the creation of the car - one of the famous British engineers, the designer of the famous Hurricane aircraft, which formed the basis of the Royal Air Force fighter aircraft during the “Battle of Britain”. NATO was very interested in the new project and agreed to finance the development, so that in the autumn of 1960, the first experimental machine was rolled out of the Hawker plant workshop. First, the R.1127 Kestrel (as the plane was soon named) made a cycle of test takeoffs "on a leash" (it was attached to the ground with steel cables). It was necessary to accurately determine the characteristics of the power plant and to study the characteristics of the aerodynamics of the aircraft. Finally, after careful processing of the information received and making the necessary changes, test pilot Bill Bradford raised the car into the air for real. Launching and testing Kestrel went at a very fast pace, and a year later Bradford successfully made the first landing on the aircraft carrier Arc Royal. Meanwhile, the designers of Rolls-Royce significantly improved the performance of their engine, and the almost completely redesigned P.1127 went into a series called Harrier Gr.1 (harrier means “swamp harrier”). The first squadron of 12 vehicles was completed in the 1969 year. Her main task was to develop tactics for the use of an unusual aircraft.

Take off from the snoutVeridzhet
The accuracy of the approach to the starting mast necessary for a successful X-13 landing was of the order of 20 cm, which not every pilot could do. When landing, the pilot had to navigate by special marks on the starting mast, and rely on commands from the ground.

Anatomy of "Moon"

The main features of the Harrier design are in its power plant and aircraft control system. The Pegasus (Pegasus) engine has four jet nozzles arranged in pairs on the sides of the aircraft and capable of simultaneously turning to 89,5 ° using a special chain transmission. Thus, with a vertical take-off, lifting force is applied at four points, which gives the aircraft additional stability. The front two nozzles are connected to a low pressure turbocharger, and the rear ones are connected to the engine's combustion chamber. Due to the fact that the engine on the plane is only one, the distribution of thrust to the four nozzles is greatly facilitated, since there is no need for precise coordination of the work of several engines. By changing the position of the nozzles along its axis, the aircraft can produce vertical takeoff and landing, horizontal flight, and even fly “tail forward”.

Traction PMD is so great that when the Pegasus nozzles are lowered down, the pilot is almost unable to control the aircraft’s steady position. In such dangerous modes, an automatic reactive control system is activated. It consists of micromotors installed in the nose and tail parts, as well as on the wing consoles. There are no combustion chambers in these engines, but they work by ejecting compressed air, which is supplied to them through special pipelines from the main engine compressor. The reactive control system allows the Harrier to turn in place in a hover mode in any direction and be controlled by roll. Due to the layout of the aircraft, the “bicycle” chassis scheme is used. It consists of two main pillars, located along the axis of the aircraft, and two supporting, mounted on the ends of the wing.

The total capacity of the internal fuel tanks of the aircraft is 2861 l, it is also possible to suspend two discharged additional tanks for 455 l. A large amount of fuel is necessary because of the huge consumption during vertical take-off and landing, therefore, to improve efficiency, a mode of “shortened” take-off is used, during which during a short run-up part of the lifting force is created by the wing and part by the engine. This decision has significantly increased the range of the aircraft, and because of its very characteristic flight style Harrier received the nickname Jump Jet - “jet skip”. In case of an accident, the aircraft is equipped with one of the most reliable ejection seats - Martin-Baker Mk.9. The takeoff occurs as follows: turning the nozzles to a horizontal position and putting the plane on the brake, the pilot takes the engine to maximum speed, by moving the special handle lowers the nozzles down, and the jet stream takes Harrier off the ground.

During the fighting for the Falkland Islands, the Harrier aircraft demonstrated high efficiency and proved to be dangerous opponents even for such serious opponents as the French Mirage III fighters in service with Argentina. But most loudly about the qualities of Harrier is the fact that with the advent of this remarkable machine, the United States and other NATO countries for a long time abandoned the development of their own VTOLS.

"Harrier" on takeoff. Pay attention to the bulge on the left air intake: it is the fairing of the boom of the refueling system in the air that is currently in the retracted position

Soviet experience

In the Soviet Union, many OKBs dealt with the subject of vertical take-off. Most of the experiments were limited to the installation of lifting motors on serial machines. But only the Yakovlev Design Bureau could design a serial VTOL. In the course of work on “vertical lines”, many projects were considered. One unusual suggestion was to use a turbofan engine (on the principle of operation identical to the Pegasus), whose lift fans were to be mounted in the wing, and their rotation was carried out by a gas jet, rather than a mechanical drive. However, Yakovlev understood that the creation of a new engine with a high specific gravity is associated with enormous difficulties, and proposed the creation of an experienced aircraft with a combined propulsion system - a combination of lift-cruise and additional lifting engines. Experiments began with the installation of lift engines on the Yak-28 serial interceptor, and already in 1963, the first Soviet VTOL Yak-36, controlled by Yuri Garnaev, took off.

