In the Russian Federation, the development of heavy wig

TsKB them. Alekseeva completed work on the conceptual design and began to develop the technical design of heavy ekranoplan A-050, reports MIC With reference to the head of the enterprise Georgy Antsev.




“Works on the A-050 ekranoplane takeoff weight of the 50 t order are carried out within the framework of the development budget of the enterprise,” Antsev said.

He noted that "the level of preparation of the project today is such that the company is ready to begin construction of the head sample." In parallel, negotiations are underway with potential customers of the machine.

“Most likely, it will be a foreign customer,” said Antsev. - A-050 ekranoplan is ideal for the Federal Border Service, for the Ministry of Emergencies, for the Federal Guard Service, for patrolling the near zone in the interests of the Naval fleet».

“A-050 will be equipped with fully Russian avionics and modern navigation and aerobatic complex, developed in conjunction with the Aviation Equipment Research Institute,” he said. - The ekranoplan has very good aero-hydrodynamic characteristics. He successfully passed the tests in the wind tunnel and at the hydro channel. ”

According to Antsev, the Central Clinical Hospital in recent years "has risen to its feet: many different levels of research and development have been carried out in the speed fleet, in the wing, in the cavern and in ekranoplans, including in the interests of the Ministry of Defense." “TsKB them. Alekseeva regained the former laboratory and bench equipment, almost completely restored the laboratory research and, in part, production potential, ”he said.

Help CCB: “The A-050 marine ekranoplan will have a take-off weight of 54 t, carrying capacity of 9 t or 100 passengers. Cruising speed will be 350-450 km / h. Seaworthiness during takeoff / landing - 1,5 m. Power plant - starting engines P-195 x 4500 kg (as on the Su-25 attack aircraft) mid-flight - TV7-117СМ x 2500 hp (as on the IL-114). Flight range will be 5000 km. "

Photos used:
bastion-karpenko.ru
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. evil partisan 5 September 2015 08: 25 New
    • 20
    • 0
    +20
    Some kind of evil look from him ... sad Or did it just seem to me after yesterday's corporate party on the occasion of the Civil Labor Party? what
    1. Vladimirets 5 September 2015 08: 31 New
      • 36
      • 0
      +36
      Quote: wicked partisan
      after yesterday's corporate party on the occasion of the day of NGP workers

      After that, the wife has an unkind look. wink
      1. evil partisan 5 September 2015 08: 43 New
        • 23
        • 0
        +23
        Quote: Vladimirets
        the wife has an unkind look.

        Especially the last 30 years. yes
        1. crazyrom 6 September 2015 03: 52 New
          • 8
          • 0
          +8
          Tell me the experts: The most difficult thing for an ekranoplan is to take off, crawl out of the water. I read somewhere, the biggest for separation from the water goes 18 tons of kerosene. And if under the lower part, which is in the water, to force air in order to have a layer of bubbles there, this should greatly reduce the resistance, it will slide on the air cushion, it may be easier to get out of the water and less motors will need to take off?
          1. Nick 6 September 2015 13: 33 New
            • 8
            • 0
            +8
            Quote: crazyrom
            Tell me the experts: The most difficult thing for an ekranoplan is to take off, crawl out of the water. I read somewhere, the biggest for separation from the water goes 18 tons of kerosene. And if under the lower part, which is in the water, to force air in order to have a layer of bubbles there, this should greatly reduce the resistance, it will slide on the air cushion, it may be easier to get out of the water and less motors will need to take off?

            The classic way is the use of redana on the bottom, it is used to switch to the planing mode on high-speed boats, it was also used on seaplanes at the time, to facilitate separation from water, and as in the case of an ekranoplan, the question is ...
            1. abrakadabre 7 September 2015 08: 01 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              As well as boosting exhaust gases and jets from propellers under the wing.
          2. Kir
            Kir 6 September 2015 19: 32 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Crazyrom, it is implemented in a hybrid called ECIP, by the way, in terms of flight altitude and the possibility of take-off and landing, it surpasses its progenitor.
          3. unclevad 7 September 2015 09: 56 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            It says about starting engines. They are not visible on the model, but if you recall the design of the "Caspian monster", then its nasal turbojet engines (three in a row on each side) blow off the wing with gases ("working fluid") during takeoff, creating lift on it so that time exit no planning mode was less. Of course they ate a huge amount of fuel. This is clearly visible on the "Eaglet". At cruising speeds, starting ones are not needed, and when it is necessary to fly at low speeds below the critical speed, they are launched again. And with the effect of the "screen" encountered in testing the TU-144. When landing, its huge wings created a screen over the runway and he refused to land normally. The testers walked to "squeeze" him to the strip. The designers had to rack their brains on how to get rid of this.
            1. Wasiliy1985 7 September 2015 21: 01 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Why is it not visible then ?! Above the nose are the “nostrils” of the air intake, and on the sides, behind the cockpit, the “gills” of the exhaust are clearly visible! In the best traditions of Alekseev’s design bureau, there are obliquely installed screen blowing engines that facilitate access to it. Exactly such a scheme was used on the Eaglet landing craft: two launch and inflatable airplanes, quickly display on the “screen” mode (in case of a march failure, they can fully ensure flight on the screen, but with much greater “gluttony”) and one turbo-propeller marching on the developed keel at the back (provides the main flight on the "screen").

              Eaglet
    2. BilliBoms09 5 September 2015 08: 33 New
      • 12
      • 0
      +12

      He noted that "the level of preparation of the project today is such that the company is ready to begin the construction of the prototype."
      It's always nice to read good news. In the morning the mood is uplifting. smile
      1. EGOrkka 5 September 2015 10: 53 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Given the range of 5000kw, it’s cooler than the Mistral.
        1. Dormidont2 5 September 2015 13: 55 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          you can get undetected at low altitude and let go
        2. lelikas 6 September 2015 12: 05 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: EGOrkka
          Given the range of 5000kw, it’s cooler than the Mistral.

          - What's cooler?
          - Than Mistral ... laughing
      2. palmse 5 September 2015 11: 03 New
        • 8
        • 0
        +8
        For me, it would be better in the morning the wife raised And everyone in the cell of society would have a good mood
    3. MIKHAN 5 September 2015 08: 34 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      Eh such at least a couple of amers to drive on the Black Sea .... inconspicuous and good speed, a range of 5000 km!
      1. TVM - 75 5 September 2015 08: 55 New
        • 16
        • 0
        +16
        Note that the customer is foreign. This is not at all pleasing.
        1. clidon 6 September 2015 21: 23 New
          • -1
          • 0
          -1
          Do not worry, most likely he will remain a project. except that China will buy a little thing for itself to see, to feel.
      2. CTEPX 8 September 2015 09: 34 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: MIKHAN
        amers to drive on the Black Sea ....

        Already there)).
    4. Abbra 5 September 2015 08: 39 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      This look is prepared in case of landing opposite Los Angeles ...
    5. War and Peace 5 September 2015 08: 42 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Most likely, it will be a foreign customer, said Antsev.


      such a flight is needed for a country with long maritime borders, such as China or India ...
      1. rosarioagro 5 September 2015 08: 46 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: war and peace
        such a flight is needed for a country with long maritime borders, such as China or India ...

        In my opinion this is the only goal - for sale
        1. 17085 5 September 2015 09: 04 New
          • 8
          • 0
          +8
          If 54 tons is heavy, then Lun ??? Heavyweight?

          As far as I remember, they began to develop a preliminary design long before 2013?
          If at such a pace, then my dream is to ride on a normal ekranoplan ... in short, I will not survive (((
          1. avia1991 5 September 2015 20: 42 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: 17085
            If at such a pace, then my dream is to ride on a normal ekranoplan ...

            With your flag ?! That's for sure - hardly wink
            Development was carried out in the USSR in the late 60s - early 70s. In the 70s it was curtailed. So this sample is the work of the last 2-3 years, no more!
            1. 17085 8 September 2015 07: 03 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: avia1991
              Development was carried out in the USSR in the late 60s - early 70s. In the 70s it was curtailed. So this sample is the work of the last 2-3 years, no more!


              Photograph of the 13th year, rather more.
              But don’t look at my flag, I’m not hiding behind the Soviet one, I have nothing to hide, today I’m here, and tomorrow there ...
              wink
          2. Aljavad 6 September 2015 02: 59 New
            • 5
            • 0
            +5
            If at such a pace, then my dream is to ride on a normal ekranoplan ... in short, I will not survive (((


            It is written: "restored the test base ... returned the laboratory, equipment ...".

            THOSE. Forcibly recovered from an aimed blow. further should go easier. There would be orders ...
            1. Zoldat_A 7 September 2015 11: 32 New
              • 4
              • 0
              +4
              Quote: Aljavad
              It is written: "restored the test base ... returned the laboratory, equipment ...".

              TE Forcibly recovered from an aimed blow. further should go easier. There would be orders ...

              They showed it on TV about it. There is some guy with money - an enthusiast, a childhood dream he had all these hydrofoils, etc. The boy grew up, cut the dough and started a hobby - he bought the production and testing base of R.E. Alekseev, restored it, and now produces tiny 2 for sale -3-local ekranoplans according to technology and on the areas still laid by R.E. Alekseev. Well, there is no rush demand, in my opinion, - our "successful managers" probably haven’t entered this fashion yet. But - a unique base saves from destruction and weeds - and thanks for that. Orders, he says, are exclusively private, the Ministry of Defense is not interested in ekranoplans (I’ll add from myself - it’s been with us for many years that it’s only been interested in the Mistrals - okay, even though the progress has begun). But the "private traders" have not yet tried what kind of toy it is and therefore there is no money for serious cars.

              I don’t remember whether it was G. Antsev, who is in the article or not, but since the base is R.E. Alekseev, it means a conversation about her.

              If all our hucksters had such hobbies, we would have lived in a completely different way. And then they are increasingly buying football clubs and Faberge eggs. No, this, of course, is also a necessary and important matter, but with the ekranoplans - well done man. For example, I never dreamed about a lot of money, but if I had fallen, I thought about such a hobby. And we have...

              There, Potanin, in the 2002 year for the Hermitage bought for Lyam dollars (then 28 Lyamov rubles) Malevich's “Black Square”. For that lam, some pool in the Central Design Bureau of Alekseev would have been better restored - there would have been more benefit. But this scarecrow weighs in the Hermitage - under one roof with the Dutch and the Impressionists ...
              1. Wasiliy1985 7 September 2015 21: 39 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Is Black Square a masterpiece? I thought that - the daub of one idiot for other same idiots ..
                For me, Shishkin is such a talent!
                And this namalevich, in my opinion, of those that is Fima Malevich, an Odessa “ascetic” with Deribasovskaya who successfully steamed his daub to a London dandy, and one who did not look like a “sucker” in front of his own, made an advertisement in the style: “how fresh it is ! " In short, the sucker of a sucker sees from afar ..
                1. Zoldat_A 8 September 2015 01: 02 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Wasiliy1985
                  "Black Square" is a masterpiece, or what ?!

                  None of the art historians explained to me what the value of the "Black Square" is, so I, an ignoramus, do not know what a masterpiece it is. Moreover, all 4 “Squares” are stored in Russia - two in the Tretyakov Gallery, one in the Russian Museum and one in the Hermitage. I would have driven all four of them for a lot of money on the same “Christie”. All Aivazovsky’s money can be bought with the proceeds, which floats abroad.

                  And even more so - it is possible for such uncles who not only plunder, but also try to revive something - well, if not money, well, at least they helped. There are some benefits or something else ... No, we have tax benefits for oligarchs who buy eggs abroad and "Squares" ...
            2. 17085 8 September 2015 07: 07 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: Aljavad
              It is written: "restored the test base ... returned the laboratory, equipment ...".

              THOSE. Forcibly recovered from an aimed blow. further should go easier. There would be orders ...


              I believe! I agree ... but not just a ride ... I confess. I dreamed of becoming the captain of such an ekranoplan on 25 thousand and drove from Vladik to Murmansk in February in 72 hours with a hundred containers.
              1. Zveruga 30 January 2017 19: 50 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Your words are heard. Design such, just for such tasks.
      2. veksha50 5 September 2015 09: 53 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        Quote: war and peace
        such a flight is needed for a country with long maritime borders, such as China or India ...



