Military Review

An ekranoplan is needed ... like a dead galosh

409



With all due respect to Alekseev, Lippish and Bartini, constantly flying in takeoff mode is bad, damn uneconomical and deadly. The altitude is very useful for the aircraft, the health of its crew and passengers.

All the benefits of the screen effect (an increase in lift when flying a few meters above the surface) are leveled by the resistance of the dense layers of the atmosphere, aggravated by the design of the “sea monsters” themselves.

They need the whole "festoon" of engines to exit on-screen mode, which entails obvious trouble:

A) The deterioration of the aerodynamic appearance compared to a conventional aircraft (smooth cigar-shaped fuselage, only two or four engines).

B) Catastrophic fuel consumption in takeoff mode. Ten jet engines of KM ekranoplan burned at the start of 30 tons of kerosene!

C) Part of the engine was turned off when entering the on-screen mode and then messing around as a useless “ballast”.

Each of the “Lunya” engines, together with the fuel fittings and the engine nacelle, weighed four tons. And he had eight of these!

To expand the possibilities of using WIG in stormy weather and safe take-off with overcoming hydrodynamic resistance at speeds of hundreds of kilometers per hour, their design should have increased strength, like the hulls of ships. All this is a direct violation of the theory of LA, where there is a struggle for every kilogram of weight.

An ekranoplan is needed ... like a dead galosh


Plus, the fuselage with the characteristic ship contours and bulky not retractable hydrolic for landing on water and maintaining stability on the water.

Yes, that is why the unfortunate “Eaglet” with the same payload with the An-12 had 1,5 times lower speed and half the flight range. He lifted all 20 tons, with a dry weight of his 120 design tons! For comparison: the An-12 created twenty years before it lifted the same load with the total weight of the entire 36 tons.

That is why the "Lun" ekranoplane did not have enough combat radius to cross the Caspian Sea. After that, someone suggests using similar ECPs to pursue aircraft carriers in the Atlantic. Himself is not funny?

That is why the modern EKP “Aquaglide” has the same capacity (400 kg) as the Cessna-172 created half a century ago. At the same time, “Cessna” for some reason (surprise!) Is satisfied with a motor of half the power (160 versus 326 hp) and, of course, has a great speed.

All these figures are unlikely to impress the public. Fans of this type of technology will continue to deny the obvious. As usual, all failures will fall down. not on the objective difficulties encountered when flying in dense layers of the atmosphere, and the lack of modern engines, materials and calculations.

But if the perennial “calculations” show that it turns out stupid, it would be strange to continue to solve something.

In the future, new lightweight materials and economical engines will appear, but the situation will remain the same. With the introduction of new technologies, the aircraft will once again show their complete superiority over ekranoplanes.

WIG enthusiasts are saddened by the comparison of EPC with aviation and ships. In their opinion, this ingenious “monster” exists in a separate reality and, due to its genius, cannot compete with existing modes of transport.

Different types of transport is quite necessary and can be compared, because Railways is quite a competitor to Aeroflot and is fighting for a single client. And suddenly some RosEkranoplan wedged into this pair and said that it would be able to carry everyone faster, cheaper and safer. Will RosEkranoplan be able to squeeze out a significant chunk of the shipping market from Russian Railways or Aeroflot?

Comment by Alex_59

Being unable to bring counter-arguments of a technical nature and explain the advantages of flying at low altitudes, ECP fans refer to other types of technology. Allegedly, they also experienced unbearable torment during their implementation.

Replace in this article with an airplane "ekranoplan", change the date to 1903 year, and it will look like the truth.

Only the truth is different there.

Airplanes had enough 10 years to transform into a full-fledged air force. Without the participation of which any military conflict became unthinkable. Despite the wretchedness of the design of the first "bookshelves", their advantages were so great that they could not leave anyone aside.

A reliable mechanism for skewing the screws was barely created - helicopters went massively into the series. “Sikorsky R4” has been actively used in combat since April 1944. The Germans with the 1944, acted helicopter "Drache" c squadron anti-submarine helicopters Fl.282 "Hummingbird". Highly appreciating the car, the command Kriegsmarine immediately issued an order for 1000 such "birds".

The ability to take off from any “patch”, hover in place and move the overall cargo on the external sling - the properties of helicopters are invaluable.

And what can ekranoplan offer?

The only achievement of the creators of the "monsters" was that, at the cost of incredible effort, they still able to lift into the air that, by nature, should not fly. Not paying attention to costs, relying on the endless funding from the state.

The question of why and why create difficulties out of the blue remained unanswered.

Probably, it was fun to drive the 500-ton “barn” across the Caspian with the help of a “string” of 10 jet engines from supersonic Tu-22 bombers.



The inadequacy of the 10 motor “monster” was evident even at the stage of primary calculations. But it still embodied in the metal. And, apparently, the experiment was considered successful. Crazy ideas of the “Caspian Monster” were developed in the form of an EKNE "Lun" with eight engines from the wide-body IL-86 airliner.

Comedy with ekranoplans lasted more than half a century, but it could not last forever. Having received the results of the practical operation of these machines, including 140-, 380- and 540-ton "monsters", customers from the Navy, in the end, covered up the unpromising direction.

At times lower speed and payload with the same take-off weight, triple fuel consumption, the impossibility of flying over land - all that distinguishes the WIG from a normal aircraft.

An ekranoplan is ideal for disembarking scout groups - the roar of 10 engines will be heard all along the coast.

About stealth on radars when flying at low altitude: what prevents a missile carrier bomber from doing the same trick? Sneak up to the goal at extremely low altitude at twice the speed than RPC?

Contrary to the rumors about the safety of WIG, “which, when engine fails, immediately land on the water,” in reality, they fight no less than ordinary aircraft. Of the eight large “Alekseev” monsters, four were smashed, including two catastrophes with human victims.

EK pilots do not have saving seconds to assess the situation and level the car. One awkward movement of the steering wheel - and the tail will break off from the impact on the water at 400 km / h. If you take the steering wheel a little over yourself - separation from the screen, loss of stability, loss of control over the car, disaster, death.

Manageability becomes an even bigger problem. Due to the impossibility of making bends with a deep roll, the turning radius of the “Lunya” at cruising speed was three kilometers! Now let the most desperate people try to “get through” the curvature of the river on an 380-toned WIG. Or evade a tug unexpectedly arising directly at the rate.

The only scope of ECP today is a water attraction for spoiled tourists who are tired of riding banana and hydrolic.

The idea of ​​an ekranoplane does not carry the slightest common sense. Flying at an ultra-low altitude can only worsen all, without exception, the characteristics of the aircraft. Just as a weight tied to the leg will never contribute to an athlete’s running speed. You can recalculate again and make a weight of carbon, but the weight will remain a weight. The main question is why is she on the foot at all if you can live without a kettlebell?

History with ekranoplan is an interesting social experiment. How easily people believe in all sorts of nonsense. And when trying to point out the obvious fallacy of their judgments, they are ready to violently uphold an absurd point of view, accusing their opponents of betraying national interests.

And then they are surprised how Kashpirovsk and MMM could appear.

Those who call for the revival of work on the creation of heavy WIG, are divided into two categories. The first ones are impressionable inhabitants who liked the sight of a low-flying “super-airplane” with a dozen roaring engines. Being confident that they are right, they do not notice the shortcomings and invented the imaginary merits of ECP on the move.

The second represent a group of interests of serious people. Which everyone understands perfectly well, because they are trying to launch a knowingly ineffectual, therefore, a lengthy and expensive project, “sawing” with this a decent amount of funds.

Author:
409 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Ruslan67
    Ruslan67 19 February 2016 06: 20
    13
    Articles about these monsters are already reminiscent of advice to gardeners in the yellow newspaper sad Thank God that no one will build them to prove fool their complete uselessness
    1. Wheel
      Wheel 19 February 2016 06: 27
      62
      Again Kaptsov !!!
      Oleg, get on! laughing
      If you do not like cats, then you simply do not know how to cook them! laughing
      1. efendia
        efendia 19 February 2016 08: 10
        +3
        People do not know where to put themselves here and multiply entities without a detailed analysis of the pros and cons - the next article is nothing. It is interesting to know what AvToR itself did useful in this life if it is such a cool special on ekranoplanes? Maybe he came up with something new and more revolutionary? Or can it just scam other people's developments?
        1. Old
          Old 19 February 2016 08: 39
          +6
          I also have similar similar suspicions regarding the author. If you are talented in something in terms of creation, then why do you need to argue with someone? Do it! And so this is an empty boast of his own erudition. Maybe he gets money for it. Then it is clear.
          And research must be conducted, in any case, this is a forward movement. Discoveries in the most unexpected areas are always possible. There are enthusiasts and God help them.
          1. Sirocco
            Sirocco 20 February 2016 05: 26
            +1
            Quote: Old
            . If you are talented in something,

            What to say about such a scraper?
            The inadequacy of the 10 motor “monster” was evident even at the stage of primary calculations. But it still embodied in the metal. And, apparently, the experiment was considered successful. Crazy ideas of the “Caspian Monster” were developed in the form of an EKNE "Lun" with eight engines from the wide-body IL-86 airliner.

            A bad child is the grief of parents !!!! A master of the genre in the form of tossing famous masses onto a fan.
            Everything is bad, everything is gone chef. Just like our colleagues from the promised land))))
            1. crazyrom
              crazyrom 21 February 2016 01: 42
              0
              The fact that the enemies continue to scribble articles of this type already proves by itself that they are very necessary. With pleasure would fill the face AUTOR.
        2. My doctor
          My doctor 19 February 2016 09: 53
          14
          Quote: efendia
          It is interesting to know what AvToR itself did useful in this life

          - Did you ask yourself such a question? Probably YES, and most likely the answer didn’t please, otherwise this question would have been closed and didn’t pop up in my head.
          Quote: efendia
          Or can it just scam other people's developments?
          - Don’t be stupid, AvToR doesn’t overshadow other people's developments, he criticizes the arguments of fans of ekranoplanes, at that time you can override his arguments, just as I can neigh from your comments, and then someone from mine, etc. etc.)))))
          1. Generalissimo
            Generalissimo 19 February 2016 11: 11
            11
            There is no criticism there, only distortions and demagogy.
          2. guzik007
            guzik007 19 February 2016 12: 06
            +7
            - Don’t be stupid. AvToR does not oohits other people's developments,
            ------------------------------------------------
            I have developed a very controversial attitude. So, when I saw IT about twenty years ago, already the hair on my head stirred with delight and pride in the country.
            And after seeing the figures and calculations of the author, I gradually come to a similar thought, a monstrous wunderwolf. It's just that the designer was lucky in his time, when, against the background of the frenzied success of "rockets" and "comets", he was given great powers and money.
            Well, I couldn’t! It’s time to agree and take the bitter pill — the wunderwafer is the wunderwafer.
            Although ... if more economical, more powerful and most importantly light engines appear, in the future this principle of flight will have prospects.
            1. KaPToC
              KaPToC 19 February 2016 13: 47
              +3
              The low economic efficiency of the Soviet ekranoplanes is due to the fact that the runway is water for them and they need to be compared with seaplanes, and not with Cessna. Soviet ekranoplanes were not pure ekranoplanes; they were amphibians.
              1. Nikolaevich I
                Nikolaevich I 19 February 2016 16: 14
                +2
                Actually, such "aggregates" are called "ekranolets", not "amphibians".
                1. nimboris
                  nimboris 20 February 2016 10: 11
                  0
                  ekranolety differ from ekranoplanes in that they can fly in a plane, but ekranoplanes not.
                  1. Nikolaevich I
                    Nikolaevich I 20 February 2016 18: 12
                    +1
                    And who is arguing?
              2. mav1971
                mav1971 19 February 2016 19: 45
                +1
                Quote: KaPToC
                The low economic efficiency of the Soviet ekranoplanes is due to the fact that the runway is water for them and they need to be compared with seaplanes, and not with Cessna. Soviet ekranoplanes were not pure ekranoplanes; they were amphibians.


                Where are the amphibians now?
                How many are there in the world?
                What are their tasks?
                Are new ones being designed?
                Answer yourself these questions and everything will fall into place ...
            2. evgenii57
              evgenii57 20 February 2016 04: 17
              +5
              For the gifted. The ekranoplan is economical only for flight conditions on the screen. As a plane, its use is not effective. And according to the purpose, using it carries a larger load with lower fuel consumption. But for the Navy this is not the most important thing. The most important thing is stealth, speed (speed), landing on water in the high storm of the storm, as a means of landing, but not reconnaissance groups and many more options, since it is simply irreplaceable.
              1. Htorm
                Htorm 22 February 2016 14: 05
                0
                Hello. I will repeat the phrase of one general of the navy "Ekronoplane is a hu..th boat and even more hu..th airplane
          3. aleks 62 next
            aleks 62 next 19 February 2016 14: 23
            +4
            .... he criticizes the arguments of ekranoplan fans ...

            ... Criticism should be based on KNOWLEDGE !!!! .... And judging by the pearls and conclusions, simply NO !!!! .... If I don’t understand how to put the dough and bake pies, then I don’t go there. ... hi
            1. gladcu2
              gladcu2 19 February 2016 23: 35
              +3
              aleks

              I agree. The author distort.

              WIG, this is a military development. It is known that the military are not friends with commercial effectiveness.

              By the way, under the article. Initially, the style of the article was more detailed. It seemed that a person with good knowledge and a balanced approach seemed to write. And then at some point I began to suspect that the tenth grader began to write the article. I looked at the signature and, well ... I turned to the comment.
            2. cyberhanter
              cyberhanter 24 February 2016 10: 28
              0
              do you have? :) Give reasons
        3. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 19 February 2016 10: 10
          0
          The question is that the site constantly publishes such pornography
          1. Zeppelin ml.
            Zeppelin ml. 19 February 2016 11: 05
            +1
            Quote: Generalissimo
            The question is that the site constantly publishes such pornography

            sorry, what do you mean by pornography?
            1. Generalissimo
              Generalissimo 19 February 2016 13: 42
              -3
              Articles of this kind
              1. mav1971
                mav1971 19 February 2016 19: 46
                0
                Commentators of this kind, like you, are pornography actors no less ...
                So highly artistic. there's nowhere to spit ..
                1. Generalissimo
                  Generalissimo 19 February 2016 23: 46
                  -1
                  Well then, spit on yourself, since you can’t afford it.
            2. KaPToC
              KaPToC 19 February 2016 13: 49
              +8
              The one-sided coverage of the issue in custom articles is pornography. the author did not say anything about the benefits of ekranoplanes, but they are significant.
        4. cheguevarazhiv
          cheguevarazhiv 19 February 2016 10: 51
          +9
          I fully support. It is not serious to judge the new direction of operation (and scanty) of actually experimental machines. Such arguments would kill the idea of ​​the Wright brothers. The reference to the rapid progress of aviation is also not correct - ALL the leading countries of the world were engaged in it in the conditions of TWO WORLD wars (apart from other local conflicts, although they should not be reset). About the social experiment, he smiled at all - if everyone listened to such retrogrades, then humanity probably still would not have known the wheel. We must dare, seek and not give up !!!
          1. Vita vko
            Vita vko 19 February 2016 13: 47
            14
            At the same time, taking advantage of Soviet developments, China already today successfully builds and sells ekranoplanes for various purposes.
            Maybe the author Oleg Kaptsov should translate soy articles into Chinese and publish his nonsense there! I am sure that after the first publication he will become a persona non grata.
            1. mav1971
              mav1971 19 February 2016 20: 01
              +2
              Quote: Vita VKO
              At the same time, taking advantage of Soviet developments, China already today successfully builds and sells ekranoplanes for various purposes.
              Maybe the author Oleg Kaptsov should translate soy articles into Chinese and publish his nonsense there! I am sure that after the first publication he will become a persona non grata.


              Oh well...
              Well, show us these same Chinese ekranoplanes that the Chinese are building and successfully selling?

              Just do not show everyone the well-known developments of two aviation institutes, which made 4 prototypes, purely "load students" ...
              1. Vita vko
                Vita vko 20 February 2016 22: 18
                +2
                Quote: mav1971
                show us these same ekranoplanes,

                Immediately suggested a similar question, I wanted to upload a photo, but it did not work out. Something crashes on the site. Here is the link http://www.abirus.ru/content/564/623/631/736.html
                But the point is not that someone took advantage of something there. And the fact that people with an engineering education, good or bad, they argue as tyrants who 100 years ago criticized the Wright brothers, scaring everyone with airplanes that can fall on their heads and are deadly for people, and before that 200 years ago, they criticized the inventor of steam engines Richard Trivaitik.
                It only remains to be surprised at these dinosaurs. Although in fact the problem is serious. Most corporations are not interested in rebuilding their technological base and producing cheap and effective tools. Remember the history of the invention of the light bulb, which was invented in Russia, and steel was produced in the West.
                So it is with ekranoplans. Like any new remedy, it had its own "illnesses", possibly security problems. But these problems are solved in a new round of technologies in an elementary way - by transferring part of the functions to computer controls. The same can be said for the materials and the construction itself. At the same time, the main advantages are: low altitude, i.e. Potentially low probability of timely detection by enemy air defense systems, high speed and high carrying capacity are key in solving a very wide range of tasks.
                1. Generalissimo
                  Generalissimo 22 February 2016 10: 33
                  0
                  you can also ask Google "Iranian ekranoplanes" and start with small
          2. KKND
            KKND 19 February 2016 14: 49
            -5
            Quote: cheguevarazh
            We must dare, seek and not give up !!!

            Are you ready to spend your own $ 2 billion personally
            Quote: cheguevarazh
            We must dare, seek and not give up !!!

            Although something tells me that it does not threaten you.
            1. Generalissimo
              Generalissimo 22 February 2016 10: 34
              0
              there is a picture above, it’s unlikely that it should cost 2 billion
        5. Kadavercianin
          Kadavercianin 19 February 2016 15: 16
          12
          The author, apparently, enjoys writing articles with this topic.

          But I wonder if he is so familiar with the subject of ekranoplanes, then he probably read special literature about them, moreover, not special popular science, but special, and if he read it, why in no article, he never pointed out, 2 small details, such you know insignificant, but details:
          1) Ekranoplanes - not airplanes or ships, by the method and mechanics of movement, they are closest to air-cushion ships (SVP) and that they are much more efficient than SVP in speed and energy consumption
          2) Not a single ekranoplan was created for him, if the author read these books, then he should know that the optimal form for the ekranoplan is a wide mono-wing of large thickness, such a plan for himself on the screen, a licked suitcase, at least for large machines, and also came to the conclusion that others are needed for the ekranoplan and engines, in addition, problems with the wings were not solved, but this was at the time of their creation.

          The author in each article proves to us that the ekranoplan is not an airplane or a ship, I agree, I will say even more tests and calculations (of that time) showed that the ekranoplan's efficiency does not reach the airplane (if not a seaplane) and ship, but FACTOR OF superior to SVP, both in speed and in fuel consumption and load capacity.
          It would be enough to point out these data and many disputes would be resolved, but the author of this article already writes that it is impossible to make an airship out of a tank, but it is not necessary. Moreover, the class of technology is not really developed and not tested, and no one wants to consider the advantages, there is an excuse "then have seen enough" - and the whole topic was closed and expensive in the end.
          1. Xzistant
            Xzistant 19 February 2016 15: 53
            +3
            Kadavercianin, fully support!

            Moreover, such a project has already been created! I don't remember exactly what it was called, but it looked exactly like a "flying suitcase"! wink

            and so that the afftor does not have questions, let him familiarize himself with the work of colleagues: http: //topwar.ru/16867-letatelnyy-apparat-ekip-russkoe-nlo.html

            Yes, this is not exactly a WIG, but it is a variation on the theme of flying on the screen. Even the type of this aircraft is an ekranolet. hi
          2. Uncle VasyaSayapin
            Uncle VasyaSayapin 19 February 2016 17: 15
            -1
            And that the ekranoplan as SVP can call on the shore and unload. Or does he, like a ship or a seaplane, need a pier? And will it slip over floating ice or thin curved ice?
            1. aleksey980
              aleksey980 19 February 2016 17: 49
              +1
              Quote: Uncle VasyaSayapin
              And that the ekranoplan as SVP can call on the shore and unload. Or does he, like a ship or a seaplane, need a pier? And will it slip over floating ice or thin curved ice?

              And what is stopping him? SVP also strongly dislikes hummocks, hemp and similar obstacles. Who said that a retractable landing gear cannot be put on an ekranoplane. Many seaplanes ride on the ground quite well and can take off / land without water. And when bringing the design to the optimum, what will prevent the ekranoleta from jumping the same airliner if such a maneuver is laid down at the design stage?
            2. Kadavercianin
              Kadavercianin 19 February 2016 20: 03
              0
              In general, the same eaglet was just supposed to have its landing gear turned to the side and the landing was performed, in addition, the larger the ekranoplan the higher / thicker the screen, which means the higher the device can fly without any problems, in addition some types of ekranoplanes can easily tear off the screen for a while at least.
            3. cesar65
              cesar65 20 February 2016 23: 29
              +2
              here's a photo of how an ekranoplan stands on the shore
          3. pimen
            pimen 19 February 2016 18: 29
            0
            Actually, according to the mind, the ekranoplane should supplant seaplanes as a class, but for this it needs not only a water cannon to move in a seaworthy way, but also a normal wing for flight as a "mediocre" aircraft
        6. mav1971
          mav1971 19 February 2016 19: 37
          0
          Quote: efendia
          People do not know where to put themselves here and multiply entities without a detailed analysis of the pros and cons - the next article is nothing. It is interesting to know what AvToR itself did useful in this life if it is such a cool special on ekranoplanes? Maybe he came up with something new and more revolutionary? Or can it just scam other people's developments?


          You probably yourself have never done anything in life ...
          For only criticism, or rather a critical view, creates in reality what is called "done well" or "done right."
          Without criticism, everything that would turn out would be shit. "And so it will do."
          When critical opinions are tried to be resolved, the result is improved.
          And when there is praise on the basis of two or three ur-patriotic TV shows. which everyone is like a balm for the soul - this is bad.
          Or are athletes only praised in training?
          Or are students only praised in the classroom?
          Or at the factory for the created jamb - the master will praise you?
          No, they’ll get it both in cabbage soup and in wort ...
          This is all criticism!
          Again.
          Without criticism, the result will never be.
          Never mind. who leads her.
          But if he uses the arguments. which can be expressed in figures and facts. This is the right criticism.
          1. efendia
            efendia 19 February 2016 21: 27
            0
            Quote: mav1971
            And when there is praise on the basis of two or three ur-patriotic TV shows. which are like balm for everyone

            And I somewhere praised EP ??? remind
            Quote: mav1971
            But if he uses the arguments. which can be expressed in figures and facts.