An unusual machine brought a lot of trouble to both designers and pilots: the new Yak was taught to fly at great cost. Designers led by Stanislav Mordovin had to overcome many hitherto unknown problems associated with the flow of a jet stream around the plane and the nearby surface of the earth. I even had to invent protection to cover a concrete runway that could not withstand the effects of hot gases. A separate problem was the feature of aerodynamics of vertical take-off - the emergence of a rarefied space under the wing, which literally did not allow the car to lift off the ground. A lot of hassle and working out the system of jet rudders, on the principle of operation is identical to the one that stood on the "Harrier". Nevertheless, the problems were solved, and soon the Yak-36, managed by Valentin Mukhin, demonstrated its capabilities at an aviation festival in Domodedovo. However, the aircraft had too modest range and a small payload, so the serial production of the combat vehicle was not discussed.

The layout of the fighter JSF F-35 VTOL

Attempt is not torture

However, the experience gained soon allowed the creation of the Yak-38, which entered service with naval aviation. Due to the lack of a suitable PMD in the USSR, the Yak-38 was equipped with three engines at once, two of which were installed vertically behind the pilot’s cabin and turned on only during takeoff and landing, and the third — equipped with swiveling nozzles — was lifted and sustained. On the one hand, such a scheme removed the need to create a new PMD, but on the other hand, the two lifting engines turned off during cruising mode became useless ballast and catastrophically “ate up” the characteristics of the aircraft.

The use of three separate engines at once required the creation of a special system designed to coordinate their work and adjust the thrust. The problem was solved without the use of electronics: the device was completely mechanical, which further increased reliability. Because of the big problems with “overweight”, the Yak-38 design is maximally lightened, in some places even to the detriment of the safety margin. This made it impossible to create a modification intended for an ejection start. There were problems with the power unit Yak-38 - in the tropics during the southern campaigns of aircraft carrying cruisers lifting engines simply refused to start. It was necessary to install additional oxygen cylinders to power the engines, which allowed them to develop acceptable traction.

The combat capabilities of the Yak-38 were extremely limited: firstly, to save weight, the radar had to be abandoned, and secondly, the early Yaks could not lift anything into the air except unguided rockets and small-caliber bombs, which made them almost useless in defense - both against sea and against air targets. In case of anything, the aircraft-carrying cruiser would have to completely rely on its own air defense system and the powerful Granit anti-ship missile system.

Flight modes F-35


Despite the very mediocre flight data and the offensive nickname “plane of defense of the mast”, obtained from a very modest range, the Yak-38 allowed engineers and the military to accumulate truly invaluable developments in the operation and use of VTOL. Modification of the Yak-38M already armed with guided missiles and taught to take off with a short run-up (while saving fuel), and a special program was developed for the training of sea pilots, which made it possible to effectively train them on difficult-to-control aircraft. His baptism of fire "cucumber", as the pilots called it, took place in Afghanistan, as part of an air group specially created for this.

During the construction of the Yak-38, a unique in terms of reliability system of automatic forced ejection SK-3М was developed. The fact is that in many cases, when a number of systems fail, during a takeoff, the pilot simply does not have enough reaction time to react to the danger. For example, in the event of a failure of the jet rudder during hovering mode, the plane turns over "on its back" in 1,5 seconds. CK-3M analyzes a variety of parameters, allowing you to detect danger before a person, and issues a signal for automatic ejection of the pilot to the K-36ВМ seat. As a result, although the accident rate of the Yak-38 for the USSR was simply a record, not a single pilot was killed during the entire period of operation of these aircraft with SC-3M turned on. There was a case on the aircraft-carrying cruiser “Minsk” when the crew was catapulted out of the water: engines failed on the Yak-38U (training version), and the plane that fell next to the ship began to sink quickly. The catapult triggered in time threw both pilots out of the cockpit of an already submerged aircraft - the pilots landed on parachutes right onto the cruiser deck. After the collapse of the USSR, all Yak-38 were written off, because the country no longer needed these machines. The last flight of this aircraft took place during the preparation for the demonstration program at the MAKS-95 air show and ended in an accident. Both pilots remained alive.

Created at the end of 1980-ies, the Yak-41 became a direct development of the Yak-38 concept, but with the possibility of supersonic flight. The project was led by the son of Alexander Yakovlev - Sergey Yakovlev. Initially, it was planned to install a single lift-propulsion engine on the plane, but due to the death of Dmitry Ustinov, who patronized the entire program, work on the new power plant was delayed, and soon completely stalled, and the designers had no choice but to decide on the use of a circuit with a combination engines. Despite the viciousness of such a decision that had already become obvious in the experience of the Yak-38, the construction of the aircraft was necessary for the development of all systems and assemblies with the subsequent alteration of the machine for a new, powerful and economical turbofan engine. The upgraded version of the Yak-41M began 9 March 1987, and with the passage of each test phase it became more and more obvious that the plane was quite successful. The fact that the pilot Andrey Sinitsin set 12 world records for climb and flight altitude for the VTOL aircraft speaks about its uniqueness. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the progress of work on the car, which received the new name - Yak-141, slowed down, and the accident that occurred in 1991 in the year served only as a reason to curtail the project.


