Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+69
Mir
Lurk83
limb
kvs
ALAMO
Broski
Kiko
Backman
mnztr
Rodion_Romanovic
LMFS
dino00
Labrador
Hole
hoom
Luq man
wilhelm
miketheterrible
T-47
Big_Gazza
Benya
Singular_Transform
Isos
franco
KiloGolf
Giulio
Tsavo Lion
kopyo-21
GarryB
airstrike
Dima
JohninMK
Werewolf
eehnie
max steel
ult
artjomh
nastle77
Svyatoslavich
Cucumber Khan
d_taddei2
PapaDragon
GunshipDemocracy
Flanky
magnumcromagnon
Kyo
chicken
Stealthflanker
Cyberspec
Mike E
mack8
medo
flamming_python
calripson
GJ Flanker
Viktor
AlfaT8
runaway
George1
TheArmenian
Austin
Flyingdutchman
Corrosion
Hachimoto
KomissarBojanchev
SOC
TR1
Admin
sepheronx
73 posters

    Russian Naval Aviation: News

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 32206
    Points : 32734
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Wed Jul 28, 2021 8:51 am

    Well why would it have canards, if its a stealth aircraft?

    Wouldn't it be more stealthy to go for thrust-vectoring?

    Well first of all it depends on what the canards are made of, but at the end of the day you can go hard out super stealthy, or you can make a fighter plane that can manouver and get into a position to kill other planes and I suspect the Russian priority has been more the latter than the former... because the former is very very very expensive and not always guaranteed to be effective with their own anti stealth countermeasures of L band AESA radar and IR sensors and missiles.

    Looks like a fan song of Mig to me scratch
    They had to show something, so ... used some cardboard&glue on existing models Laughing

    It is consistent with what they have been saying all along... low cost lighter LMFS programme will start when Serial production of PAK FA begins... this is the first MAKS after serial production of PAK FA started... we should have been expecting this, but if you want to pretend this is a desperate act from MiG then go right ahead... obviously they have been doing no research or design or testing and just pulled these models from their asses when they saw Sukhoi aircraft being leaked in the days before MAKS started Rolling Eyes so overnight they came up with three designs and had models built and displayed them like they have been working on them for more than 10 seconds.

    Mig and Su are divisions of the same company, at the level above them will be a co-ordinating group who's objective will be to ensure that there is as little expensive duplication, especially in the various design bureaus, between their divisions as possible.

    This is true, but for there to be any point in having more than one division in that company designing planes then they all need to develop ideas and compete on every aircraft programme, except where there is a foreign customer that will pay for it all.

    The Checkmate is an LTS design and is not an LMFS aircraft programme aircraft.

    What we are seeing is what they want us to see, not what might be going on.

    What we are seeing is Sukhoi playing all sorts of reveal tricks and hype and going overboard to sell a design that they clearly need to sell lots of to make it a viable aircraft programme. What we are also seeing is MiG showing models of aircraft that it probably has contracts for with the Russian military so not so much information and not so showy because they wont be for export for a while anyway.

    I'm not one of the Mig bashers. I just don't see how an su 57 can be improved upon for a carrier application.

    I am not a Sukhoi basher either.... if you look back at my posts I think they should make a navalised version of the Su-57... but I also think for space efficiency and operational efficiency a carrier group would benefit from Russias best fighter, but also from a smaller lighter bomb truck, or in this case a missile truck that has shorter range but is smaller so you can carry more and when stealth is not an issue that it can carry a real shit ton of air to air missiles because that is its function for the navy.... an airborne rather powerful radar able to use its own missiles... fly 400km rapidly out to investigate a radar blip and determine if it is an F-15 attacking the ships or a civilian airliner and act appropriately.

    Having Su-33s only was not a good thing for the Kuznetsov because the Su-33s are single seat only so they needed Su-28s for landing and takeoff training... the Su-28 is not able to carry any weapons at all so is essentially only a training aircraft... the new MiG-29KR is fully multirole modern fighter than can be fitted out with one or two seats... you can swap between versions if you want... so the MiG does not just eliminate the need for the unarmed Su-28s but it also increases the number of aircraft the ship can carry because they are smaller and the LMFS will do the same on the newer bigger carriers.

    Sukhoi are talking about two seat Su-57s... I hope that includes naval models for carrier based operations.

    The metrics of success I see in these discussions are western marketing tripe.

    It is pretty clear that Sukhoi is better in this case in western type marketing... from the strip tease of the prototype... there was clearly no reason to roll that plane around the airfield except to get it noticed... and get it noticed in a skimpy black miniskirt.... sex sells... but MiG might be being shy because it already has the job in the same way Sukhoi got the job for the PAK FA programme.