            This is exactly what I am achieving. Only objective figures, taking into account all the nuances, not ceiling figures. But unfortunately all my attempts are in vain.
        7. evgenii57
          evgenii57 20 February 2016 04: 05
          +1
          I want to correct you a little. This scarecrow haunts OUR designs. This is not our people.
        8. sisa29
          sisa29 20 February 2016 08: 12
          +1
          Man wrote an article. Let us discuss it, bring our arguments in favor of the EP or our other arguments on the topic. And instead of that you began to turn to personalities and suggest that you delve into the author’s dirty laundry.
        9. Real stalinist
          Real stalinist 20 February 2016 18: 28
          0
          "Chel" knows what to do with himself and does not multiply the essence, but consistently and reasonably defends his point of view.
          Oleg Kaptsov is one of the famous authors of VO who has written many interesting articles on naval topics.
          And it is not a "chelu" with the nickname "effendi" (translated from Turkish - mister) to criticize him in such a cheeky manner.
          1. efendia
            efendia 20 February 2016 20: 13
            +3
            Well, if fame is expressed by the amount of nonsense thrown into the form of pseudoscientific articles with far-fetched arguments where the warm is confused with the soft and everything seems to be convenient for the author and uncomfortable moments are hushed up then - YES KNOWN (delirium) Author. And why doesn’t such a kampututny author refute with arguments (and not emotions) the normal technical arguments of people (not even me talking about) with an engineering education. It is thought because there are not enough brains. And as for my nickname - this does not concern you in any way - this is in the first place, and in the second place - switching to secondary things is a favorite technique such as the author of the article, a way of shifting attention from uncomfortable questions.
      2. avt
        avt 19 February 2016 10: 00
        29
        Quote: Wheel
        Again Kaptsov !!!
        Oleg, get on!

        Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! And reverently read! In general, every morning, start by reading the imperishable new laws of Newton’s nature of our time — Kaptsov! The first law
        The aircraft should be as lightweight as possible.
        All airplanes heavier than air must be brought to the state of a balloon and airship in accordance with it! Second Law
        The ship must be strong (and therefore heavy) for safe walking on the waves.
        , and therefore armored! And in general, all this
        Those who call for the revival of work on the creation of heavy WIG, are divided into two categories. The first ones are impressionable inhabitants who liked the sight of a low-flying “super-airplane” with a dozen roaring engines. Being confident that they are right, they do not notice the shortcomings and invented the imaginary merits of ECP on the move.

        The latter represent a group of interests of serious people. Which everyone understands perfectly, that’s why they are trying to launch a deliberately inconclusive, therefore long and expensive project, having “cut” a decent amount of funds for this
        to heretics - a follower of the heretic Alekseev, who violated the "laws of nature" and distracting from the construction of battleships - a life cycle with nails. wassat In general, how did Oleg float? And his KM "smashed to pieces", well, straight, the fuel disappeared, having spent it all, breaking into pieces "Yes, so only a leg in camouflage was found wassat but it’s yesterday, and today it’s
        Manageability becomes an even bigger problem. Due to the impossibility of making bends with a deep roll, the turning radius of the “Lunya” at cruising speed was three kilometers! Now let the most desperate people try to “get through” the curvature of the river on an 380-toned WIG. Or evade a tug unexpectedly arising directly at the rate.
        Why just a tug? Take it higher - the ocean liner will definitely not jump over and go around. ”By the way, why did Oleg forget about the ecology? After all, they used to start with the fact that the ekranoplan presses the birds on the river.
        Quote: efendia
        - The next article is not about anything.

        Here are a few cons you soldered. laughing An article about the new laws. Kaptsov and in general .... ,, Denunciation of the Doctor of the villain. "A natural pest who came up with how to use the screen effect to squander people's money ...... On which it was possible to build battleships and, in general, cast heavy ships from lead.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 19 February 2016 10: 05
          +7
          After all, before they started with the fact that the ekranoplan of birds on the river crushes.

          Well, this is really a serious problem. I'm not even joking. However, I think the birds will get used to it. In cities, dogs are already switching to traffic lights, so the birds on the rivers will understand quite well that you should not climb across the roaring monster.
          1. opus
            opus 19 February 2016 12: 10
            +5
            Quote: Wedmak
            However, I think the birds will get used to it.

            Are you used to airports?

            100 or more years of struggle continues

            FREQUENCY OF COLLISIONS WITH DIFFERENT TYPES OF BIRDS (Pulkovo)

            PARTS OF THE AIRCRAFT IN WHICH BIRDS WILL GET (attention to% of remote control)

            In Pulkovo, any puddle (birds love them) is covered with a net


            why not use (noise gas gun)

            Now all this junk (together with specially trained falcons, peregrine falcons and saker falcons) must be placed in the location of the ekranoplan and DESIRED on the route of his flights(5 meters cruising height, it is not 10 km)
            ------------------------------------

            Why do you think you were tormented by putting this grille on the air intake of the turbofan engine?


            Against sea spray? against RVV? "Protection" from the products of combustion of solid propellant rocket missiles ?.
            And this is not serial (on one gondola). This is an attempt (unsuccessful and) to solve the problem
            1. Generalissimo
              Generalissimo 19 February 2016 14: 27
              -2
              There is no problem, these engines are not used during the flight, they can be covered even with an armored cap.
              1. opus
                opus 19 February 2016 15: 55
                +3
                Quote: Generalissimo
                There is no problem, these engines are not used during the flight

                1. Who told you such nonsense?

                8 turbojet engine NK-87

                You and the eaglet have not beguiled?

                2.And take off? Well, if "used".
                The coastal zone is so fond of birds
                1. Generalissimo
                  Generalissimo 19 February 2016 16: 42
                  -3
                  They are used during takeoff. The rest has already been answered. Or about the "stupidity" with the shelling of engines with chickens from a pneumatic cannon?
                  1. opus
                    opus 19 February 2016 16: 57
                    +2
                    Quote: Generalissimo
                    They are used during take-off.

                    then it’s finished flying by the power of thought. Or with the help of crew oars fool
                    REPEAT:

                    Quote: Generalissimo
                    Or about the "stupidity" with the shelling of engines with chickens from a pneumatic cannon?

                    Or.
                    Quote: Generalissimo
                    folly
                    comrade aleks 62 next essno read
                    Quote: aleks 62 next
                    .You lagged behind life .... At that time - yes. it was a problem for turbojet engines ... Now, especially not ... All modern engines pass the test for a bird entering the engine .... For this, they use carcasses of ordinary hens, who spit out a special gun (to accelerate to flight speeds) .... After such a hit, the engine must maintain NORMAL performance according to certification standards .... Given that ostriches do not fly here, and most birds have a mass similar to chicken (about 2 kg), then this is already not very urgent problem


                    And he answered.
                    You call me, I do not want to waste time reading pearls of silly generalisimuses (with potential tending to zero)
                    1. Generalissimo
                      Generalissimo 19 February 2016 17: 24
                      -2
                      Look for other quotes, circle them yourself and another pencil and you have to figure it out.
                      And there they answered already too.
                      1. opus
                        opus 19 February 2016 17: 39
                        +3
                        Quote: Generalissimo
                        Look for other quotes, circle them yourself and another pencil

                        Maybe you will at least bring something (you can not circle it, you don’t have any pencils, I understand).
                        Well, at least a bit?
                        You can't just "wag the tongue".
                        ?
                        Link there what thread?

                        How is the MOON
                        Quote: Generalissimo
                        these engines are not used during the flight, they can be covered even with an armored cap.

                        ?
                        What is flying?
                        Oars? or power mosska?
                        Quote: Generalissimo
                        And there they answered already too.

                        Do you think this is the answer?
                      2. Generalissimo
                        Generalissimo 19 February 2016 18: 01
                        -3
                        I think that you are not worth it to answer 8-)
                      3. mav1971
                        mav1971 19 February 2016 20: 27
                        +2
                        Quote: Generalissimo
                        I think that you are not worth it to answer 8-)


                        Well what can I tell you ...

                        D, B!
                        (c) Lavrov ..
                      4. Generalissimo
                        Generalissimo 19 February 2016 23: 49
                        0
                        And you too, major from the Dromedary cavalry.
      3. Kadavercianin
        Kadavercianin 19 February 2016 14: 35
        0
        Do they do the same for SVP? After all, they are also not the slowest and the air intake is not the smallest ,?
        1. opus
          opus 19 February 2016 16: 07
          -1
          Quote: Kadavercianin
          Do they do the same for SVP? After all, they are also not the slowest and the air intake is not the smallest ,?

          Are there many birds on the aircraft carrier?


          Or are runways located in coastal zones or near a landfill?





          Read more here Garbage "Mordor" against the military airfield in Borisoglebsk

          -------------------
          the level at VTOL all is not 5 meters above the water mirror. \ SO?

          International statistics show that up to three quarters of bird collisions with an airplane (birds entering aircraft engines) occur exactly at that moment when planes take off or land.
          VTOL aircraft have less chances to get a bird (linear speed is not the same)
          1. Generalissimo
            Generalissimo 19 February 2016 16: 44
            -4
            Around the ships there are always a lot of birds. Do you know whether they fly in the middle of the sea to sit on them.
            The chances are the same - the bird does not have time to deviate.
          2. Kadavercianin
            Kadavercianin 19 February 2016 17: 55
            +2
            Dear opus

            Sorry, but still we are talking about ekranoplans, are there any statistics on the collision of working machines, but they were rather big and there were not 2 of them, about a collision with birds. So for the purity of the experiment or the data on seaplanes, maybe there is something on the SVP, among them there are large machines that do not move much slower than some planes when taking off or landing.

            Quote: Generalissimo
            Around the ships there are always a lot of birds. Do you know whether they fly in the middle of the sea to sit on them.
            The chances are the same - the bird does not have time to deviate.


            Also, by the way, a small nuance of operation.

            In addition, you still need to clarify what infrastructure the ekranoplan needs, because he, as such, does not need a runway. And take into account the existing large-sized ekranoplanes at the moment, if you create them, you will have to do a lot from scratch, so those ekranoplanes that were and those that can be will be structurally very different.

            I’m writing not to refute your data or to find fault, but to expand my understanding of the issue. Argument your position.
            1. opus
              opus 19 February 2016 18: 09
              0
              Quote: Kadavercianin
              are there any statistics on a collision of working machines, but they were rather big and there were not 2 of them, about a collision with birds

              You will not find.
              Consider this my conclusions based on "rumors"
              Quote: opus
              Why do you think you were tormented by putting this grille on the air intake of the turbofan engine?


              I gave statistics on Pulkovo (a typical case is near the coastal zone, swamps - there are enough birds




              35% of seagulls, takeoff and landing, typical ekranoplan flight profile
              Quote: Kadavercianin
              Also, by the way, a small nuance of operation.

              what?
              Is this stupid?
              Quote: Generalissimo
              Do you know whether they fly in the middle of the sea to sit on them.

              Ship food source (galley waste, latrine, fishing seiner
              1. opus
                opus 19 February 2016 18: 13
                +3
                Quote: Kadavercianin
                because he doesn’t need a runway as such.

                A platform on the shore is needed





                a hangar is needed, shallow water is needed, a dock is needed.
                In principle, I am already tired of arguing


                1. Generalissimo
                  Generalissimo 19 February 2016 18: 22
                  0
                  Tired - take a rest. Ships also sometimes need a dry dock. And they usually build them afloat.
                2. opus
                  opus 19 February 2016 19: 06
                  +3
                  Quote: Generalissimo
                  Tired - take a rest.

                  I support Sergey Lavrov

                  100% support good
                3. Generalissimo
                  Generalissimo 19 February 2016 23: 50
                  -1
                  And he is you? :-)
            2. Kadavercianin
              Kadavercianin 19 February 2016 18: 36
              0
              The hangar is most likely needed, but the dock performs the same functions, definitely the parking place at the taxiway is needed if it will be operated as a seaplane and it has a landing gear, then shallow water is needed, and a pier may be needed instead if it, like the SVP, will be located.

              Here, it seems to me, the nuance is how exactly it is supposed to be exploited. In addition, I'm interested in how quickly it "takes off" and "lands".
            3. opus
              opus 19 February 2016 19: 03
              0
              Quote: Kadavercianin
              but the dock performs the same functions

              Quote: Kadavercianin
              he has a chassis

              how much is 500 tons of taken-up mass ...chassis? What class of runway is needed? Buranovskaya?

              Unlike "Eaglet", "Lun" does not have a chassis, only a hydro-ski (and why? the answer is -> in mass)



              cannot climb ashore independently.
              Therefore, he needs a dry floating dock.





              This dock tugboats displayed in the bay, then plunges several meters (diving up to 10 meters is possible) and Further, the floated ekranoplan enters (leaves) into it under its own power.
              ZY.ya about birds for what? To the fact that the author did not pay attention to this.
              This is not a major issue, but a PROBLEM!
              Quote: Kadavercianin
              In addition, I'm interested in how quickly it "takes off" and "lands".

              The answer is in the "polar" chart

              From the graph, you can see how the proximity of the screen withappears on lift and drag
              picked up the separation speed, you need to break away immediately otherwise the resistance will eat fuel
            4. Kadavercianin
              Kadavercianin 19 February 2016 19: 45
              0
              Well, at the expense of the fact that Lun has no chassis, as if, in principle, I guessed.
              Well, and besides, what is the point after gaining speed on the screen, it seems that no one in his mind 10–20 meters above the ground in supersonic sounds (this I exaggerate) was not going to fly and is not going to.

              In addition, I can be mistaken, but ordinary planes also do not overclock during take-off, after reaching the necessary and sufficient speeds, so to speak, and yes I am aware that further flight is very different from the ekranoplan and the aerodynamic requirements of planes are different.

              But here for the nuances of acceleration and landing it will be necessary to clarify how much they can be made soft and hard, not in the context of those devices that were once, but let's say in a more modern context.
            5. opus
              opus 19 February 2016 20: 18
              +1
              Quote: Kadavercianin
              Well and besides what is the point after going to the screen

              I do not know..

              can Schaub quickly get to the aircraft carrier? wink
              mb because some external force (for example, a gust of wind) presses the ekranolet to water, then the increment of the lifting force is in focus in height along the center of gravity creates a dive moment. The angle of attack from positive to negative?

              mb because the aerodynamic focus of the ekranolet, so constant in flight at altitude, suddenly bifurcates at the screen?


              at a speed of more than 200 km / h, the ekranolet unexpectedly loses stability and turns over through the stern. That is how they died in 1967, Donald Campbell on the “Blue Bird” and seven years later - Cesare Scottie on a tunnel boat.
              Quote: Kadavercianin
              In addition, I could be wrong, but ordinary planes do not overclock too much when taking off

              can an ekranoplan give such an angle of attack?

              "tail" does not strike?
              Quote: Kadavercianin
              But for the nuances of acceleration and landing

              water environment is insidious.
              It seems to be soft, wet and malleable, but at speed like concrete, but failing
            6. Kadavercianin
              Kadavercianin 19 February 2016 21: 05
              +1
              Quote: opus
              can an ekranoplan give such an angle of attack?


              In this case, I rather drew an analogy for the ekranoplane exit on the screen and take off the plane, I did not offer the ekranoplan to take off or tear off the screen, why? I just drew an analogy that the plane doesn’t accelerate too much during take-off (relatively strong), and the ekranoplane went on the screen and kept it in front. The difference between the aircraft here is at least in working altitude and conditions.
            7. opus
              opus 19 February 2016 21: 41
              0
              Quote: Kadavercianin
              I just made an analogy that the plane doesn’t accelerate too much when taking off (relatively strong),

              the aircraft has lift due to the angle of attack.
              in EP differently.
              And all aircraft are trying to quickly leave this strange altitude (more economical, safer (10 km under the wing or 5 m?), Maneuverability (turn, turn), and so on)
              Quote: Kadavercianin
              and ekranoplan: went to the screen and in front keep it up.

              this is the plane "keep it up", but with the ZhEP-question (well, I brought it)
              Potom weapons.
              Well, where is the suspension of arms from the TOP seen (and from below it cannot clear the stump)?
              Where the flow is accelerated, where there is vacuum. there is such a "gentle" area, rarefaction, suction effect, refusal - boom on the coupol, and not a flight to the ground.
              Well and so on
            8. Kadavercianin
              Kadavercianin 19 February 2016 22: 39
              0
              Quote: opus
              in EP differently.


              Yes, it is this difference that gives rise to such a number of disputes. Basically, how much ET plane, and how many SVP.

              Quote: opus
              And all the aircraft are trying to quickly leave this strange height


              Of course, but the plane and the ekranoplan are still different things and, as they say, one is obliged, the other should not.

              Quote: opus
              Well, where is the suspension of arms from the TOP seen (and from below it cannot clear the stump)?


              It’s a pity I don’t know how to look for veils like you. I remember only seeing rocket attempts at some European one, either a fighter or a drummer, to put above the wings, but it didn’t go far, so relatively speaking I saw something like that, but this level of childhood memories is not worth believing in it .
              Well, and the weapon is on top, well, what else can you do, as you don’t have it and don’t do it anyway, there will be problems, so there are suspicions that the installation of weapons was treated quite carefully and thought over this option, since they were assembled.

              And at the expense of "ekranoplans today" - I have already said that if they will be created, especially difficult ones, I am more than sure that this will not be a repetition of old projects and mistakes, a lot will have to be done, how to do this and invent from scratch, so that if they are done, they will have as much in common with ekranoplanes of that time as the first 40x jet fighters with 60x fighters.
  • Generalissimo
    Generalissimo 20 February 2016 00: 24
    0
    You just have to sit. There are not many scavengers among seabirds. And they are not all waterfowl.
  • aleks 62 next
    aleks 62 next 19 February 2016 14: 38
    0
    ..... Why do you think you were tormented by putting this grille on the air intake of the turbofan engine? ... This is an attempt (unsuccessful at that) to solve the problem that they got into trouble ....

    .... You are behind the times .... At that time - yes. it was a problem for turbojet engines ... Now, especially not ... All modern engines pass the test of a bird getting into the engine .... For this, they use carcasses of ordinary hens that are spit out of a special gun (to disperse to flight speeds) ... .After such a hit, the engine, according to the certification standards, should maintain NORMAL operability .... Considering that our ostriches do not fly, and most birds have a mass similar to chicken (about 2 kg), this is not a very urgent problem ... hi
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 19 February 2016 15: 07
      +2
      Tell the pilots that.
      1. aleks 62 next
        aleks 62 next 19 February 2016 15: 36
        0
        .... Pilots tell it ....

        ... Suggest to yourself ????? laughing
    2. opus
      opus 19 February 2016 16: 17
      0
      Quote: aleks 62 next
      ..You are behind the times.

      Well, you then her (life) "overtook" I see. Far from
      Quote: aleks 62 next
      All modern engines pass the test for birds in the engine ....

      belay

      On July 10, 2006, when a Russian Tu-134A aircraft with serial number 63875, flying to Moscow, took off at a speed of about 300 km / h, a bird got into the air duct of the left engine. PIC it was decided to stop taking off. There was not enough distance from the edge of the runway to the fences of the strip: there was a collision of the aircraft with stretch marks of the antenna field and the bypass and airfield fences.



      Quote: aleks 62 next
      To do this, use the carcasses of ordinary hens that spit out from a special gun ( to accelerate to flight speeds)

      fool


      Quote: aleks 62 next
      then this is not a very urgent problem

      Yeah





      Blochers they are stubborn
      Quote: aleks 62 next
      . Suggest to yourself ????

      I would advise you

      Quote: aleks 62 next
      spit out a special gun
      to myself.
      Can it help?
      1. aleks 62 next
        aleks 62 next 19 February 2016 16: 58
        0
        .... Well, you then her (life) "overtook" I see. Far away ...


        .... Well, yes .... And you were stuck at the level of Tu-134 (development of the early 60s and turbojet engines including) ...

        ... I would advise you

        Quote: aleks 62 next
        spit out a special gun for yourself.
        Can it help?

        ... You don’t have to be rude .... Couch flyer .... This is firstly ... Secondly I wrote that MODERN engines .... Thirdly, the presence of a flame after being hit does not always cause an engine fire; th !!!! .... hi
        1. opus
          opus 19 February 2016 17: 55
          -2
          Quote: aleks 62 next
          .. Well, yes .... And you were stuck at the level of Tu-134 (development of the early 60s and turbojet engines including) ...

          And why only Tu-134 then?
          More mind / strength was not enough? Is the RAM overloaded?
          and A-321? (29/04/2007) Also "the beginning of the century"?
          and the view from the cockpit of a combat aircraft? (2008 year m / a by the way)
          the same "Old" of the beginning of the century?

          2009 mp
          The danish government can expect billion dollar claims if a plane crash is caused by birds, because the State has developed many bird sanctuaries close to the airport in violation of the ICAO aviation regulations. Each year Copenhagen Airport is bothered by several hundred birdstrikes.
          Quote: aleks 62 next
          Secondly, I wrote that MODERN engines ..

          yep

          Threat Tu showed that to focus on delirium
          Quote: aleks 62 next
          Yes, at that time. it was a problem for turbojet engines ... Now, especially not ...

          ------------------

          Quote: aleks 62 next
          . You don’t have to be rude .... Sofa flyer .... This is firstly ... Secondly I wrote

          1. Do you have an inferiority complex?
          2. How not to "be rude"
          Quote: aleks 62 next
          .For this, use the carcasses of ordinary hens that spit out of a special gun (to disperse to flight speeds) ...

          yep
          Repetition

          gun carcass (s)
          So for reference:
          This is a test to maintain the integrity of the engine when the blades of the first compressor rupture. The orange box on the scapula is a micropower of explosives.
          imitation of a "carcass from a cannon" hit
          Quote: aleks 62 next
          spit out a special gun for yourself.

          I understand you lobotomy did not help?

          Quote: aleks 62 next
          Sofa flyer ..