        Do we have less sea borders, or what?
      3. PQ-18 5 September 2015 11: 44 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        such a flight is needed for a country with long maritime borders, such as China or India ...

        belay what well, except of Russia ... "the length of the sea borders" is less than the total Indo-Chinese ?! request crying
      4. Zveruga 30 January 2017 19: 48 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Russia is the country with the largest maritime border in the world.
    6. starshina78 5 September 2015 09: 03 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      It is scary that the phrase sounds: - "Most likely it will be a foreign customer ...". But what about our listed: Ministry of Emergencies, the FSB border service, the Navy. What do not they need? Looks weird.
      1. atalef 5 September 2015 09: 27 New
        • -19
        • 0
        -19
        Quote: starshina78
        It is scary that the phrase sounds: - "Most likely it will be a foreign customer ...". But what about our listed: Ministry of Emergencies, the FSB border service, the Navy. What do not they need? Looks weird.

        how many articles about ekranoplanes were
        In my opinion, this is a dead end branch of development. It makes no sense, expensive, the application is nude - that’s how to cut the dough, like Gazprom’s proposal to remake the Shark’s nuclear submarines into liquefied gas carriers.
        1. dr.star75 5 September 2015 09: 50 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Well, why a dead end branch? Imagine: the Israeli Navy on such things quickly went off the coast of Syria, shot off along Damascus, returned! And then I'm not me, and the cow is not mine! wink
          1. atalef 5 September 2015 09: 55 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: dr.star75
            Well, why a dead end branch? Imagine: the Israeli Navy on such things quickly went off the coast of Syria, shot off along Damascus

            Adjacent and only.
            From ekranoplanes - shot back belay
            In Damascus, you can easily shoot artillery from the Golan, on a good day it can be seen, only 60 km.
            Yes, in fact, someone will explain the combat use of this device.
            I’m entering somehow
            Quote: dr.star75
            And then I'm not me, and the cow is not mine!

            And then no matter with the airship - the same cow and not mine wink
            1. sabakina 5 September 2015 11: 07 New
              • 11
              • 0
              +11
              Atalef, actually on the "Lun" "Mosquitoes" stood. Why not put a sea-to-earth rocket?
              1. strannik1985 5 September 2015 11: 23 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Because “Lun” as a carrier of anti-ship missiles lost to both ships and MPA.
                1. avia1991 5 September 2015 20: 47 New
                  • 7
                  • 0
                  +7
                  Quote: strannik1985
                  lost to both ships and MPA.

                  Is it possible in more detail? When, where, with whom were they compared, and what weapons were used?
                  It does not hurt to draw an analogy with today ..?
                  1. strannik1985 6 September 2015 07: 20 New
                    • -1
                    • 0
                    -1
                    Is it difficult to compare specifications?
                    1. avia1991 6 September 2015 21: 31 New
                      • 7
                      • 0
                      +7
                      Quote: strannik1985
                      Is it difficult to compare specifications?

                      There is just no difficulty! You are simply throwing groundless statements, trying to pass off your own attitude to the ekranoplan as justified by comparative tests! You do not like the concept - but for God's sake! But then answer on YOUR behalf.
                      Compare experienced - not serial, mind you! - the sample that did not complete the state tests does not have practical meaning. And given the development of technology, the quality of anti-ship weapons, the combat ekranoplane built today can become a real "killer of aircraft carriers", and even the AUG of those same! Now tell me which is more promising: to build aircraft carriers, spending CRAZY means and forces on it - or to create weapons that are most likely capable of destroying these aircraft carriers?
                      1. strannik1985 7 September 2015 01: 23 New
                        • -2
                        • 0
                        -2
                        In order to appreciate the taste of the dish you need to be a cook, and the quality of writing a book writer?
                        1.Although you read yourself carefully. If EPs have been developing from the end of the 50s and have not crawled out of short pants (Didn’t you want to build 8 “Luns”? Is this not a series, in your opinion?), So that we can talk about creating a normal machine taking into account the development of technology (which by the way?), then what kind of comparison can we talk about?
                        2. An aircraft carrier, a means of gaining dominance at sea, to cover anti-aircraft forces (even if it is a hypothetical shock EP with an acceptable range and seaworthiness), you still need an aircraft carrier aircraft group. If you are already talking about anti-avianos EP, then compare it with MPA or PLARK.
                      2. avia1991 8 September 2015 20: 28 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: strannik1985
                        If EP has been developing since the end of the 50s and did not get out of short pants

                        Do you even make friends with History?
                        Remember, in what conditions ekranoplans were developed, under what competition, and what concept did the then leadership of the country sympathize with? If it weren’t for Ustinov, it’s not known at all, they would have managed to build at least something!
                        By the way, for the sake of interest, read what problems were with the An-12mi at the beginning of their "service" in the army. Ekranoplanes and half of these sores did not have! However, An went into a large-scale series, and the EP was hacked, without particularly going into details.
                        So your sarcasm about the "long-term" ekranoplanes is inappropriate in principle hi
                      3. strannik1985 8 September 2015 20: 38 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Transition to personality is a sign of defeat.
                        Namely, if it were not for the personal predilections of Ustinov, D.F. instead of a bunch of failed projects, the fleet would have received normal funds to asymmetric answers. As far as I remember, research and development on the topic of electronic technologies until the year 1985 cost the state 500 million rubles.
                        A slight difference is that the AN-12 problems are resolved, but the EP-no.
                      4. The comment was deleted.
                      5. strannik1985 9 September 2015 08: 01 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        I reply to the deleted comment.
                        AVI Magazine 06.
                        Interview with the general designer of the ekranoplanes Sokolov November 26, 1993, Moscow.
                        Answer: Until 1985, in the prices of the pre-inflation period, about 500 million was spent on everything. rubles.

                        Maize was removed in 1964, the R&D Order was a military-economic justification for the construction of an aircraft carrier pr.1160-1969-1972, carried out by the Nevsky Design Bureau, it was planned to build a series of 3 aircraft carriers in 1973-1986. Under project 1160, catapult outfits were completed , aerofinisher and emergency barrier. Under the preliminary project, more than 900 documents were issued, interaction with subcontractors was worked out.
                        An army can be (although three different MBTs with similar characteristics is still insanity), and a fleet can not, having successful foreign experience before its eyes, scientific justification and capabilities spent money and time, resulting in zero.

                        Lun was built in 1983-1986, in March 1987, design tests, in July 1989, factory, trial operation in 1990-1991. Ustinov from "that world" supported the project?

                        Many seaplane models also have landing gears, NKs can be supplied from floating bases, planes to land on suitable public roads — does this eliminate the need to build a standard infrastructure?
            2. Starley from the south 6 September 2015 14: 37 New
              • 4
              • 0
              +4
              Quote: avia1991
              When, where, with whom did they compare,

              No one, of course, compared. It’s just that the ekranoplanes have more speed than the ships, it’s harder to detect, and even if you find it, it’s harder to destroy (still, the target moving from 300 is 500 km / h). If they create our military ekranoplan, then it will be necessary to create or alter all systems for it: navigation, target designation, weapons. Then, on full-scale tests, we can say what is where and for what is better.
              1. Alexashka964 6 September 2015 21: 07 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Quote: Starley from the South
                If they create our military ekranoplan, then it will be necessary to create or remake all systems for it

                So you have to CREATE, and not wipe the pants in the Kremlin, hiding behind "smart" words and beautiful promises ...
          2. proletarian 5 September 2015 23: 16 New
            • 8
            • 0
            +8
            The “Lun” had its own tasks, before “scattering”, familiarize yourself with its performance characteristics and purpose.
            This is a unique car and don’t need la-la about the Caspian Dragon
            1. 73petia 6 September 2015 15: 34 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Not the Caspian Dragon, but the Caspian Monster or KM. KM is the abbreviation for "ship layout." KM was a purely experimental design, and he became a "monster" only by the will of journalists.
      2. dr.star75 5 September 2015 12: 52 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        “But someone suddenly ISRAELISTS in Damascus decided” In Damascus, you can easily shoot artillery from the Golan, on a good day you can see it, only 60 km “shoot back? Damascus that declared war on Israel?
      3. proletarian 5 September 2015 23: 12 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        The main task of ekranoplanes (at least in the USSR) was to quickly and seamlessly deliver heavily armed troops to the enemy’s coast.
        And if it weren’t for the “spot”, then “MOONS” would not have transferred the Air Force and the ekranoplan’s career in the army would not have been interrupted.
        Traitors were and will be; scary is different when the traitors of their country "get" to the highest echelons of power.
        1. strannik1985 6 September 2015 07: 35 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          How will it be inconspicuous if they are preliminarily attacked by the Air Force and the Navy anyway, if the airborne winged landing craft still need to be covered by the Air Force? Landing EP poher back in 1984, after Ustinov.
          "Lun" generally carrier rocket with a range of 2 km, was intended to deal with aircraft carriers.
      4. Starley from the south 6 September 2015 14: 28 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: atalef
        Yes, in fact, someone will explain the combat use of this device.

        More often you need to read reviews of military or other equipment, for example, here in VO - there will be fewer questions. In short, the ekranoplan has three main advantages: profitability (and the greater the distance (not intercontinental) than the gain compared to the aircraft above), does not require specially prepared airfields and berths, can quickly and covertly approach the target, and if necessary destroy her. Sorry if you have to explain all this as a first-grader. hi
        1. strannik1985 6 September 2015 16: 02 New
          • -6
          • 0
          -6
          Profitability? An-12 carries 20 tons per 3200 km, and Eaglet the same 20 tons per 1500 km. What will happen from the layout, and what will be compared with transport aircraft is unknown.
          I.e. how not needed? Hangars, slips, hydraulic ramps, hangars, service boats, anti-corrosion equipment, floating docks (Lun has a floating dock for 500 tons).
          EPR at the level of a ship of comparable (or rather large sizes) at higher speed, there is only a nuance, now in modern combat with the widespread use of guided weapons and aircraft, this advantage can hardly be called decisive, especially since it is not equipped with self-defense means. The output is expensive horseradish with low combat stability and serious limitations in use.
          1. avia1991 6 September 2015 22: 13 New
            • 7
            • 0
            +7
            Quote: strannik1985
            Eaglet the same 20 tons per 1500 km

            Not 20, but 28 tons. By the way, the AN-12go's NORMAL load is just 12 tons, 20 is the maximum, and with such a weight of 3200 km it will NOT fly ANYWHERE! And do not forget that the ekranoplane moves near the ground, at an altitude of 10 meters, where the drag is much higher than that of the An-5th going 7-12 km. So I repeat: stop your personal attitude to the ekranoplan as “scientifically based” wassat
            1. strannik1985 7 September 2015 01: 09 New
              • -2
              • 0
              -2
              Airwar.ru gives a load capacity of 20 tons.
              That is, at maximum load, the range of the An-12 will be equal to or slightly further than that of the "Eaglet"? And this is a 50s development aircraft where it’s just not flying and with a bunch of modifications?
              1. avia1991 8 September 2015 20: 22 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: strannik1985
                Airwar.ru gives a load capacity of 20 tons.

                So where do you get the information from!
                I, in a sinful affair, thought that PERSONAL PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE is more important .. but if your source is a site .. of course, then you are great wassat
                1. strannik1985 8 September 2015 20: 39 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Those. essentially, Mr. Minuser, have nothing to say? Thanks for your attention.
                2. avia1991 8 September 2015 23: 40 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: strannik1985
                  Mr. Minuser, do you have anything to say?