France, which began developing its own machines at the beginning of the 1960-s, achieved some success in designing the VTOL. The first of these was the Mirage-Balzac fighter, equipped in addition to the Orpheus 803F main engine already with eight lifting! Aircraft tests in the 1964 year ended in disaster. The next aircraft, Mirage V, repeating the design of the predecessor, became the world's first supersonic VTOL. However, he suffered an accident, and work was stopped in favor of the traditional aircraft with the usual take-off and landing.

At the end of 1960-s, several VTOL designs were developed in Germany: the first was the Dornier Do.31 tactical transport aircraft. Despite successful trials, work on Do.31 was discontinued ... due to competition with transport helicopters, which eventually turned out to be more convenient to use. Another unusual development of German engineers is the EWR-Sud VJ-101 supersonic interceptor fighter, whose main propulsion engines were located in two rotary nacelles at the wing tips (and additional lift engines in the fuselage). According to calculations, the system of rotation of the entire engine should have given a certain gain in weight compared with a change in the thrust vector due to the rotary nozzle. The jet control of this aircraft worked by controlling the thrust of the power plant itself. Thus, in hover mode, the plane was balanced on three engines. Despite the beauty of the design and the good performance obtained during the flight, the VJ-101 was never launched in the series. The work of the German concern VFW-Fokker on the VAK-191 fighter with the Pegasus engine was also unsuccessful: the characteristics of the Harrier delivered to the stream turned out to be higher, and it was simply inappropriate to “bring” the new car.

Further perspectives

Despite the widespread use of US Navy Harrier aircraft, the development of VTOL aircraft in this country did not stop. According to some reports, in the middle of 1990-ies between the Design Bureau. A.S. Yakovlev and Lockheed Martin signed an agreement on joint work under the JAST program to create a promising fighter for the US Air Force (later renamed JSF). In accordance with this agreement OKB im. A.S. Yakovlev provided the American side with information and research results on the VTOL of the VTOL, as well as preliminary designs of the future Yak-201 fighter. This data was used to create JSF F-35 Lightning II, the most modern development in this direction. To date, this aircraft is in flight testing. The new multi-purpose fighter will have to replace a whole range of combat aircraft, including the morally obsolete, despite continuous and effective modernization, Harrier. The F-35 powerplant utilizes the F-119-PW100 turbofan engine, which was developed by Pratt & Whitney specifically for the F-35. A distinctive feature of the new aircraft in the VTOL version is the use of an external fan mounted vertically in the fuselage. Torque to impellers rotating in opposite directions is transmitted from the turbine through the shaft.

Many modern military analysts are quite skeptical about the F-35 in the VTOL variant, partly believing that using an external fan (which is disabled in flight) is not the best solution in terms of weight savings and that Lockheed Martin repeated in many respects the errors of the Yakovlev design bureau. Nevertheless, the development of aircraft with a short (or vertical) take-off and vertical landing is today one of the most promising and relevant areas. After all, thanks to the use of reconnaissance satellites and high-precision weapons such a structure, as a military airfield, is gradually becoming a thing of the past, giving way to mobile VTOLT, capable of taking off on a mission from any patch.
History Harrier's creations

Special Purpose Aircraft. Yak-38

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. cartridge
    cartridge 15 June 2013 08: 46 New
    I sincerely hope that Serdyukov's disgusting and wrecking plans to reduce the network of military airfields at times will never be realized on the scale on which they were conceived. A well-developed aerodrome network, especially during the threatened period, makes our aviation less susceptible to the first attacks of the enemy and can dramatically reduce the risk of possible losses of both aircraft and the flight and technical personnel of the Air Force.
  2. cobalt
    cobalt 15 June 2013 09: 04 New
    I want to believe that our BB aircraft will have a future, because we can when we want.
    1. elmi
      elmi 15 June 2013 12: 40 New
      It is a pity that Gorby ruined the development of aircraft carriers and the Yak-141. Now they would be very useful to us, for example, our future Mistral helicopter carriers could be used with a slight revision of the vertical take-off aircraft, thereby at least slightly covering the lack of aircraft carriers even in this version.
      1. aviamed90
        aviamed90 15 June 2013 15: 57 New

        And now I’m looking at the ruins of the Saratov Aviation Plant and they do not inspire optimistic thoughts to me.

        But there they produced the Yak-40, Yak-42, Yak-38 ... And this is only in my memory. The plant worked stably during the Second World War. They produced the Yak-3.

        Nothing left of the plant. Land sold. Workers fled (about 30 thousand people). Now there is a building for offices and residential buildings.
        1. cobalt
          cobalt 15 June 2013 20: 24 New
          It’s sad, but quite natural for the developing "crap".
          1. Civil
            Civil 16 June 2013 17: 57 New
            the question is not shit democracy, but capitalism, maybe it’s worth moving towards greater socialization
  3. cobalt
    cobalt 15 June 2013 09: 12 New
    Here is a video of an unsuccessful short take-off from Minsk Yak-38-U
    1. Taoist
      Taoist 15 June 2013 14: 45 New
      SK-EM saved the pilot. A unique system - the same Harrier never had anything like it. Any other deck here would be doomed.
    2. Argon
      Argon 16 June 2013 00: 22 New
      Actually, this is a landing, just the case described in the article, with ejection from under the water. fellow
    3. wei
      wei 16 June 2013 12: 59 New
      Quote: cobalt
      Here is a video of an unsuccessful short take-off from Minsk Yak-38-U