          Sofa nonsense, tongue grind -not bags toss and turn.
          one chatter, at least something to prove their "knowledge"
        2. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 19 February 2016 18: 03
          +1
          Aleks 62 next do not argue, a little more and others will not notice the difference.
  • KaPToC
    KaPToC 19 February 2016 13: 52
    -1
    I’ll clarify, not just birds, but SNOWERS.
  • VadimL
    VadimL 19 February 2016 16: 07
    +1
    In cities, dogs are already switching to traffic lights

    Dogs are moving, but some people will not learn.
  • GRAY
    GRAY 19 February 2016 10: 13
    14
    If we consider the title of the article from the point of view of psychoanalysis, we can come to the conclusion that some, last time, were not weakly bombed. lol
  • Taoist
    Taoist 19 February 2016 10: 41
    13
    And the main "fault" of ekranoplanes is that they are a "ship with wings" and without armor ... Now, if Alekseev had built a "battleship on the screen effect", then he would not have had a more furious defender than Kaptsov ... ... Again, the hated RCC managed to screw it up ... ;-)
    1. Generalissimo
      Generalissimo 19 February 2016 14: 30
      0
      And if you still run verticals from his back with increased combat load? No - no way! The free world will not check out.
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 19 February 2016 15: 08
        0
        Well, yes, it’s spoiling, because the vertical engine will burn the carrier itself, but in general the idea of ​​such slaughterhouses that it simply amazes, as they do not understand. Well, put extra on the plane. accelerator and you will be Happiness.
        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 19 February 2016 15: 54
          0
          It is strange that gas turbine power plants of the ships did not burn before, and the vertical engine did not burn the deck of the carrier ships.
          She will also sit on the accelerator in the middle of the Ocean, and then he will not allow her to drown?
  • Wheel
    Wheel 19 February 2016 11: 43
    +4
    Quote: avt
    Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! And reverently read! And in general, every morning, start by reading the imperishable new laws of Newton’s nature of our time — Kaptsov

    repeat I am ashamed, ashamed ... repeat

    laughing laughing laughing
    1. KKND
      KKND 19 February 2016 14: 56
      0
      In essence, you can say about the benefits of electronic signature or you can only put emoticons
      Marshal You are ours.
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion 19 February 2016 15: 05
    0
    If you are not able to understand the objective, then do not blame Kaptsov for this.
  • Htorm
    Htorm 3 March 2016 00: 49
    0
    Hello. The boat "progress-4m" at a maximum speed of 55 km per hour and running against a small wave falls apart in a couple of hours while sailing near the Ivolga ekranoplan, the takeoff speed is 110 km h. Fly only in calm weather. Why then is he to the military?
  • Ingvar 72
    Ingvar 72 19 February 2016 10: 11
    +8
    Quote: Wheel
    If you do not like cats, then you simply do not know how to cook them!

    But he knows how to cook armadillos with different sauces! laughing
    But still, Oleg plus for persistence! And the issue with ekranoletami really controversial. hi
  • Mareman Vasilich
    Mareman Vasilich 19 February 2016 10: 12
    0
    Get out of the idiot. He is at work. And the guy mania, he imagines himself a great designer, who considers mediocre Soviet design bureaus.
    1. My doctor
      My doctor 19 February 2016 11: 28
      +3
      Quote: Mareman Vasilich
      Get out of the idiot. He is at work. And the guy mania, he imagines himself a great designer, who considers mediocre Soviet design bureaus.
      such a strange feeling when he writes more literally than the one who named him. You yourself Mareman Vasilich can’t even connect two words in one sentence without confusing the end of words. And of course I am also illiterate and I can alliance And put at the beginning of the sentence. Your constant appeal to unquestioned authorities as the final argument says that I myself do not remember)))))
      1. Mareman Vasilich
        Mareman Vasilich 19 February 2016 12: 05
        0
        Follow yourself, spelling.
        1. My doctor
          My doctor 19 February 2016 12: 18
          +1
          I follow. I read my work, my hair stood on end, half the words are missing. At the time of sending the text, the firvox freezes, now I do not know how to delete the previous comment.
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 19 February 2016 15: 09
      0
      Are you smart?
  • tomket
    tomket 19 February 2016 10: 15
    12
    Quote: Wheel
    Again Kaptsov !!!
    Oleg, get on

    Kaptsov-man is a joke, but calm down already.) People already have no strength to laugh at your opus))))
    1. Uncle VasyaSayapin
      Uncle VasyaSayapin 19 February 2016 17: 34
      +2
      Everyone says an article for fools, an article for fools, but I like it! lol
  • Rus2012
    Rus2012 19 February 2016 10: 39
    +4
    constantly flying in take-off mode is bad, damn uneconomical and deadly.
    m requires whole “garlands” of engines to enter the on-screen mode, which entails obvious troubles:

    A) The deterioration of the aerodynamic appearance compared to a conventional aircraft (smooth cigar-shaped fuselage, only two or four engines).

    B) Catastrophic fuel consumption in takeoff mode. Ten jet engines of KM ekranoplan burned at the start of 30 tons of kerosene!

    C) Part of the engine was turned off when entering the on-screen mode and then messing around as a useless “ballast”.

    Each of the Lunya engines, together with fuel valves and a nacelle, weighed four tons. And he had eight of these


    ... a lot of ignorance is mixed in these phrases!
    I will not even try to explain. This is understandable even to a freshman after an introductory topic about aerodynamics and aircraft design laughing

    really -
    Quote: Wheel
    Oleg, get on!
    1. KKND
      KKND 19 February 2016 15: 02
      0
      I will not even try to explain. This is understandable even to a freshman after an introductory topic about aerodynamics and aircraft design

      Maybe you cannot explain because in Aerodynamics you are not in a "tooth with your foot"
  • aleks 62 next
    aleks 62 next 19 February 2016 14: 20
    0
    ..... Again Kaptsov !!!
    Oleg, get on! laughing

    ... One gets the impression that Kaptsov trolls all visitors to the site .... Again speculative conclusions at the level of a pioneer - amateur ..... Oleg !!!! .... Do not terrorize people !!!! .... self-education, before talking about aero and hydrodynamics !!!! .... And then it all starts to look like a spring aggravation of the institution's client to Kashchenko ..... request
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 19 February 2016 15: 09
      0
      Again the mind is not enough to understand the simplest.
  • Dam
    Dam 19 February 2016 14: 26
    +2
    And this time I recognized the author from the first lines. So spring, aggravation, missed haloperidol. And you will be cured
  • user
    user 19 February 2016 15: 49
    +1
    The ekranoplan idea does not carry the slightest common sense.


    I do not understand, the author has an inferiority complex?

    The idea and the project worked, the research was carried out, issues in this area were resolved. Unprofitable in comparison with whom? Not one tank and armored personnel carrier is not worth as a VAZ, and their fuel consumption is not like that of the German TSI engine. Today, no one is building an EPC in the Russian Federation, but the experience of designing, building and operating devices of this class remains. Moreover, no one could repeat this.
    Are you not happy with the result of research in this area?
    Or did you decide to show your genius?

    The article is incomprehensible.
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 19 February 2016 16: 10
    +1
    The Chinese are masters of "cooking cats"! Let's "wait", what will the Chinese "say" to this?
  • leshiy076
    leshiy076 19 February 2016 21: 04
    +1
    Maybe there really is currently no point in building ekranoplans. But I have a feeling that Alekseev is the personal enemy of Oleg Kaptsov, given the intonation with which his article was written. Moreover, the second in the last day. Oleg, Alekseev, in addition to ekranoplanes, he designed and built hundreds of hydrofoil ships, but what did you build? Why don’t you write anything about them? After all, they are on the move to this day, and they are more than half a century old.
  • sso-xnumx
    sso-xnumx 19 February 2016 21: 43
    +2
    Quote: Wheel
    Again Kaptsov !!!
    Oleg, get on!

    Dear forum users! Or maybe we should not write our opinion about O. Kaptsov’s articles? Just leave an empty place, and express your opinion in the pros and cons of evaluating the article.
  • atalef
    atalef 19 February 2016 07: 29
    +5
    Quote: Ruslan67
    Articles about these monsters are already reminiscent of advice to gardeners in the yellow newspaper sad Thank God that no one will build them to prove fool their complete uselessness

    Hi Ruslan.
    The number of articles on ekranoplanes in the VO is off the charts.
    The topic has been sucked from all sides for 100 times.
    Dead end and unpromising branch of development.
    Well, experimented, well, it didn’t work, it's okay.
    A negative result is the same result.
    But the passion of many comrades for gigantomania is amazing.
    More, not always better.
    Article plus. And it's time to tie up with ekranoplanes NV VO.
    1. Forget
      Forget 19 February 2016 07: 36
      +8
      Quote: atalef
      Dead end and unpromising branch of development.

      I would not be so categorical, maybe they were born ahead of time ....

      Quote: atalef
      And it's time to tie up with ekranoplanes NV VO

      here i agree
      1. Rus2012
        Rus2012 19 February 2016 11: 10
        +5
        Quote: Forget
        And it's time to tie up with ekranoplanes NV VO
        here i agree

        .
        Well this is your opinion. Which, fortunately, is not supported by all.
        laughing
        And in the case, it is worth recalling three things:
        1. EPs, as well as amphibians of type A-40 / Be-200 - first of all, as it is fashionable to say today, are demonstrators of ideas, technologies and opportunities
        2. If Alekseev, Bartini, especially the USSR, were alive, these demonstrators would continue to develop, reaching perfection and practical application. As now Be-200, and those who went to the masses - PGRK, BZHRK.
        3. The fact that in Russia these undeservedly broken ideas are beginning to revive again is also not an unimportant factor. Especially when you hear howls and tantrums of your opponents about this.

        And finally, the fourth factor - China also revives them - to them, having many island territories - they are in the first place!
        1. atalef
          atalef 19 February 2016 14: 29
          -5
          Quote: Rus2012
          EPs, as well as amphibians of type A-40 / Be-200 - first of all, as it is fashionable to say today, are demonstrators of ideas, technologies and opportunities

          Demonstration of opportunities - everything is beautiful and wonderful, but I would suggest going down to sinful land, namely, to the field of economic justification.
          Who would tell me how economically sound was
          1.Design
          2. Create technology
          3y. Create production
          4. Contain spare parts and repair base for
          B-xnumx?
          In general, how much has been invested for its release and what is the economic effect when operating this particular aircraft, and not assume smaller 3's?
          The fact that he is picking up water is good.
          The fact that he is big is also good.
          But in the world there is no ... ki, and a simple question: did someone buy this device?
          He does not belong to the field of super secret developments and he would be happy to sell it. if someone wanted to buy.
          There are enough countries with similar climatic zones, water pools, etc. in the world.
          The question is - why not buy, if unique and profitable?
          If so many tasks can perform?
          So a stupid question that does not understand anything in this area of ​​man?
          The aircraft market (theoretically) is not much different from the market for the same refrigerators.
          So you came to the store, they showed you a new super fancy refrigerator at a price several times more expensive than the others, it does everything, including the functions of a microwave.
          Everything is beautiful . but he asked, and someone already bought it - they say - not yet (well, except for Azerbaijan, 1 is an airplane), --- then the questions begin, why?

          Quote: Rus2012
          If Alekseev, Bartini, especially the USSR, were alive, these demonstrators would continue to develop, reaching perfection and practical application. Like Be-200 now,

          Well, what are the masses


          Quote: Rus2012
          The fact that in Russia these undeservedly broken ideas are beginning to revive again is also not an unimportant factor.

          says only one thing - as they did not know how to count money - they did not learn
          Quote: Rus2012
          And finally, the fourth factor - China also revives them - to them, having many island territories - they are in the first place!

          well just a killer argument laughing
          1. Rus2012
            Rus2012 19 February 2016 14: 51
            +2
            Quote: atalef
            Like Be-200 now,
            Well, what are the masses

            Be-200 - approx. half a hundred copies.
            Today in the ranks - 16pcs.
            And this is with the active opposition of the global hegemons of the aircraft industry. Both foreign and through agents of influence inside. And this is just the beginning.
            Activated work on A-40.
            There will be further continuation using composites and non-metals, as well as new engines ...

            Quote: atalef
            well just a killer argument

            ... well, let's see how you all (world hegemons) will sing when the Chinese take all the southerly islands on the quiet. Including using amphibians and EP.
            1. atalef
              atalef 19 February 2016 14: 57
              -2
              Quote: Rus2012
              Be-200 - approx. half a hundred copies.
              Today in the ranks - 16pcs.
              And this is with the active opposition of the global hegemons of the aircraft industry. Both foreign and through agents of influence inside. And this is just the beginning.

              When they buy equipment, they write that it has no analogues
              When they don’t buy, they are agents of influence.
              Leave empty talk - to influence everyone - you will tear your pants.
              People just know how to count money
              Quote: Rus2012
              Activated work on A-40.
              There will be further continuation using composites and non-metals, as well as new engines ...

              Great, there will be a plane. there will be orders - there will be something to talk about

              Quote: Rus2012
              Well, let's see how you all (world hegemons) will sing when the Chinese take all the southerly islands on the quiet.

              They will pick up - we will speak, nor will they pick up - we will not.

              Maybe it's worth going down to real land, rather than feeding people breakfast?
        2. EvilLion
          EvilLion 19 February 2016 15: 16
          +3
          I’ll tell you one clever thing, just don’t be offended, but Be-200 is now a completely piece product that is used exclusively as a firefighter. Because the largest seaplane in the world actually didn’t give a damn to anyone. The airdrome network has simply grown over the century, so that almost everywhere you can put a normal IL-76 and not engage in nonsense. Likewise, it makes no sense to engage in ekranoplanes, when it is much easier to fly normally on 10-11 km at a speed of 900 km / h than to decide how not to kill on 5 meters at a speed of 300 km / h.
          1. atalef
            atalef 19 February 2016 22: 50
            0
            Quote: EvilLion
            I’ll tell you one clever thing, but don’t be offended, but Be-200 is now a completely piece product

            Not offended, but why do you think that a thing is smart?
            Quote: EvilLion
            used exclusively as a firefighter.

            And now what?
            Quote: EvilLion
            Because the largest seaplane in the world actually didn’t give a damn to anyone.

            Back to the first sentence about the smart thing wink

            Quote: EvilLion
            The airdrome network has simply grown over the century, so that almost everywhere you can put a normal IL-76 and not engage in nonsense. Likewise, it makes no sense to engage in ekranoplanes, when it is much easier to fly normally on 10-11 km at a speed of 900 km / h than to decide how not to get killed on 5 meters at a speed of 300 km / h

            Well, sort of supported? And to be offended by what?
        3. mav1971
          mav1971 19 February 2016 20: 46
          0
          Quote: Rus2012
          Quote: Forget
          And it's time to tie up with ekranoplanes NV VO
          here i agree

          .
          Well this is your opinion. Which, fortunately, is not supported by all.
          laughing
          And in the case, it is worth recalling three things:
          1. EPs, as well as amphibians of type A-40 / Be-200 - first of all, as it is fashionable to say today, are demonstrators of ideas, technologies and opportunities
          2. If Alekseev, Bartini, especially the USSR, were alive, these demonstrators would continue to develop, reaching perfection and practical application. As now Be-200, and those who went to the masses - PGRK, BZHRK.
          3. The fact that in Russia these undeservedly broken ideas are beginning to revive again is also not an unimportant factor. Especially when you hear howls and tantrums of your opponents about this.

          And finally, the fourth factor - China also revives them - to them, having many island territories - they are in the first place!



          Let's start from the end.
          China does not revive.
          Chinese students slept 4 pieces and calmed down on this.
          About amphibians.
          Already a dead topic. Irrevocably.
          At present, it does not have economic and effective efficiency.
          Almost every company tried to make an ekranoplan.
          And everyone stopped at the level of aircraft models.
          No one went further.
          If you want to read a lot of literate words about ekranoplanes, read the forum airbase. There 15 years ago (in 2002 year) there was a good analysis of this.
          Of course there is a lot of water, but sound judgments also appeared.
          Find, work hard.
          Expediency in all respects is zero.
          WIG is always worse than others in direct comparison.

          And only the craving for gigantism strongly developed in the USSR allowed Alekseev to create this demon.


          Yes, now the ranks of those trying to make an ekranoplan are replenishing again.
          Fragment of the newly nouveau riche-idealist designers.
          Only now these firms appear, make an 1-2 instance and disappear.
          Go broke.
          Reappear and ruin again.
          This is the standard scheme.
          So once there were automobile companies in the world of which there were hundreds and thousands.
          There were always people who were stubborn with some sort of idea to madness.
          Not capable of mathematics, economics, design, or common sense.
          Only capable of ideology.
          They gathered and went bankrupt.
          The majority and most of them ruined the people who entrusted their savings to them, like shareholders.
          A dead, dead-end branch is an ekranoplan.
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 19 February 2016 15: 11
        0
        Well, of course ahead of time. As if any hypothetical progress will not affect the same way on airplanes. They will make the engine 2 times easier with the same thrust; planes from this will also fly better.
      3. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 19 February 2016 16: 32
        +2
        Quote: Forget
        I would not be so categorical, maybe they were born ahead of time ....

        There is something here ... it's not for nothing that "information leaks" about the "birth attempts" of scientists working in the field of the gravitational field ..., antigravity began to break through the Internet more and more often ... So .... . give (!) anti-gravity "flying tar .... platform the size of the battleship" Iowa "! Call it an ekranoplan and .... everyone will be happy! fellow
    2. Santa Fe
      19 February 2016 08: 08
      -2
      Quote: atalef
      The number of articles on ekranoplanes in the VO is off the charts.

      I agree, we will read about Ukraine
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 19 February 2016 10: 19
        +4
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        I agree, we will read about Ukraine

        Better about battleships and ekranoplanes! laughing Ukraine as a topic has already got it, and news writers are ready to suck something out of their fingers.
        1. avt
          avt 19 February 2016 10: 24
          +6
          Quote: Ingvar 72
          Ukraine as a topic has already gotten

          Quote: Ingvar 72
          Better about battleships and ekranoplanes!

          Dear editor! Maybe better about the reactor,
          About your favorite moon tractor? After all, you can not the same year
          Then the plates are scared, they say, mean, fly,
          Then you have dogs barking, then ruins say.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 19 February 2016 10: 52
            +7
            But to the machinations and ravings
            Networks are y us and nonsense -
            Do not spoil our masses
            Evil machinations of enemies!

            These are their bad devils
            Bermuta water in the pond
            Churchill came up with it all
            In the eighteenth year!
      2. aleks 62 next
        aleks 62 next 19 February 2016 14: 44
        +1
        ..... I agree, we will read about Ukraine ...

        .... Really wasted ????? belay
      3. atalef
        atalef 19 February 2016 22: 51
        0
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        Quote: atalef
        The number of articles on ekranoplanes in the VO is off the charts.

        I agree, we will read about Ukraine

        Interesting alternative belay
        and who the fuck is needed?
    3. Generalissimo
      Generalissimo 19 February 2016 10: 15
      +4
      It's time, it's time ... Israel is very vulnerable to attacks from ekranoplanes.
    4. tomket
      tomket 19 February 2016 10: 20
      +2
      Quote: atalef
      And it's time to tie up with ekranoplanes NV VO.

      Kaptsov is apparently called upon to solve, so to speak, the final question with ekranoplans?)
    5. Rus2012
      Rus2012 19 February 2016 10: 50
      +2
      Quote: atalef
      A negative result is the same result.
      But the passion of many comrades for gigantomania is amazing.

      Dear Colleague
      The 3,14ndos also failed to build the BZHRK, PGRK, amphibian a la Be-200 - let's also relate these sections of technology to gigantomania and a dead end branch!
      And much more ...

      But cho, they didn’t take it — who makes stupid people!
      But for some reason, critics quickly become silent at the mention of fu-35, and especially fu-35
      laughing
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 19 February 2016 11: 02
        +2
        Quote: Rus2012
        3,14ndos also failed to build BZHRK

        In 1990, there were already 2 prototypes. But alas, the US military-industrial complex suffered a terrible tragedy - the USSR collapsed. smile
        Quote: Rus2012
        PGRK

        "Midgetman". Buried under the rubble of the USSR.
        Quote: Rus2012
        amphibians a la be-xnumx

        Why do they need them?
        And, honestly - why do we need them? After all, all their tasks are feasible by traditional aviation.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 19 February 2016 11: 07
          13
          After all, all their tasks are feasible by traditional aviation.

          Yes, yes ... traditional aviation can easily and naturally draw water from planing.
          1. Rus2012
            Rus2012 19 February 2016 11: 16
            +7
            Quote: Wedmak
            Yes, yes ... traditional aviation can easily and naturally draw water from planing.

            ... another thing strikes me, as all these opponents BELIEVE EVERYTHING that even from different branches of technology, BUT COMBINES with being an advanced-breakthrough-unparalleled over the hill ...
            laughing laughing laughing
            1. mav1971
              mav1971 19 February 2016 21: 13
              -5
              Quote: Rus2012
              Quote: Wedmak
              Yes, yes ... traditional aviation can easily and naturally draw water from planing.

              ... another thing strikes me, as all these opponents BELIEVE EVERYTHING that even from different branches of technology, BUT COMBINES with being an advanced-breakthrough-unparalleled over the hill ...
              laughing laughing laughing


              You, apparently, consider yourself so right in all your opinion that you do not consider it necessary to notice that there are dead-end technologies.
              And we must honestly talk about them.
              Even if our military refused such searchlights. what to speak of greatness and the best that have no analogues.

              Have you noticed that all the words are about unparalleled in the world. say the former employees of these design bureaus who are left out of work, or pensioners who always praise what they had.
              And the grass is greener.
              And the girls are bigger.
              And it all came from a series of television shows.
              as if someone was trying to remove some kind of inferiority complex.
              Someone imagined. that the people have a set of inferiority, and began to put this phrase "unparalleled in the world" for any reason and without reason.
              And some picked it up.
              And immediately it became clear who has an inferiority complex.
              Just those who repeat.

              ZY
              My grandfather still remembers about 407 Muscovites - "that was a car!"
              Especially when the glass gets caught.
              I listened to him then, I think to give him such.
              Thought buy, restore. repaint and give.
              Well, let him drive the dream again.
              He recognized something like this.
              He refused. To scandal.
              No, I'm driving on GrandVitar ...
              So the words e past greatness is empty. Chatter one.
              Like dibs on a bench.
          2. pv1005
            pv1005 19 February 2016 11: 27
            +4
            Quote: Wedmak
            After all, all their tasks are feasible by traditional aviation.

            Yes, yes ... traditional aviation can easily and naturally draw water from planing.


            Yes, easily, but only once, until it sinks to the bottom. smile
          3. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 19 February 2016 11: 33
            -2
            Quote: Wedmak
            Yes, yes ... traditional aviation can easily and naturally draw water from planing.

            Excellent - one problem was found.
            Only the trouble is sadness ... to extinguish fires, you do not need to build a huge unique and no analogs in the world A-40 / Be-200. Or you can take a cheaper and more maneuverable amphibian - of the CL-215 type or in general one of the amphibians of the WWII times. Because firefighting planes have to work from low altitudes to accurately discharge water, and even often in confined areas. In addition, smaller amphibians require a smaller "mirror" of water.
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 19 February 2016 11: 43
              +7
              Because firefighting planes have to work from low altitudes to accurately discharge water, and even often in confined areas. In addition, smaller amphibians require a smaller "mirror" of water.