                  First, literate people write “you” with a capital letter. Secondly, I said enough, if you didn’t understand, it was about my own professional experience (with regard to the characteristics of the An-12), and your links to the site’s data ... You amused me - no more.
                  Thirdly, there were ONE drawbacks from me ONE time when you started to cite the very data that was written off somewhere - I can not stand it when you categorically begin to say something, referring to the information "read somewhere"! And if you were surprised by the total number of "minuses" - here I am not an assistant: ask people why they did not like your statements request . Who wants to - answer.
                  "Essentially" I repeat the following: for some reason, you categorically do not accept the idea of ​​using ekranoplans. It seems to me that your technical training is not enough - but there is plenty of aplomb. And therefore, I don’t see any reason to give you any arguments “FOR” EP: you won’t take them, your task is not to find out the truth, but to prove your “rightness”, even contrary to logic and common sense. No wonder you have riveted so many comments here.
                  I’m not for anyone - and even more so, for a person who shut up his ears! - I’m not going to prove anything - I don’t need it.
                  Wake up and take my leave. There will be a desire to DISCUSS something - contact. And with haughty, condescending teachings - this is not the right place.
                3. strannik1985 9 September 2015 06: 34 New
                  • -1
                  • 0
                  -1
                  Dear, if you are not able to argue your point of view based on written sources, then who is your doctor? Why should anyone take your word for it? The behavior of a young man in puberty, not an adult.
  2. Alexashka964 6 September 2015 21: 04 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: atalef
    Yes, in fact, someone will explain the combat use of this device.
    I’m entering somehow

    As for combat use: With a carrying capacity of 9 tons, it can be used, for example, as a high-speed torpedo bomber, killer aircraft carriers, for example. 100 passengers - a wonderful high-speed landing transport, and with one refueling - and off the coast of America, and for some 15-20 hours ...
    WIG - a new promising form of transport, and much cheaper than aviation, at aviation speeds. When the first plane took off (more precisely, an airplane), not only ordinary people asked similar questions, but also the first persons of the states ...
  • Maxom75 6 September 2015 01: 02 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    That is why Syria has BAL complexes. Now do not go)))
  • EGOrkka 5 September 2015 11: 10 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It’s even very cool: from Sochi to Tel Aviv in 5 hours of summer. The highways would be trudging for 3 days .....
    1. strannik1985 5 September 2015 11: 46 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Even if it is lagging, though not lagging, the DESO’s survival will depend on the density of the airborne / air defense umbrella covering it, so the Mistrals have a full-fledged radar, air defense systems and large-caliber machine guns for close air defense, while the seafaring of Orlyonka and Lunya was limited 2-3 points, I'm not talking about much less capacity and flexibility of use.
      1. EGOrkka 5 September 2015 12: 39 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        .... what are you? what are you? 100 passengers-050, 200 passengers-080. A festive fireworks and friendly support may well be arranged by frigates of project 22350 and project 11356.
        1. Großer feldherr 5 September 2015 13: 21 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: EGOrkka
          .... what are you? what are you? 100 passengers-050, 200 passengers-080. A festive fireworks and friendly support may well be arranged by frigates of project 22350 and project 11356.


          What then is the point of speed (the only advantage to the detriment of everything else), if ordinary "slow" ships cover it?
          Well, if speed is so important, what are the advantages of ekranovlanov as rocket carriers over the Tu22, Su34 / 35 squadron or something like that?
          It’s not worth dreaming for landing, because it’s already obvious that it is contraindicated for them to approach the places where they shoot and where the enemy fighter can get it.
          1. EGOrkka 5 September 2015 13: 38 New
            • -3
            • 0
            -3
            what's the point of dragging 7-15 days of highly specialized fighters to use ..... or not to use ?????? during this time they could be in 7-10 places! And what about your air defense frigates somewhere? Yes, they also have a hangar for helicopters !!!! Where is it better ?! A group of 4-8 ships can be anywhere ....

            Well, aviation in +
        2. strannik1985 5 September 2015 14: 07 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Yeah, against 450-900 fighters, up to 70 combat vehicles, 16 helicopters, a command center, a hospital, stocks of MTOs, weapons and ammunition. All the same, you’ll have to either build a special large EP to transport equipment or have a traditional landing ship as part of the compound.
          If the cover will still be provided by means with much higher (aircraft) or lower (ships) speed, then why fence the garden? Helicopters of frigates will serve as a PLO, they have enough of their tasks.
          1. EGOrkka 5 September 2015 14: 49 New
            • -3
            • 0
            -3
            Well, drag your ro on the ro-ro and the hospital at least for months for landing, then what the hell ??? as a watchman? And when necessary, he will or will not come ....

            why should everyone slow down.
            1. strannik1985 5 September 2015 18: 19 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              That is, other things being equal, there will be two DESOs, respectively, you need twice as much strength to cover. Great.
              Moreover, the landing without the support of heavy equipment, DVKD helicopters will be easier to suppress, the enemy will be able to beat us in parts.
      2. proletarian 5 September 2015 23: 34 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        You probably don’t understand? The ekranoplan is not a “mullet full of mullet” for you, the ekranoplan only takes off and is brought down from the surface of the water and the movement occurs as above the surface of the water (up to 30 meters) although available sources say about 1-5 meters on the “screen” above of course, less land up to 10 meters (due to the heterogeneous terrain); oh yes about the “moon” you dearly overdid it with diminishing its merits, seaworthiness “Moon” 5-6 points, range 2000 km, maximum take-off weight 380 tons, capable of to transfer a motorized rifle battalion with full armament, which is about 500 people plus a full-time "set" of infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers and other "nishtyaks", at a speed of 500 km per hour or by sea "standards" of 270.3 knots.
        1. strannik1985 6 September 2015 07: 13 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Cowards or a cross?
          "Lun" -shock machine, carried anti-ship missile Moskit, a crew of 10 people, what kind of landing?
          The landing was the "Eaglet", it only carried 20 tons (AN-12 (the beginning of operation in 1959) has the same cargo capacity, which is equal to 90 soldiers or 60 paratroopers, with a range of 3200 km).
      3. Kir
        Kir 6 September 2015 20: 29 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Interesting thing, most specialists indicate the lack of protection of “Mistral” with their own weapons, and by the way, by the “flexibility of application”, “speed” and materials used, they have also been known for a long time, so about this gesture of the former Minister of “Defense” Serdyuk and his clique better not to talk. By the way, as far as I remember one of the reasons for signing this shameful pact was the purchase of certain equipment that came with it, if I remember correctly it was a question of thermal imaging and some other equipment, but you wrote about nothing.
        1. strannik1985 7 September 2015 01: 57 New
          • -2
          • 0
          -2
          You see what’s the matter, the use of the Mistral DVKD is considered as part of the connection, which will provide it with air defense / PLO. The ship itself is located at a great distance from the coast, relatively small and high-speed landing boats and helicopters fall under attack. DEP cannot be covered by ship forces, the speeds are too different, aviation remains, but its use at long ranges is limited (instead of part of the payload, you need to carry PTBs, do not quickly increase (flight time)) and if the missile defense can only hit anti-ship missiles, the number of which is limited, then DEP arrives directly on shore, under the fire of everything, including mortars and ATGMs (naturally, pre-process BOs, but who will give a 100% guarantee?).
          An alternative to Mistral-0, zero, nothing, nothing. After reviewing the image, the Nevsky Design Bureau promised to build an analogue in 7 years, but that was before the sanctions, that is, the deadline is likely to be longer. Existing landing ships, still Soviet-built, are intensively operated as part of the Syrian Express, sooner or later they will crumble. As a result, the fleet may turn out to be without DCs or with a very limited number of them.
          1. Kir
            Kir 7 September 2015 02: 29 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            And what about the fact that the material from which it was created is used in civilian life, then in which theater of operations this trough can be used, because it is unsuitable for most of our water areas, then there’s haemorrhage with fitting our helicopters to their design, and for what it is .. ... especially since from the very beginning they indicated that they were taking it because of the devices, but not because of its use. Then, what does the sanction have to do with it? After all, a lot of things in those that didn’t come to us were installed by ours, then rather, probably, first of all, Our Krylov State Scientific Center and a number of others, at least some of the leading World centers that they themselves are not able to create so do you think I’m generally silent about the materials. Moreover, with what fright we need an analogue of ento, even if there are no tasks for which it was created in our military doctrine. By the way, why should the aircraft, when hunting for this pit, only have to rely on PTB, and not on air refueling.
            By the way, if there are alternatives, then there is only one Alternative, it is its direct descendant of the ECIP, so with all your attitude to the topic of such aircraft, do not explicitly indicate a replacement, since it is simply not in nature.
            1. strannik1985 7 September 2015 04: 14 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Given the changes in the body, on any, including SF.
              There were a lot of articles on this deal, including on the betrayal of everyone and everything, now believe everyone?
              To begin with, in the USSR / Russian Federation such ships (DVKD) did not develop further projects, it was precisely for the opportunity to get acquainted with the current model, and not for brochures, and this, in part, was realized, they paid money.
              Of course they’ll build it, in 7-9 years (only the development of the project is 2,5 years), stuffing bumps where they could work taking into account the operation of the serial DVDKD.
              That is, how not? And why do they build two BDK pr.11711?
              In fact, of the serial counterparts of DEP, there are transport aircraft and landing ships, a long time in metal and successful operation.
              I will not indicate, because the ECIP itself is not in nature.
              1. Kir
                Kir 7 September 2015 16: 31 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Excuse me, what? EKIP, oh well, probably the foreigners showed interest in “castles in the air”, and by the way, the layouts, but unfortunately so far only they periodically fly. Strannik1985 I'm sorry why you have such a biased attitude towards machines using the screen effect.
                For interchangeability, you have given a whole list of what can actually completely replace one type of aircraft
                1 What delivery vehicle can be operated from different "airfields", of course, you can point to WUAs, but the trouble is they are still attached to the surface
                2 Combine spacecraft at high speed
                3 low flying target

                With regards to everything, believe me, forgive me, and that, in addition to these pelvis, the then leadership didn’t buy 2 Augusta before the pile (one now seems to be the prime minister, and the other is listed as Moscow Region), Iveco and other things, the Earth didn’t grab the Earth, it dispersed and moved part of the WU and further in the text, well, how is it not worth believing?

                According to the projects, the strange logic, that is, that which has no prospects embodied in metal, but that it was necessary to stop at the stage of projects ....... not exactly the idiots + Manilovs + pests at one time, but now eyes have opened and began to buy what we ourselves could’t build, or maybe vice versa Then they thought about the Perspective, and now ...... By the way, the aircraft carriers were not built due to the fact that they can be based all year round only on TF, which is more than compensated by other types ships, including the largest Submarine Fleet. Then We and they had different strategies for using the Armed Forces, which also leaves its mark on the types of weapons.

                PS I would like to believe that the time when they thought to return, and when it was done for the sake of a gesheft ends, it is even better if the wall and confiscation are for the enemies of the People.
                1. strannik1985 7 September 2015 18: 17 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  I have nothing to do with ECIP, since there is no experience in construction, operation, its advantages and disadvantages are unknown (in practice). To EP (as a part of the Navy as amphibious or assault vehicles), the ratio is negative, both in the experience of actual operation and comparison with analogues.
                  For example, the same IL-76 is designed for operation from concrete and unpaved airfields with strength characteristics of at least 0,6 MPa and is capable of delivering loads with a maximum mass of 28-60 tons to a distance of 3600-4200 km with a cruising speed of 770-800 km / h (maximum the mass of the transported cargo and the flight range depends on the modification). All IL-76 cockpits are sealed, which makes it possible to transport 167 (in the double-deck version - 245) soldiers with personal weapons or to ensure the release of 126 troops. The aircraft can transport the entire range of military equipment of the airborne units and most of the technology of motorized rifle divisions. The cargo compartment measures 24,5 m in length (of which 4,5 fall on a ramp), 3,45 m in width and 3,4 m in height. The aircraft is able to take on board up to 109500 liters of fuel and cover a distance of up to 6700 km with an average fuel consumption of 9 tons / hour. The take-off take-off length is 1500-2000 m, and the landing run 930-1000 m.
                  And the most interesting thing is that you can’t tear your tail off with a careless maneuver.
                  To paraphrase you, why are you biased towards aviation (both transport and strike) and ships (because the money from GOZ will go from traditional means to ekranoplanes, it’s not enough for everyone, not even enough in the Union)?
                  For individuals, a foreign customer, for a suitable niche (not an electric depot and not a RCC carrier), please, but do not repeat the second trip to the rake.

                  There are both positive and negative steps in the actions of any leadership. In the situation with the purchase of Mistral Serdyukov is nothing more than an statistician, the final decision was made by the GDP.