    Russian carrier aviation is colossally narrow goal

    But the real problem is the focus... the land based LMFS is about low cost so in a sense a souped up LIFT jet trainer would be the closest you could get to such a thing, but for the navy what they essentially want is a next generation MiG-35 which is what that model clearly is, and of course both programmes will be requiring a jet fighter drone escort which is what that drone is... so it is all predictable and explained... but obviously if there are problems nothing is set in stone.

    The thing is that the MiG LMFS and the Sukhoi LTS are both going to be 5th gen super cheap super low cost fighters, so in many ways both are going to be attractive to export customers for which even 4th gen fighters are becoming too expensive...
    avatar
    hoom


    Posts : 2332
    Points : 2322
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  hoom Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:25 am

    A twin engined Sujkhoi LTS with Canards... yeah it is terrible...
    But it is not that.
    We've seen a twin engined Sukhoi LTS already: the Su-57.
    If Sukhoi was involved in this it'd look like a navalised Su-57 & that would be awesome.

    Instead it looks like a pathetic minimal upgrade to 1.44, well deserving of scorn.
    avatar
    limb


    Posts : 378
    Points : 388
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  limb Wed Jul 28, 2021 12:26 pm

    hoom wrote:
    The whole point of a single engined fighter it seems according to LMFS (the member, not the fighter project) was that a smaller lighter fighter will have better acceleration and manouver performance and just out turn and beat everything at close range in a knife fight...
    Not talking about any single engine thing, this was presented by MiG as 'new' naval fighter
    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 PIPK_MIG_MAKS-2021_01
    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 PIPK_MIG_MAKS-2021_02
    Its clearly based off MiG 1.44 minimally tarted up with some 'stealth' angles.

    Hey maybe its the mythical stealthy 1.42 that garry keeps harping on about(the supposed aircraft chinese copied), which if true means they didnt do any designing and just plopped a classified 90s design.
    avatar
    Lurk83


    Posts : 91
    Points : 95
    Join date : 2021-02-23

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Lurk83 Wed Jul 28, 2021 12:39 pm

    Apparently mig is starting a mig35 sized 5th gen vtol fighter for carriers?
    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 1395
    Points : 1399
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Mir Wed Jul 28, 2021 2:53 pm

    Lurk83 wrote:Apparently mig is starting a mig35 sized 5th gen vtol fighter for carriers?

    They should forget about VTOL as a "prime" version. It should be developed as an afterthought. These planes are heavy and very expensive.
    I can see UAV's taking over the VTOL role in the near future.

    GarryB likes this post

    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon


    Posts : 11878
    Points : 11944
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  PapaDragon Wed Jul 28, 2021 4:25 pm

    limb wrote:
    hoom wrote:...Its clearly based off MiG 1.44 minimally tarted up with some 'stealth' angles.

    Hey maybe its the mythical stealthy 1.42 that garry keeps harping on about(the supposed aircraft chinese copied), which if true means they didnt do any designing and just plopped a classified 90s design.

    Oh don't say that

    It's clear that in previous 2 decades they worked hard to make cockpit look like a complete joke

    Also there is no way in hell that the tail section on that thing is anywhere close to stealthy

    Backman
    Backman


    Posts : 915
    Points : 923
    Join date : 2020-11-11

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Backman Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:03 pm

    limb wrote:
    hoom wrote:
    The whole point of a single engined fighter it seems according to LMFS (the member, not the fighter project) was that a smaller lighter fighter will have better acceleration and manouver performance and just out turn and beat everything at close range in a knife fight...
    Not talking about any single engine thing, this was presented by MiG as 'new' naval fighter
    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 PIPK_MIG_MAKS-2021_01
    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 PIPK_MIG_MAKS-2021_02
    Its clearly based off MiG 1.44 minimally tarted up with some 'stealth' angles.

    Hey maybe its the mythical stealthy 1.42 that garry keeps harping on about(the supposed aircraft chinese copied), which if true means they didnt do any designing and just plopped a  classified 90s design.
    How did China manage to build a 5th gen fighter in 5-6 years less time than the F-22, 35 and su 57 ? Supposedly ? I think not. 

    I prefer the way Mig does its IRST compared to how Sukhoi does theirs. The Sukhoi way isnt a problem but perception is worth something. It just doesn't fit the lines of the aircraft compared to the way Mig has it on the bottom

    GarryB likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 32206
    Points : 32734
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Thu Jul 29, 2021 7:08 am

    Instead it looks like a pathetic minimal upgrade to 1.44, well deserving of scorn.