              Yeah .. and these small amphibians, like cockroaches, will carry around a teaspoon per hour. In general, there is little water to extinguish a fire. In addition, the Be-200 has not just one tank, but a tank of 8 sections, allowing you to reset them sequentially or simultaneously. But that’s not all, as they say in the clinging TV shops. Be-200 multipurpose aircraft. Patrolling, rescue, fire fighting, the passenger version are also not excluded, there would be orders.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 19 February 2016 12: 35
                -4
                Quote: Wedmak
                Yeah .. and these small amphibians, like cockroaches, will carry around a teaspoon per hour. In general, there is little water to extinguish a fire.

                Yes Yes Yes... low accuracy of hit we will compensate for warhead power. smile

                Optimum discharge height - 50 meters. In total, 1,5 times more than the wing span or the length of the Be-200.
                Actually, it was the need to work at extremely low altitudes in conditions of low visibility that led to the fact that abroad large fire-fighting aircraft are extremely rare.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 19 February 2016 12: 49
                  +6
                  Actually, it was the need to work at extremely low altitudes in conditions of low visibility that led to the fact that abroad large fire-fighting aircraft are extremely rare.

                  And that is precisely why our Be-200 often extinguish fires in Europe.
                  Optimum discharge height - 50 meters. In total, 1,5 times more than the wing span or the length of the Be-200.

                  It’s not a question at all, with the current avionics.
                2. evgenii57
                  evgenii57 20 February 2016 05: 36
                  +1
                  Cheaper to rent from Russia large.
              2. atalef
                atalef 19 February 2016 14: 31
                -4
                Quote: Wedmak
                Be-200 multipurpose aircraft. Patrolling, rescue, fire fighting, the passenger version are also not excluded, there would be orders.

                Why not order?
              3. EvilLion
                EvilLion 19 February 2016 15: 19
                0
                A couple of cars on duty are enough to save. It’s easier to carry passengers on conventional airplanes, all the more so since you still have to build an airfield, all kinds of IL-76 will not land on the water, and roads will go to the airfield.
              4. mav1971
                mav1971 19 February 2016 22: 47
                -2
                Quote: Wedmak
                Because firefighting planes have to work from low altitudes to accurately discharge water, and even often in confined areas. In addition, smaller amphibians require a smaller "mirror" of water.

                Yeah .. and these small amphibians, like cockroaches, will carry around a teaspoon per hour. In general, there is little water to extinguish a fire. In addition, the Be-200 has not just one tank, but a tank of 8 sections, allowing you to reset them sequentially or simultaneously. But that’s not all, as they say in the clinging TV shops. Be-200 multipurpose aircraft. Patrolling, rescue, fire fighting, the passenger version are also not excluded, there would be orders.


                For the money, how much does this aircraft cost and its maintenance, but the cost of fuel and pilots' salaries, etc.
                It would be possible to stretch the pipes throughout the taiga. Plastic and make a single fire pipe system :)

                a joke of course. but part of the truth is there.
                Expensive aircraft. And a single task. And only summer.
                In 2000, it was reissued into a state contract for a total amount of about 5 billion rubles for the purchase of 7 amphibious aircraft of the Be-200 type by the Ministry of Emergencies of the Russian Federation.
                Those. for that money the plane cost 715 million rubles.
                At the moment, its price is 2 billion rubles.
            2. evgenii57
              evgenii57 20 February 2016 05: 34
              +1
              And more walkers. Or a larger number of amphibians. And how the forest burns in Amurka or in Transbaikalia, then the entire mass of BE-200 can not cope. So everyones are needed.
          4. fennekRUS
            fennekRUS 19 February 2016 12: 52
            0

            as you can see.
            1. pv1005
              pv1005 19 February 2016 14: 59
              +3
              Quote: fennekRUS

              as you can see.

              Yes, but where is the promised IL-76? request
              1. fennekRUS
                fennekRUS 19 February 2016 15: 46
                -1
                claims to the author of the video, in any case not be-200. Let me remind you of the essence of the question to which I answered, an ordinary plane CANNOT take water from a reservoir.
                1. pv1005
                  pv1005 20 February 2016 12: 45
                  +1
                  Quote: fennekRUS
                  claims to the author of the video, in any case not be-200. Let me remind you of the essence of the question to which I answered, an ordinary plane CANNOT take water from a reservoir.

                  Claims to you. You posted the video on the site, not the author. And learn the materiel on the video exactly Be-200.
          5. EvilLion
            EvilLion 19 February 2016 15: 17
            0
            This is where the scope of their application ends.
        2. Wheel
          Wheel 19 February 2016 12: 19
          +2
          Quote: Alexey RA
          In 1990, there were already 2 prototypes. But alas, the US military-industrial complex suffered a terrible tragedy - the USSR collapsed.

          Did not have.

          According to paragraph 10 b) of Article III of the Treaty, the American side declared the MX missile with the existing types of ICBMs for mobile launchers (the performance characteristics for the railway version of the missile were not indicated), noting that the mobile version of the missile was not deployed. In accordance with Section II, item b) and Appendix A of the Memorandum of Understanding on the Establishment of Baseline Data in Connection with the Treaty between the USSR and the United States on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, the Americans presented: the number of missiles and warheads of the BZHRK - 0; their throw weight is 0; non-deployed mobile launchers - prototype only; test launcher - 1; fixed structure for mobile launchers - no; transport and handling facilities - 1; non-deployed MX missile at test site - 1. Photographs of the launch car and other means according to Appendix J (by way of mutual exchange) were not presented.

          http://topwar.ru/67100-proekt-peacekeeper-rail-garrison-posledniy-raketnyy-poezd
          -ssha.html # comment-id-3947618
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 19 February 2016 12: 30
            -4
            Quote: Wheel
            In accordance with Section II, paragraph b) and Appendix A of the Memorandum of Understanding on the Establishment of Baseline Data in Relation to the Treaty between the USSR and the USA on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, the Americans presented: the number of missiles and warheads of the BZHRK - 0; their cast weight is 0; non-deployed mobile launchers - prototype only; test launcher - 1; stationary construction for mobile launchers - no; transport and handling facilities - 1; MX non-deployed missile at the training ground - 1.

            1 prototype still said the Yankees.
            1. Wheel
              Wheel 19 February 2016 14: 26
              +3
              Quote: Alexey RA
              1 prototype still said the Yankees.

              You can declare anything, but there was nothing to present ....
      2. Santa Fe
        19 February 2016 11: 06
        +1
        Quote: Rus2012
        3,14ndos also failed to build BZHRK

        Come on

        For the first time, the idea of ​​rail-based ballistic missiles was thoroughly considered in the USA in the early 1960's. The appearance of the Minitman solid-fuel ICBM, which did not need a pre-launch refueling, which was resistant (unlike early liquid-fuel rockets) to vibration and shaking in motion, made it possible for the first time launches of intercontinental ballistic missiles from a moving platform.

        In the summer of 1960, as part of the theoretical study, the operation "Big Star" (Eng. Big Star) was carried out, in which prototypes of future railway launch complexes were moved along the US railways. The purpose of the exercises was to check the mobility of the complexes, the possibility of their dispersal over the railways used. Based on the results of the operation, a project was prepared at 1961 and a prototype of the train was created, capable of carrying five Minitmen missiles on specially reinforced platforms

        Mine launch complexes for the Minutemans were considered a more effective solution - cheap and protected from existing Soviet ICBMs, which at that time had extremely low accuracy. Plus, problems with the movement of such trains on private railways. In the summer of 1961, the project was closed.
        Quote: Rus2012
        amphibians a la be-xnumx

        Martin P6M Seamaster (1955 year)
        also tested in ekranoplan mode
        1. kugelblitz
          kugelblitz 19 February 2016 11: 11
          0
          As I recall, Seamaster was exactly the same problem in terms of landing and take-off on water as the Be-10, so the Be-12 amphibian with turboprop engines was later created.
          Like the Be-200, a completely different machine, firstly an amphibian, secondly the most powerful wing mechanization, thirdly turbofan engines.
        2. Rus2012
          Rus2012 19 February 2016 11: 19
          +4
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          Come on

          ... and de it all went into business?
          SHOULD NOT - and this is the main thing!

          And everything else is an excuse.
          By the way, there is a lot of information on the net about the targeted shooting of Soviet-Russian scientists ...
        3. Rus2012
          Rus2012 19 February 2016 11: 27
          +1
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          For the first time, the idea of ​​rail-based ballistic missiles was thoroughly considered in the USA in the early 1960's.

          ... but it’s not bad that, for example, the Wehrmacht designed, and later in the USSR, the first to start putting the FAU-2 (P-1 / P-2) on railway cars?
        4. aleks 62 next
          aleks 62 next 19 February 2016 14: 51
          +1
          .... Martin P6M Seamaster (1955)
          also, tested in ekranoplan mode ...

          ... Actually, this device in the photo for an ekranoplan has a too large (redundant) wing span .... And besides, with an aerodynamic step along the leading edge ..... In general, everything that flies at an altitude of about to one wing span ... Why ???? .... Read at least an introductory subsonic aerodynamics course for university students .... hi
      3. KKND
        KKND 19 February 2016 15: 20
        0
        Quote: Rus2012
        The 3,14ndos also failed to build the BZHRK, PGRK, amphibian a la Be-200 - let's also relate these sections of technology to gigantomania and a dead end branch!

        Once again I ask, can you describe the advantages in terms of aerodynamics?
        Once YOU relate yourself to smart people.
        If you can plus me and my apologies.
        1. Rus2012
          Rus2012 19 February 2016 17: 53
          +1
          Quote: KKND
          Once again I ask, can you describe the advantages in terms of aerodynamics?

          And you do not know how to read and search about the "screen effect in the underlying environment"?
          http://www.vonovke.ru/s/graund-effekt
          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AD%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%
          D1%8D%D1%84%D1%84%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82

          Still have a conscience so arrogantly ask, what do I say to you as a class teacher or teacher? :(
          1. Maegrom
            Maegrom 19 February 2016 18: 53
            0
            The screen effect raises steeply. Who is arguing ?! But the density of air, which affects fuel consumption, does not directly decrease.
          2. KKND
            KKND 19 February 2016 19: 21
            -1
            Quote: Rus2012
            And you do not know how to read and search about the "screen effect in the underlying environment"?

            On the first link, the answer is very comprehensive lol With tables, graphs, diagrams, theoretical physics.
            The second link is already with one formula. Keep it up, Comrade Marshal soldier
            With such knowledge on the subject, you are dear to MIT
    6. Zeppelin ml.
      Zeppelin ml. 19 February 2016 11: 14
      +2
      Quote: atalef
      Article plus. And it's time to tie up with ekranoplanes NV VO.

      moreover, the lion's share of comments is not devoted to the subject, but to the person of the author.
      By the way, the passage touches that because of people like him, the Wright brothers might not have taken to the air) Obscurant, you know. Retrograde.
    7. aleks 62 next
      aleks 62 next 19 February 2016 14: 43
      +1
      ..... The dead end and unpromising branch of development ....

      ..... Yesterday you sang praises to convertiplanes .... And you do not consider them a dead end branch of aviation development ???? .... After all, except for the amers, no one is seriously engaged in them .... lol
      1. atalef
        atalef 19 February 2016 15: 01
        -1
        Quote: aleks 62 next
        Yesterday you sang praises to convertiplanes .... And you do not consider them a dead end branch of aviation development ??

        Well, I did not sing praises.
        and unlike ekranoplanes, their scope is an order of magnitude higher.
        Unlike ekranoplanes, they not only fly. but also taken into service.
        Quote: aleks 62 next
        After all, except for amers, no one is seriously engaged in them

        In the 2008 year, the Pentagon signed a contract for the supply of 167 V-22 Osprey convertiplanes totaling 10,4 billion dollars [5].

        The Pentagon’s readiness to weigh the supply of convertiplanes for the armament of foreign armies was also reported, with preference being given to the Israeli Air Force, Canadian Air Force and the United Arab Emirates [6]. In April 2013, the United States Department of Defense announced its intention to include the supply of V-22 Osprey convertiplanes in the final stages of the discussion (totaling $ 10 billion) of arms supplies to Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia [7]
        1. aleks 62 next
          aleks 62 next 19 February 2016 15: 19
          +2
          ... and unlike ekranoplanes, their scope is an order of magnitude higher.
          Unlike ekranoplanes, they not only fly. but also taken into service.

          ... This still does not mean anything ... The same F-104 was for its time a child prodigy and adopted for service .... As the pilots themselves called it ???? .... Convertibles are basically an interesting thing, but they have serious flaws that generally can not be surpassed .... The cross-sectional scheme itself .... What will happen if one engine fails on takeoff ???? ..... This is not a helicopter .... Yes, and horizontal flight ???? ... The wing is small, the screw is huge, the braking effect will be wow (as long as the autoflower works - it takes a few seconds) .... Yes, and he can’t sit down on an airplane .... In my look an extremely difficult way of suicide ..... I'm afraid that they will suffer the fate of the same F-104 ... hi
  • garpastum75
    garpastum75 19 February 2016 08: 55
    0
    Pretty interesting
  • marlin1203
    marlin1203 19 February 2016 11: 24
    +1
    Well, why be wise, calculate the main parameters: load capacity, power-to-weight ratio, efficiency, etc. See if ekranoplanes have "exclusive" capabilities and decide on their need. In my opinion, hydroplanes are more expedient in this area. The impact functions of ekranoplanes are leveled by the development of cruise missiles and anti-aircraft missiles, and there are no "trucks" at all.
  • efendia
    efendia 19 February 2016 15: 05
    0
    Let's discuss American vertical takeoff aircraft. For us and the Europeans, their darkness was beaten, the program was closed and the Merikos are developing. And the indicators there probably "are much better than WIG?
  • efendia
    efendia 19 February 2016 15: 38
    0
    I wonder why the author does not scold vertical take-off aircraft? How many of them were beaten at the time, both with us and with them, and mostly not in combat conditions. Probably because the Americans continue to do them, but in Russia they turned off the program by passing on the developments to the Amers? Or does VTOL have very attractive specifications? That is why not discuss this topic - THE AMERICAN VERTICAL TAKEOFF PLANE AND ITS CHARACTERISTICS.
  • siberalt
    siberalt 19 February 2016 16: 12
    0
    Feed the ekranoplan to Ukraine for the Silk Road to China through two seas laughing But seriously, let it be useful on the farm, everything has its time.
  • dzeredzavkomimu
    dzeredzavkomimu 20 February 2016 02: 00
    +1
    well, you’re an outstanding expert, I’ll remind you, my dear one, that before the start of the Second World War, the same clever men in the army leadership had the opinion that a submachine gun was exclusively a police weapon for dispersing demonstrators, while the Finns in the forest were in trouble for us ... They didn’t give us their submachine guns, they said the same thing about their complete uselessness, because it was believed that the battle would be fought at a distance of at least 500 meters, did not remind you of anything? and as a result, by the beginning of the Second World War we had 200 PPD submachine guns and those at headquarters. The screenplan is theoretically much more load-bearing than an airplane with the same mass and not much lower speed, the article is nonsense, like your koment
  • nimboris
    nimboris 20 February 2016 10: 14
    0
    Aha, as well as the wise saying of the ancients: "born to crawl - cannot fly"
  • c3r
    c3r 19 February 2016 06: 25
    +2
    Well, the scouts might be loud, but a Marine battalion with a company of heavy weapons is just right. But for this, in general, there are enough large amphibious assault ships. I don’t presume to count the economic benefits, but militarily it is more convenient, since the DESSO ships will support the landing force while remaining inaccessible to the enemy, and the ekranoplan will turn around and fly away. this has been shown by the experience of two world wars, and hovercraft can equally successfully transport people along northern rivers. Probably the author is right about something, but how beautiful the "Caspian Monster" sounds, but it looks even cooler!
    1. AK64
      AK64 19 February 2016 07: 11
      -5
      How will the ECP battalion land?
      ECP, in principle, cannot crawl ashore, or land on the shore. That is, he will approach the shore as a large boat, or a small ship - and nothing more.

      Yes, and about the battalion .... Fantazer you: the battalion for short distances - this Mistral is needed. Compare the sizes!
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 19 February 2016 09: 31
        20
        ECP, in principle, cannot crawl ashore, or land on the shore.

        Really?

        And how did this ECP get ashore, and even with an APC inside?
        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 19 February 2016 10: 17
          +6
          and he flies with ten times (or more) higher speed than the ship with the landing
      2. GRAY
        GRAY 19 February 2016 10: 19
        -1
        Quote: AK64
        ECP, in principle, cannot crawl ashore,

        He has more problems with "crawling away", and it is undesirable to linger during disembarkation - they can gouge.
        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 19 February 2016 14: 57
          0
          What problems? Both crawled out and crawled out.
      3. pticas
        pticas 19 February 2016 10: 27
        17
        Especially for you!
        The ekranoplane leaves and independently leaves the coast!
        Personally participated in the landing of 200 foot soldiers in Krasnovodsk in 1982.
        They started from Baku, after 1 hour 40min. started from Krasnovodsk.
        Tell me, would you manage to prepare forces during this time to counter the landing?
        1. GRAY
          GRAY 19 February 2016 11: 04
          0
          Quote: pticas
          The ekranoplane leaves and independently leaves the coast!

          A hovercraft will leave the landing zone several times faster.
          Quote: pticas
          Tell me, would you manage to prepare forces during this time to counter the landing?

          Let’s say, for example, artillery will beat kilometers from 20 over an area — is it not enough?
        2. tlauicol
          tlauicol 20 February 2016 06: 03
          0
          SW Sergey, I am addressing you as a possible eyewitness to events. What was this time spent (1 hour 40 minutes) - for acceleration, maneuvering, direct landing, refueling, airborne assault, or landing assault to a / l mission on shore? No offense. And, if possible, in all details.
          1. tlauicol
            tlauicol 20 February 2016 07: 26
            0
            Particularly interested in the place and conditions of landing. In the bay or from the sea, settlement, landfill, weather (wind wave), landing area (prepared, equipped or wild, soil, slope, topography, vegetation). After landing, did the EP leave the sea after 2 minutes for an unattainable distance, how does everyone write about it, waited on the shore or stayed on shore? Did they cross the scythe and, in general, did they land on land and to what depth? Loaded, refueled? Any details would be interesting. Thanks in advance !
  • Pencil
    Pencil 19 February 2016 06: 41
    -11 qualifying.
    The fate of the monsters is in the cemetery. Only beautiful planes fly beautifully.
    1. venaya
      venaya 19 February 2016 06: 53
      +3
      Quote: Pencil
      Only beautiful planes fly beautifully.

      Your proposal is similar to the proposal to send all hovercraft to the landfill, because they also do not fly very beautifully. I note that both ekranoplanes and hovercraft are able to solve problems that cannot be solved by conventional aircraft, in principle, the tasks are different and the principles of flight are somewhat different.
      1. AK64
        AK64 19 February 2016 07: 14
        0
        Your proposal is similar to the proposal to send all hovercraft to the landfill, because they also do not fly very beautifully. I note that both ekranoplanes and hovercraft are able to solve problems that cannot be solved by conventional aircraft, in principle, the tasks are different and the principles of flight are somewhat different.


        What specific task can the ekranoplan solve?

        This is a typical example of demagoguery: croaking about an unknown task, but not skzzat which task.

        SVPs have ONE single niche: they are able to crawl out of the water onto the UNEQUIPPED shore, and from the shore into the water - this quality justifies the existence of the SVP.

        What can justify ekranoleta (except entertainment)?
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. efendia
            efendia 19 February 2016 09: 05
            +3
            I never considered Wikipedia the ultimate truth.
            1. terehvlad
              terehvlad 19 February 2016 09: 19
              0
              and include brains? Let it fall because of barges along the way, let it be difficult to control, the autopilot complicate, let the tsunami - inhuman (and we do not fight with the rainbow and unicorns) = in general, this machine allows you to put an end to the arms race.
              A different picture in the USA. More than 80 percent of the population lives in coastal areas that are slightly above sea level.
              and many more wormholes on a bitch from which one monkey threatens http://www.narodsobor.ru/events/analytics/25922-megaoruzhie-kremlya-ssha-smoet-g
              igantskoe-czunami-ili-zasypet-pepel-supervulkana-jellouston # .Vsaykjp3Evc
              1. efendia
                efendia 19 February 2016 09: 54
                +4
                Duck and I about the fact that brains must be turned on at least sometimes, and look at different sources of information and then only draw their conclusions, and not in such a categorical form as the author of the article. So you can agree to the point of absurdity. And then you might think that the author is the coolest engineer in the field of aeronautics and construction materials, strength and other other things, and personally participated in the design.
          2. Generalissimo
            Generalissimo 19 February 2016 10: 19
            0
            it can also deliver a landing force and it will be in this case much shorter travel time under possible enemy fire.
            1. Rus2012
              Rus2012 20 February 2016 12: 08
              0
              Quote: Generalissimo
              she can also deliver a landing

              And now the final answer to all professional mourners, the "rotten-toothed chorus" of creative office plankton and the entire inner 5th column is
              WIG Grunin - high-speed "sting" of the Russian fleet

              http://warfiles.ru/show-109387-ekranoplan-grunina-skorostnoe-zhalo-rossiyskogo-f


              lota.html

              Here it is - BE! And in a new guise
              1. The comment was deleted.
          3. opus
            opus 19 February 2016 14: 12
            +2
            Quote: terehvlad
            What am I the most intelligent here?

            OH YEAH!!!!
            Quote: terehvlad
            and for DELIVERY 3,14 # $% #

            with such delivery PERFECTLY and ORDER copes better .... ICBM





            1. Generalissimo
              Generalissimo 20 February 2016 11: 19
              0
              But this landing can no longer be delivered! Also, you can not deliver a sudden blow to the enemy.
        2. tomket
          tomket 19 February 2016 10: 31
          +4
          Quote: AK64
          What specific task can the ekranoplan solve?

          To rescue the Komsomolets crew.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 19 February 2016 11: 05
            0
            Quote: tomket
            To rescue the Komsomolets crew.

            The usual An-12PS available on the SF could solve the same problem, the landing ship of which could bring previously dumped life rafts to the side of the submarine.
            1. tomket
              tomket 19 February 2016 13: 26
              +1
              Quote: Alexey RA
              The usual An-12PS available on the SF could solve the same problem, the landing ship of which could bring previously dumped life rafts to the side of the submarine.