                  TAVKr "Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov" is based on the Northern Fleet.
                  You see what’s the matter, being carried away by the Prospects, we spent 1,5 times more money than the United States, without creating a means for the Navy to gain supremacy at sea.
                  For example, the same Ustinov buried two atomic AB projects; instead, the fleet received 4 pre-aircraft carrier cross-cruisers, and by the fifth the understanding of the need for a normal AB came. And here, at the request of Ustinov, they abandoned the large AB, for the fleet they ordered two more pre-aircraft carriers pr.1143.5 and 1143.6 with a springboard, without AWACS, with a converted GEM (which very soon could not provide enough speed for the Su-33 to take off with full load), to the seventh was ordered a normal AB (ATAVKr pr.1143.7 Ulyanovsk), but the Union collapsed.
                  The situation with SSBNs was in many respects similar, having a bunch of RPLs (86 pieces by 1982) could not provide comparable to American KOH boats.
                2. Kir
                  Kir 7 September 2015 18: 52 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Excuse me, but what do you mean by EP analogs?
                  For 1.5 times the big expenses, where did this information come from, then oh, they didn’t create a damn .... That’s why we, with humpback and Eltsin and his comrades, actively sniffed and pearled, by the way, take an interest in who invented Red Glue and who now he brings income, the same will be for many other technologies and materials. By the way, I repeat again with us they were and I hope that there will be different concepts for the development of not only HE but also a lot, because in addition to individual schizoid and provocateurs, they do not see those hallucinations about world domination and the paranoid idea of ​​their exclusiveness, as well as a mustache in the world around us, but what is there, in the whole Universe, encroaching on this stronghold of the very self.
                  Now, according to Ustinov, Putin, and others: it’s somehow interesting that it turns out that the responsibility lies only with the Minister of Defense, then the finish line immediately First person, maybe there is still some kind of decision-making hierarchy.
                  With regards to the Navy and Aviation, here you are enough, I can’t treat them badly, if only because my father is a graduate of the Kaliningrad Higher Military School of Economics (graduating from 1954, and before that the primary and secondary schools in Vladivostok and Engels), then he really worked in related organizations with Aviation and Space, mother is a graduate of the Moscow Aviation Institute, then he has a lot of acquaintances from among those associated with aviation, so .......
                  For the money that is always lacking, this is the favorite song of all "communities", then Cosmos has eaten up everything, then the Army has eaten pensions and benefits, etc., etc., it seems like they have already drunk on verbiage. There are less than any humanitarian subversive funds, public anti-public associations and other things ....... it is necessary to subsidize, but at the same time not to produce any humanitarian who have a single working body language.
                3. strannik1985 8 September 2015 11: 06 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Analogs for the tasks being solved.
                  Kuzin V.P., Nikolsky V.I. "Navy of the USSR 1945-1991." Pp. 458-460.
                  Industrial espionage was, is and will be, but no one in the world builds large electronic agents, despite the great backlog made in the USSR.
                  Until 1976, Dmitry Fedorovich Ustinov was secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU and a candidate member of the PB of the Central Committee of the CPSU in charge of the defense industry, and in those days the shipbuilding program was approved precisely by the decisions of the Central Committee and the Council of Ministers. Different countries, different management structures, the rights and obligations of responsible persons, and different decisions — a shipbuilding program within the USSR / ATS or a large order in a Western country.
                  Ustinov’s position on large-tonnage aircraft carriers softened only by the beginning of the 80s, when it became clear that TAVKR and KVVP could not fulfill all the tasks facing aircraft-carrying ships, and small-displacement aircraft were flawed, before projects AB.1160 and pr.1153 were hacked on the vine.
                  More than 1961 billion rubles were spent on the creation of the naval component of the anti-aircraft forces in 1990-10 (16 DPLRK, 5 AB and AVK, 14 KR were built), which in terms of finances is equal to 20 AB pr.11435 with 1 aircraft or 000 AVR .14 without air groups.
                  What does it mean to feel good or bad? What does emotion have to do with history analysis? Without an objective assessment of the past, there will be no future (the same ekranoplans are an example of this).
                  In the USSR there was no NPO, a powerful pro-Western lobby, the elite was not so much connected with the West, it did not help.
                4. Kir
                  Kir 8 September 2015 17: 18 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Here, specially now, I quickly ran through the topic and it turns out that they continue to build
                  South Korea:
                  Aron ship, there is evidence that Indonesia wants to purchase them. Then there was the 2007 project for the construction of electric power plants weighing 300 tons, at which stage I was not currently looking.
                  It is unnecessary to write about the periodic attempts of the United States to give birth to a bridge

                  In the Russian Federation:
                  At least two specialized resources
                  1 NPP Experimental Aviation Association
                  2 Boats and a Yacht (I can ask there how it is signed there). The topic started in 2004 and is entitled- We are building an ekranoplan, the last post is dated August 25 of this year.
                  the topic is actively living.
                  Then what about books and authors like:
                  P.P. Belavin see his book "WIG" 2nd edition 1977, by the way written according to foreign press
                  a series of books under the general title "WIGs of the World"
                  and a number of others, moreover, they are often posted on well-known resources such as, for example, AIRSPOT.Ru
                  And after all this, you dare to prove that such devices have no future?
                  By the way, I spoke not about espionage, but about the theft of ideas without risk and harm to health, then the case with the purchase of engines for rockets from us is a vivid confirmation that they can not do everything themselves. Simply put, one does not need to impersonate impotence.
                  According to NCO, this is not such a new story, it just used to sit in the corners. Regarding the connection with the west of our "elites", well, excuse me, but who brought all kinds of products for adults, clothes and stuff here, who were actively engaged in farce, that they were children of mere mortals, plus who wanted to keep state property in the form of departmental dachas, apartments and other things for eternal use, which again are mere mortals. Then it can remind who were in the USSR such as Khodorkovsky and others like that, so do not.

                  PS I dare to hope, like many others, that We, as before, will prove that Leaders, all the more so, are obliged to such People as Alekseev, Schukin and a number of others that the work to which they devoted their Lives is not in vain !!!
                5. strannik1985 8 September 2015 17: 50 New
                  • -1
                  • 0
                  -1
                  What does the topic have to do with it? Why did you decide that I refuse ekranoplans in life in general?
                  We are talking about the development and construction for the Navy of landing and strike ekranoplanes. All.
                  If they needed engines for the LV they bought them, what is the problem of buying a license, creating a joint venture, paying for the development of a specialized design bureau?
                  Those who made decisions on military construction did not have anything to do with acquisitions, after Brezhnev, for example, there were several second-hand foreign cars left. The USSR had scientific / industrial capacities several times larger than the Russian Federation, the problem was their correct application.
                6. Kir
                  Kir 8 September 2015 19: 12 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  So, to give or refuse not only life in general, but also in the development of topics, they did not give authority on this, at least as I think, and most of these people do not.
                  Let's not be cunning on the topic of licensing and joint ventures:
                  sorry, but as far as they know, they have not sold them to the production of engines, so .......
                  According to the joint venture, there are two aspects
                  1 In what state of affairs was Alekseev’s design bureau in those years
                  2 The negative experience of these same joint ventures with them, here on the forum, one openly called them a crook for real reasons - first they created, then they covered the topic, and then ........ they took themselves
                  I see arguing about innocence to no purpose, because for some reason you separately consider the Individuals and their environment, including their families.
                  According to the wrong application: probably the transfer and development of the Scientific and Technical potential to the Union republics, plus the placement of orders and the selection (often imposing) of allies, this, in your opinion, can be attributed to the definition of "incorrect use". By the way, if it weren’t for a coup in some, then to this day we subsidized their economy to the detriment of developing our scientific and production base, moreover, they were handed over to developments that those on the blue eye consider their property with the right to dispose at their discretion.
                7. strannik1985 8 September 2015 20: 58 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  I’m not the official responsible for financing such projects and I can’t refuse or allow those or other projects in any way, but I have the right to have and have a personal opinion on the profile site.
                  Those. China and Iran mastered the EP, albeit small, but no other countries?
                  I’m not talking about cases where such decisions were made out of malice with regard to the country's defense capabilities (small-town interests, as with the parallel development of three practically identical MBTs, which, nevertheless, negatively affected the level of combat readiness and the level of economy- yes, but I can’t say that the same Ustinov intentionally, with malicious intent, pushed VTOL and other projects).
                  The economies of the Allied countries on ATS were financed, because they were seriously preparing for a hot war in Europe, for example, 47 nuclear war warheads were stored in the Union for the Bulgarian army in the Union. Could the Bulgarian Armed Forces have three missile brigades and 13 separate OTR divisions without organizational, financial, and technical assistance from the USSR? The question is rhetorical.
                  And the game was far from one gate, for example, from 1946 to 1990 in Bulgaria 16 225,48 tons of uranium ore were mined, guess where it went?
                  Yes, considerable money was spent on allies and other countries, but this is not the reason for the collapse of the USSR, and I touched on the issue of irrational use of funds already allocated to the Navy.
                8. Kir
                  Kir 8 September 2015 22: 30 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  You specifically know about the irrational expenditure of funds, if so then specifically in what it was expressed, or again referring to where it was read.
                  The most important thing is Stannik1985, please answer specific questions, and not drag in third-party topics:
                  The economies of the Allied countries on ATS were financed, because they were seriously preparing for a hot war in Europe, for example, 47 nuclear war warheads were stored in the Union for the Bulgarian army in the Union. Could the Bulgarian Armed Forces have three
                  etc
                  I clearly pointed to the Union Republic, for more specifics, the transfer, creation and development of a scientific and technical base on the territory of what is now called Ukraine.
                  short list:
                  Design Bureau Antonova
                  The design bureau created and located in Moscow, during the Second World War, was moved to the Urals, but for some reason, it’s understandable why it moved to the Ussr
                  Transfer to the production of engines designed by Klimov Design Bureau for Zaporizhzhya Motor Sich
                  Transferring documentation to the BISS, now
                  the list of "achievements" can be continued
                  I talked about such examples.
                  Then from which they dragged China and Iran.

                  PS Strannik1985, please read carefully and respond only to what was asked.
                9. strannik1985 9 September 2015 06: 43 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Do you have a few examples with the construction of AB / AVK? Are these not "concrete" examples?
                  Stunned! The USSR is a republic within the USSR! The founding fathers, in principle, did not consider the Ukrainian SSR as a de facto independent republic, how do they know the future? If now any production is being created in the Republic of Tuva, the Republic of Dagestan, etc., is this "unreasonable" development of the scientific and industrial base of a foreign state in your opinion?

                  We have a conversation about ES, have not forgotten? China and Iran are an example of countries that have mastered the production of these machines.
                10. Kir
                  Kir 9 September 2015 14: 38 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Yeah, but what about the "financing" from 1991 to the present (see the squeals of a specialist from aviation, and now the editor-in-chief, "arguments of the week" Uglanov, how he went about advocating a big load of the same sich and dr. and it wasn’t long before their coup) we still see a single living, so ....... Then the quality of the products of one nomenclature varied greatly, something about the low quality of the products produced in the BSSR, and now in Belarus I have never heard, but unflattering reviews about the Ukrainian industry, and the current collapse of their scientific and industrial industry is vivid evidence of this - the dead born is not capable of independent existence. About the Territory and Human Resources I think it is generally unnecessary to mention. Then, attempts to live in harmony with the entimi more than once proved their "gratitude", and therefore, taken together, this was an unreasonable development, well, apart from local interests (how much was at the top from there).
                  The only reason I’m grateful for the collapse of the USSR is for avoiding those, it’s a pity that the connection was not completely broken, of course, together with the question of returning the territories, plus cancellation or the requirement to pay Real prices for technical documentation and so on, and even more so for the Earth should not only Us, but also Poland, Hungary, and how much Romania is remembered, by the way I won’t be surprised that some of them should still leave for Belarus.
                  According to Dagestan, forgive the excellent artisans there were always, the same Kubachi, Kizlyar and etc.
                  Sorry about the topic of EP, and why South Korea in the series of producing EP is not mentioned. it was they who threatened to build a 300 ton apparatus.
                11. strannik1985 9 September 2015 19: 28 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  It is from the territory and human resources, production volumes, place in military plans (the second strategic echelon of the Armed Forces in case of the Great War in Europe) that it is worth starting, the Ukrainian SSR cannot be compared with other republics.
                  And in vain thank you for the fact that we now have the deployment of elements of the American missile defense system in Eastern Europe, the blockade of Russian projects, the creation of hotbeds of tension at the Russian borders, the fruits of the USSR’s withdrawal from the countries of V. Europe, the CIS countries. Politics, like nature, does not tolerate emptiness , what we leave the Americans to occupy is life, very few countries have full sovereignty and can conduct a completely independent policy.
                  And in the Ukrainian SSR a lot of industries (even before industrialization), mines, land, all the difference is that Dagestan is now part of the Russian Federation, and Ukraine is not.
                  Judging the actions of the leadership of half a century ago from modern positions is not too objective, do not you?
                  Because the status of the project is not known to me, the swing does not count.
  • lopvlad 5 September 2015 11: 50 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    In my opinion - this is a dead end branch of development. There is no sense, expensive, the application is nude