    You clearly miss the irony that the Su-57 looks rather more like the 1.44 than it looks like the Berkut S.37 FSW candidate from Sukhoi...

    Where has the FSW gone?

    Hey maybe its the mythical stealthy 1.42 that garry keeps harping on about(the supposed aircraft chinese copied), which if true means they didnt do any designing and just plopped a classified 90s design.

    The laws of physics have not changed much... the fact that their design actually looks rather like the Sukhoi LTS except with more common undernose intake and a single engine makes such comments amusing... if they want to make a VSTOL version of the LTS they can't keep the air intakes where they are because a front mounted lift fan would need to go there and they would need conventional side intakes like the ones shown on the MiG design.

    Apparently mig is starting a mig35 sized 5th gen vtol fighter for carriers?

    If they do it is to please some, but this model is the carrier deck model that is just about right.

    They should forget about VTOL as a "prime" version. It should be developed as an afterthought. These planes are heavy and very expensive.

    Totally agree... VSTOL is hard enough to get right on its own, but trying to also make it a 5th gen affordable aircraft is a bridge too far.

    Also there is no way in hell that the tail section on that thing is anywhere close to stealthy

    Take away an engine and it is not much different from the Su-75...

    How did China manage to build a 5th gen fighter in 5-6 years less time than the F-22, 35 and su 57 ? Supposedly ? I think not.

    They could borrow the external shape, but they would then have to spend very long periods of testing to establish its performance envelope because they didn't design it so they wont know what it is. If on the other hand they paid MiG to help them with a quick and easy stealth design they could manufacture then that would make sense and explain the speed.

    It is one thing to come up with the best design, but if you can't make it to the accuracy required to actually achieve stealth then it is a bit of a waste of time.

    George1
    George1


    Posts : 17251
    Points : 17762
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  George1 Sun Sep 19, 2021 3:07 am

    Training of young deck pilots of the Naval Aviation of the Russian Navy

    Original taken from colleague samoletchik in Training of young deck pilots. This year at the airfield in Novofedorovka [Saki in Crimea] 7 young pilots and one instructor of 279 KIAP [279th separate shipborne fighter aviation regiment of the Northern Fleet aviation] are being trained! I can't remember anything like that.

    Usually 2-3, and then 7 at once!

    Program on Su-33, but test flights on UTGshke [Su-25UTG]
    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Su-2511

    [Su-33 with tail number] 60. Some pilots made their first hooks on it!
    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 16233610
    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 16264010

    https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4399206.html

    GarryB, dino00, zepia, LMFS, Hole and Mir like this post

    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 8463
    Points : 8447
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Isos Tue Sep 28, 2021 10:45 pm

    Pretty rare event, il-38 using dumb bombs. Not really successful.


    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 1395
    Points : 1399
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Mir Wed Sep 29, 2021 12:01 am

    Yes I think the IL-38 should rather do what it was designed for - maritime patrol and anti-submarine warfare. Leave the bombing to the professionals! Laughing

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 8463
    Points : 8447
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Isos Wed Sep 29, 2021 2:25 am

    Mir wrote:Yes I think the IL-38 should rather do what it was designed for - maritime patrol and anti-submarine warfare. Leave the bombing to the professionals! Laughing

    Nuclear bombs can correct this 200m error Very Happy .
    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 1395
    Points : 1399
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Mir Wed Sep 29, 2021 9:20 am

    ...and instantly vaporize the poor Il-38 Smile
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 32206
    Points : 32734
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Wed Sep 29, 2021 10:58 am

    Most of the depth charges it uses are guided so that might not even be a miss against a submarine....
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 8463
    Points : 8447
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Isos Wed Sep 29, 2021 11:18 am

    Mir wrote:...and instantly vaporize the poor Il-38 Smile  

    Just launch it from higher at full speed like tu-95. Actually they have nuclear deapth charges as standard weapon against US subs.
    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 1395
    Points : 1399
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Mir Wed Sep 29, 2021 4:28 pm

    I don't think the standard dept charge would be nuclear though? That would be like a last resort type to use.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon


    Posts : 11878
    Points : 11944
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  PapaDragon Wed Sep 29, 2021 10:52 pm

    Mir wrote:...and instantly vaporize the poor Il-38 Smile  

    It's a sacrifice I would be willing to make because awesomeness Cool

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 32206
    Points : 32734
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Thu Sep 30, 2021 11:13 am

    Obviously with nuclear depth charges they don't explode when they hit the water surface... it takes several tens of seconds for it to submerge to the depth it is designed to detonate at... during which period the aircraft is leaving the area.