              So how did you decide? Dumped? How many people were saved this way?
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 19 February 2016 13: 37
                +2
                And how much can the ekranoplan save?
                If he succeeds, because his speed is lower than that of An-12PS
                If it doesn’t storm much, and the ekranoplan will be able to splash down and stop
                If there is enough range, the ekranoplan cannot be refueled in the air.
                If the water surface is clean, without ice or anything else
                1. kugelblitz
                  kugelblitz 19 February 2016 13: 50
                  +1
                  The ekranoplan "Rescuer" based on the "Lunya" had not frail dimensions, which means good seaworthiness, all the more so right on board to immediately provide first aid, or would you also order doctors with equipment to be dropped after the boats? wassat
                  1. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 19 February 2016 14: 48
                    +1
                    Its "small size" does not make it more seaworthy than a rescue vessel and faster than a transport aircraft.

                    Modern systems for the landing of cargo allow bulldozers to be thrown onto the ice, not like boats, which allow "to provide medical assistance right on board." Twenty tons, dear, this is not a hukhry-muhry.
                    The same "Gagara" of project 1401 in modern conditions and with modern materials can be made much more seaworthy and faster. And the control systems will allow the boat with a crew to splash down in almost any weather conditions.

                    Why do you think it is necessary to abandon such rescue systems in favor of an uncomplicated ekranoplan?
                    1. kugelblitz
                      kugelblitz 19 February 2016 15: 04
                      +1
                      I’d better quote you from the well-known pedivics, strangely enough this time they didn’t screw up. wassat

                      The second ship was also laid as a missile carrier, but the collapse of the Soviet Union negatively affected the financing of the military-industrial complex. Attempts were made to complete the construction of the second ekranoplan as a search and rescue vessel, called the "Rescuer". The ekranoplan should not only be equipped with special rescue equipment, but also have on board a hospital capable of receiving 150 victims. In a critical situation, up to 500 people could be taken aboard. Work on this project in the 90s due to lack of funding was frozen at a 75% degree of readiness of the vessel.


                      But to you for the development of erudition, the speckle of a missile carrier is also very good.


                      Wingspan - 44,00 m
                      Length - 73,80 m
                      Height - 19,20 m
                      Wing Area - 550,00 m2
                      Weight:
                      empty aircraft - 243000 kg
                      maximum take-off - 380000 kg
                      Type of engines - NK-87
                      Thrust - 8 x 13000 kgf
                      Maximum speed - 500 km / h
                      Practical range - 2000 km
                      Flight height on the screen - 1-5 m
                      Seaworthiness - 5-6 points
                      Crew - 10 people.
                      Armament: 6 PU PKR ZM-80 Mosquito


                      There is actually a very mobile and lifting platform with very good seaworthiness, it’s not in a boat to hang out in the open sea, suffering from heat or cold, waiting for a rescue ship! wassat
                      1. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 19 February 2016 15: 17
                        -1
                        "Not bad" or "better than any rescue boat, including the promising ones," please specify.

                        By the way, at the moment we are not talking about "hanging out in a lifeboat", but about "hanging out on a bunch of rafts." It is they who can be delivered by transport planes at this moment.
                      2. kugelblitz
                        kugelblitz 19 February 2016 16: 28
                        +1
                        5 points - fresh
                        Almost the entire sea is covered with white lambs. Wind speed 8 - 10,7 m / s, wave height 2 meters. Swinging branches and thin tree trunks.

                        6 points - strong
                        The sea in many places is covered with white ridges. The height of the waves reaches 4x meters, the average height is 3 meters. Wind speed 10,8 - 13,8 m / s. Bending thin tree trunks, and thick tree branches, buzzing telephone wires.


                        ... and transport back at the same speed! wassat
              2. tomket
                tomket 19 February 2016 13: 54
                0
                Quote: Spade
                If he succeeds, because his speed is lower than that of An-12PS

                And have there been precedents with the rescue of crews using the An-12 PS? Just recall the sunken trawler due to overload. Have you got it? Saved? but we already had Be-200 at the Ministry of Emergency Situations. But I did not hear something about the rescue of drowning aircraft.
                Quote: Spade
                If the water surface is clean, without ice or anything else

                And if the Martians do not intervene? :)))
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 19 February 2016 14: 06
                  -1
                  Quote: tomket
                  And have there been precedents with the rescue of crews using the An-12 PS?

                  Do you have reliable information that there were no such cases? No. So in favor of what is this argument?
                  1. DrVintorez
                    DrVintorez 19 February 2016 14: 45
                    +2
                    Do you have reliable information that such cases were? if so - facts to the studio.
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 19 February 2016 15: 00
                      0
                      I apologize, but this is not my argument ... Here I have four fire extinguishers at home, two in the house itself, one in the barn and one in the bathhouse. But I am not ready to refuse them because I have never needed them.
                    2. The comment was deleted.
                    3. DrVintorez
                      DrVintorez 19 February 2016 15: 23
                      0
                      right that you do not refuse! because you know, they were useful to other people. and those who did not have them were very sad.
                2. tomket
                  tomket 19 February 2016 15: 06
                  0
                  Quote: Spade
                  Do you have reliable information that there were no such cases?

                  in general, you prove the professional suitability of An-12PS, and therefore you must give facts, if any, to your hands, as they say)))) Do not be shy, beat with facts, not chatter))))
                  1. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 19 February 2016 15: 24
                    -2
                    Not, dear, I prove the professional suitability of the aircraft rescue complex, and not long ago taken out of service of the An-12PS.

                    And here the argument "I have not heard about the use of An-12PS" by no means rolls.
            2. Generalissimo
              Generalissimo 19 February 2016 14: 54
              0
              Why not? The ekranoplan, unlike the An-12, can still be refueled from a tanker. Storms are such that they have to leave squadrons or take shelter under another shore in a 12-mile zone or in ports.
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 19 February 2016 15: 18
                -2
                Yeah, from the tanker. 8)))))))) And how much time do you need to spend on its output to the refueling point?
                1. Generalissimo
                  Generalissimo 19 February 2016 15: 30
                  0
                  It should already be deployed there in advance, for example, underwater :-)
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 19 February 2016 17: 33
            -1
            Quote: tomket
            So how did you decide? Dumped? How many people were saved this way?

            But this question should be asked to the command of the Northern Fleet: why the fleet of the An-12PS fleet was not involved in the rescue operation.
            A year before the death of the submarine, a complex team consisting of representatives of industry and the Ministry of Defense, as a result of field supervision, examined the technical condition of the An-12PS systems in the Northern Fleet and identified a number of defects that the Ministry of Industry and Minaviaprom should eliminate by complaint. Despite the identified defects, there were no prohibitions on the use of the An-12PS complex. Moreover, the defects set forth in the act of architectural supervision did not prevent in March 1988 the successful conduct of two training landing of serial boats with crews of the Northern and Pacific fleets from An-12PS aircraft.

            It is puzzling that the complex, based 500 km from the scene of the accident in the Norwegian Sea, was not put into operation and was not sent for rescue operations, although weather conditions in the area of ​​the accident made it possible.

            It seems to me that if there had been an ekranoplan on the SF, it would have been left at the base the same way.
            1. tomket
              tomket 19 February 2016 18: 12
              +1
              Quote: Alexey RA
              It seems to me that if there had been an ekranoplan on the SF, it would have been left at the base the same way.

              They drove the Kirov to the Komsomolets, but would they leave the ekranoplan? Or maybe they just decided not to engage in circus performances with the landing of boats?
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 20 February 2016 10: 14
                -1
                Quote: tomket
                Or maybe they just decided not to do circus numbers with landing boats?

                We read carefully:
                Moreover, the defects set forth in the act of architectural supervision did not prevent in March 1988 the successful conduct of two training landing of serial boats with crews of the Northern and Pacific fleets from An-12PS aircraft.

                That is, the system actually worked, and with naval crews.
                What about circus numbers... well, yes, it’s better if the crew of a sinking submarine tries to catch rafts driven away by wind in ice water.
        3. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 19 February 2016 14: 52
          0
          Could a deep-sea vehicle be lowered?
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 19 February 2016 15: 21
            -1
            Modern parachute systems are able to provide airborne cargo weighing up to 20 tons.
            1. Generalissimo
              Generalissimo 19 February 2016 15: 32
              0
              and all the cables and support personnel on the other parachute hitch next?
              "paramedics" usually arrive by helicopter
            2. Generalissimo
              Generalissimo 21 February 2016 00: 58
              0
              Can parachute systems then lift the deep-sea vehicle back?
  • Good cat
    Good cat 19 February 2016 06: 48
    12
    It’s the same thing the second time. Already everyone understood your idea from the first run. Only one doubt torments me, all of these constructors of which you called, they get obvious things did not understand? Did you rave, how do you write, or do you rave, or hay? And now a lot of people advocating for the revival of ekranoplanes are also apparently not very far away, thank God Oleg Kaptsov. I put everything on the shelves.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 19 February 2016 06: 57
      +3
      Quote: Good cat
      Only one doubt torments me, all of these constructors of which you called, they get obvious things did not understand?

      Do not break your spears, this is just a stage in the design of aircraft, as well as airships. If they justified their hopes, they would be massively built and used. And the little ones do, as they say - for the amateur. smile hi
      1. Generalissimo
        Generalissimo 19 February 2016 10: 23
        +1
        What about flying boats? Japan has one - they can ... :-)
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet 19 February 2016 11: 00
          0
          Quote: Generalissimo
          What about flying boats? Japan has - they can ...: -

          We also have flying boats - Be-200, Be-12, and there is still a trifle.
          1. Generalissimo
            Generalissimo 19 February 2016 13: 51
            0
            Does Russia have a lot of them?
            1. Bayonet
              Bayonet 20 February 2016 15: 54
              0
              Quote: Generalissimo
              Does Russia have a lot of them?

              Shoigu knows him, there is something wink
              1. Generalissimo
                Generalissimo 20 February 2016 16: 03
                0
                Compared to some kind of Japan - almost nothing.
    2. AK64
      AK64 19 February 2016 07: 17
      -5
      Only one doubt torments me, all of these constructors of which you called, they get obvious things did not understand? Did you rave, how do you write, or do you rave, or hay?


      They didn’t come up with a budget yesterday.
      At one time, Kosygin was brought to sign a BAM estimate. Kosygin signed. Here are just those who brought this estimate to UNDERSTAND somewhere in .... 10 times! Ioni knew very well that they were underestimating, as they also knew that Kosygin would not sign a real estimate, for a real amount - that is, they committed deliberate forgery.

      What were their motives?
    3. My doctor
      My doctor 19 February 2016 10: 19
      0
      Quote: Good cat
      only one doubt torments me, all of these constructors of which you called, they get obvious things did not understand?

      And what do you think if the designers who created the essentially new vehicle from scratch should have foreseen all the nuances. By and large, they coped with the task, created TP based on the screen effect. But here, having no operational experience, they couldn’t calculate the effectiveness. And of course, the people at the headquarters of the Navy, and eminent scientists in the aircraft industry with all hands for, but only our author is against, pours water on the mill of imperialism.
      1. Santa Fe
        19 February 2016 10: 25
        +1
        Quote: MyVrach
        created TP based on the screen effect. But here, having no operational experience, they couldn’t calculate the effectiveness.

        To understand that 10 engines are too, banal erudition and incomprehensible eternal logic are enough
        1. DrVintorez
          DrVintorez 19 February 2016 14: 48
          0
          and two engines and 8 wheels is normal? Well, by your logic. or for example 8 engines. 8 is this normal, bust or 50/50?

          I'm talking about BTR-60 and B-52
        2. Rus2012
          Rus2012 19 February 2016 19: 05
          +1
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          To understand that 10 engines are too, banal erudition and incomprehensible eternal logic are enough

          ... well, how do you like the SpaceX Falcon 9 with 9 LRE engines on 1st., does your casting pass in terms of logic?
          And with two side accelerators attached to it. Total 27 engines Merlin 1D ?!
  • Alex_59
    Alex_59 19 February 2016 07: 16
    36
    Oleg, calm down already with EPC, in the first article the topic is disclosed in 100%. This is already too much.

    And with all the uselessness of ekranoplanes, stop using phrases like "delusional", "barn" or "Alekseevsky monsters" in their address and their designers. It's not ethical! An experiment for that and an experiment to test the most crazy ideas. And the Soviet EKPs are the experimental machines made by piece. And the designer Rostislav Alekseev does not deserve such humiliating reviews about himself, he was not only engaged in ekranoplanes. I would even say that he was mainly engaged in NOT ekranoplanes. And many of his works have brought great benefit to the people.
    1. Santa Fe
      19 February 2016 08: 00
      -4
      25 thousand views and 400 comments on the previous article showed that the topic is NOT disclosed and is really interesting for VO visitors. No derogatory comments were made about Alekseev, you yourself came up with it. The article begins with a listing of talented aircraft designers. With all due respect to Alekseev, Lippisch and Bartini, who were engaged not only in EPC, but also in other much more useful developments. Although folk rumor knows R. Alekseev, first of all, as the creator of ekranoplanes.

      Experiments are not required to break in deliberately delusional ideas. To do this, conduct a full-scale experiment in the form of an 500-meter ship-plane, if the result was known from the very beginning. Of course, sooner or later, it will fly. With 10 engines, even a grand piano will fly.

      The scope of work on the creation of ekranoplanes, many models and attempts to organize their serial (!) Production suggests that Alekseev himself did not consider his "monsters" an experiment. What motives were the head of the design bureau guided by? What "fights of bulldogs under the carpet" took place in the ministries of the former. THE USSR? What amounts and privileges were shared between KB? However, everything could be much simpler:

      "Science is the best way to satisfy personal curiosity at government expense"
      - Academician Lev Artsimovich
      1. Avenich
        Avenich 19 February 2016 08: 20
        13
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        No derogatory comments were made about Alekseev, you yourself came up with it.

        "Those who support the construction of these slaughterhouses ..." By Oleg Kaptsov
        1. tomket
          tomket 19 February 2016 10: 34
          +6
          Quote: Avenich
          "Those who support the construction of these slaughterhouses ..." By Oleg Kaptsov

          Yes, Kaptsov has already been caught many times, already there is no desire to discuss him, it is already right for him to award the title of chief cheater on VO.
      2. Alex_59
        Alex_59 19 February 2016 08: 24
        +2
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        For running deliberately crazy ideas, experiments are not required.

        I do not agree. Experiments required. The whole history of aviation is permeated by these experiments.
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        The scope of work on the creation of ekranoplanes, many models and attempts to organize their serial (!) Production suggests that Alekseev himself did not consider his "monsters" an experiment.
        Of course I didn't. Like the designer Kurchevsky. Or even the famous Tupolev with his "Sh" and "G" boats. In the case of Kurchevsky or EKP, the country's leadership showed wisdom. In the case of Tupolev or in the case of MRK pr. 1239 - no. It happens.
        1. Santa Fe
          19 February 2016 08: 36
          -9
          Quote: Alex_59
          An experiment on that and an experiment to break in the most crazy ideas.

          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          Alekseev himself did not consider his "monsters" an experiment

          Quote: Alex_59
          Of course I didn’t. Like the designer Kurchevsky.

          Then why the dreary story of a failed experiment

          the created serial ECP samples were not an experiment and they intended to be built in series. At best it’s a mistake, at worst it’s like a scam
          1. Alex_59
            Alex_59 19 February 2016 09: 26
            11
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            Then why the dreary story of a failed experiment

            Oleg, you turn off the fool already wink Alekseev did not consider the ECP as an experiment, but his leadership, as I see it in the final result, considered all the work on the ECP subject to be an experiment. Because nothing went into the series, despite the desire of the designer.
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            the created serial ECP samples were not an experiment and they intended to be built in series
            Who knows what he intended there. The reality is that there WAS NOT a large series.

            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            At best it’s a mistake, at worst it’s like a scam
            No mistake. Imagine yourself in the place of Gorshkov. Comrade comes to him. Alekseev says - there is such an idea, to cut down the EKP. The advantages are such and such. Cons - such and such. Gorshkov scratches his forehead. It seems tempting, but there are doubts. You should not immediately discard an untested project, but suddenly it will be really useful. He calls the State Planning Committee, talks about something for a long time, hangs up and says to Alekseev: "Ok, brother, let's work, I knocked you money for assembling an experimental model, and if the model flies, they promise to give more money for a test missile carrier and three transport EKPs" ... Alekseev happily goes to the design bureau, thinking in his head - "this is cool, I will build them, and then I INTEND to knock out mass production." Several years pass. Alekseev comes again to Gorshkov with the results of trial operation. And Gorshkov is not alone, but surrounded by the commission. They read the materials, figured it out and say - "No, so far your ECPs do not show any wild success. We will not give money for the series."

            Like this. :-) It almost always happens that way in life.
            1. tlauicol
              tlauicol 19 February 2016 09: 38
              -2
              Those. thought and d ... they didn’t start to run in a series. What's so surprising? Conspiracy? American machinations?
              1. Generalissimo
                Generalissimo 19 February 2016 10: 25
                -3
                And whose else? The US is very vulnerable to ekranoplan attacks.
            2. pticas
              pticas 19 February 2016 10: 35
              +6
              Don't make up for Gorshkov! He went out to sea on board "Eaglet" and remained delighted! They were going to build a series of 10 "eagles", but in Feodosia or Georgia. Even specialists from these factories came. But the collapse of the Union ...
      3. brn521
        brn521 19 February 2016 10: 20
        +6
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        25 thousand views and 400 comments

        Well, I looked, so what? Since before that I knew about ekranoplans only from the films of the series "soar and flutter", then put a plus. I climbed the Internet, researching the issue. All the advantages and disadvantages of the article became clear. All. In this article, I thought that something has changed or added. But no. All the same abuse and comparison of warm with soft. It's boring and not at all unknowing.
      4. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 19 February 2016 10: 23
        +3
        In my opinion, this kind of article smacks of a cheap over-hype, honestly too superficial and gives away yellowness. wassat
  • kpd
    kpd 19 February 2016 07: 20
    +9
    "what is by nature should not fly"
    1. Rurikovich
      Rurikovich 19 February 2016 07: 39
      +2
      Do not confuse God's gift with scrambled eggs - hovercraft (namely ships, not planes, because ekranoplanes are compared primarily with airplanes) were designed as amphibious assault ships. Their task is to quickly overcome the dangerous section and land them (and this implies an air cushion) personnel with equipment.
      Therefore, these structures float rather than fly. Types glide along the upper edge of the water, rather than flying over it wink
      1. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 19 February 2016 07: 50
        +5
        The principle of maintaining them is the same, in creating an area of ​​high pressure under the body or structural parts. Here is an example of an early SVP without a skirt.

        1. Rurikovich
          Rurikovich 19 February 2016 08: 18
          +1
          The principle is one and the embodiment is different. And if one is enough to create an air cushion by injecting air under the bottom (with its, naturally, design solutions), then the second one also needs a certain speed to reach the screen effect, a hundred generates its own problems and requires its own solutions wink
          The former turned out to be a quite tolerable combat landing ship, while the others received a nondos airplane with very conflicting characteristics and capabilities.
          Of course, both have their own limitations, but within the framework of the tasks that are set before them, the SVPs are quite coping. hi
          1. Generalissimo
            Generalissimo 19 February 2016 10: 32
            +1
            Speed ​​is required to quickly transfer troops, anti-ship missiles, or other payloads; forcing occurs by itself simply because of it.
        2. Maegrom
          Maegrom 19 February 2016 08: 22
          +4
          As already mentioned, the difference is the availability of a niche for use. Effective landing ship expanding tactical capabilities when landing. A niche for ekranoplanes, in which they would have an advantage over existing types of serial equipment, was not invented. While the principle of action is very interesting and will probably be applied in our lifetime. The emergence and development of aircraft helicopter construction was caused by the presence of the original application niche. At the same time, this niche expanded over time and the development of technology. Large mail cargo and passenger transportations were delivered to mail, intelligence. Advantages grew, profitability increased. EPC having access to high aviation technologies does not have a significant niche. It is from this point of view that their technical characteristics can be considered. Unfortunately, Oleg does not give comparative parameters with competing equipment for various purposes of application. Including a comparison of the necessary infrastructure and accessibility. Other ways to prove ECP insolvency are pointless. Also, comments should be recommended of two types - the proposed tactics of application; answer with comparative parameters. Also, when comparing a separate column, the estimated cost of funds to solve the problem in one way or another should be determined. Without such an analysis, such articles are the boiling of the masses and the transfusion from empty to empty.
      2. avt
        avt 19 February 2016 10: 56
        +2
        Quote: Rurikovich
        .Type glide along the upper edge of the water, and do not fly over it

        laughing Powerfully pushed in! However, like everything else. Again, in the spirit of those times when they were deciding what to call ekranoplan and ekranoplan, that's when the famous appeared - "that above the telegraph pole, then ekranoplane, and all the rest - ekranoplanes".
        Quote: kugelblitz
        . Here is an example of an early SVP without a skirt.

        Quote: Rurikovich
        The principle is one and the embodiment is different.

        laughing It’s just right for the most I can’t! laughing Yes, the eggs are the same. BUT! View then in profile! And this significantly changes the essence and nature of the eggs! wassat
        1. kugelblitz
          kugelblitz 19 February 2016 12: 00
          +2
          So, so the package of starting engines on which right is necessary? wassat

          What about the Orioles screws right in front of the wing?

          1. Santa Fe
            19 February 2016 12: 19
            0
            Quote: kugelblitz
            What about the Orioles screws right in front of the wing?

            Car loading capacity
            1. kugelblitz
              kugelblitz 19 February 2016 12: 26
              +6
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN

              Car loading capacity


              Take-off weight - 3900 kg
              Commercial load - 1200 kg
              Chevrolet LS-3/2 x 430 hp engines
              Fuel per 1 ton of cargo per 1 km (kg / t.km) - 0,15
              Flight range at one gas station at an altitude of 0,3 / 0,8 m (km) - 1500/1300

              In principle, good performance.
              1. avt
                avt 19 February 2016 12: 37
                +4
                Quote: kugelblitz
                Take-off weight - 3900 kg
                Commercial load - 1200 kg

                Quote: kugelblitz
                In principle, good performance.

                No. Firstly - the heavy, well, obviously heavier than air, began to be the requirement of the first Kaptsov law is no longer fulfilled wassat ; Secondly - yes actually
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                Car loading capacity

                and not like a normal iron .... well, at least a barge; Thirdly - here it is still drawn from the times
                Quote: avt
                ... Again, in the spirit of those times when they were deciding what to call ekranoplan and ekranoplan, that's when the famous appeared - "that above the telegraph pole, then ekranoplane, and all the rest - ekranoplanes".

                it’s the same ekranolet, and this is sa-a-apsem others
                Quote: avt
                Yes, the eggs are the same. BUT! View then in profile! And this significantly changes the essence and nature of the eggs!

                laughing But again - natural sabotage against the "laws of nature"! Burn it immediately!
            2. DrVintorez
              DrVintorez 19 February 2016 14: 52
              +2
              this is the car! well, not a car - a gazelle! or without reservation means immediately sucks?
              1. tlauicol
                tlauicol 19 February 2016 17: 35
                -2
                yeah, the Gazelle, only with a lower carrying capacity, with two engines 8-9 times more powerful.
                1. Kvazar
                  Kvazar 19 February 2016 18: 35
                  0
                  Well, yes.
                  My consumption on a 4x4 sable was 22 liters per hundred square meters.
                  This ekranolet has 21 liters.
                  The carrying capacity is the same.
                  Cruising speed 70 versus 170. Maximum 110 versus 200.