      want to give a more positive headline
      test of the super catapult of the returning pilot from underwater to the launch site
  4. Thomas A. Anderson
    Thomas A. Anderson 15 June 2013 12: 38 New
    Yak-201 is a perfect machine, to what extent are Americans stupid, that having received all the data, the JSF F-35 Lightning II surpasses the Yak-141 only in electronics ....
    1. Argon
      Argon 16 June 2013 00: 44 New
      Not everything is so simple, and in any case, it’s not worth getting excited. Any aircraft (and VTOL especially) becomes perfect in the course of many years of operation. At the moment, such a machine is considered (and rightly "Harier") Another thing, the issue of transferring / selling documentation (and in fact technology) to Americans, requires at least an explanation, this business really smacks of betrayal. angry
  5. Zomanus
    Zomanus 15 June 2013 12: 49 New
    Again, a look at the pro-wins? Yes, the idea is certainly interesting. But at least we need to develop something that has not been completed yet ... have not lost.
  6. Alikovo
    Alikovo 15 June 2013 13: 13 New
    amers stole our technology in the 90s.
    1. ded10041948
      ded10041948 17 June 2013 05: 23 New
      It was not necessary to "rub" anything. We ourselves have given them everything for familiarization in the wake of democratic euphoria.
  7. Taoist
    Taoist 15 June 2013 13: 59 New
    The article is good. But since in my specialty I’m just a technician of the YAK-38 aircraft, I can somewhat add. Yak 38 was not called a "cucumber" ... he was nicknamed "mad cucumber" wassat As for the "lightweight construction to the detriment of strength", I would not be too excited. 38 was an exceptionally strong machine - he made such mistakes during landing and piloting ... (in the photo one of our cars after it accidentally catapulted the pilot almost completely sat down.) And there are a lot of such examples. The stories about the "small weight return" of Yak in comparison with Harrier are also untrue. They (all other things being equal) have close parameters.
    It is well known that the Yak-38 has a separate power plant, and it is also widely known that it is bad, and that a single engine, like that of the Harrier, is good. Let's see how it looks in real numbers.
    In fact, from birth and still on all Harriers there are versions of the same Pegasus engine - any attempts to develop something new rested on the incredible complexity and cost of development. The engine, without exaggeration, is unique, and for its time (the first option was still on Kestrel in the 1960 year!) Is really outstanding. Everything that is possible was squeezed out of the old man, but he still does not give out more than 10200 kgs (in 1982 there were only 9750 kgs). From this we need to take away a decent airflow for jet control and some kind of reserve - after all, we need not just to hang, we must rise. So it turns out that with a vertical take-off, the Harrier of that time could not have been heavier than 9 tons (in fact, even slightly less - 8620 kg). The "backward" power plant of the Yak-38 easily made it possible to fly vertically with a weight of 10300 kg. One and a half tons in our favor! Of course, part of this “eats” the difference in the weight of the power plant. This difference is 225 kg, that is, one Harrier engine - 1708 kg - is two hundred and twenty-five kilos lighter than three Yak engines (1522 + 2 * 205,5 = 1933 kg). It’s also a lot, but it’s not one and a half tons. It should also be taken into account that Sea Harrier inherited from the land ancestor an auxiliary power unit (APU) - its weight is not included in this calculation, it simply did not find the data. In fact, the APU is another low-power engine that provides power and / or compressed air to start the main engine of the aircraft, and the weight of the APU on the Harrier is hardly less than 100 kg. The Yak-38 was originally designed for deck use, so its engine starts when power is supplied from the ship - the APU is not needed, it was not there. The Americans went the same way when creating their decked aircraft.
    Another interesting point is connected with engines. In combat operation, the Yak-38 vertically took off at intervals of 5-7 s - i.e., 6-10 vehicles per minute. The British have a lower pace - 4 aircraft per minute. And with the shortened take-off the same picture: the Yak-38 took off from the 90-120 m, the Harrier flew without a springboard 300-400 m - it turns out that our plane takes off more energetically. And in fact, if you calculate the thrust margin for takeoff (engine thrust minus takeoff weight), it turns out:
    (6100+2*2900=11900)-10300=1600 для Як-38,
    1 * 9750-8620 = 1130 for Sea Harrier.
  8. Taoist
    Taoist 15 June 2013 14: 00 New
    Another question is that Harrier was significantly superior to Yak in avionics. However, at 141 this gap was eliminated.
    In general, if we take the history of verticals then to this day the Yak141 "freestyle" remains the most advanced VTOL in terms of a set of characteristics. By the way, neither the United States nor Britain were able to independently design the supersonic rotary nozzle with an afterburner circuit and bought our development of Yakovlev Design Bureau for the F-35 (alas, we saved the United States years and billions for the “cracker cap”)
    Of the real shortcomings of the Yak was its high dependence on the temperature of the outside air (due to the low gas-dynamic stability of PD compressors), which forced the development and installation of an oxygen recharge system and a limitation on the PD working time, which required pilots to calculate the landing accurately. Well, the high temperature and speed of the gas stream did not allow the use of these machines even with concrete - a metal coating was required.
    1. Windbreak
      Windbreak 15 June 2013 23: 08 New
      Quote: Taoist
      By the way, the design of a supersonic rotary nozzle with an afterburner was not able to be developed either by the USA or Britain.
      And that the British RB.153-76A engine disappeared somewhere?
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 15 June 2013 23: 23 New
        Quote: Burel
        And that the British RB.153-76A engine disappeared somewhere?