    The video of the exercise gives us no indication which direction the aircraft is approaching from... the drone taking the video will not be in the way... the videos of the helicopter attacks were taken from the side as shown by the strafing gun and rocket attacks started short of the target and hit the ground at various points across the target... very few ships are round.

    For all we know what we saw was a calculated drop of a depth charge in the path of a moving submarine that would get to the target subs depth and therefore explode as the submarine reached that position.

    Maybe they identified the target as being a British warship in Russian waters and that was the first warning shot to get them to leave Russian waters... Twisted Evil
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 8463
    Points : 8447
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Isos Thu Sep 30, 2021 5:47 pm

    Proposed il-114 with Kasatka-EP system for multipurpose patrol aircraft :

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 45785d10

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 D9dd1b10

    Proposed il-114 with Kasatka-EP for patrol reconaissance aircraft:

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 08f8b710

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Bb358910

    Proposed il-114 with Kasatka-EP system for AEW:

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 56a7af10

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 A0704a10

    Proposed il-114 with Kasatka-EP system for EW:

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 C2783c10

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 161bb310

    Proposed il-114 with Kasataka-EP for geophysical monitoring aircraft :

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Ebbdaa10

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 7c0e2810

    More details here:

    https://radar-mms.com/en/product/kompleksy-aviatsionnogo-bazirovaniya/poiskovo-pritselnyy-kompleks-kasatka/modifikatsii-ppk-kasatka/

    GarryB, franco, flamming_python, dino00, Big_Gazza, LMFS, Hole and Mir like this post

    avatar
    owais.usmani


    Posts : 991
    Points : 989
    Join date : 2019-03-27
    Age : 35

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  owais.usmani Thu Sep 30, 2021 6:57 pm

    ^^That is a proposal from 2018, haven't got anywhere till now:



    Better to use a jet aircraft in this capacity instead of a turboprop, like superjet or Tu-214 or even MS-21.
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 8463
    Points : 8447
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Isos Thu Sep 30, 2021 7:23 pm

    Actually someone said here jet aircraft aren't better for low level flight. That's why they previously used il-38 and tu-142.

    They fly low to see rhe ships better and detect submarines with their magnetic sensors.

    It is mainly for export so it is still available. With the growing tensions in the south china sea and mediteranean, they could sell some soon as most of the countries can't afford more expensive system like A-50, P-8 or tu-214 based systems.

    Mir likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 32206
    Points : 32734
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Fri Oct 01, 2021 8:05 am

    Hasn't gotten anywhere because they are waiting for engines and serial production before they start talking about expensive variants...

    Most of those designs look rather good and as mentioned for flying at lower altitudes at lower speeds turboprops are often better than jets which work better at altitude.

    Short range regional air transport planes are dominated by turboprops like the ATR-72 and An-24/26...
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 8463
    Points : 8447
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Isos Fri Oct 01, 2021 11:51 am

    The EW is a must have plane. It multiply by a great factor your success during attacks against air defences or ships with stand off jamming.

    The other are good but you can probably have better plateforms for either longer leggs or more powerfull radars.

    The AEW would be good against f-15 and su-27 type aircraft or track tomahawks but against modern stealthier jets with long range missiles it would be more of a target than anything else. Even bigger AWACS have 100-300km range against stealthy shapped fighters. New missiles have 200-400km ranges.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 32206
    Points : 32734
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Sat Oct 02, 2021 5:02 am

    They have perfected modern digital AESA long wave radars... it is not essential that any radar fitted to an aircraft needs to be a short wave model only... two large arrays down the fuselage sides of the aircraft could form the large antennas needed for detecting any airborne target from thousands of kms...

    Such aircraft are often more interested in close in to the shore where low level coverage might not be perfect... just filling in gaps in low level areas around targets... this aircraft might be able to deal with 300 targets, which means ground based radar can focus on higher flying targets or just different targets to monitor... they are also rather more mobile than the Russian land based IADS network radars so for instance in Syria you could have a few flying around so you never need to turn your S-300s or S-400s on anything but listening modes so you can move those around but still get accurate target.

    These are gap fillers and if anything will replace Ka-31/35 AEW helicopters in coastal roles...

    I just like the fact that these new designs and new roles means larger production runs of new aircraft which means better production runs and more users finding problems and getting solutions so they mature faster and the average age of aircraft in service drops a few decades.