                  And what is the offset)
                  1. tlauicol
                    tlauicol 19 February 2016 19: 27
                    -1
                    excerpt from tests: "The average fuel consumption during flight at a speed of 150-180 km / h along a route with a variable profile and maneuvering along the course and altitude did not exceed 25-35 liters of AI-95 gasoline per 100 km of track with a takeoff weight of 3700 kg and 8 In the "airplane" mode, the consumption reached 75-90 liters. "

                    at the same time changed 6 engines, constantly increasing power - could not take off. To mention the price of the pepelats or is it not worth shocking?
            3. The comment was deleted.
      3. alstr
        alstr 19 February 2016 11: 38
        +3
        Firstly, for some reason everyone compares ECPs with airplanes, but they generally grew out of a ship theme, namely hydrofoils.
        Secondly, if you take the Eaglet, then in size it is comparable to the Bison (compare their linear dimensions and you will be surprised). The only difference between them is that the ECP takes less (20 versus 150 tons), but delivers 4 times faster.

        Both ECP and Bison can go to the unprepared coast. At the same time, Eaglet has even an advantage, because can jump on the coastal strip (for example, on a plateau near the sea).

        Why is ECP bad in this application?
        I already wrote that ECP and Bison can complement each other. ECP - this is the first wave of landing + fast delivery of reinforcements. Bison - second wave + heavy weapons delivery.

        Moreover, their visibility is the same. But EPC can have an advantage, because it’s practically a plane in speed, but if it flies near the water, then it is initially identified as a ship with super high speed, which is poorly designed for fighting ships. As long as they guess to start fighting him like an airplane, time will be lost and the EPC will already complete its task.
      4. Kvazar
        Kvazar 19 February 2016 18: 26
        0
        Since when should the ekranoplan be compared with a ship? This is a ship of pure water. At the same time, it is forbidden to take it off the screen in case of accidents, but it must be removed from the screen.

        You confused warm with soft and called it wet.
  • inkass_98
    inkass_98 19 February 2016 07: 32
    +7
    Oleg, if everyone was going your way, then we would still be plowing on horses, at best, or even digging up the ground with a digging stick.
    An experiment is the engine of progress, without such experiments there would be neither an airplane, nor a car, nor even your armadillos dearly beloved by you.
    And yes, colleagues have already written above - you need to know the norm, this is already too much, you already start to spit with bile. If earlier it was interesting to read your articles, now it’s just unpleasant hi .
  • Turkestan
    Turkestan 19 February 2016 07: 34
    +2
    By and large, each technical or military means has its own niche, where its use is most optimal. Everything new and unusual is this information and invaluable experience that mankind is gaining through trial and error, tragedy and greatness. Any failure is still a success, for ekranoplans the future.
  • kugelblitz
    kugelblitz 19 February 2016 07: 38
    11
    Well, it’s not in vain that SEC and SVP simultaneously developed.
    The former, of course, demanded significant costs for separation of the hull from the water surface, and there are limitations in the maximum displacement, but nevertheless, in the class of small passenger, patrol and rescue ships, they proved to be excellent. Of course there were problems with the operation, but it concerns solely the cases of light alloys, I think the transition to composites would solve this problem.



    Alekseev had an interesting passenger boat, and only the problem with the gearbox stopped operation because of the rush. Excellent weight return parameters, where the boat took 40 passengers for less than 50 tons and one decommissioned AI-20 aircraft engine was enough.



    For landing and transporting heavy loads, amphibious SVPs show excellent results in terms of weight return.



    And there are still skeg SVPs with much higher profitability parameters.



    Therefore, due to such intense competition, the ekranoplane is difficult to compete with these types of vessels.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 19 February 2016 09: 40
      +5
      Alekseev simply went further, he decided to completely get rid of the water resistance, and the result was ECP. He achieved his goal - high speed, decent carrying capacity. But the EPC flies, it is no longer a ship. It flies low and mostly above water, that is, not a plane.
      Alekseev created a device moving on the border of two media, it was not his fault that there were no necessary materials at that time. It is not known how the case would have turned out, had everything been in stock.
      Comparison of ECP with other types of ships, this is a comparison of a train and a transport aircraft - one is not lucky and fast, the second is not much, but fast. What's better???
      1. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 19 February 2016 10: 20
        +4
        I think it’s just that the ekranoplan still has its own sphere, namely, as a rescue and patrol vessel on the principle of an interceptor from the base, i.e. where fuel costs are not taken into account and speed characteristics are required.
        It’s stupid to rush from one extreme to the other, as if splashing out a child’s water, following the example of recoilless guns.
      2. Generalissimo
        Generalissimo 19 February 2016 10: 51
        0
        In fact, he simply sawed off the extra wing consoles to a flying boat - an airplane with a large wing shakes at low altitude, a low altitude is needed to break through air defense.
        1. kugelblitz
          kugelblitz 19 February 2016 11: 22
          0
          Well, the ekranoplan kakbe also has a reinforced structure and afterburning engines for takeoff, which on the one hand allows you to make it much larger than a regular flying boat.
          The large size helps to improve seaworthiness in a displacement position, say during a rescue operation. Lun then had the option of a lifeguard, but as luck would have it by then they began to cut financing everywhere, perestroika was the same, if it wasn’t okay! wassat



          So it is unfinished ....

          1. Generalissimo
            Generalissimo 19 February 2016 13: 55
            0
            Reinforced construction because it walks for a long time at low altitude. A flying boat 20 minutes after such a flight will simply fall apart.
            1. tlauicol
              tlauicol 19 February 2016 14: 45
              -1
              ohh, you begin to slowly understand the 2nd paragraph of the article.

              read on
              1. Generalissimo
                Generalissimo 19 February 2016 15: 02
                0
                can explain?
                1. tlauicol
                  tlauicol 19 February 2016 17: 37
                  -1
                  I thought you understood that the ES walks for a long time at low altitude. and as regards its design.
                  read next paragraph etc.
                  1. Generalissimo
                    Generalissimo 19 February 2016 17: 46
                    0
                    he should walk almost constantly at low altitude, this applies to his appointment.
      3. KaPToC
        KaPToC 19 February 2016 14: 20
        0
        For the development of ekranoletov need variable geometry of the wing, only in a broader sense than we are used to.
        First, you need to abandon take-off from the water - this is what makes ekranoplanes terribly ineffective.
        The ekranolet should accelerate like an ordinary airplane, but it will take off at the much lower speed, continue to accelerate on the screen, then take off from the screen and fly like an airplane.
    2. Generalissimo
      Generalissimo 19 February 2016 10: 47
      0
      Which of these types of ships can go at speeds above 500km / h?
      1. kugelblitz
        kugelblitz 19 February 2016 11: 39
        0
        Yes, you do not always need high speed, for example, along the rivers. As in coastal navigation with heavy traffic there is a risk of collision. There is a limit of 50-60 knots, and at such speeds, SVPs with SECs go well. For example, SPK river Petrel and marine Cyclone-M. Both gas turbines.





        But the English ferry SR.N4, which worked the devil knows how many years ... created back in the 60s.

        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 19 February 2016 13: 57
          0
          military and rescue workers need speed almost always.
        2. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 20 February 2016 00: 01
          0
          None of what was in the pictures can even walk at such speed.
  • Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 19 February 2016 07: 49
    12
    Yes, Kaptsov has such a trait as bringing to rejection due to repeated articles on the same topic with new evidence of his talent lol
    Many are right, the previous article is successful, fully proving certain points in the erroneousness of the creation of ekranoplanes (or their application - to anyone else) and dotting the "i".
    But the old song begins again - probably every week a couple of articles on this topic within a month should convince readers that Kaptsov is right. Yes, he is right, and all this was already seen in the first article. winked lol
    And now there is a further attack on their rake - proving with various kinds of epithets to the topic of their innocence laughing
    1. pv1005
      pv1005 19 February 2016 10: 47
      +8
      Who is Rostislav Alekseev?
      Doctor of Technical Sciences, scientist
      Member of the Special Council of the Higher Attestation Commission
      Honored Inventor of the RSFSR
      Laureate of the Lenin and Stalin Prizes for the development of ships
      Head of the Design Bureau and the labor collective
      - just a man with a capital letter. hi

      Who is O. Kaptsov ??? request
      - just a clicker
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 19 February 2016 11: 13
        -2
        Hmm ... crush regalia - not the best choice.

        Because in our history there was already an academician of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, academician of the Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR, academician of the Agricultural Academy. Hero of Socialist Labor. Laureate of three Stalin Prizes of the first degree. He was awarded eight orders of Lenin, a gold medal to them. I.I. Mechnikov Academy of Sciences of the USSR.
        1. pv1005
          pv1005 19 February 2016 11: 37
          +3
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Hmm ... crush regalia - not the best choice.

          Because in our history there was already an academician of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, academician of the Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR, academician of the Agricultural Academy. Hero of Socialist Labor. Laureate of three Stalin Prizes of the first degree. He was awarded eight orders of Lenin, a gold medal to them. I.I. Mechnikov Academy of Sciences of the USSR.


          But to blaspheme the invention of a truly honored person (and not the one you cited as an example of Lysenko) who will never be able to answer without doing anything useful himself, this is certainly the best choice. hi
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 19 February 2016 12: 38
            +1
            So Trofim Denisovich, with all his twists, also did good deeds. The mere breeding of natural domestic rubber plants is worth it.
    2. Generalissimo
      Generalissimo 19 February 2016 10: 56
      0
      Articles should be repeated, because in the previous ones, and here it has already been popularly explained that ekranoplanes eat it well, and what he is doing with them (like everything the USSR was ahead of) ... therefore, it’s necessary to put new readers into the brains of comments but they don’t pass from under one article to another.
  • candidate
    candidate 19 February 2016 08: 12
    +5
    ... man! Friend! Do not worry! Understand
    Everyone here has their own pies
    Love yourself, loved ones, but not those
    who stupidly thinks - he is smarter than everyone ...
  • Olkass
    Olkass 19 February 2016 08: 19
    12
    Stupidly stupid libel of the near hipster. (Further quote from Mr. Lavrov)
    Do you eat every day ?! What for??? One hell is ineffective. 80 percent work on the toilet.
    Efficiency of steam engines and internal combustion engines do not tell me how much?
    And what is the yield of useful after slaughtering cattle or pigs?
    Just think about using such devices as life-saving appliances.
    Next Lavrov.
  • Arikkhab
    Arikkhab 19 February 2016 08: 20
    +2
    With a takeoff weight of 500 tons, the KM could carry up to 304 tons of cargo. An-225 with a maximum takeoff weight of 640 tons could lift up to 250 tons.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 19 February 2016 10: 22
      0
      Only at KM fuel consumption was significantly higher than that of An 225.
    2. Santa Fe
      19 February 2016 10: 27
      +1
      Quote: ArikKhab
      With a "takeoff" weight of 500 tons, the CM could carry up to 304 tons of cargo.

      Where such fantastic numbers come from
      10 engines probably powered by air
      1. Wheel
        Wheel 19 February 2016 12: 53
        0
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        Where such fantastic numbers come from
        10 engines probably powered by air

        Oleg, do you know how to count?
        Count on the photo the number of engines ....
        1. kugelblitz
          kugelblitz 19 February 2016 13: 47
          +1
          The KM really had 10 engines, except for 8 in the front, there were 2 in the tail.



          But only the rear ones worked on the screen, later on the moon they got rid of them and 2 front ones began to fulfill the function of running gears, with 6 disabled.
          1. Wheel
            Wheel 19 February 2016 14: 35
            -3
            Quote: kugelblitz
            The KM really had 10 engines, except for 8 in the front, there were 2 in the tail.

            He put on his glasses, looked at all the available photos - he didn’t find any engines in the tail ...
            1. kugelblitz
              kugelblitz 19 February 2016 14: 55
              +2
              Right on the tail above tail number 04, even the exhaust trace darkens behind them.





      2. DrVintorez
        DrVintorez 19 February 2016 14: 57
        0
        duck all engines are needed only on takeoff mode. it seems so? In flight, two engines are running.
        1. tlauicol
          tlauicol 19 February 2016 17: 39
          -3
          and the remaining 8 and fuel for them - a kettlebell on foot (quote)
      3. The comment was deleted.
    3. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 19 February 2016 16: 00
      0
      Quote: ArikKhab
      With a takeoff weight of 500 tons, the KM could carry up to 304 tons of cargo. An-225 with a maximum takeoff weight of 640 tons could lift up to 250 tons.

      For An-225.
      Weight, kg
      empty 250000 aircraft
      maximum takeoff 600000
      Domestic fuel, kg 300000
      Engine type 6 turbofan engine Progress (Lotarev) D-18T
      Rod, kN 6 x 229.47
      Cruising speed, km / h 800-850
      Ferrying range, km 15000
      Practical range, km 4000
      Practical ceiling, m 11600
      Crew 6-7
      Payload: up to 250 kg of cargo
      For EPC KM
      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 points
      Payload: 304 000 kg


      The carrying capacity includes fuel, do not confuse it with the payload, pay attention to seaworthiness and do not pull the hedgehogs tight.
  • V.ic
    V.ic 19 February 2016 08: 21
    +2
    "An ekranoplan is necessary ... like a dead man's galoshes" Author Oleg Kaptsov

    Like a blind man’s glasses, a dull explanatory dictionary, a dead man’s not held kernel at his feet ... Why and for whom to write, about ekranoplans on the seas, potatoes on the balcony and onions sprouted in containers from eggs. The best of all, of course, is a barge, with an oo-oo small tug. Advantages: a small number of service personnel, high cargo capacity, o-o-very high indicator (net tons / per km.).
    1. DrVintorez
      DrVintorez 19 February 2016 14: 59
      +2
      the barge must be armored !!! otherwise - "neschitova battle ned !!!! adynadynadyteen".
  • mpzss
    mpzss 19 February 2016 08: 23
    +6
    The author, I have the impression that what you do not understand and do not like should not exist in nature !?
    So, and now for the article:
    About stealth on radars when flying at low altitude: what prevents you from doing the same trick to a missile bomber?

    Can you imagine a "White Swan" or TU 95, at an altitude of 15-20 meters from the water surface !? I would like to see this flight, but it seems to me that no pilot will agree to this!
    And anyway, who said that KM should be compared with aircraft and ships !? in my opinion, this is generally a separate type of technology, well, I don’t know, take modern gadgets: a smartphone, it’s not quite a phone, but also not a computer, here it is! however, no one refuses from smartphones!
    Manageability becomes an even bigger problem. Due to the impossibility of making bends with a deep roll, the turning radius of the “Lunya” at cruising speed was three kilometers! Now let the most desperate people try to “get through” the curvature of the river on an 380-toned WIG. Or evade a tug unexpectedly arising directly at the rate.

    and who said that it should be exploited on the rivers !? After all, it is needed to deliver missiles to the distance of a shot at an aircraft carrier (and aircraft carriers do not sail into the rivers!), and there is no noticeable delivery, and aircraft can be seen on radars, submarines and surface ships can be seen by acoustics, and the ekranoplan is not visible anywhere, only from space or in the aisles of direct visibility, and this is about 20-25 km, and it’s pointless for him to fly up a distance!
    Therefore, my opinion is that this type of armament MUST exist, there is no alternative to it, it’s another matter that it was born a little earlier than the due date, but this business is fixable!
    1. Santa Fe
      19 February 2016 08: 39
      +3
      Quote: mpzss
      Can you imagine a "White Swan" or TU 95, at an altitude of 15-20 meters from the water surface !?





      Over the water it would be even easier
      1. Siberia 9444
        Siberia 9444 19 February 2016 09: 23
        +2
        Cool men aces!
      2. pv1005
        pv1005 19 February 2016 09: 52
        +4
        But the same thing, but with supersonic sound (for which the Tu-160 and Tu-22M3 were actually created) and for two hours in a row. Weak?
        1. tlauicol
          tlauicol 19 February 2016 09: 56
          +3
          probably ekranoplan not weak? at least 2 seconds in a row?
          1. pv1005
            pv1005 19 February 2016 10: 14
            0
            Quote: Tlauicol
            probably ekranoplan not weak? at least 2 seconds in a row?

            WIG is an operating mode, it is higher and does not fly, although for a short time it can climb higher.
            1. tlauicol
              tlauicol 19 February 2016 14: 35
              -2
              on supersonic?
          2. Generalissimo
            Generalissimo 19 February 2016 10: 59
            0
            Can a Su-24 or Tu-160 get splashed, stay in a given area for weeks and then take off again from the water?
            1. tlauicol
              tlauicol 19 February 2016 14: 47
              -1
              for weeks? guys, operate on facts and arguments, not fantasy and fairy tales
              1. Generalissimo
                Generalissimo 19 February 2016 15: 06
                +1
                at least for months! :-) and you do not like it - you need it to be as before, the Tu-142 will fly in, hang out on the American shore for an hour and fly, or for someone to sit under water in a slow iron barrel in the faint hope that it cannot be seen from above and Can not hear
                1. saturn.mmm
                  saturn.mmm 19 February 2016 16: 15
                  -1
                  Quote: Generalissimo
                  it is necessary that it was as before, the Tu-142 flew in, hung around the American coast for an hour and flew away

                  Want to ride the waves off the American coast, fly the Be-200.
                  1. Generalissimo
                    Generalissimo 19 February 2016 16: 52
                    +1
                    Be-200 will be detected much faster and it has lesser plight.
                2. tlauicol
                  tlauicol 19 February 2016 17: 40
                  -2
                  I asked: facts, not fairy tales
                  1. Generalissimo
                    Generalissimo 19 February 2016 17: 48
                    0
                    and where have you not seen the facts?
                    1. tlauicol
                      tlauicol 19 February 2016 19: 30
                      -1
                      for weeks. Yes, even for months - these are the facts? no, this is nonsense! tie up
                      1. Generalissimo
                        Generalissimo 19 February 2016 23: 54
                        -2
                        you nonsense. go solitary and for six months
                      2. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 20 February 2016 05: 15
                        -1
                        "splash down, stay in a given area for weeks and then take off again from the water? even for months!: -" mowing like a fool?
                      3. Generalissimo
                        Generalissimo 20 February 2016 11: 23
                        -2
                        you - no, splashed surface ships like hanging around for months in a given area
  • Wedmak
    Wedmak 19 February 2016 09: 59
    +1
    These are small spans, aces pilots. And so go an hour or two? And then the attack, maneuvers, withdrawal? Will the pilot survive? Even with the use of automation?
    1. Alex_59
      Alex_59 19 February 2016 10: 35
      +4
      Quote: Wedmak
      These are small spans, aces pilots. And so go an hour or two? And then the attack, maneuvers, withdrawal? Will the pilot survive? Even with the use of automation?

      Nowhere and never was the terrain flight conceived as cruising and long-term. It’s not a matter of whether the pilot can survive or not. The flight range at low altitude drops significantly. For example, I somehow had fun and made a navigational calculation according to the Su-24 flight manual and it turned out that the Su-24 with 2xPTB-3000 and 6 FAB-500-M62 flies 1600 km at high altitude, and only 600 km at low altitude. What does it mean? Firstly, it is easy to calculate that the entire fuel supply at low altitude of the Su-24 will burn out in just 45 minutes. This is 600 km of flight at a speed of 800 km / h. That is, no one, by definition, is going to fly for hours at such heights. Second, it is obvious that if a low-altitude flight is required from an aircraft, then only in the area of ​​a powerful air defense breakthrough at the target. Those. to such a height the Su-24 will drop about 100 km to the target, and after the impact it will also move 100 km away from the target, and then again up to the altitude, into the discharged "economical" layers of the atmosphere, otherwise it will not reach the base. This entire 200 km throw on the ground at the Su-24 will take 15 minutes.
      About the same applies to the Tu-22M3 or Tu-160. But there are two pilots there, they can hold out twice as long, so I think they can fly off peacefully until 1,5 hours, and more is impossible due to the inefficiency of such a flight.
  • alstr
    alstr 19 February 2016 12: 04
    0
    Just a comment. This is a short flight. A long flight of such a heavy aircraft is not real, because just hard physically.
    Secondly, a flight on water is different in that water will get into the engines, which will force the take-off mode to be applied (mechanisms protecting the engine from getting musoars from the ground work on it). And this is a completely different song.
    1. Alex_59
      Alex_59 19 February 2016 12: 28
      +4
      Quote: alstr
      water will fall into the engines, which will force the take-off mode to be applied (mechanisms protecting the engine from getting musoar from the ground work on it)

      What can’t you read here? Oh, m ...
      In fact, water gets into the navigator’s mouth when he sticks out of the window and the debris looks like a mop from the engine fan blades. Chesslovo. I saw it myself.
  • DrVintorez
    DrVintorez 19 February 2016 15: 01
    0
    the author, read what they write to you. and they write to you about the Tu-160 and Tu-95. I understand that watching numbers is difficult, but sometimes necessary! the mass of the su-24 / tu-22m3 compare with the mass of the tu-160/95! only chur compare the same: not empty with take-off, etc.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Delta
    Delta 20 February 2016 00: 22
    0
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    Over the water it would be even easier


    So ?
    https://youtu.be/l3bijF2--os

  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 19 February 2016 11: 20
    0
    Quote: mpzss
    Can you imagine a "White Swan" or TU 95, at an altitude of 15-20 meters from the water surface !? I would like to see this flight, but it seems to me that no pilot will agree to this!

    Tu-22M3 flew 50-60 m. You want to live ...
    In 1976, the group under the command of Deinekin for the first time in Long-Range Aviation completed a flight at low altitudes (50-60 m), clearly demonstrating the unique capabilities of the new aircraft and the skill of the crews.

    As for the larger machines, then during his visit to the United States, the same Deinekin had an episode with piloting a B-1B at an altitude of 50 m: "Our generals don’t fly like that".
  • Old26
    Old26 19 February 2016 08: 25
    0
    Quote: Pencil
    The fate of the monsters is in the cemetery. Only beautiful planes fly beautifully.

    And they are already in the cemetery. Time has clearly shown that such machines are not needed. Theoretically, everything seems to be correct. But practically ... I don’t remember exactly, but it seems to Wiener, the words attributed to the father of cybernetics: "Theoretically, even a person can be transmitted by wires, but the difficulties arising from this are insurmountable."