        And on what plane is it installed?
      2. Taoist
        Taoist 16 June 2013 00: 43 New
        There were plenty of experimental aircraft and experimental engines on the topic of "supersonic VTOL". But not one of them (unlike 141go) was brought to any real positive result. Ensuring afterburning combustion in a rotary (curvilinear) nozzle is a very complicated gas-dynamic and strength task. And it was practically solved (brought to the level that allowed to really launch the series) was with us.
        "For the first time in world practice, an afterburner was implemented in the second circuit of the rotary nozzle for the lift-propulsion engine, which provides an increase in thrust by more than 66%" (s)
  9. borisjdin1957
    borisjdin1957 15 June 2013 14: 18 New
    from the Don.
    In 77g. served as an emergency in the city of Akhtubinsk. We had Yak-36, Yak-38. Take-off and landing, especially at night, is an incredible sight !!!.
    1. Taoist
      Taoist 15 June 2013 14: 43 New
      Yes, the night flights of my "products" are a bewitching sight ... At first there is a sound - the characteristic "squeal" of working PDs cannot be confused with anything ... Then, pale violet exhaust torches beating to the Earth become visible. A “headlamp” flashes and a blue white pillar of light seems to pull the car to the ground ... The screech grows and becomes almost unbearable ... Swinging on the lights the triangularly angular silhouette of the car as a UFO approaches the ground ... Touching - and suddenly a wheezing breaks off the sound of the PD and it seems that the site was nailed by silence ...
      1. Baron Wrangell
        Baron Wrangell 17 June 2013 09: 47 New
        Quote: Taoist


        15 June 2013 14: 43

        ↑ ↓ New

        Yes, the night flights of my "products" are a bewitching sight ... At first there is a sound - the characteristic "squeal" of working PDs cannot be confused with anything ... Then, pale violet exhaust torches beating to the Earth become visible. A “headlamp” flashes and a blue white pillar of light seems to pull the car to the ground ... The screech grows and becomes almost unbearable ... Swinging on the lights the triangularly angular silhouette of the car as a UFO approaches the ground ... Touching - and suddenly a wheezing breaks off the sound of the PD and it seems that the site was nailed by silence ...

        Yes, you are my friend poet !!! Beautifully described! You ++++ smile
        1. Taoist
          Taoist 17 June 2013 12: 03 New
          Well, when he was also a poet ... Here you are from that "lieutenant poetry" now only now there is no longer poetry ...

          "Piercing with a sleepless eye
          Radar beam lay on the screen ...
          Here we are again in your arms
          They came, Great Ocean.
          In a turbine screen and howl
          Ball steel flickers ...
          Although we are made for battle
          We are silent sea pity.
          Again stress alert
          The ship will swing on the wave ... "(c)
          Like on a blade in Arabic script
          Salty stroke on the armor.
  10. Avenger711
    Avenger711 15 June 2013 14: 19 New
    During the battles for the Falkland Islands, Harrier aircraft showed high efficiency and proved to be dangerous opponents even for such serious opponents as the French Mirage III fighters armed with Argentina.

    Bullshit, "mirages" worked there at the uttermost distance.

    Experience Yak-38 is recognized as negative.

    All aircraft of this type have a very high accident rate and mediocre characteristics due to excess weight. So to regret the Yak-141, at least, is stupid. The development of similar machines should be considered wrecking.

    Indeed, thanks to the use of reconnaissance satellites and high-precision weapons, such a structure as a military airfield is gradually becoming a thing of the past, giving way to mobile VTOL aircraft that can fly to a mission from any patch.

    WHAT ?? F-35B is not allowed to go to land airports, it’s a weapon of transport troughs and pseudo-aircraft carriers. 99% of combat aircraft in the next 50 years will be traditional.

    Article minus.
    1. Taoist
      Taoist 15 June 2013 14: 31 New
      Do not be so categorical. VTOL aircraft were designed and will be developed. Yes, they have their own specific flaws, but as you know, "flaws are a continuation of advantages." Conventional aircraft performed by VTOL aircraft in conditions of limited space for takeoff and landing by conventional aircraft cannot solve in principle. note that both the US and Britain are in no hurry to write off their vertical lines - moreover, the option with GDP is laid in the 5 generation fighter. Are they pests too? And accident rate VTOL incidentally greatly exaggerated. In our regiment, for example, there was not a single disaster. There were accidents and there were no accidents ...
  11. penyvr
    penyvr 15 June 2013 21: 14 New
    No, well, we gave them the technology and what kind of joint project ??
    1. Taoist
      Taoist 15 June 2013 21: 56 New
      Well, that’s what they called so that they would save their face ... but in general, for a half a million “greens” at the end of the 90x, the then leadership of Yakovlev Design Bureau simply stupidly sold the amers all the documentation for the 141go rotary nozzle. + added "from bounty" developments on the development thereof. But it was the creation (more precisely, the difficulties in its development) of a supersonic nozzle with FC that became the main reason that the “superharrier” project was put “under the cloth” at one time.