    Hole likes this post

    franco
    franco


    Posts : 4736
    Points : 4768
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  franco Mon Oct 18, 2021 2:01 pm

    Timid hope. Does the Russian naval aviation have a future?

    The article offered to the reader is heavy in its texture. And it must be emphasized right away that now, after the change in the leadership of the Naval Aviation of the Navy, positive trends have emerged in the real solution of its problems.

    However, the article is about problems, and its meaning is to objectively reveal them, not to let them be swept under the plinth (under the pretext of “no money,” “some have responsibility, and others have the possibilities and resources to solve them,” “these problems are now yours, so you and… sweep them up so that they are not (visible) ”). In essence and meaning - to achieve (squeeze) their resolution and elimination.

    The prospects and capabilities of Naval Aviation are a topic for a separate article.

    Taking into account the specifics of the topic, word-for-word citation is widely used, and, as a rule, not just "Internet resources", but publications that have all the appropriate permissions and approvals from the authorized official bodies.

    Previously, the author has repeatedly touched upon the problems of Naval Aviation, since 2007 - articles “Aviation of the Navy. Was. There is? Will?" and the articles of 2018 in the "Independent Military Review" "The Fiery Sky of the Russian Navy" :

    ... the problems of our naval aviation are not really technical, but organizational. Let's start with the fact that the research organization of naval aviation is included not in the structure of the Navy, but in the VKS (and the relationship between "ship" and "aviation" organizations is an extremely painful issue), and ending with questions of banal funding. The obvious priority of the Navy is submarines (in relation to which there are many questions on various kinds of problems and the effectiveness of spending). A much lower priority is surface ships, and aviation is simply in the role of a stepdaughter.

    However, all this in no way relieves the responsibility of the relevant officials of the Naval Aviation itself.

    "Blind Killer Whale"


    The Kasatka search and targeting complex is a large-scale project that involves the integration of all kinds of elements of modern equipment on board any carrier: an airplane, a helicopter, an ekranoplan, a drone. The composition of the Kasatka's equipment is impressive: radar, magnetometric, electro-optical, radio-hydroacoustic and other systems, the data from which is processed by an information and control system based on a modern computing platform, "the executive director of Radar MMS told TASS during MAKS-2021 Ivan Antsev.

    “The software of the Kasatka complex is built according to the most modern principles using artificial intelligence and neuroanalytics. Thanks to the use of artificial intelligence, the Kasatka PPK has incorporated technologies that provide self-learning, ”Antsev said. According to him, "Kasatka" regularly undergoes modernization, during which the complex integrates modern technologies in the field of information processing, graphics, cartography, as well as new equipment.

    Below the author will show the real cost of all this neuroanalytics, "artificial intelligence" and similar advertising dregs.

    I would like to emphasize that on the basis of advertising materials from the developer itself (in principle, we will not give a number of harsh comments on the Kasatka testing network).

    At MAKS-2021, at the Radar-MMS stand, an advertising video of the Kasatka complex (photo on the right side of the figure) was played with some digital parameters that fully characterize the real “value” (in quotes) and the inability of Kasatka to actually solve problems by destination.

    So, the interval of setting the radio-hydroacoustic buoys RSB-16MK of the intercepting barrier is 2 s (screen from the advertising video "Radar-MMS"). With an airplane speed of about 500 km / h, these 2 s also mean a linear interval of buoy placement of about ... 270 m. That is, with an overlap of 0.75, the detection range of a single RGAB turns out to be about 200 m!

    As they say - "Repin's picture sailed."

    Those who wish can recalculate the theoretical reserve of the RGAB on the plane with the "Kasatka" for its search performance, but there is little practical sense in this - in view of the obvious scantiness of this figure.

    After that, it is appropriate to look at the public procurement website and inquire about the volume and cost of contracts for the RSL-16MK buoys (with their shown negligible effectiveness as part of the "newest" (in quotes) search and sighting system offered by the Navy).

    As a matter of fact, all this is well known to specialists and has been discussed for a long time both in the special and open press, for example, in the previously mentioned article in NVO:

    The extreme obsolescence of the PPS is the main drawback of our anti-submarine aviation. At the same time, we still consider hydroacoustic buoys (RGAB) as separate (single) hydroacoustic stations. Our “field of buoys” is a set of single receivers, while in the West, already in the 1980s, the transition to joint complex processing of signals from the RGAB field as from a single antenna began, that is, RGAB became a “sensor”. This technical solution has dramatically increased the search performance of anti-submarine aircraft. With the advent of low-frequency RGAB-emitters (LFA) in the early 1990s, detection of the lowest-noise submarines was ensured.