    History (I'm not afraid of this word) has shown how needed ekranoplanes are. At the stage of "pushing through" this project, our Defense Ministry planned to build more than a hundred EKP of the "Eaglet" type - it was limited to 4 pieces. The service life of these machines is 5 years. And ended in 1984? ECP supporters did not ask why? I think they had only one thought - the "inner enemy" is to blame.

    In reality, nobody ever DO NOT TEST ekranoplan in real conditions SEAS... They drove only in the Caspian Sea (lake). Moreover, according to the old residents of the Dagdizel plant, they did not remember that it took place in extreme conditions, that is, in a storm.

    ECP proponents do not consider the following question, for example. And how will the whole process take place, for example, the landing (on the same "Eaglet").
    Well, with the start, everything is clear. Descends from a concrete slip (exclusively concrete) to water. Maybe on its own (there is a wheeled chassis). I dispersed, took off .... I flew the right distance and here is the enemy shore in front of it. It is good if there are no rocks on the shore. But even sand. Crawled out on the screen ashore. He threw aside the bow, landed and ....
    What's next? To start - you need clean water. Before her on the chassis that he has and on the sand, even when the engines are turned on at full power - with all the desire not to crawl ....

    And what about the possibility of refueling the EKP? This has never been done at all and it is not known what to do ... Not to mention how he can fly in a stormy sea. And dozens of "minuses" that the supporters of these machines do not want to hear about.

    In short. As an experiment, a bold experiment - it was a success and showed that such an aggregate is not needed. He has no niche.

    The use of small cars for several people, especially if they can move not only on the screen - but for God's sake (like "Petrel-24"). You can try to exploit.

    But as a military, they are not needed, because have no advantages over any other weapon systems.
    But in general, it is worth tying up with this topic, otherwise we will go for the second time. Our people are very fond of different "wunderwaffe". He considers them to be indestructible, infallible. EKP is one of these "wunder"
    1. Wheel
      Wheel 19 February 2016 08: 42
      +9
      Quote: Old26
      And ended in 1984? ECP proponents have not wondered - why?

      And you did not ask yourself why, well, sooooo much ended in the 84th?
      For the Old with memory problems, I recall that it was in the 84th that Ustinov died ...
    2. Maegrom
      Maegrom 19 February 2016 09: 50
      +1
      Great post. How many times did they work with prototype detectors that should work wonderfully, were developed by academicians (quite real), have a serious theoretical basis, but in practice, either noise immunity does not rise to the desired mark due to the peculiarities of the detection principle, for example, for ultrasonic detectors, or the same functions and with the same efficiency are solved by a detector worth ten times cheaper. And then there are screams - we ruin science.
    3. Wedmak
      Wedmak 19 February 2016 10: 02
      +5
      And they are already in the cemetery. Time has clearly shown that such machines are not needed.

      Yeah, but for some reason, recently ECP projects appear like mushrooms after rain.
      What's next? To start - you need clean water. Before her on the chassis that he has and on the sand, even when the engines are turned on at full power - with all the desire not to crawl ....

      You should have watched films about Eaglet first. He crawled ashore to himself, and threw the landing, and crawled back into the water.
      1. pv1005
        pv1005 19 February 2016 10: 19
        +5
        Quote: Wedmak
        And they are already in the cemetery. Time has clearly shown that such machines are not needed.

        Yeah, but for some reason, recently ECP projects appear like mushrooms after rain.
        What's next? To start - you need clean water. Before her on the chassis that he has and on the sand, even when the engines are turned on at full power - with all the desire not to crawl ....

        You should have watched films about Eaglet first. He crawled ashore to himself, and threw the landing, and crawled back into the water.

        Why watch? Why comparison tables? So the whole "harmonious theory" of the worthlessness of the ekranoplan will collapse.
  • kapitan281271
    kapitan281271 19 February 2016 08: 29
    +7
    I remember there was such a moment in our glorious history when the Air Force command and many other clever men argued very reasonably that the IL-2 was an absolutely unnecessary and even harmful machine, by the way, twice, then it was very convincingly told what Su-25 tea was no longer the 41st in our age of supersonic and radar.

    PS Ekranoplanes in a landfill give superdreadnoughts with a main caliber of at least 20 inches. drinks
    1. DrVintorez
      DrVintorez 19 February 2016 15: 03
      +1
      and armor in 21 inches !!!
  • hhhhhhh
    hhhhhhh 19 February 2016 08: 56
    0
    Do not spend money on science, then where? On US bonds? Now, according to the situation in the country, if they give money, for science, it is necessary to take and deal with, even unpromising affairs.
    The andron collahedron was also built for what is not yet.
  • Irgy
    Irgy 19 February 2016 09: 00
    +4
    Kaptsov, you got it already! If you are not able to correctly and reasonably write articles, go clean the toilets! Everyone should do their own thing and business, and you are definitely out of place!
  • Old26
    Old26 19 February 2016 09: 00
    +4
    Quote: Wheel
    For the Old with memory problems, I recall that it was in the 84th that Ustinov died ...

    In-in. And immediately invisibly the question of internal enemies arises? But "Lun" after the same 5 years of operation was mothballed in 1991, even before the collapse of the Soviet Union. Shall we look for the reason in the subsequent collapse of the Union? Or maybe the reason is that the car turned out to be unnecessary? And by the way, about the death of Ustinov. For the first time "Eaglet" got on the wing in 1975. Operation began in 1979. If Ustinov was such a fan of the EKP, why all these 5 years only 4 cars flew and no new ones were built to replace the dead (during his lifetime)? Can you answer the question?
    1. vvp2412
      vvp2412 19 February 2016 09: 21
      +1
      Yes, nothing can. He can only write shit!
    2. Wheel
      Wheel 19 February 2016 09: 30
      +2
      Quote: Old26
      In-in. And immediately invisibly the question of internal enemies arises? But "Lun" after the same 5 years of operation was mothballed in 1991, even before the collapse of the Soviet Union. Shall we look for the reason in the subsequent collapse of the Union? Or maybe the reason is that the car turned out to be unnecessary? And by the way, about the death of Ustinov. For the first time "Eaglet" got on the wing in 1975. Operation began in 1979. If Ustinov was such a fan of the EKP, why all these 5 years only 4 cars flew and no new ones were built to replace the dead (during his lifetime)? Can you answer the question?

      I can.
      The unenviable fate of the ekranoplanes is explained very prosaically.
      They attributed them to the IMF.
      But the strategy and tactics of their application is by no means the IMF, as well as not the WWF, but its own.
      And it was developed ...
      Selling the same moromanov D.F. did not have enough time...
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 19 February 2016 13: 13
        +1
        Quote: Wheel
        But the strategy and tactics of their application is by no means the IMF, as well as not the WWF, but its own.

        Precisely that "own". For it is quite difficult to justify the construction of something worse than ships and worse than aircraft.

        WIG simply has no place in modern combat operations at sea.
        1. pv1005
          pv1005 19 February 2016 14: 34
          +1
          Quote: Spade
          Quote: Wheel
          But the strategy and tactics of their application is by no means the IMF, as well as not the WWF, but its own.

          Precisely that "own". For it is quite difficult to justify the construction of something worse than ships and worse than aircraft.

          For example, tanks, in terms of their performance characteristics, are much worse than ships and planes, and their tactics are somewhat weird. Do not find? recourse
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 19 February 2016 15: 05
            0
            Y-yes ...
            Are you personally sure that you need to build ekranoplanes instead of modern aircraft and ships?
            Instead, and not together, for they, oddly enough, cost money.

            What "your own strategy and tactics" justifies replacing ships with ekranoplanes? And what about replacing aircraft with ekranoplanes?
            1. pv1005
              pv1005 19 February 2016 15: 46
              +1
              Quote: Spade
              Y-yes ...
              Are you personally sure that you need to build ekranoplanes instead of modern aircraft and ships?
              Instead, and not together, for they, oddly enough, cost money.

              What "your own strategy and tactics" justifies replacing ships with ekranoplanes? And what about replacing aircraft with ekranoplanes?


              And who and when said that it is necessary to replace the ekranoplans ships and planes ???
              The whole point is that the ekranoplan is an intermediate link between airplanes and ships, where it must perform (supplement) those functions that are not available to ships and planes, are ineffective, inexpedient. And only together, and not instead.
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 19 February 2016 16: 23
                -2
                Hello, we arrived ...
                And where will the money for their development and construction come from?
                Enterprises for the construction of ekranoplanes, ground-based infrastructure for their use and maintenance, will also appear from nothing?

                In addition, this is your "supplement" ... For example, the positioning area of ​​our nuclear missile carriers in the Pacific Ocean. Covered by a group of surface ships. Aviation patrols, and in the event of the outbreak of hostilities strengthens the grouping. What will ekranoplanes "supplement" here?
    3. V.ic
      V.ic 19 February 2016 10: 13
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      Can you answer the question?

      If you served, then try to prescribe: ekranoplan it is-
      1. Marine vessel.
      2. The aircraft.
      Then develop a financing system for a promising project. It will turn out, then you are a financial genius, such as Serdyukov / Kudrin. Nothing personal, just facts. hi
      1. Wheel
        Wheel 19 February 2016 13: 09
        +2
        Quote: V.ic
        If you served, then try to prescribe: ekranoplan it is-
        1. Marine vessel.
        2. The aircraft.
        Then develop a financing system for a promising project. It will turn out, then you are a financial genius, such as Serdyukov / Kudrin. Nothing personal, just facts.

        Black
        Heavy?
        Horses?
        People?
        belay request
    4. alstr
      alstr 19 February 2016 13: 39
      +2
      The answer is simple. Did not make it.

      For comparison: Mig-29.
      Start of development - 1974
      The first flight is 1977.
      Serial production expanded - 1982.
      Received troops - August 1983

      Su-27
      The beginning of work 1971.
      First flight - 1977
      Launched production - 1981.
      Received troops - 1982.
      Operation in the troops - 1985.


      And I ask you to note this for fighters, who were in priorities much higher than ekranoplanes, who did not know where to attribute either to the Navy or to the Air Force.

      In addition to the production itself, it was necessary to train pilots, develop tactics and application strategies, solve basing issues, etc.

      In addition, if I understand correctly, there was no final decision on mass production. All ekranoplanes were going to pilot production.
  • Max40
    Max40 19 February 2016 09: 05
    +3
    Here are some interesting links!
    http://igor113.livejournal.com/51213.html
    http://igor113.livejournal.com/52174.html
  • engineer74
    engineer74 19 February 2016 09: 11
    +4
    "History teaches that it teaches nothing!" - imagine an airplane built using the technologies of the 18-19th century - will you fly far and safely on it? It is the same with EP: they used shipbuilding technologies, mixed them with aviation technologies, counted expensive fuel, stuck in an imperfect and unreliable "avionics" - and got a natural result! There will be new sources of energy, engines with a thrust ratio of afterburner / sustainer 10/1 control systems, which will have a height of 5-10 meters for reaction and displacement vessels will displace EF, but this will not be tomorrow ...
    The only scope of ECP today is a water attraction for spoiled tourists who are tired of riding banana and hydrolic.
    I completely agree with this!
    IMHO
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 19 February 2016 09: 19
    +3
    Another govnovbros from Kaptsova .... When will he be forbidden here to post any crap !?
    2 of the day ago already wrote a similar creation. It won’t calm down. It seems that he was paid to conduct anti-propaganda ...
    I didn’t even read. At first I looked - who the scribbler is. Kaptsov? Who are you? Goodbye!?
  • Stas57
    Stas57 19 February 2016 09: 24
    +2
    on the one hand, it pleases that an active discussion is underway, people are passionate, they are interested.

    it’s bad that it all looks, thanks to the author, in the style of the newspaper Speed-Info.

    Well, the video about the fact that the work is conducted, that there is interest, that money gives
    During the test flight over Lake Onega, the Orion-20 ekranoplane crashed. All crew members are alive, but received various injuries.
    https://youtu.be/CuEsR8DFjHI
  • Irgy
    Irgy 19 February 2016 09: 26
    +5
    How much can you ride on the same track ?! Do you have paranoia regarding ECP ?! And one more thing: how long does it take to finally get to the idea that you can’t compare incomparable things, or do you have a joke about a tank ?! As a result of the closure of the project, the ECP only entered the stage of formation, even under the condition of serial construction. Enough time should pass to get the finished technology, and in this case it simply wasn’t enough. Or will you again recall the main aspects of the history of aircraft construction ?! Help calculate how much time has passed, from the first biplanes to the su-27 or your favorite An-12 ?!
    ECP, by the way, was born precisely from the technology of ekranoplanes, and the Americans, the very pragmatic Americans who do not like wasting money and see the benefits in everything, were ready to build a plant in the USA under it. And ECP is also just the beginning of EPC technology. By the way, no one believed in helicopters either, and considered them to be stray, before the creation of the swashplate. If the ekranoplanes were given as much time as the planes or helicopters had, they would calmly prove their profitability and their potential.
    Finish already shining your ignorance on the entire Internet, otherwise you can easily pass for Psaki. You’ll be like Dog Kaptsov ...
    PS "There is nothing to blame on others since the very face is crooked" there is a saying about you, you belittle the dignity of other people only because you yourself have achieved absolutely nothing in this life. And you prove this once again with your articles. Article 2 (two) for illiteracy and inconsistency.
  • mixdiur
    mixdiur 19 February 2016 09: 32
    -1
    According to the author_and_convertoplans_not_ needed! Armor_no, difficult_manage, expensive ,,, Chey_
    then stupid_merikos_ exploit. The author is an idiot not far. And, it seems, prop_okator
    fucked up.
    1. tlauicol
      tlauicol 19 February 2016 09: 48
      0
      No, well, the fact that there are such boors on the forums, yes, it happens. But the fact that such scumbags put approving pluses for SUCH comments is already a complete degradation. Are you guys out of your mind? Are these all your arguments?

      Dima, if you can’t do it without insults - PNH then
      1. mixdiur
        mixdiur 19 February 2016 10: 17
        -4
        Put me minus and calm down, tolerance
      2. Generalissimo
        Generalissimo 19 February 2016 11: 01
        -3
        something smelled of a jackal of tobacco ...
  • maximghost
    maximghost 19 February 2016 09: 42
    +4
    Oleg, you can list the WIG pluses, in pursuit of the minuses. If you don’t do it, then either argue or read articles of the article (except for historical ones, they are good) it makes no sense.
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 19 February 2016 14: 17
      +2
      Quote: maximghost
      If you do not argue,

      So do it you and there will be something to argue about, lay out all the advantages of ekranoplanes, read most of the comments and have not read about the obvious pluses of EPC, in what they have a clear advantage over aircraft helicopters and ships? An ekranoplan is a separate branch; it is not necessary to put it on the same line with hovercraft and amphibious aircraft, since in the first case it is ships and in the second it is airplanes.

      Maybe it’s better to use the funds for the development of new planes, helicopters and ships, maybe with this money to develop and create the world's best diesel engine and ship gas turbine unit?
      1. Generalissimo
        Generalissimo 19 February 2016 15: 11
        +1
        As a matter of fact, the author should do this, or the editors should simply stop skipping such articles.
        WIG pluses are easy to find just google, for some reason he did not.
    2. efendia
      efendia 20 February 2016 21: 32
      +1
      http://igor113.livejournal.com/51213.html - вот человек нормально собрал инфу и выложил на обсуждения безо всяких предвзятых осуждений, и просит поправить спецов и людей знакомых с темой, даже интересно читать. А тут - ВСЕ ПЛОХО, ВСЕ ПРОПАЛО, ВСЕ БЫЛИ идиёты один Я дартаньян.
  • Irgy
    Irgy 19 February 2016 09: 43
    0
    And by the way, about modern ECPs, they are all built on the old technologies of the Soviet era, not a single new technology has been developed for them lately, hence the legs grow. Serial copies will appear in the West or in China and everything will turn around again. By the way, it happened with helicopters, as with many others in Russia ...
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 19 February 2016 09: 56
      +2
      Not quite the old ones. Aerodynamics does not stand still and now the modern ECP has a slightly different arrangement of the wing, engines and, in general, the general layout of the hull.
      For example, this project no longer seems like a monster, right?
      1. Santa Fe
        19 February 2016 10: 22
        -3
        Quote: Wedmak
        this project no longer seems like a monster, right?

        Two turbofan engines
        Two jet dvigla in the bow

        For an An-24 aircraft, the most
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 19 February 2016 11: 01
          +5

          For an An-24 aircraft, the most

          Are you kidding me?

          A-050 SCREEN FEATURES
          Overall length, m - 34,8
          Width overall, m - 25,3
          Take-off weight, t - 54,0
          Draft, m - 1,3
          Airspeed, km / h - 350-450
          Range, km - to 5000
          Payload, t - 9
          Crew - 4
          Passenger capacity, people - 100
          Seaworthiness (wave height), m take-off / landing - 1,5

          Source: http://bastion-karpenko.ru/a-050/ MTC "BASTION" AVKarpenko

          This is twice as much as AN-24 can take. Characteristics of the An-24 to lay out? Given the fact that this EPA is marine. And he can walk and land where even the An-24 cannot.
          1. Santa Fe
            19 February 2016 11: 15
            -5
            Quote: Wedmak
            Overall length, m - 34,8
            Width overall, m - 25,3
            Take-off weight, t - 54,0

            Airbus A319 specifications

            dimensions
            Length (m) 33.8
            Wingspan (m) 34.1
            Max. take-off weight (kg) 64 000 - 75 500

            Flight range with max. download (km) 4 700 - 6 800
            Max. cruising speed (km / h) 820

            Specific fuel consumption (g / pass.-km) 20.5
            Hourly fuel consumption (kg) 2 600

            The passenger compartment
            Number of seats (economy) 150

            A320 Family Commercially Available since 1988
            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 19 February 2016 11: 31
              +3
              A320 Family Commercially Available

              So what?
              This family needs an airfield with good GDP, a bunch of equipment on the ground, including for boarding and boarding passengers, and so on. A A-050 is only a river / lake / ice and a small platform for loading / unloading. In areas of the north, tundra, coastal areas will give odds to any aircraft and helicopter.
              1. Alex_59
                Alex_59 19 February 2016 11: 55
                0
                Quote: Wedmak
                A A-050 is only a river / lake / ice and a small platform for loading / unloading. In areas of the north, tundra, coastal areas will give odds to any aircraft and helicopter.

                Why are you attached to these airfields? In any collective farm where there is a need for a long time all the airfields are. In Tarko-Sale, An-24 sits on the sand, buries, then it was pulled with a tractor, deployed, the shift workers sat down and flew back. Where do you live, do not be in the tundra, you need to transport 9 tons? Just in the swamp chtoli? Duck ECP in the swamp as it sits, the duck will remain there, they are drowning in the MT-LB tundra. There is nowhere to carry 9 tons. There, where you need to throw a couple of people for a long time, there are helipads, and there where 9 tons and more - airfields. And what equipment is there - SKP-9 is standing in the middle of the field, that's all the equipment.
                Quote: Wedmak
                Airbus A319 specifications

                You would still have the performance characteristics of a Boeing-747. And then A319 and this EPC? Airliner and ECP for fixed-wing airlines. Different technique. Comparison with the An-24 is more adequate.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 19 February 2016 12: 16
                  +1
                  Why are you attached to these airfields?

                  I was not attached, Oleg became attached, trying to compare A319 with ECP.
                  You would still have the performance characteristics of a Boeing-747.

                  Actually, I brought the performance characteristics of the EPC project in response to comparing it with An-24.
                  And you, having interfered in the conversation, mixed everything up - mine and Oleg’s words.
                  1. Alex_59
                    Alex_59 19 February 2016 12: 24
                    -2
                    Quote: Wedmak
                    Actually, I brought the performance characteristics of the EPC project in response to comparing it with An-24. And you, having interfered in the conversation, mixed everything up - mine and Oleg’s words.

                    Well, I’m silent. wink
            2. DrVintorez
              DrVintorez 19 February 2016 15: 10
              +1
              characteristics of the t-90.
              a lot of armor!
              RCC is not scary!
              rides!
          2. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 19 February 2016 14: 42
            0
            Quote: Wedmak
            A-050 SCREEN FEATURES

            This is what the developers promise to attract attention, only to promise does not mean to get married.
            Earlier it was reported that the marine ekranoplan A-050 will have...

            dated September 3, 2015.
            What he will show in tests is another conversation, another attempt at the current stage of technology development.
          3. tlauicol
            tlauicol 19 February 2016 14: 50
            -3
            Maybe he can, reaches, raises .. where is this EP? on paper ? the paper will endure. And what in fact? Pictures promises and a plastic toy?
        2. DrVintorez
          DrVintorez 19 February 2016 15: 08
          -2
          all? except for counting the number of engines and an approximate estimation of the sizes there is nothing more to say? digits must be loved! what if this unit will drag more than the An-24 with less fuel consumption and a greater range?
          1. tlauicol
            tlauicol 19 February 2016 18: 04
            -2
            "What if" is your argument? 80 years does not drag, but suddenly after 180 will drag, right?

            that's why MMM appear in our country (quote)
            1. DrVintorez
              DrVintorez 26 February 2016 18: 56
              0
              and "suddenly" appeared in my post on the same basis, on which such important characteristics as the number of engines and approximate dimensions are indicated. sorry to have to explain it.
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 19 February 2016 10: 26
        +2
        This is already a campaign ekranolet.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 19 February 2016 11: 05
          +2
          This is already a campaign ekranolet.

          The upper wing is very narrow and long, it will not be able to carry the entire apparatus at a height where the air is thin. But such an ekranoplan can certainly "jump" high.
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 19 February 2016 15: 31
            0
            For an airplane, the thinner and longer the wing, at higher altitudes - better.
  • efendia
    efendia 19 February 2016 10: 07
    +3
    Quote: MyVrach
    - Did you ask yourself such a question? Probably YES, and most likely the answer didn’t please, otherwise this question would have been closed and didn’t pop up in my head.

    And I already know what I did. Yes, of course, this is far from ES. But all are also quite interesting engineering structures and solutions. So, therefore, purely technical questions arise for the author, and not only for me, which he does not stubbornly answer, but only BLA-BLA-BLA.
  • Irbenwolf
    Irbenwolf 19 February 2016 10: 37
    +2
    He endured the first aggressive article and here is the second - an article. Perhaps in a nutshell I will comment ...

    I myself am not a fan of ekranoplanes - the appearance of these machines is too unusual, even in my coordinates it is repulsive. The author of the article to these devices from the position of aircraft, which in my opinion is too narrow and one-sided point of view. After all, you can look at the device from the point of view of the ships. These cars and fuels consume more and move MUCH slower. Even anticipating the objection of TONUT under unfavorable conditions (as well as planes fall).