      “in the middle of the 1990's, an agreement was signed between A. Yakovlev Design Bureau and Lockheed Martin on joint work under the JAST program to create a promising fighter for the US Air Force (later renamed JSF). In accordance with this agreement, the Design Bureau named after AS Yakovlev presented to the American side information and research results on VTOL aircraft, as well as preliminary designs for the future Yak-201 fighter. These data were used to create the JSF F-35 Lightning II "(c)
      "then Dondukov came to the helm of OKB and it began ...
      He sold all the engine documentation for 500 thousand greens and, most importantly, the engine management system ...
      Well, the YAK-3 was sold from the museum, they spoke at 3 of the year, but he never returned.
      From the dynamic testing workshop, the machine and equipment were thrown out ... and they began to saw diamonds there, and then almost all the design bureaus were given to the Bank.

      Although what was to be expected from Dondukov .... "(c)
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 16 June 2013 03: 02 New
        Quote: Taoist
        Although what was to be expected from Dondukov .... "(c)
        How many such Donduks were there in the country, that they exchanged pure gold for American glass beads, for the sake of momentary selfish interest. As I understand it, there are no blueprints in Russia for YAK-141 / 201? Now we have complete silence on the topic, and Dondukov’s FSB is not going to hang on the hook ... Thank you for the informative comments on the topic.
        1. Taoist
          Taoist 16 June 2013 11: 57 New
          As for the left, I don’t know, I don’t know. Probably all the same, there should be copies in the archives. But the fact that the design bureau itself (its technological base) and the plant (Saratov) were "repurposed" into another shopping center ... And my TAKRs went "on the needles" without serving even half the time ... Me (like thousands of the same ones) were also "written off" (but in my specialization we graduated less than astronauts and it cost our preparation I think a little less) It's a shame and a shame. I personally am ashamed to this day - it turns out that I did not fulfill the oath - which I gave consciously and voluntarily. It seems not through his own fault (no one then asked us when they replaced the Power with Sneakers ...) but still ashamed. But the “dondukovs” do not seem ashamed ...
      2. old man54
        old man54 17 June 2013 15: 36 New
        Quote: Taoist

        Although what was to be expected from Dondukov .... "(c)

        Yes, the name "speaking" for itself, you can’t imagine on purpose! Change the second letter to “y” and everything is in order!
  12. Taoist
    Taoist 15 June 2013 22: 09 New
    By the way, a little about the "unreliability and breakdown" of Yak. A unique rescue system was created ... And a system to automatically maintain the stability of the machine. They are not equal to this day.

    “More than 200 Yak-38 entered service with the Russian Navy. During their operation, 19 automatic ejections in vertical modes were registered, including two paired ejections in a two-seater Yak-38U, and all of these ejections were successful. The NAC proved to be a reliable rescuer for pilots in vertical modes. Over a dozen successful manual bailouts in airplane modes during this time also occurred over land and sea.
    This was especially noticeable in the first period of development of the Harriers and the Jacob. So, by the 6 of May 1978, the Armed Forces of England and the USA had delivered 215 "Harriers" of the first generation, and the Navy of the USSR - 45 Yak-38. Of them lost 46 Harriers and 6 Yak-38. 19 English and American pilots died. Of the 27 bailouts, only 19 were successful (of the 9 bailouts in vertical modes, only two were successful). In our case, all four bailouts were successful, and not a single pilot died.
    Only in the United States ILC (in which about half of all serial Harriers were delivered) from the moment of adoption into service in 1970 until the end of 2002 (in the 31 year of operation), in accidents and catastrophes (excluding combat losses ) on the "Harriers" of all modifications 45 combat pilots died and was lost 143 aircraft. 1975 combat pilots died on Yaks from 1991 to 16 (11 years of operation). Many of the Harrier pilots could have survived if there had been an automatic ejection system on these planes, like on Yaks. Only from April 1975 to July 1985 in emergency situations 38% of pilots were saved on Yak-80, and only 50% on English and American Harriers
    1. Argon
      Argon 16 June 2013 01: 23 New
      I completely agree with the respected Taoist, everything is competent and justified, in my opinion the 38th was, if not successful, then fully compliant with the requirements of the machine. Especially if you take into account the cost of the Harier. It ruined the "confinement" of the fleet. Unfortunately, the integration work Yak-38 in the army aviation (and consequently the improvement of the design) were discontinued.
      1. studentmati
        studentmati 16 June 2013 01: 29 New
        The car is certainly beautiful and smart! But the range is critically small! 141 Yak was succeeding, but did not reach ...
        1. Borat
          Borat 16 June 2013 17: 57 New
          Quote: studentmati
          range is critically small!