    This raises logical questions - why do we have such PPPs "wrong"? And why are Western planes and helicopters working very effectively on our submarines (including the latest projects)?

    And the answer to these questions will be in the spirit of the times - the head organization on the subject in the Russian Federation was appointed (by the former leadership of Naval Aviation through the relevant structures of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation) an office that had never been involved in such work (that is, simply with zero experience and the same scientific and technical backlog ).

    July 6, 2015. At the naval show in St. Petersburg, the operation of the search and sighting complex "Kasatka" in real time from the Il-114 was demonstrated for the first time, "Vzglyad" reports with reference to the director of "NPP Radar MMS" Ivan Antsev. “The Killer Whale search and sighting complex was presented at the salon, which we showed for the first time fully in action. Our IL-114 laboratory aircraft during demonstration flights via a broadband channel in real time transmitted information to the ground, directly to our stand, ”said the director.

    Apparently, according to Mr. Antsev, "fully in action" for the search complex - this is "the connection is transmitting something", the screens "show something": take the fleet of the complex (and most importantly - pay)!

    Ability to solve problems as intended?

    And what is it?

    In any case, it is obvious from these statements that the head of the enterprise himself, to put it mildly, does not quite understand. Which, however, is not surprising, since the chief designer of the complex himself (who does not have any specialized education or experience in the subject) has similar problems!

    During the military-technical forum "Army-2015", an extremely interesting and useful round table "Marine underwater weapons (MPS): realities and prospects" was held ( link).

    List of reports (in the order of presentation):
    ... “Magnetometric guidance systems for naval underwater weapons in conditions of massive hydraulic resistance. Theory and Results ",

    with whom the actively lobbied magnetometer and (concurrently) chief designer (as of 2015) of the Kasatka complex spoke (and was represented by persons from the Naval Aviation).

    There, representatives of the Maritime Aviation "Radar-MMS" who were present (at the round table discussed, among other things, the issues of Naval Aviation, more on this below) was declared as "the lead organization on the subject."

    When discussing magnetometric topics directly at the round table, there was a piquant moment when representatives of the Navy and the chief designer himself first stated that it was “impossible to counteract and imitate” magnetometric systems, and an hour later, when discussing the problem of high-speed submarine missiles, “the need to finance simulators for full-scale development of magnetometric guidance channels (MMK) ”. To the author's subsequent question about how this statement correlates with the postulate expressed an hour before these statements about the alleged "technical impossibility" of such an imitation, the answer from the persons of the Navy and the respected chief designer was silence.

    Of course, imitation of a magnetic field is not only possible, but has already been implemented for a long time. In fact, we have a play on words: SGPD (means of hydroacoustic counteraction) - "hydroacoustic", and MMK - "magnetic", in which the fact that some SGPD also have means of imitation of a magnetic field is completely omitted. Moreover, such cheating (in this particular case, this word accurately characterizes what was happening) does not occur in some lobbies or smoking rooms, but takes place in the highest official documents of promising topics! Unfortunately, the situation is such that today it is not only possible to lie, but, as a rule, it is possible with impunity, including in “high documents” and the highest “decision-makers”.

    Returning to the work on search and targeting systems (PPS) of anti-submarine and patrol complexes, there is an opinion that the problem of the patrol aviation of the Navy is allegedly "in the plane", but "there are a lot of those who want to develop the complex" (one of the literal statements on a specialized forum on the Internet) ... Let's call a spade a spade: in this case, we are talking about the mass of those who want to “master the money” for teaching staff, but there are big doubts about the ability of individuals and organizations that have never done this to actually perform the work.

    So, in the case of Kasatka, the magnetometer became the chief designer of the search (that is, first of all, the hydroacoustic complex, and secondly - the radar). With a corresponding result. With equal "success" (in quotation marks), one could appoint a cook or a stove-maker.

    In this whole situation, the funny thing is that, having already received harsh criticism of everything that was created in Kasatka, and the numbers in advertising, the corresponding "especially effective managers" of "Radar-MMS" solved the problem, so to speak, on a "high methodological level ”- removing the numbers in the new version of the advertising video (with the same plot).

    A two-second dumping of buoys on it is not just a verdict on the Kasatka complex, it is just a shame and disgrace to its developers and leaders of the organization, who for all these years did not bother to figure out what a modern teaching staff is (and exposing this ignorance to the public) !

    At the same time, it should be noted that, while harshly criticizing the management of Radar-MMS in this particular case, it is necessary to note and emphasize their active work in various areas of innovation.