    a dead-end branch is for those who can’t bring such things to mind. The high-speed "sea" target for missiles of a conditional enemy is such a pain in the neck that it makes sense to bother.
    If Israel had the technology for manufacturing such heavy ekranoplanes, they would have been manufacturing them for a long time.
    1. strannik1985 5 September 2015 11: 53 New
      • -2
      • 0
      -2
      KB Alekseeva has been developing on this topic since the late 50s, it’s high time for a normal result to appear, don’t you? This speed target is inferior to the aircraft, not to mention supersonic anti-ship missiles.
      1. proletarian 5 September 2015 23: 49 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        This high-speed “target”, as you say, has an advantage over transport airplanes (which, by the way, also urgently needs cover) in that it actually moves near the surface of water or land (which is a big “headache” for enemy radars, and high speed and very "not stupid" maneuverability give a much greater chance of getting away from the "terrible supersonic" anti-ship missiles than the fastest ship itself.
        And who said that the same "Moons" had nothing to answer?
        1. strannik1985 6 September 2015 06: 56 New
          • -1
          • 0
          -1
          EPR at the ship level of comparable (or rather large, taking into account the flight altitude) sizes.
          The speed of the EP is less than that of transport aircraft (AN-12-530-670 km / h, IL-76-750-850 km / h), maneuverability, at best at the vehicle level, but rather less. At the same time, the flexibility of use is much less, since it can only fly over the sea, the practical range is less, concrete plums, hangars, anti-corrosion equipment or (heavy) personal dock for each EP are needed for operation (all), and all this for one type of equipment ( airfields are needed for the vehicle, but they are already built, they can operate both civilian and military vehicles).
          Were there self-defense facilities on EP Lun?
  • Homo 5 September 2015 15: 30 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Quote: atalef
    In my opinion, this is a dead end branch of development.

    Yes Yes! WIG - dead end branch, PAK FA - junk, Armata - old, S-300 - yesterday, but Merkava - super-duper for all ages!
    1. proletarian 5 September 2015 23: 50 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Humor (albeit "black") appreciated.
  • starshina78 5 September 2015 15: 39 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    For afaief. After the appearance in the Soviet Navy of airborne ekranoplanes and ekranoplan, armed with anti-ship missiles and the possibility of using sea-to-earth missiles, the NATO troops pulled out all their hair in a seat. Not a single radar saw them; the speed was about five hundred kilometers. The time to reach the shores of Germany was calculated in minutes. Not for nothing they demanded to write off the "Caspian Monster", and ours, under the guise of inexpediency, sawed it into needles.
    1. strannik1985 5 September 2015 18: 21 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      KM crashed, the pilot put his tail on the water and the feed fell off, and back in 1980.
      Are EP based in the Baltic?
      1. Stas57 5 September 2015 18: 45 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: strannik1985
        Are EP based in the Baltic?

        but the point is, everything is close by there, and during the USSR the GBV was still
        1. strannik1985 5 September 2015 18: 50 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          And where else do you put them with seaworthiness 2-3 points? And their range was 1500-2000 km.
          1. proletarian 5 September 2015 23: 57 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            I already spoke about seaworthiness, not 2-3, but 5-6 points (Lun’s height is almost 20 meters). This is a real “flying frigate.” Yes, it’s too “gluttonous”, well, excuse me, but when was it created and on which technological base?
            1. strannik1985 6 September 2015 16: 14 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              As far as I know, the second "Lun" began to be completed as a lifeguard, for it declared seaworthiness in 5-6 points. With this seaworthiness KM maximum 3 points, "Eaglet" -2-3 points. Moreover, even with such excitement, their operation is very difficult (including due to difficulties in management). KM himself, one of the "Eagles", half of the layouts were smashed precisely as a result of errors in management with moderate excitement.
      2. proletarian 5 September 2015 23: 53 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        And his Air Force pilot “gouged”, because he did not know the specifics of controlling this machine.
        1. strannik1985 6 September 2015 06: 58 New
          • -2
          • 0
          -2
          Do not tell the ship or the plane which can tear off the stern with an careless maneuver?
    2. Starley from the south 6 September 2015 14: 51 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: starshina78
      After the appearance in the Soviet Navy of landing amphibious wagons and ekranoplan, armed with anti-ship missiles and the possibility of using sea-earth-class missiles, the NATO troops pulled out all their hair in a seat

      We can guess or not guess whether we need EP or not ... But for our "partners", that's for sure, the possibility of such weapons appearing in us causes trembling in the knees and in other places. Another thing is that it will be cheaper to achieve the tasks of protecting sea lines and cooling the heads of potential opponents: several ships, destroyers and frigates, or several specialized EPs. The question is open.
  • avia1991 5 September 2015 20: 46 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: atalef
    In my opinion, this is a dead end branch of development.

    So let it be your way this will continue! We ourselves, somehow, will figure out what to build Russia - and what not. Good? And let your speculations and guesses about the worthlessness of such devices be a guide to action: when the time comes, it will be easier and easier for us. hi
  • Alexashka964 6 September 2015 21: 24 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: atalef
    In my opinion, this is a dead end branch of development

    Do you think hovercraft are a dead end? Yes, and aviation can also be attributed there, however ...
    At one time, there were hydrofoil vessels, nowhere in the world were they mass-produced, because similar arguments were given. And in the USSR, a wide range of such vessels, both river and sea, was mass-produced. And very successfully exploited.
  • sso-xnumx 5 September 2015 18: 57 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: starshina78
    But what about our listed: Ministry of Emergencies, the FSB border service, the Navy. What do not they need? Looks weird.

    And ours do not know what to do with it !!! As the saying goes: "Neither mind nor imagination!"
  • siberalt 5 September 2015 09: 28 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    I understand that it is designed to carry goods and passengers. And what does the border service? Well, he caught up with the intruder, and then what?
    1. VseDoFeNi 5 September 2015 09: 36 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      So triremes with galleys appeared after fishing boats and passenger ships ...
    2. alexdovgal 5 September 2015 09: 42 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      will overtake him))))
      1. demon1978 5 September 2015 09: 55 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: alexdovgal
        will overtake him))))

        laughing laughing
        And wring out a place near the mooring wall ??? !!!! fellow laughing
      2. Bayonet 5 September 2015 14: 51 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: alexdovgal
        will overtake him))))

        Nothing else left, especially considering its maneuverability smile
    3. atalef 5 September 2015 09: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: siberalt
      I understand that it is designed to carry goods and passengers. And what does the border service? Well, he caught up with the intruder, and then what?

      And threw his hats.
      1. Temples 5 September 2015 10: 32 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        carrying capacity of 9 tons or 100 passengers.


        How much fuel does he eat?
        Bad weather and where is it?
        For a couple of thousand kilometers they will be sent with passengers, while the sea sway reaches a little more than permissible and ....?
        What are its commercial benefits?
        1. EGOrkka 5 September 2015 16: 01 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Temples
          What are its commercial benefits?


          the commercial benefit is once more in carrying capacity than in airplanes and greater speed than in ships example: you fly to New Mexico 10 hours (instead of 8 like in an airplane) but have a place like a VIP in an airplane but at an economical price.
          1. The comment was deleted.
    4. wasjasibirjac 5 September 2015 10: 46 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      turret with a 23 mm cannon to put or ATGMs, caught up, scared, splashed down beside me and wonder - gentlemen, and who are you? where are we going?
      1. self-propelled 5 September 2015 11: 42 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Quote: wasjasibirjac
        turret with 23 mm gun to put or ATGMs, caught up, scared, splashed down next and wonder - gentlemen, and who are you? where are we swimming

        something like that
        PATROLL POLICE BOAT "SMERCH"
        On the basis of the Ekran-30 passenger device, a more detailed study of a police patrol boat was carried out, which was intended to patrol and protect the economic zone in the coastal regions of the countries of the South-East region.
        Among the tasks to be solved were:
        1) Running patrol and police services on the go and drifting in designated areas, maintaining the established customs regime, suppressing customs violations, combating smuggling and piracy, conducting customs inspection of ships.
        2) Collection of data on the situation in the patrolled area using on-board surveillance equipment and external sources of information, notification of the movement of vessels on the patrolled area.
        3) Fulfillment of tasks in cooperation with maritime border forces to maintain an operational regime in a given area.
        4) Detention of Customs Violators
        5) Seizure of Smuggled Goods and Drugs

        this device was supposed to carry in addition to the automatic 30-mm guns URs, NARs and various machine guns and grenade launchers.
        the project remained on paper

        taken from http://andriuha077.narod.ru/sea/tornado.html
  • Platonich 5 September 2015 15: 57 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It looks like a shark
  • digo 5 September 2015 16: 18 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: wicked partisan
    Some kind of evil look from him ... Or did it just seem to me after yesterday's corporate party on the occasion of the National Labor Party workers?

    yes Looks like a shark hi
  • qwert 7 September 2015 07: 44 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    "In Russia, the development of a heavy ekranoplan with take-off mass 50 tons."

    And in the USSR ekranoplan Orlyonok with take-off weight in 120 tons was called light. Here is a comparison of the scale of the USSR and Russia. So we rose from our knees, but somehow became dwarfs at the same time.
  • Voha_krim 5 September 2015 08: 27 New
    • 13
    • 0
    +13
    good good good
    Especially happy
    "Central Design Bureau named. Alekseeva regained the former laboratory-bench equipment, almost completely restored the laboratory research and, in part, production potential "

    It's time to regain the lead in the field of ekranoplanes !!!
    Good luck in everything !!!!!!!
    1. smith7 5 September 2015 08: 55 New
      • 9
      • 0
      +9
      How much has the "time to return" lately, isn't it? In this connection? “In connection with the aggressive policies of our Western“ partners, ”you say, and you’ll be right. But I think that it’s time to make fun of the good of the fatherland, so as not to lose it later to the state of“ time to return. ”How bitter and It's a shame that "it would be time to return" we admitted in the 80s, flattered by cheap "Western values."
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. NEXUS 5 September 2015 09: 04 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      Quote: Voha_krim
      It's time to regain the lead in the field of ekranoplanes !!!

      But we are still the first in the issue of ekranoplanes. We have saved the work, and we haven’t dispersed the specialists. But if we don’t start building ekranoplans now, in ten years our competitors and adversary will catch up with us, since work is being carried out in many developed countries. hi
      1. Bayonet 5 September 2015 14: 54 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: NEXUS
        , because work is underway in many developed countries.

        In developed countries, they are very skeptical and, if they build, they are small birds. smile hi
  • iliitchitch 5 September 2015 08: 30 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Quote: wicked partisan
    Some kind of evil look from him ... sad Or did it just seem to me after yesterday's corporate party on the occasion of the Civil Labor Party? what


    I doubt that he will massively carry passengers. But there are a lot of suspension points, because the look is unkind and promising.
    1. Vladimirets 5 September 2015 08: 31 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: iliitch
      But there are many suspension points

      On ekranoplan? And what can be suspended there?
      1. Kos_kalinki9 5 September 2015 08: 39 New
        • 8
        • 0
        +8
        After corporate? ALL.
  • MIKHAN 5 September 2015 08: 39 New
    • 15
    • 0
    +15
    They’ve done it before! What power and beauty ....
    1. Bayonet 5 September 2015 14: 58 New
      • -2
      • 0
      -2
      Quote: MIKHAN
      They’ve done it before! What power and beauty ....

      Well, admire who doesn’t give smile But for serious matters - it won’t work, and trial operation has shown it! So do not shake the air for nothing hi
    2. wk
      wk 5 September 2015 23: 23 New
      • -7
      • 0
      -7
      Quote: MIKHAN
      They’ve done it before! What power and beauty ....

      and the majestic uselessness is flying out even to such a state as the USSR .... even countless articles not on the topic of Ukraine in VO are not so annoying as about our EVERYTHING! the killer of aircraft carriers and lunokhodov .... "MOON" and "ROUGH" ... or "EAGLE" .... in general, "MISTRESS"!
    3. The comment was deleted.
  • sv68 5 September 2015 08: 40 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    50 tons take-off mass — is this a class of heavy ekranoplanes? But what about the “moon”, “eaglet”, “Caspian monster” —they are super heavy, then or what?
    1. Armored optimist 5 September 2015 08: 43 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      This is compared to 0.5-1t toys
    2. rosarioagro 5 September 2015 08: 47 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: sv68
      50 tons take-off mass — is this a class of heavy ekranoplanes? But what about the “moon”, “eaglet”, “Caspian monster” —they are super heavy, then or what?