          I remember during my studies (the end of the eighties - the beginning of the nineties) the Yak-38 was called the DPRM security plane.
          1. Taoist
            Taoist 16 June 2013 20: 51 New
            Well, at the time, the MiG 29 was also called a machine for "gaining superiority in the air over a short-range drive" ... In fact, Yak’s range is quite comparable to the same Harrier. You do not forget that the range depends to a large extent on the combat load and, most importantly, the “flight profile” ... Yes, with vertical take-off and vertical landing and flight at very low altitudes with a maximum combat load it was about 100km. But during the WRC and flight along the profile “large-small-large altitude” it amounted to quite decent 600-700 km. Well, the PTBs that appeared on 38M have not been canceled either. When you compare the characteristics of machines, consider that you need to compare with “other things being equal” ... Harrier, by the way, with vertical take-off can hardly carry weapons at all or requires a decrease in fuel supply, which ultimately gives the same 100-120km of combat radius at a combat load of half a ton. All the "maximum" load values ​​indicated in the performance characteristics do not imply vertical take-off at all.
      2. Taoist
        Taoist 16 June 2013 01: 32 New
        Well, not really like that. It is worth recalling the work of our Rhombus group in Afghanistan. There, by the way, experiments were also conducted with the launch of Jacob from a caravan. Another question is that 38 was initially considered as an "intermediate" machine. His task was rather to prepare flight and technical personnel for the operation of VTOL in principle. Of course, the main bet was placed on 41. It should already have become a full-fledged combat vehicle, including for providing the Air Force.
        By the way - an interesting point - it’s almost never mentioned in the sources, but 38, despite its modest combat capabilities, was nevertheless capable (and had the appropriate equipment) to carry “special items”.
        1. studentmati
          studentmati 16 June 2013 01: 35 New
          Of course, the operating experience of the 38th gave an enormous reserve during the development of the 41st!
    2. old man54
      old man54 17 June 2013 15: 52 New
      Quote: Taoist
      By the way, a little about the "unreliability and breakdown" of Yak. A unique rescue system was created ... And a system to automatically maintain the stability of the machine. They are not equal to this day.

      Sorry, but I watched the dokfilm about the Yak-38, it seems "Shock Force", so there the situation was told when, when taking off from one of the TAKRs, the Yak-38 fell directly into the sea at the heading of the ship. Possible engine failure. So the pilot did not catapult, and it was not possible to save him. the plane was pulled under the ship’s hull, under the working propellers of the ship ... and no one else saw it. :( There, in the film, even the name of the pilot was called. Was this the case, or an invention? And what about the catapult?
      And in general, I heard that the ejection seat of this system greatly complicated the lives of pilots, because itself, it automatically made bailouts, and it seems that often there was no reason for this. What say about it.
      1. Taoist
        Taoist 17 June 2013 16: 25 New
        Well, as one well-known literary hero “don't read Soviet newspapers at dinner” said ... Unfortunately, such “popular films” are often sculpted by authors who have no or “very rough” idea of ​​the subject.
        SAK (automatic bailout system) is not a panacea at all, especially if you do not turn it on. In fact, there was only one case of unauthorized operation I quote:

        "NAC lost the first round of psychological opposition to Yak-38 pilots against the black box. Ironically, the first automatic bailout on the Yak-38 was false.

        4 March 1976 military test pilot, Hero of the Soviet Union, Colonel V. Khomyakov was to perform an acceptance flight on a serial Yak-38 from the factory airfield. In transition mode, when turning the PMD nozzle, the pilot was unexpectedly ejected in the horizontal position of the aircraft at an altitude of about 70 m. He landed on a parachute near the take-off point and, so to speak, became interested in, and where, in fact, his plane.

        The aircraft, meanwhile, continued to fly with autopilot, gaining altitude in transition mode. The local air defense service made noise about the appearance of an unidentified object in the airspace that did not respond to requests from the ground. The management was informed, and a decision was made to bring down the unknown. By this time, the aircraft had run out of fuel, and the “unmanned” Yak-38 landed almost vertically on a snowy field. His cabin was inspected by two collective farmers, and the rest of the plane was in good condition. It took almost a month to determine the cause of the false positives. The defect in the electronic circuit was found, eliminated, the NAC development team was severely criticized, and the Yak-38 aircraft resumed flights.

        After this incident, the psychological climate for NAO was not very favorable. And only after the dramatic, according to the accident conditions, automatic bailout of 15 on January 1977 of the civilian test pilot Isaev at the same airfield, the clouds began to disperse. This time, the NAO saved the life of the pilot after the PMD failed in transition on landing. Automatic bailout occurred 0,2 seconds before the aircraft hit the ground with a subsequent fire.

        After this event, a different kind of incident occurred. An experienced pilot-instructor A. Belokopytov died while performing a simple ferry flight on the Yak-38 in the Crimea. The pilot did not turn on the SAK and in transition to landing mode did not notice the non-launch of one AP. When the plane lost speed, it went into a sharp dive, rolled over for 2, hit the ground and burned down. The pilot did not attempt to bail out manually.