    Yes, they were not always successful. Yes, sometimes necessary and relevant topics were thrown at the moment when the "critical point" had already been passed, and it was already "starting to work out." Yes, sometimes they were engaged in frankly unfounded fantasies. However, the very fact of their active work for the future (of which there are certainly serious positive results) stands out noticeably in a positive way against the background of our defense industry (and industry), and the question of translating all this positive groundwork into a practical (and financial) plane is the need an objective and critical analysis of all the work of the company - both successes and failures, with a subsequent change in technical policy.

    And where did the fleet look, the leadership of the Naval Aviation?

    And the answer will be where her ex-chief came after his dismissal from the RF Armed Forces (and where he carefully prepared for himself a "soft chair" for many years) ...

    Hanging "Novella"

    A logical question arises: what about the really only organization in the Russian Federation - TsNPO "Leninets" and its complex "Novella" (export "Sea Serpent")?

    Alas, a photo of the Indian Navy, because our Navy does not need aircraft with missiles. As a matter of fact, he did not even need the Novella itself (for the head and promising one was the Kasatka from Radar-MMS). From the article "Anti-submarine aviation of the Russian Navy: simulated targets and blanks instead of weapons" :

    Moreover, even a relatively modern (and quite efficient) "Novella" went to the fleet "castrated" - without all the prescribed nomenclature of new RSAB.

    It would be appropriate to quote the following quote here ( direct link to the pdf file on the website of the RF Ministry of Defense ):

    On March 26, 2018, the Center began special flight tests of the Il-38N aircraft to remove the restrictions of the State Special Test Act.
    ... the generation of targeting data in the training station and the issuance of signals for the control system for the preparation and dropping of search and destruction means, according to information from the RGS. In addition, in the course of the flights, a comprehensive assessment of 1НВ1 (radar) products was carried out; 1НВ2 (RGS); НВ5 (ТТС) REC "Novella P-38", as well as ... According to preliminary estimates, all test flights are credited.

    So, 2018. State tests of the Novella itself were completed back in the 2000s, the first production aircraft of the Navy completed its modernization in 2014 (Indian, with the Sea Serpent - in 2005). To put it mildly, we were not in a hurry to "lift the restriction" of the Act of State Special Tests (there is no talk about new buoys any more), which, given the passionate love for Kasatka advertising brochures, is not surprising.

    Yes, in a number of aspects, Novella is outdated, but it is a really working, concretely effective (with a number of reservations) complex, which was made by experienced specialists and an organization that alone had the necessary experience and potential in the Russian Federation.

    Moreover, the complex was successful in the foreign market (Il-38SD aircraft of the Indian Navy), despite the fact that, at the suggestion of some bureaucrats, it was simply delivered in a slaughtered form (from the appearance shown and announced at salons and exhibitions). Moreover, there was even a question about the modernization of Tu-142ME aircraft of the Indian Navy under the Sea Serpent, which, unfortunately, was not implemented to a large extent due to the past leadership and a number of specialists of Tupolev PJSC (not always, unfortunately, who understood that "the problems are solved not by the glider, but by the complex").

    The consequence of this was that the Russian Tu-142M did not receive a full-fledged modernization (and a number of statements in the media about Hephaestus and similar advertising dregs from the point of view of the real tasks of these aviation complexes cause only a sad smile).

    Long song "Apatita"

    The topic of the prospective patrol complex "Apatit" has been hanging in the air for a long time . Link .

    ... the idea of ​​creating a patrol complex for the Navy on the basis of the Tu-214 aircraft is far from new and goes back to the mid-1990s. Then the patrol aircraft based on the Tu-214 won the competition against the Tu-170PRLTs aircraft and the A-42 amphibious aircraft developed by the Beriev Design Bureau. Based on the results of this competition, the creation of a patrol complex based on the Tu-214 aircraft was determined by government decree No. 61-10 of February 19, 1996.

    Today we have a situation of rapidly dwindling resource of the Il-38 and Tu-142M aircraft and, in fact, we are on the verge of simply losing the patrol and anti-submarine aircraft of the Navy.

    Helicopter failure "Kema"

    The senior instructor-navigator of the research department of the combat use of the naval aviation branches 859 of the Center for combat use, Major Stasik I.M. ( link, pdf ):

    Since 2016, a massive supply of modernized Ka-27M helicopters has begun to the naval aviation of the Navy. The modernized machine is equipped with modern systems for processing and transmitting information over secure channels in real time. The updated helicopter in the field of modern radio electronics is ahead of similar helicopters of our "potential adversaries".
    The basis for the armament of the Ka-27M anti-submarine helicopter is the radar command-tactical system developed by the JSC "Corporation" Fazotron-NIIR " reconnaissance and anti-submarine aircraft weapons.