      Yes, in space the same thing is 80 tons now it’s heavyweight :-) Somehow people are fading or something
    3. demon1978 5 September 2015 09: 09 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: sv68
      50 tons take-off mass — is this a class of heavy ekranoplanes? But what about the “moon”, “eaglet”, “Caspian monster” —they are super heavy, then or what?


      Yes, somehow sharply they fell silent ..... request and the ratio of 54t flown to 9t combat what I thought in ekranoplanes, this figure should be much larger request Well, about SUCH fellow (that same "monster")

      Wingspan: 37,60 m
      Tail Sweep: 37,00 m
      Length: 92,00 m
      Height: 21,80 m
      Wing area: 662,50 m²
      Net WIG weight: 240 000 kg
      Weight maximum take-off: 544 000 kg
      Engine Type: 10 TRD VD-7
      Thrust: 10 x 13000 kgf
      Maximum speed: 500 km / h
      Cruising speed: 430 km / h
      Practical range: 1500 km
      Flight height on the screen: 4-14 m
      Seaworthiness: 3 score
      Payload: 304 000 kg

      There is still an interesting link / comparison
      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D1%83%D0%BD%D1%8C_(%D1%8D%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0
      %D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%BD)#.D0.A1.D1.80.D0.B0.D0.B2.D0.BD.D0.B5.D0.BD
      .D0.B8.D0.B5_.D1.81_.D0.B0.D0.BD.D0.B0.D0.BB.D0.BE.D0.B3.D0.B0.D0.BC.D0.B8
      1. Tanais 5 September 2015 09: 18 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: demon1978
        Yes, somehow they sharpened sharply ..... and the ratio of 54t is flown to 9t is combat I thought in ekranoplanes, this figure should be much larger


        Yes, the "correlation" is not that ... Or a typo?
        1. sir.jonn 5 September 2015 09: 32 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Tanais
          Quote: demon1978
          Yes, somehow they sharpened sharply ..... and the ratio of 54t is flown to 9t is combat I thought in ekranoplanes, this figure should be much larger


          Yes, the "correlation" is not that ... Or a typo?

          On the website these numbers are written
          http://www.ckbspk.ru/?p=1211525479

          perhaps in the passenger version a considerable amount is occupied by the cabin and an increased fuel supply
        2. demon1978 5 September 2015 09: 33 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Tanais
          Yes, the "correlation" is not that ... Or a typo?


          Maybe a typo, but it seems the matter is in the engines (thrust-weight ratio) request Although the effect of the screen should give solid "bonuses" request
        3. Vadim237 5 September 2015 13: 38 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Most likely, 50 tons is not the weight of an ekranoplan, but its carrying capacity, and the total mass is more than 100 tons, judging by the layout, it is more than the Eaglet.
    4. Voha_krim 5 September 2015 09: 21 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      Quote: sv68
      50 tons take-off mass — is this a class of heavy ekranoplanes? But what about the “moon”, “eaglet”, “Caspian monster” —they are super heavy, then or what?

      That at least let him take into service and start production. And then we will increase as much as necessary, and if necessary, then we will surpass Lun!
  • uzer 13 5 September 2015 08: 43 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    It was high time to start working in this direction. As a means of delivering cruise missiles, it’s a pretty good option. A screen plane can move at a minimum height and is difficult to detect with radar. It can enter enemy territory, while remaining inconspicuous. You can count a lot of points where it is desirable to have such a technique.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Old26 5 September 2015 08: 45 New
    • -4
    • 0
    -4
    Quote: MIKHAN
    Eh such at least a couple of amers to drive on the Black Sea .... inconspicuous

    Invisible? I doubt it ... I doubt it very much. And an airplane is a more effective weapon than an ekranoplan, more universal. No, let him carry civilian goods and passengers, although it’s not entirely clear where ...

    Quote: Voha_krim
    It's time to regain the lead in the field of ekranoplanes !!!

    Well refund. What's next? What is the economic feasibility of such products? Well, ekranoplanes with a passenger capacity of 6-10 people and a load capacity of half a ton, and not "purely" ekranoplanes, but universal vehicles that can operate in displacement mode, in planing mode, in screen mode and in airplane mode. There, at least, economic feasibility is visible. And in this?

    Quote: Vladimirets
    Quote: iliitch
    But there are many suspension points

    On ekranoplan? And what can be suspended there?

    I join the question
    1. iliitchitch 5 September 2015 08: 55 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      You can suspend electronic warfare, for example.
      1. Vladimirets 5 September 2015 09: 41 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: iliitch
        You can suspend electronic warfare, for example.

        On a device that flies above a surface of 5m? What about efficiency?
        1. iliitchitch 6 September 2015 00: 26 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Well, another tease, you are our gambling. It is possible to create a mobile guidance complex from 5-6-7 such devices, independent of ANYTHING (I emphasize!), Except for the ekranoplanes themselves. With a modern electronic base, the accuracy will be amazing in the CB (!) Range (they will close the Black Sea, according to my estimates). It is possible to pervert, and make the Far East (energy consumption will increase). But such a goal as an ekranoplane, to "harpoon" ay is not easy, with the support of something. Naturally, power supply is not from batteries, but efficiency, oh, yes,% 10, but the adversary is enough. In the context of real hostilities + sik rather big may be. And about the effectiveness of electronic warfare ... It all depends on the current strength on board, and the efficiency of 100% does not happen, that's it.
    2. just exp 5 September 2015 08: 59 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      the plane is better, maneuverable, faster and other nishtyaki, but the plane has one minus, it needs an airfield, or an aircraft carrier. xs may be wrong, but it seems to me that the harpoon to get into the ekranoplan will be problematic. although the SD of explosives can get there, but all kinds of fragments from the SD of explosives are inferior in terms of penetrating warheads to anti-ship missiles.
      Threat truly ekranoplanes only one minus, they do not like the turbulent sea. and in the ocean this is a common occurrence.
      1. Bayonet 5 September 2015 15: 10 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: just EXPL
        but the plane has one minus, it needs an airfield, or an aircraft carrier

        Will the ekranoplan fly all the time or hang out in the blue sea? He also needs a dock (for heavy) or special sites for storage, maintenance and repair hi
      2. Maxom75 6 September 2015 01: 08 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        flight range of 1500 km, and then it is necessary to refuel. It turns out he landed and is waiting for the fuel to be brought up? What kind of air defense will be placed on it, because otherwise it will be demolished even when approaching the target.
        9tn - this is very small for an ekranoplan wing, you need somewhere 90-100tn otherwise it makes no sense to fence a garden.
    3. Bayonet 5 September 2015 15: 06 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      Well refund. What's next?

      Well, then - let’s pound ourselves in the chest, after all, "having no analogues"!
      Why they started the lunar program - to be the first! And how the Americans got ahead - they spat and forgot. An analogue of the Shuttle was built and .... We have many projects created just for this - to be the first! smile
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Yarik 5 September 2015 08: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Economical thing and seaworthy passion! But what is it all for? Well, besides loading production capacities.
    1. 0255 5 September 2015 09: 25 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Yarik
      Economical thing and seaworthy passion! But what is it all for? Well, besides loading production capacities.

      No need to bury ekranoplans stop Korolev in the 1930s also laughed when he led the development of rockets and spacecraft. As with the developers of rockets and Katyushas, ​​who already at the beginning of the war showed the Germans "where the crayfish hibernate." There are many cases in history when some developments were declared unnecessary, and then it turned out that they were criticized in vain
      1. ferdiperdozzz 5 September 2015 10: 08 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Eiffel Tower there too
      2. tlauicol 5 September 2015 11: 55 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        who laughed at the developers of PCs? Stalin or what?
        1. 0255 5 September 2015 14: 39 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Tlauicol
          who laughed at the developers of PCs? Stalin or what?

          I read in the book "Arms of Victory" of another Soviet publication that they laughed at the developers of RSs. I don’t remember exactly who, but definitely not Stalin.
      3. Bayonet 5 September 2015 15: 11 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: 0255
        Korolev in the 1930s also laughed,

        Remember how the herring was wrapped in the works of Tsiolkovsky! The argument is killer! smile
  • roskot 5 September 2015 08: 52 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Get more customers and stand stronger.
  • Old26 5 September 2015 09: 04 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: uzer 13
    As a means of delivery of cruise missiles, a pretty good option.

    As a means of delivering cruise missiles, there is nothing better than a plane that has not yet been invented.

    Quote: uzer 13
    The ekranoplan can move at a minimum height and is difficult to detect by radar.

    It's hard to talk about something that has never been tested. EPR has much more aircraft due to the wing chord (AWACS will look down and down)

    Quote: uzer 13
    He can enter enemy territory, while remaining invisible

    To the Papuans? Yes maybe.

    Quote: uzer 13
    You can count a lot of points where it is desirable to have such a technique.

    "read out the entire list"
    1. uzer 13 5 September 2015 14: 34 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      You think in terms of peacetime. (Not my minuses) What are the Avaks during the war? They will all be shot down at the very first hour. There will only be ground and ship radars that do not see the target well near the surface of the earth and water. Try to go through an air defense system on an airplane, not there are a lot of people who want to do this. It’s not for nothing that anti-ship missiles fly along an intricate trajectory. (ESR doesn’t bother them at all). place. It’s not worth talking about all locations, you can first look at the coast of the northern seas. There are few transport and troops.
      1. Bayonet 5 September 2015 15: 16 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: uzer 13
        anti-ship missiles fly along an intricate trajectory.

        That's the trouble with ekranoplanes - they cannot fly along an "intricate trajectory"! They have no maneuverability! He can not lay a bend !!! hi
        1. Cat man null 5 September 2015 15: 22 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: Bayonet
          He can not lay a bend !!!

          Oh, by the way .. I never thought - but how does this hat turn at all?

          - in an airplane - the height is too small, you can’t wave your wings ..
          - in a tank - he has no tracks ...
          -?

          belay
          1. Bayonet 5 September 2015 19: 20 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: Cat Man Null
            Oh by the way. I never wondered - but how does this hat turn at all?

            Oh, very smoothly - with a pancake, the possible rolls are very small, and the turning radii are too large. If a bend is laid, or it will catch on water or the screen will lose. hi
  • family tree 5 September 2015 09: 05 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Takeoff / landing seaworthiness - 1,5 m.
    Zachotny phrase wassat The height of the wave, or something so designated what 9 point and Beaufort already canceled? belay
    1. Vladimirets 5 September 2015 09: 48 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: perepilka
      9 point and Beaufort already canceled?

      So this is aviation. laughing
      1. family tree 5 September 2015 09: 55 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Vladimirets
        So this is aviation. laughing

        Tada is understandable, which means run-up, mileage during take-off, landing, one and a half meters, respect! wassat
  • pv1005 5 September 2015 09: 12 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Wing A-050 is ideal for the Federal Border Service

    The Federal Border Guard Service of Russia has been gone for more than 10 years, instead of it the FSB FSB of RUSSIA. And she does not need a heavy ekranoplan, there are no tasks for him. Well, the need for such a machine for the FSO (protection of the first persons of the state - who does not know) is generally perplexing. Either it was said for the red words to impress the unprepared audience, or he himself does not understand what he is singing about.
  • atamankko 5 September 2015 09: 17 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    Ekranoplanes always justify themselves, given
    the size and transport network of our country.
  • APASUS 5 September 2015 09: 23 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The news is pleasing and not at the same time. I thought it was about to start, but it turned out to be in the interests of the foreign customer again. But the design bureau is still alive, there are achievements, experience, projects, it’s just ridiculous to talk about the success of such products. It will be like buying with many Russian discoveries. ........ now the truth is no longer in Europe, but in China!
  • Old26 5 September 2015 09: 24 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: just EXPL
    the plane is in every way better, more maneuverable, faster and other nishtyaki, but the plane has one minus, it needs an airfield, or an aircraft carrier.