        After this incident, the command issued instructions on the mandatory inclusion of the NAC in accordance with the Operation Manual. The operation of turning on the NAO was recorded on the emergency parameters recorder.

        so of course there were disasters with the Yaks - but here I gave REAL statistics of accidents with the Yaks and the Harriers and how much we and they lost while doing this.
  13. kind
    kind 16 June 2013 13: 12 New
    The Saratov Aviation Plant producing the Yak-38 is no longer there.
  14. andr1966a
    andr1966a 16 June 2013 15: 09 New
    Is it possible to revive?
    1. Taoist
      Taoist 16 June 2013 15: 31 New
      Everything is theoretically possible. But it’s worth understanding that the factory is far from walls and machine tools ... the factory is primarily people. You can’t prepare a qualified locksmith or turner (and the highest qualifications are needed for aviation production) in a year or even two. This is a process that takes a decade, even under those conditions, if the “generational connection” has not been interrupted - but we have been interrupted. Old people leave - who will teach youth? I'm not talking about being “prestigious” today as a worker ... But the world is not at all on “managers with lawyers”, the world is still on the shoulders of “engineers, technicians, locksmiths and welders ...” - but for some reason we forgot about it.
  15. old man54
    old man54 17 June 2013 15: 55 New
    I liked the article very much, "+"! The mood really leaves a sad, nostalgic, that everything was there, but then they were shamed, defeated, sold, and for this they have not punished anyone to this day! Sadly, but ... maybe this will teach someone something?
  16. Taoist
    Taoist 17 June 2013 17: 07 New
    Well and again, since I started talking about Yak’s “ejection seat”.
    To begin with, the “ejection system” and the “ejection seat” are far from the same thing. The ejection system includes an ejection seat as one of the components. two models of seats were installed on the 38.
    The "complex" of rescue equipment at the first 14 VTOL Yak-38 consisted of an ejection seat K-21 designed by OKB im. A.S. Yakovleva and SAK. Starting with 15, serial Yak-38 aircraft were equipped with more efficient K-36ВМ ejection seats designed by the Zvezda plant with the same SAK. "
    The K-36ВМ chair, which became the main one for the "vertical", differed from just the K-36 in that it had two bailout programs. “standard” - used in “airplane modes” (when the flaps are closed) and “vertical” - in addition, a complex automation system and sensors of the SK-EM system
    When operating an aircraft from a ship to a chair, a mechanism was installed to deviate the flight path of the chair to the left when ejecting. This is to prevent collisions with starboard add-ons. When flying from a ship to a coastal airfield, it was recommended to land in an airplane, since when ejecting with a left bank and with a connected mechanism, the safe height of departure from the aircraft increased.

    The emergency reset system for the hinged part of the lantern is electromechanical. Emergency discharge was provided only with the closed upper shutter of the PD. The lantern could be reset both from the seat catapult drives and from the "Avar. Lantern reset" button on the starboard side of the cab. In the vertical and transitional regimes, when the upper flap of the PD was in the open position, ejection was carried out through the glazing of a lamp with a thickness of 8 mm, which was destroyed by the punches installed on the head of the chair. To destroy the glazing of the lantern, when jamming its detachable part in the sub-lantern frame, when leaving the plane on the ground without emergency ejection of a seat, an emergency heading shooting system was intended. On the headrest there was a nest with a ball lock for the handle of his emergency shooting (the handle was located on the vertical wall of the right console of the cabin).

    Both with automatic and manual ejection, the electrical circuit of the ejection unit provided simultaneous supply of voltage from the SK-EM system to the inclusion of a number of electromechanisms: pulling and fixing the pilot in the seat (emergency pull of the shoulders and belt, raising the legs, fixing the arms with limiters); mechanism for lowering the light filter of the protective helmet ЗШ-5А; "transfer" of the nozzle of the powder engine.

    To ensure safe bailout with a fixed position, a left-hand reset mechanism with RUD-a is installed. In accordance with the instructions, the pilots had to perform vertical and transient flight modes with shoulders and a belt pulled and fixed by the operating system. "

    From 1974 to 1988, the total flight time of the Yak-38 and Yak-38M aircraft amounted to 29 425 hours, during this time 37 flight accidents were recorded, of which eight accidents, 21 accident and eight breakdowns, as a result of which 36 aircraft were lost. In the 31 case, the pilots successfully ejected, and in the 18 cases the ejection was performed automatically.
  17. valya
    valya 23 June 2013 18: 14 New
    Quote: cobalt
    I want to believe that our BB aircraft will have a future, because we can when we want.
    1. Taoist
      Taoist 23 June 2013 23: 18 New
      In the beginning, the on-board 59 is my car ...
  18. rubin6286
    rubin6286 13 June 2015 12: 25 New
    Dear Taoist!

    Thank you for your comments, which are always the most interesting for me on the VO website. It's nice to deal with knowledgeable, competent people. From the “guys who worked on the marine theme” in the late 70s, I heard that the appearance of our aircraft-carrying ships in the Mediterranean Sea and the presence of Yak-38 aircraft on board, capable of delivering “special items” to the southern flank of NATO, if necessary, in that period, a sobering effect on the military-political leadership of this bloc.