    If you look at the little ball on which we live and recall the course of natural science for the 3rd grade, we recall that this very ball consists of 2/3 of the water. That is a space that is relatively relatively subjugated to man by more than half the planet. moreover, the speed of movement in this medium is very small.

    Let's take a look at the question from a relatively military point of view (and add to the heap the most probable enemy here). The surface area of ​​the ocean, which must be covered is very rather large. Yes, radar and other means of detection are undoubtedly present, but the means of hitting naval targets at this stage are designed mainly at speeds that the current classic ships are capable of developing. In the case of an ekranoplan, these means will become very relative, because the means that are designed for use in the aquatic environment will not work in principle, and the means for which the environment is air, are again mainly designed for speeds that modern ships develop.

    I note, I do not claim that the ekranoplanes are completely invulnerable. However, the considerable speed of movement of the device and the rather low height on the surface make it poorly noticeable in view of the fact that this is a gray zone of the sea / air radar. That is, a machine can strike an enemy aircraft carrier group quite suddenly and with good chances of success to leave the confrontation zone unscathed.

    Is it worth it for the operation to cost as the operation of several aircraft, which thanks to the current means of air defense are very likely to be hit even on approach. Probably yes.

    The aircraft carrier drags a whole group of ships with it across the ocean, whose task is only to COVER this cow and no one asks the question HOW MUCH it costs. Probably more expensive than the cost of operating one "Lunya".

    Any idea, even airships, does not become flawed on its own - there are objective technology flaws that make its use cheaper or cheaper.
  • su navy
    su navy 19 February 2016 10: 47
    +1
    Being a "goldfinch", in 1978. My older brother gave me a small-format book "Anti-submarine forces and assets of foreign fleets" (I don't remember the author), where one of the most promising means of PLC was considered just ECP, however, their speeds were considered at 250-300 knots. For some reason, the enemy's actual development of the EKP did not go, or they were silent about it.
  • tolancop
    tolancop 19 February 2016 11: 10
    +3
    Again he began to read without knowing the name of the author, only assuming. Even sports interest appeared - I guess or not ... I guessed.

    The author may be right in some ways, but his argumentation is often lame.

    For example, the
    "... The pilots of ekranoplanes do not have saving seconds to assess the situation and level the car. One awkward movement of the steering wheel - and the tail will break off from hitting the water at 400 km / h. , loss of control over the car, disaster, death ... "
    Horror, and only. But did the author hear anything about the automation that controls flights and eliminates gross pilots mistakes? Does the author know that a bunch of planes flies actually under the control of automation, in the event of a failure of which the plane is guaranteed to beat, since it was designed that way? I am sure that he heard and knows ...
    There is nothing to comment on about the tug that suddenly appears on the course. How much should one disrespect the reader, mistaking for frank (obscene), in order to present such "arguments"?
    The author again, as in the previous material, compares ECP with land aircraft. And again, he attributes the ECP to aircraft. Don't understand the difference? I am convinced that he understands, but continues to blow into his pipe ...

    And he constantly cites "Moon" and "Eaglet" as negative examples. The fact that the cars were built more than 30 years ago is on the side. The fact that in fact they did not come out of the trial operation stage is on the side. HE IS BAD, and that's it .... THE MILITARY IS NOT SUITABLE, and that's it. Airplanes are YES !!!
    Any technique from the ugly duckling, before turning into a white swan, goes a long evolutionary path. There were no exceptions, it was not !!! The author proposes to kill the duckling almost immediately, he is ugly, why regret it?
    1. Bashibuzuk
      Bashibuzuk 19 February 2016 11: 25
      +2
      One of the main advantages of EP, as Alekseev noted, was that the ekranoplane does not require active intervention in PILOTING ..... although even the word aerobatics is of little use here.
      Like a properly seated crew in the yale, you can do without a rudder, even the military commanders conducted competitions of this kind.
      The screen effect holds this colossus on its own. And you have to sit down, without any kooky there, just reduce the engine thrust.
      .
      It got tired ... the same thing, only in profile.
    2. alstr
      alstr 19 February 2016 13: 10
      +2
      I’ll add about the accidents. The well-known accident with Orlyonok (when the tail fell off) occurred due to the incorrectly selected alloy (it was too fragile). It was replaced on other machines with a more elastic one.
      For example. When testing the SU-24, 10 aircraft were lost. Killed 13 people.
      And how many people died on the Tu-104 while the test pilot (flew on a regular flight as the first pilot) did not describe in detail the behavior of the aircraft in a catastrophe (all died).
      http://topwar.ru/index.php?newsid=11641

      And it also seems to me that the reason for the closure of the ekranoplan project is the squabble between the designers. How many good planes have our "masters" ditched from aviation because they blocked the road to their offspring?

      Here is the same thing. Ustinov died and everyone went on the brakes.
  • Belousov
    Belousov 19 February 2016 11: 16
    +1
    There was Kaptsov's last article "The Uselessness of WIGs". Everything seemed to be more or less reasoned. Now it is just rudeness, undisguised bile, anger, outright joy at the failures of the Soviet program. I can only duplicate my previous comment:

    Belousov RU  February 17, 2016 07:55 | The uselessness of ekranoplanes


    Armored? No. Built in the USA? No. Does the US have a technological advantage in the industry? Even after the sale of Soviet developments, no. Conclusion - ekranoplans are catastrophically dangerous for all progressive mankind and they should be fixed. (O. Kaptsov)
    So this article should briefly look like.
  • sabakina
    sabakina 19 February 2016 11: 18
    +3
    Especially for Кaptsova Мonstra
    You know how to write articles, know how to look at 11 minutes. You are our genius ...
  • Bashibuzuk
    Bashibuzuk 19 February 2016 11: 19
    +5
    Well guys, this is not even funny.
    Type of spring exacerbation in psychos, or what?
    The same arguments, about the same thing.
    ....
    Apply the theory of aircraft to the EP ..... well, apply the theory of displacement ships to submarines when submerged - and it will become uncomfortable for someone.
    .
    Airplanes, damn it, even the most perfect ones, one figs are not able to go beyond the atmosphere, so BURAN - a thousand times better than all of them.
    But Buran - do not produce.
    And all business.
  • Taoist
    Taoist 19 February 2016 11: 32
    10
    regardless of the topic and the author of the topic ...

    With regret, I notice how the level of education and, in general, basic literacy has degraded. This is approximately the same picture as in many mass media people who do not have a military education but often did not even approach military service act as "military experts".
    People who do not even bother to read a school physics textbook often write about "design mistakes", let alone special disciplines such as strength materials, machine parts, gas dynamics, etc.
    As a result, the lack of knowledge is replaced by a "brisk pen" or "hanging tongue", the inability and unwillingness to understand the basics are completely replaced by "cartoons" and "Wikipedia" ...

    sad gentlemen, sad ...
    1. Santa Fe
      19 February 2016 12: 06
      0
      Quote: Taoist
      sad gentlemen, sad ...

      “Young people are accustomed to luxury, they are distinguished by bad manners, despise authorities, disrespect elders, children argue with adults, swallow food greedily, and torment teachers.”
      (Socrates, V century BC)
      1. Taoist
        Taoist 19 February 2016 12: 25
        +2
        I did not say a word about "bad manners" ... Manners and slang are the tenth thing ... But the lack of knowledge while maintaining ambition is alas a sad fact. Fortunately, now "googling" you can easily pass yourself off as a specialist ... In the days of Socrates, there was still no Internet ...
  • efendia
    efendia 19 February 2016 11: 45
    +3
    I wonder why the author does not scold vertical take-off aircraft? How many of them were beaten at the time, both with us and with them, and mostly not in combat conditions. Probably because the Americans continue to do them, but in Russia they turned off the program by passing on the developments to the Amers? Or does VTOL have very attractive specifications? That is why not discuss this topic - THE AMERICAN VERTICAL TAKEOFF PLANE AND ITS CHARACTERISTICS.
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 19 February 2016 11: 55
      +2
      Quote: efendia
      doesn't scold vertical take-off planes? How many of them were beaten at the time, both with us and with them, and mostly not in combat conditions. Probably because the Americans continue to make them

      ... it is very interesting that the well-known chorus of scolders, on one forum they are called "the rotten-toothed choir of kreaklov", carefully avoids this topic. Not otherwise "training manual" forbids ...
      laughing
      1. efendia
        efendia 19 February 2016 13: 02
        +3
        Yes, for some reason, the Russian-Soviet scholars have blinded sharply or do not want to discuss this topic.
        1. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 20 February 2016 15: 33
          +1
          Well why, here is the "stale work" of the same author
          http://topwar.ru/84332-neprostoe-sovpadenie-yak-141-protiv-f-35.html
          on page 2 of 22 of his 434 articles on specific topics alone
          On EP, the first one was on page 21 and with the same picture
          http://topwar.ru/11733-morskie-monstry-obzor-ekranoplanov.html
          almost 4 years ago in 2012 on the 25th of February
          apparently the income is stable.
        2. Generalissimo
          Generalissimo 20 February 2016 15: 51
          +1
          Pay attention to the last comment on the article 4 years ago (nothing changes)
          http://topwar.ru/11733-morskie-monstry-obzor-ekranoplanov.html

          MaslovElisei RU June 9, 2012 22:58 p.m.
          "... I do not like the attraction of facts" by the ears "..." - firstly only minuses are expressed, secondly, they are attracted by such ears ... It is not clear from what finger all this is sucked!
          Rostislav Alekseev would rise from the dead to kick his ears to such a scribble if he read all this!
    2. Wedmak
      Wedmak 19 February 2016 11: 58
      +1
      That's why not discuss this topic.

      Do not wake the beast. American by default is the coolest and most effective. Then yesterday the news flashed that our tiltrotor had built a small one (a UAV, a toy, in fact), so they immediately raised the question "we were scolding American sprit, but build yourself."
      1. Rus2012
        Rus2012 19 February 2016 14: 56
        +2
        Quote: Wedmak
        Do not wake the beast. American by default is the coolest and most effective. Then yesterday the news flashed that our tiltrotor had built a small one (a UAV, a toy, in fact), so they immediately raised the question "we were scolding American sprit, but build yourself."

        ... by the way, oh, about5 overstep or zrad - http://topru.org/35017/novosti-iz-mira-aviacii/
        The Pentagon abandoned unmanned bombers. In the United States, due to a reduction in the military budget, it is planned to curtail the UCLASS program for the development of attack drones and reconnaissance drones, which should have been based on aircraft carriers.
      2. efendia
        efendia 19 February 2016 16: 44
        +1
        Quote: Wedmak
        Do not wake the beast.

        judging by the lack of cons they are zombies - they can not be woken up.
  • Nikolay71
    Nikolay71 19 February 2016 11: 47
    -2
    The second represent a group of interests of serious people. Which everyone understands perfectly well, because they are trying to launch a knowingly ineffectual, therefore, a lengthy and expensive project, “sawing” with this a decent amount of funds.
    This is more like the truth.
  • AntonV
    AntonV 19 February 2016 11: 51
    +5
    Already the second article in 2 days!
    The meaning is the same, "everything is bad, where you climb with your ekranoplan".
    Hence the question for the author is trying to drive "his" point of view into our consciousness. We are not experts, we cannot confirm or deny all the pros and cons, we will not make the decision either. What can we do? We can, with the help of the author, raise a wave of the people's "fair" anger: They squander our people's goods for any flying-floating sh ** but.
    It seems to me that the author wants to use us "in the dark" in "their" interests.
    The ekranoplan has 2 useful properties, under certain conditions that cover its 25 shortcomings.
    1 speed higher than the ship.
    2 may molest an unprepared beach.
    Hence, its only possible use is amphibious assault.
    Now let's look at the situation from the other side.
    The articles come amid the success of our videoconferencing in Syria and the termination of relations with Turkey. If Turkey declares war on us and blocks the strait, Russia will have to answer with something, now we have nothing to answer. It is not an option to provide an airborne force grouping through Iran.
    Russia should be able to respond to even hypothetical threats. WIG - one of these answers. How much will we pay for it? The answer to this question is exactly the same as the question: How much are we willing to pay for the lives of our children?
    And the last question: Author, whose will you be?
    1. DrVintorez
      DrVintorez 19 February 2016 15: 17
      0
      Quote: AntonV
      The ekranoplan has 2 useful properties, under certain conditions that cover its 25 shortcomings.
      1 speed higher than the ship.
      2 may molest an unprepared beach.

      there is still a third. low altitude flight at high speed. it is trivial to compare the effectiveness of a missile strike (without calculating fuel, etc., only a missile strike!) with 25 heavy anti-ship missiles from the Tu-22m and from ekranoplanes. a priori, the Tu-22s will be detected earlier than the low-flying ekranoplan.
  • a-cola
    a-cola 19 February 2016 11: 58
    0
    The article has some ground for thought. There is a clear contradiction in the idea of ​​ekranoplanes. We increase the lifting force on the screen, but lose it due to the high mass of the structure and low speed in dense layers of the atmosphere. I’ve thought that if there was some physical advantage in such a method of movement as ekranoplanes, then we would see flocks of geese going through the Black Sea on the screen))). I represent such geese, with take-off wings folded along the body and spreading marching, the size of pigeons. A joke of course.
    1. Avenich
      Avenich 19 February 2016 12: 23
      +1
      Quote: a-cola
      then we would see flocks of geese crossing the Black Sea on the screen

      I don’t know about geese, an owl on the screen, I saw it above the snow. A bewitching sight I will report to you. When the glider model was launched in childhood, everyone was amazed why, right before the ground, the glider goes into implausible shallow planning.
    2. Kvazar
      Kvazar 19 February 2016 18: 13
      +1
      It’s hard to lift into the air.
      Its main advantage is speed and range. Unattainable for ships even without an air cushion (Northwind 55 knots range at a full speed of 400 km and there and there a difference of 5 and 4 times). It is physically impossible to destroy PCRom that goes at a speed of 500 km per hour physically. This requires the use of anti-aircraft missiles. Moreover, at such speeds and altitudes there is a big problem with detection.

      The main task of KM Lun was a quick approach to the line of launch and departure. If you need to go 500 km to the launch line and you can do it in an HOUR! The connection of the ships can take 30 miles (50km) during this time or you send the destroyer (8 hours full speed), the displacement of the enemy is 590km. Send a hovercraft (range is not enough, it means 45 knots and 6 hours of travel), the enemy’s displacement is 370 km.

      You can send an entire link of planes on each one rocket. Flights at super low altitudes in meters from the water aerobatics.
  • surrozh
    surrozh 19 February 2016 12: 04
    +3
    But the men did not know, they build and sell ECPs, and the earth spins regardless of the author’s position. Neither theoretical calculations, nor practical calculations - one verbal husk, which becomes more like appearances by Western media.
  • akm8226
    akm8226 19 February 2016 12: 12
    +5
    From the point of view of me, as an engineer, I am more inclined to trust Alekseev than the author of the article. A simple objection is that there are dozens of products that are working !! Rocket, Meteor - it's all him! I have no doubt that he would have brought the ekranoplane to mind, leave his power alone. Engineering thought worked for him - be healthy. Next - to argue, as some here, about the feasibility of building an ekranoplane, without having any specific data - an absurdity! Total - the whole article is wild nonsense!
  • Kir1984
    Kir1984 19 February 2016 12: 17
    -1
    Faster than a ship, but you still can’t get away from the missiles (minus).
    It can instantly land an amphibious assault (plus).
    Weak maneuverability (minus).
    But the storm seems to him not at all terrible (plus).
    Epic engines (plus)
    Epic engines with terrible fuel consumption and we must assume Pts are noisy and exhaust (minus), increased. noticeability
    Something like that.
    Let me correct if that.
    1. DrVintorez
      DrVintorez 19 February 2016 15: 18
      0
      and what rockets are you going to shoot it up with? RCC or BB?
      1. Kir1984
        Kir1984 24 February 2016 07: 32
        +1
        the devil knows him, to be honest, but if we consider him all the same as an aircraft, I don’t think that his defense against missiles would be better than any subsonic one. 500 km / h and what are its missile defense systems? if at all
        1. DrVintorez
          DrVintorez 26 February 2016 18: 53
          0
          he has protection against explosives. altitude: the water surface reflects radio waves very well, it’s difficult to capture a target such as an ekranoplan into the sight of an airborne radar. You can work out a gun, there are no questions. except for one condition: if there is no defensive armament. even a commonplace fodder plant, like the Tu-95/22, is capable of criticizing an attacking fighter in such a way that it will have few arguments.
  • RPG_
    RPG_ 19 February 2016 12: 22
    +3
    Too crudely written and in the current realities the ekranoplanes have no advantages, but this does not mean that upon reaching a certain level of development an ekranoplane with 4 engines will appear with luxurious cabins at a high speed and a mass of 50-60 thousand tons with acceptable economy, it will be quite capable of moving transatlantic liners .
    And aviation took 10 years to say, but how about numerous attempts to take off early, for example, Leonardo Davinci built aircraft, and the opportunity to take off from such devices appeared only after hundreds of years.

    Yes, at the moment, the development of ekranoplanes is not commercially profitable (as well as flights to the moon, Mars, and indeed anywhere), but this does not mean that this is not worth doing.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 19 February 2016 12: 32
      +1
      Quote: RPG_
      ekranoplan with 4 engines, luxurious cabins with high speed and a mass of 50-60 thousand tons with reasonable efficiency, it will be quite capable of moving transatlantic liners.

      They will not be able to provide neither the speed of the aircraft, nor the comfort of the liner. Useless thing.

      The same thing in the military sphere is something in between. Between ships and aircraft. And therefore just as useless
  • Selevc
    Selevc 19 February 2016 12: 44
    -2
    In the case of zkranoplana, as never before I agree with Kaptsov ... Design and creation of ekranoplans is one of the most grandiose scientific and technical errors of the 20th century ... The situation can be compared with the most famous scientific delusions - for example, with the long-term search for the mysterious "phlogiston" - a fiery substance over the discovery of which the best minds of Europe fought for almost two centuries, but it turned out that it does not exist in nature ... It just does not exist ...

    Ekranoplanes have a lot of flaws with dubious merits - this can be seen even with a cursory glance at the structure. Moreover, flying above water at very low altitudes is still relatively poorly studied and, most importantly, compared with usually aviation, there is not enough experience in piloting ekranoplanes ... But as you know, experience at the forefront of science and technology is given in blood - literally ...

    You can just marvel at the stubbornness of entire generations of engineers and some with very well-known surnames ... Well, then - the great also tend to make mistakes ...
    It seems to me that the ekranoplanes will sooner or later repeat the fate of the airships - the euphoria will pass and at best they will occupy their narrow specific niche or even completely leave advanced technological progress ...
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 19 February 2016 12: 52
      +2
      It seems to me that the ekranoplanes will sooner or later repeat the fate of the airships

      Yeah, the current-current was looking at new projects of airships. They are designing something, building technology demonstrators ... why? Sofa analysts have already said their word!
      http://aerocrat.livejournal.com/127673.html
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 19 February 2016 13: 17
        -4
        Quote: Wedmak
        They design something, build technology demonstrators ...

        That's it.
        That ekranoplans, that airships, they are like a Swiss knife. Cuts worse than scissors, cuts worse than saws. The only excuse is compactness.
    2. Kvazar
      Kvazar 19 February 2016 17: 56
      0
      Well, yes, 500km speed, 1500km range of 137 tons of load.
      Are there any analogs? Maybe borey? 1050 tons range 400 km at a speed of 100 km per hour. But 2 more missiles. If necessary, to the moon and 8 rockets will be crammed.

      The airships were bent because of the United States. They did not sell helium to anyone ... And still do not sell ...
  • Old_Python
    Old_Python 19 February 2016 12: 57
    0
    Oh, and I foolishly plusanul the previous article. He did not enter, so to speak, the author’s plan. request
    I confess, people ... crying
  • pRofF
    pRofF 19 February 2016 13: 52
    +1
    (grimacing)
    Kaptsova bears - and the farther, the stronger. He more and more reminds me of a snotty schoolboy with a complex of resentment against adults who perceive him because - to the extent - just because of his snotty. And the "schoolboy" becomes more and more satanic and tries to prove to the "grown-ups" what kind of man he is ...

    Tired already, to be honest. It is better to read about Ukraine than on the tenth circle the same thing.
  • qwert
    qwert 19 February 2016 14: 19
    +5
    “Yes, that is why the unfortunate Eaglet, with the same carrying capacity as the An-12, had 1,5 times less speed and half the flight range. It lifted only 20 tons, with a dry weight of its structure of 120 tons! For comparison: created in twenty years before him, An-12 lifted the same load with its own weight of only 36 tons. " And the Zeppelin, created before the An-12, lifted this load having a total weight of minus 24 tons. Here it is a miracle of technology.

    Oleg, for the first time disappointed.

    Let's take a look at Eaglet
    Fuel consumption of lifting NK-8:
    - maximum at take-off mode near the ground, kg / h 6195
    Operating time 90 sec.
    The number of engines is 2.
    Total burns on takeoff - 300 kg !!!!

    And then as I said
    Ekranoplan Orlyonok - carrying capacity 20 tons, fuel consumption per hour of flight 2014kg. Operating time of lifting engines no more than two minutes. Those. plus 300kg for the whole flight. Cruising speed 360 km / h.
    We count on 1500 km. 1500 / 360 * 2014 + 300 = 8691 kg of fuel
    In addition, it does not require a runway, it is less noticeable on radars, due to its low height. Landing. Smaller size, etc.
    An-12 aircraft - carrying capacity -21tn, fuel consumption per hour of flight 3420 kg. Cruising speed 570 km / h.
    We consider 1500 / 570 * 3420 = 8999 kg of fuel.
    Those. WIG at least no more gluttonous. The remaining claims can also be easily repulsed if you take a calculator. By the way, the cost of production of Eaglet, despite the mass is lower than that of An-12.
  • uskrabut
    uskrabut 19 February 2016 14: 29
    +1
    Conclusion: no need to build an ekranoplan, you need to build a flying saucer
  • TOR2
    TOR2 19 February 2016 14: 45
    +1
    Not so long ago, topics were discussed with the formation and supply of the Northern Group of Forces. Even equipment adapted to northern conditions is being developed. This is where the ekranoplanes come in handy. This is when something needs to be quickly taken away or taken away, and the northern rivers to ekranoplans to help. When we accumulate experience in the operation of such equipment, then its further development will be.
    1. alstr
      alstr 19 February 2016 15: 14
      0
      And not only rivers. Because in the north there is a fairly flat surface, and on land they also work fine. And they can jump obstacles in airplane mode.