    It can be added that the range of the aircraft is several times greater. Yes, an airplane needs an airfield. And ekranoplan? For maintenance, in any case, a concrete slip is required, where the ekranoplan could go. Hang out in the displacement mode at the pier? Well, I don’t know, somewhere in a quiet sea, such as the Caspian Sea, it could have been for some time, but for some reason all the ekranoplanes that were always there on the shore after the “flights”

    Quote: just EXPL
    xs may be wrong, but it seems to me that the harpoon to get into the ekranoplan will be problematic. although the SD of explosives may fall, but all kinds of fragments from the SD of explosives are inferior in their consequences to penetrating warheads of anti-ship missiles.

    Of course, the ASWM strike does not compare with the RCC strike, but the hit of this ASWB in engines will lead to generally disastrous consequences. Yes, and the "Harpoon" can be on an aircraft.

    Quote: just EXPL
    Threat truly ekranoplanes only one minus, they do not like the turbulent sea. and in the ocean this is a common occurrence.

    Yes, this is the biggest minus. The second is, as they say, "not fish, not meat."

    As a combat weapon, it is inferior to a displacement ship in range, seaworthiness, autonomy, the number of the same cruise missiles, winning only in speed.

    He loses the plane in the same range, in the amount of CR, in speed, in maneuverability.
    What are the advantages of a combat ekranoplan then?
    1. Stas57 5 September 2015 09: 33 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      oh and zaminusuyut us ...))


      I completely agree that ES is a dead end, and apart from the rescue function, its purpose is not entirely clear.
      let's say, rather unnecessary than necessary. Very thin stylet for a very accurate strike.
      but if the foreign customer pays, then let the design bureau work
      1. Koshak 5 September 2015 10: 26 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Stas57
        ... apart from the rescue function, its purpose is not entirely clear

        Therefore, our security officials are not in a hurry with orders. And foreigners will ride tourists
    2. screw cutter 5 September 2015 09: 40 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      The biggest advantage of the ekranoplan is that it flies over water at 5-10 meters at a speed of 400-600 km / h, it is almost impossible to destroy it from an airplane, and it’s very difficult to get to a ship below the waterline, and it’s also easily armored.
      1. Stas57 5 September 2015 10: 05 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        you see what’s the matter, modern both air, land and sea means of destruction of enemy ships cover the entire Baltic Sea, the Caspian Sea and the World Cup are almost completely practical, it’s like “quiet seas”
        and AG will not go there.

        As for the ocean-based EP has horseradish seaworthiness and a small reserve of "summer", strong vibrations and heaviness in control. At the same time, the RER and detection systems have advanced a lot and the “borderline states” are no longer as big a problem as before, and even earlier this was not a very direct and terrible problem.

        therefore, having a nuclear submarine and an air force to destroy the AH, I personally do not see the point in an expensive toy in the form of an electronic signature, but again, if a foreign customer pays, then at least a Death Star can and should be developed for his money) A hypersonic cruise missile which is on those at the same heights, with greater speed, in 1000 times maneuverable it will perform the same task with a better result

        I’m saying, an awesome, narrow stylet with which you can pierce any enemy armor, but only if the enemy is in exactly the same position, in one place, and so on. But this does not happen.
      2. Koshak 5 September 2015 10: 31 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: screw cutter
        it’s almost impossible to destroy it from an airplane

        But how do you think planes destroy cruise missiles? Their flight altitude is about the same, but their speed is larger and their sizes smaller.
      3. kote119 5 September 2015 10: 41 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        and what’s the problem of knocking an ekranoplane off an airplane ?, the ship will also tear at a meeting, what kind of reservation can there be?
        1. sabakina 5 September 2015 11: 36 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: kote119
          and what’s the problem of knocking an ekranoplane off an airplane ?, the ship will also tear at a meeting, what kind of reservation can there be?

          You say as if "Lun" is permissible, there would be "one warrior in the field"! Any strike force needs support, from the sea, from the air, from the earth, from space in the end, well, or, an anchor to my throat ...
      4. Bayonet 5 September 2015 15: 21 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: screw cutter
        , it’s almost impossible to destroy it from an airplane

        There is nothing easier! The aircraft has great speed and excellent maneuverability; the ekranoplan is almost straightforward, without the possibility of a sharp maneuver. It is enough at a marching speed the affected ekranoplan to hit the water and he will finish himself. So what is the difficulty of defeating him? smile
      5. Bayonet 5 September 2015 19: 42 New
        • -1
        • 0
        -1
        Quote: screw cutter
        The biggest advantage of the ekranoplan is that it flies over the water at 5-10 meters at a speed of 400-600 km / h, s

        It’s not even worth talking about the missile carrier - it represented a danger only to its own crew (a flight altitude of several meters does not give pilots the right to make a mistake). By the way, the KM died due to one fatal mistake. Moreover, the Tu-22M was a much more powerful carrier "Mosquitoes" ...
    3. common man 5 September 2015 10: 38 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Old26
      It can be added that the range of the aircraft is several times greater.

      Quote: Old26
      As a combat weapon, it is inferior to a displacement ship in range, seaworthiness, autonomy, the number of the same cruise missiles, winning only in speed.

      When you write this, what are you comparing with?
      The mass-comparable Su-34 aircraft, 45 tons, has a practical range of 4500 km. At the same time, the combat radius is max. 1130 km. The combat load of 8 tons (6 missiles X-31 in the anti-ship version).
      Comparable ship, Katran missile and artillery boat, displacement of 290 tons, cruising range of 2200 miles (4000 km) with 10 nodal course, armament of 8 anti-ship missiles X-35.
      Well, where say the superiority of ships and aircraft factor of?
  • Koshak 5 September 2015 09: 48 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: demon1978
    Yes, somehow they sharpened sharply ..... and the ratio of 54t flown to 9t combat ...

    Indeed, it is better then to build amphibious aircraft. Won Be-200 with its own weight of 28 tons can take up to 12 tons of water on board.
  • Tor5
    Tor5 5 September 2015 09: 48 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What a pity that the "Lun" and "Eaglet" were closed ... it would be much easier.
    1. wk
      wk 5 September 2015 23: 34 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Tor5
      It would be much easier.

      what would be much easier? ....
  • Old26 5 September 2015 10: 12 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Vladimirets
    So this is aviation

    Ekranoplanes belong to ships, not to aviation

    Quote: atamankko
    The ekranoplanes will always justify themselves, given the size and transport network of our country.

    Where? You see, the words will justify, given the size of the country and so on - these are just words. You. for example, from your point of view, you can describe the places where they justify themselves, their "functionality", well, etc.

    Quote: Tor5
    What a pity that the "Lun" and "Eaglet" were closed ... it would be much easier.

    Just as a result of the operation, it became clear that something. what they predicted is impossible. Therefore, they remained in the Caspian Sea until the end of their short life, moreover, in trial operation. Lun is now on a slip at the Dagdiesel plant in Kaspiysk. Decommissioned. Slowly rusting.

    Quote: screw cutter
    it’s almost impossible to destroy it from an airplane

    What is it like? What, the plane is not able to attack from above the winged craft? And what does it mean impossible to destroy? A few missiles with IKGSN on engines and all - this is a fixed target, not able to defend

    Quote: Stas57
    I completely agree that ES is a dead end, and apart from the rescue function, its purpose is not entirely clear.

    Even as a lifeguard, he may find himself in a situation where its use is impossible. The euphoria of its use as a lifeguard is after the tragedy with Komsomolets. But no one even began to ask himself the question, but can he sit down in that weather, and sowing, what's next? Take off With a certain excitement? A lifeguard is required when the ship is in distress, but often not in calm, calm weather
  • vlad7777kul 5 September 2015 10: 16 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Seaworthiness 1.5m. As they say, wait by the sea for weather.
  • xtur 5 September 2015 10: 54 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    weight 54t, GP 9 t / 100 passengers, range 5 km. It is interesting how it looks in comparison with similar aircraft. Just remember the MiG-000 :-)
  • Old26 5 September 2015 10: 54 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: man in the street
    Well, where say the superiority of ships and aircraft at times?

    It is necessary to discuss what was and what is, and not a real plane / ship with a nonexistent, virtual ekranoplan. Moreover, using the parameters of the passenger-and-freight option as an argument.

    The talk of superiority was in relation to Lun and the plane / ship.

    In principle, one can calculate how real the range parameters are, knowing the fuel efficiency of the engines.
    In addition, the X-31 is an aircraft missile. Modification of blood pressure has a range of about 150 km when starting from a height of 15 km. At the same time, its starting weight is 700 kg. Add another accelerator, TPK container. What will be the real launch range in this case is unknown. To arm an ekranoplan with a subsonic missile is also not the best option.
    1. common man 5 September 2015 12: 00 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Well, so I compared with the latest models and not pre-revolutionary. SU-34 is an extreme model of a bomber. There are only a few of them in the army. Katran is the same. Not happy with the X-31, take the X-35. It’s both aviation and ship and ground. If the A-050 is in combat, its range and load will not change. Comparing the Lun thirty years ago is incorrect. And then, the Alekseevsky ekranoplanes had one minus. They were built according to shipbuilding standards and technology. As a result, there was a serious increase in mass. It was not Alekseev’s fault that such a system was. Now this can be avoided.
    2. xtur 5 September 2015 13: 19 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      > The talk of excellence was in relation to Lunya and the plane / ship.

      And as a result, you compared only with the plane, and did not get any advantage with the Su-34 in terms of range with maximum load. If we compare it with RTOs, then with a similar GP / VI, range, and similar combat load, we have a doubled price and an increase of 8-10 times the speed.

      That is, we have a radical increase in mobility for a double price. From my point of view, the board is not big
      1. strannik1985 5 September 2015 18: 37 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        1. Does the comparison end with these criteria?
        Better maneuverability, high speed, better operational mobility, the ability to carry high-precision homing and adjustable missiles and bombs, medium-range air-to-air guided missiles RVV-AE and short-range missiles R-73, built-in gun GS-301, the absence of such rigid weather restrictions on the application, finally.
        2. What prevents refueling (practical range increases to 7 km)?
        3. The “new” plane first flew in 1994, more than twenty years ago, against a layout that had not yet flown. Good comparison.

        Given a personal dock for a heavy EP, it’s not triple.
        RTO, dear, can be used not only in closed seas, but also in the near ocean zone (seaworthiness up to 5 points, autonomy up to 10-15 days), it has means of near air defense.
        What is the point of greater mobility, if you cover it with aviation anyway?
    3. xtur 5 September 2015 13: 28 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      > In principle, you can calculate how real the range parameters are, knowing the fuel efficiency of the engines.

      yeah, and how do you do it, not knowing the real air resistance for a particular EA? Ie do you propose to believe your assessments vs developer ratings, because their numbers break your stereotypes?
  • Pate 5 September 2015 10: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well, what about an ekranoplane with a carrying capacity of 300-400 tons for the fleet, the development of which was announced by our Moscow Region?
    1. strannik1985 5 September 2015 11: 22 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      It seems that there is simply a stuffing of information. Not so long ago, the Navy stated that the theme of the ekranoplan will not be developed at all in the Navy.
  • gregor6549 5 September 2015 11: 37 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Another PR in order to knock out a big piece of food from the budget for food. Yes, and call what is shown in the photo a heavy ekranoplan can only be with a very rich imagination, especially after the Moon, Orlenok and the Caspian Monster.
  • cyberhanter 5 September 2015 12: 15 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I don’t know if the ekranoplanes have a future, but I hope there is. Praise to our engineers and scientists :) Just ahead)
  • chunga-changa 5 September 2015 12: 20 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The shock ekranoplan has already been built and tested, large and small. In spite of the titanic efforts, they weren’t accepted for armament, he obviously does not like the military. In our country, the civilian sector remains, where the ekranoplanes will compete with helicopters, apparently unsuccessfully, or possibly an amphibious assault, in the future. For foreign customers, archipelagic states will probably be interesting, but operating an aircraft with two different power plants and driving modes is not an easy task. It requires highly qualified personnel, also familiar with our technology. Vietnam, Malaysia comes to mind.
  • Old26 5 September 2015 12: 33 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: man in the street
    Well, so I compared with the latest models and not pre-revolutionary. SU-34 is an extreme model of a bomber. There are only a few of them in the army. Katran is the same. Do not like the X-31, take the X-35.

    And I also did not compare with the pre-revolutionary. TU-22M3, TU-160 is in service, Lun is the only real combat (missile) ekranoplan, also recently decommissioned. Moreover, having an empty weight of 243 tons and a maximum of 380, it had a range of 2000 km, i.e. a combat radius of 800 km with more or less serious anti-ship missiles. How realistic is the range of this A-050 being developed at 5000 km - it must be considered, but still takes doubts about the reality of such a figure. And this with a load of 9 tons of cargo (or 100 passengers with baggage)
    Equipping a high-speed combat ekranoplan with an X-35 subsonic missile is generally beyond understanding. That is, flew up at high speed, from a distance of 100-150 km launched a subsonic missile, which will fly this distance for 10-15 minutes. Meaning?

    Quote: man in the street
    "Alekseevsky" ekranoplanes was one minus. They were built according to shipbuilding standards and technologies. As a result, a serious increase in mass. Not the fault of Alekseev, the system was like that. Now this can be avoided.

    And now they will be built according to aviation standards? Don’t joke like that anymore ... The readability characteristics of the body, designed for takeoff and landing with a certain amount of excitement and flight in the area of ​​a sufficiently strong wind load - and according to aircraft standards?

    Quote: man in the street
    If the A-050 will be in combat, its range and load will not change. Comparing the "Lun" thirty years ago is incorrect.

    As for the range, I repeat, it must be considered, although not enough data. As for comparison, or rather correctness or incorrectness, one of the rules of information analysis suggests that similar products are compared, existing and tested ones are compared. Comparison of the paper version of the ekranoplane with real aircraft samples is incorrect and lame on both legs. This comparison is more virtual than real. This is the same as taking for example the next-generation missile, the same American Trident E-6 and comparing it with the existing Trident D-5, saying that it surpasses the second in all respects. The comparison is virtual and has no facts besides the TTZ data
    1. xtur 5 September 2015 13: 45 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      > And I also did not compare with the pre-revolutionary. TU-22M3, Tu-160 ...



      The Lun is closer in mass to the Tu-160, although it surpasses in mass by 100 tons, i.e., according to the criteria you have declared - to compare similar things, these two comparisons do not work.

      But ultimately it's a topic another comparisons. Today they design another EP, for other tasks and using other technologies. Therefore, it is necessary to compare with the Su-34, as the closest in time, tasks and characteristics
    2. common man 5 September 2015 14: 04 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Old26
      And now they will be built according to aviation standards? Don’t joke like that anymore ... The readability characteristics of the body, designed for takeoff and landing with a certain amount of excitement and flight in the area of ​​a sufficiently strong wind load - and according to aircraft standards?

      That is, ALL seaplanes, including the BE-200, are designed and built according to shipbuilding standards, and from shipbuilding materials?
      Quote: Old26
      Don't joke like that anymore ...
  • inpu 5 September 2015 13: 23 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And how he behaves in a storm is interesting. How many points stand.
  • siberalt 5 September 2015 14: 12 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: atalef
    Quote: siberalt
    I understand that it is designed to carry goods and passengers. And what does the border service? Well, he caught up with the intruder, and then what?

    And threw his hats.

    + 100500! laughing
  • Zomanus 5 September 2015 14: 25 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    As a patrol option, it’s even nothing. But the hard option ...
    But honestly, I can’t imagine what a difficult option the purpose is.
    Although. if there are many small islands, then such a machine can quickly abandon / remove goods / people.
    Hence, probably a foreign customer.
  • VSkilled 5 September 2015 17: 49 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The ekranoplanes are super-duper.

    Here, the other day, there was an article, they say, naglitsy - they are building a "super dreadnought" so that in a semi-submerged form they are less noticeable on radars. True, all these games with "semi-immersion" - this is additional water resistance and loss of speed.

    And, the ekranoplan, speed - like an airplane! And - it is not visible on the radars (and - thanks to Copernicus because the Earth is round!)

    Such a “bird” is creeping in, a volley is being thrown “because of the horizon of visibility,” and, consider, the amers have less than one aircraft carrying trough ...
  • TOR2 5 September 2015 18: 11 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    In the military sphere, an ekranoplane is probably best suited as an anti-submarine weapon. Let’s take control of a dangerous area. Or bring in a given area several UAVs of the type, for example, “Teal”, capable of taking off and landing from the water.
  • Egevich 5 September 2015 19: 32 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    only I noticed that in terms of performance characteristics this model is a practical analogue of the landing ekranoplan "Eaglet" in the new reincarnation? and the cargo hatch (all of a sudden!) - behind the cabin, leaning to the side ... laughing
  • polkovnik manuch 5 September 2015 19: 50 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Alekseev’s achievements were lost, forgotten, the old (his) scientific school has not been around for a long time. "Effective managers" think more about diapers and sneakers than about combat ekranoplan (s). Therefore, today there is no need to talk about large EPs, not large ones (medium and small) will justify themselves — as transport and intelligence officers. Our "sworn friends" have some time to make money, perhaps China. It’s unlikely to develop an ekranoplane strike wing in Russia right now (scientific developments, to put it mildly, have lost, shipbuilding capacities are simply not there!), But nevertheless the topic is very interesting, maybe building for a foreign customer we will learn a lot for ourselves, and it will be seen there.
  • Old26 5 September 2015 20: 54 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: uzer 13
    They will all be shot down at the first hour.

    So they will be shot down? Can I find out what?

    Quote: xtur
    yeah, and how do you do it, not knowing the real air resistance for a particular EA? Ie do you propose to believe your assessments vs developer ratings, because their numbers break your stereotypes?

    I do not propose to believe anything. To begin with, I propose to include at least my own head. In addition, it is enough to know at least such a parameter, how much fuel is enough at such a flow rate. In approximation, this is basically enough to say whether this is bullshit or not. And are you so sure that the numbers announced in the article are the numbers of the developers?

    Quote: man in the street
    That is, ALL seaplanes, including the BE-200, are designed and built according to shipbuilding standards, and from shipbuilding materials?

    No need to juggle. Ekranoplanes do not apply to aviation, to ships, hence the compliance with all shipbuilding standards
  • SeAl2014 6 September 2015 09: 03 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Well, finally remembered Alekseev.
  • SPIKER 6 September 2015 09: 09 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The idea is good, but will it come true ??? !!! Of course, it’s far to the “Moon”, but nevertheless they have moved from the dead center !!!
  • Old26 6 September 2015 11: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    xtur
    Touching on our talk yesterday about the reality of the indicated range of the A-050 ekranoplan.
    I remove my question about the reality of data, because just went to the manufacturer’s website and checked - yes, the range is indicated in 5000 km.
    Now about fuel consumption
    Of course, I do not know the resistance, but the net consumption without reference
    - on take-off mode (during acceleration in 3 minutes)
    • for R-195 - not less than 400 kg
    • for TV7-117CM - not less than 60 kg
    For flight in cruise mode only for engines TV-7-117 (with a power of 1800-2000 in cruise mode) = from 10700 to 11800 kg.
    Flight time in cruising mode at a range of 5000 km at a speed of 350 km / h = 14,3 hours.
    The empty mass is HZ, but even if we take it from the old (Lun) it is 0,75 from the take-off, then let it be 0,6 now, then everything is at the limit. I did not take into account the navigational supply of fuel, the possibility of including marching, etc. Pure expense. So, in the passenger it can still withstand such parameters. In the military - this is complete insanity. Not only is there nowhere to put containers with missiles that will give strong resistance, but there is still no room for a radar that will also provide its part of the resistance. In addition, the thrust-to-weight ratio of such an apparatus is unlikely to be sufficient. In short, in places of military use of the A-050, you can put a big and bold cross
    1. xtur 8 September 2015 10: 03 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      > about the reality of the specified range of the ekranoplan A-050

      There is a big difference between estimates, current performance characteristics and what will result. Therefore, I see no reason to argue about what we get as a result

      It's just that there is an intrigue in the story with ekranoplanes - there is a gap between the theory that indicates their promise in comparison with cargo planes, and real achievements. And at the same time, there are questions that are simply frustrating, for which there are many answers - but it is the multiplicity of answers that speaks of the remaining obscurity.

      Let’s say why Lun was so overloaded, and at the same time, the cost of its construction was not as small as one might expect. And again - at a construction price comparable to the price of Tu-160, the KM disaster simply did not give a damn (compare with what happens in a catastrophe of comparable aircraft pricing), which suggests that there was very strong resistance to this direction at the top of the country technology development
  • Crown 6 September 2015 11: 19 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Another option, as an escort for the AUG probable enemy))) For the detection and destruction of submarines.
  • Indifferent 6 September 2015 11: 31 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    We already had a bunch of ekranoplanes and there was nothing left! The reason is simple and banal. Their exploitation has shown that there is no sense in them anywhere and in nothing. But they are expensive, and operation is more expensive than an airplane.
    So on the proposed ekranoplan four engines instead of two. Two for the start, two for the march. It turns out that the starting ones after performing the wing exit will perform the role of heavy weights on the runner’s legs. And they weigh a lot!
    Some local authors should not spread fables that the ekranoplan for invisible radars. If it is made using stealth technology, it will not be so visible, and so the AWACS aircraft discovers it at a distance of 500 km. And if you use Stealth technology, the plane will be gold at a price like the American F-35. which costs as much as a mountain of gold of equal weight with it.
    But in Russia there is no American printing press stamping dollars in unlimited quantities.
    I want to imagine for the supporters of this “water strider” where this miracle can be used in military operations. Protection of the water area - no. It can not be at sea for a long time. Anti-submarine operations, especially no, no contact with water. The fight against KUG - laughter! There is much more maneuverable aviation for this! The fight against AUG is already a homeric laughter! AUG does not walk near the shore of the adversary. Prefers the launch line of its aircraft. And this means that the ekranoplan will not reach here. Far too far. But for a long time he cannot patrol at the turn. Again, the IL-38 is much better and more convenient. A day in the air! In short, the chicken is not a bird!
  • nnz226 6 September 2015 12: 20 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Finally resumed work! Hooray!
  • Old26 6 September 2015 13: 30 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Krona
    Another option, as an escort for the AUG probable enemy))) For the detection and destruction of submarines.

    To detect either an AUG or a submarine, it is necessary to have a radar in the first case - which is not on this machine and there is simply nowhere to put it. And if you put it, then how much will the resistance increase and the range will drop?
    To detect submarines, it is necessary to have a HAS immersed in water, or an extended (in the form of a cable) antenna of such a station. Are you sure that at a speed of 350-450 km this antenna will not fly out?

    Quote: nnz226
    We already had a bunch of ekranoplanes and there was nothing left!

    Well, to be precise, then "cloud" consisted of only FIVE cars. Four landing and one rocket

    Quote: indifferent
    Their exploitation has shown that there is no sense in them anywhere and in nothing. But they are expensive, and operation is more expensive than an airplane.

    Yes

    Quote: indifferent
    So on the proposed ekranoplan four engines instead of two. Two for the start, two for the march. It turns out that the starting ones after performing the wing exit will perform the role of heavy weights on the runner’s legs. And they weigh a lot!

    That's right. Ballast. The dry weight of each is 860 kg, in the total of 1720.
  • Volga Cossack 6 September 2015 14: 36 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    KB Alekseeva means lively yet ???? !!!!! this is good news - at one time in their 4th year they had in practice - the WIG Volga - 2 created .......... and the machine was - even managed to ride ....
  • Diviz 6 September 2015 15: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The place of application of heavy ekranoplanes of the North-Arctic Ocean.
  • Old26 6 September 2015 16: 06 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: DiViZ
    The place of application of heavy ekranoplanes of the North-Arctic Ocean.

    And what should they do there?
  • Diviz 6 September 2015 19: 11 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    To develop the north pole and possibly the south. Learning poles should go faster.
  • Old26 6 September 2015 19: 54 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: DiViZ
    To develop the north pole and possibly the south. Learning poles should go faster.

    No, that’s understandable. How do you propose to implement this? Exclusively in the summer? Or when?
  • leon1204id 6 September 2015 20: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    They persistently use the scheme with starting engines, what Rostislav Alekseev used on his latest models and Orlenka. In the early 1990s, several development modifications were actively carried out on the basis of Orlenka:
    Passenger ship, known in the West as A.90.150. The range and speed were significantly increased up to 700 km / h. 450 is declared on this model! Moreover, we see a biplane. Alekseev made such an ekranoplan (Eaglet) scheme just for good speed, it was necessary to solve the stability problem , to sacrifice savings, but it was possible to land and start from any flat surface (preferably soft, although the fuselage is made of metal). It seems to have returned in a circle. As under Stalin, there was an order to copy the US strategic bomber. It seems that the ekranoplanes are not close to us.