    Well, let's deal with the next “unparalleled wunderwaffe”, allegedly “ahead of the helicopters of“ potential adversaries ”in the field of modern electronics.

    The first thing to note is that initially the Ka-27 helicopter had the "Octopus" search and sighting system developed by the Kiev Research Institute of Hydraulic Instruments (there were two centers for anti-submarine aviation work in the USSR - in Leningrad ("Leninets") and in Kiev). Yes, the system is imperfect from the height of today, so it was thrown out from the helicopter.

    Is it logical?

    How to say. Taking into account the fact that instead of the old PPS, a new one was never found, and instead of it two crutches were installed - RGA (radio-hydroacoustic equipment) "Kema" and KTS (command-tactical system) with a radar and a lowered GAS (OGAS).

    Details on Kema and its analysis are based on the materials on it demonstrated at the Army-2020 forum at the stand of the Naval Aviation of the Navy ( here ).

    What can you say to this?

    There are really no analogues: in terms of rudimentarity and antiquity of this "search crutch" Ka-27M. "Kema" in essence is not even "Berkut" (PPS Il-38 developed in the 60s), but in fact a rollback to "Baku" (Be-12 developed in the late 50s)!

    Only passive non-directional buoys simply exclude the possibility of using modern illumination modes, and the parameters of the positioning accuracy of the RGAB are extremely low and do not provide for the formation of an effective spatial antenna array. In fact, we have a "set of single detectors", but with digital processing and recording in separate channels. Moreover, "Kema" does not provide the development of the point of aiming of the weapon (the consequences of this - below).

    It is striking that the key features of modern Western teaching staff have been openly written since the beginning of the 90s, but “foreigners are not our decree”.

    From the article “Anti-submarine defense: ships against submarines. Hydroacoustics " :

    And if Western helicopters are capable of providing new OGAS with multi-position joint work with BUGAS and aviation (RGAB), then even the newest ships of Project 22350 have an upgraded Ka-27M helicopter, on which essentially the same high-frequency OGAS Ros remained (only digital and on a new element base), as on the Soviet Ka-27 helicopter of the 80s, which has absolutely unsatisfactory performance characteristics and is incapable of either working together with the Minotaur or "illuminating" the RGAB field. Simply because they work in different frequency ranges.

    Multi-position distributed operating modes of the modern Western OGAS HELRAS:

    Timid hope. Does the Russian naval aviation have a future?

    Obviously, Ros-VM is not capable of anything like that, it just catastrophically lags behind in characteristics and has a short detection range for submarines.

    There is an opinion that the Ka-27M is a "temporary solution", but "very soon" we will have "grace" with the "newest helicopter" "Lamprey".

    Therefore upgrading Ka-27M went on "budget to the embodiment, as the tank T-72." Yes, to a large extent this is so (for example, this is why the radar did not have a phased array, but a simple old scheme with a "mirror" antenna was used). However, the T-72B3 tank, with all its shortcomings, has real capabilities to destroy targets, but the Ka-27M has very big problems with this (more on that below).

    Now for the Lamprey.


    The Russian Helicopters holding has coordinated the terms of reference with suppliers for the project of the promising sea-going helicopter Minoga. Andrey Boginsky, General Director of the Russian Helicopters holding, told TASS at MAKS-2021.
    “Now we are working on the development of a set of design documentation, which will be created by 2023. Last year we received advances and brought them to the suppliers. All technical specifications have also been agreed with each of the suppliers, ”he said.
    Earlier, within the framework of the Army-2020 forum, the Russian Helicopters holding signed a development contract with the Ministry of Defense for the promising deck-based Minoga helicopter.

    So, "terms of reference have been agreed," "advances have been issued."

    Excuse me, but for what ?!

    For our objectively, with a scientific and technical basis for the complex, the situation is such that even the TTZ cannot be written on it, there are too many unclear questions that need to be dealt with based on the results of serious and deep tests and special research projects!

    Actually, the "assessment of the situation" from "academic and applied science":

    A. E. Borodin (Far Eastern Branch of the Section of Applied Problems under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences) "Methods for monitoring the underwater situation by advanced aircraft systems (APLK) in a naval network-centric war" ( link, pdf ) :

    ... the solution is to introduce the "distributed detection" method into domestic CGS, which allows to fully realize the technical advantages of aviation platforms ... A necessary condition for creating a CGS based on the proposed method is the organization of complex fundamental and applied research aimed at creating the necessary scientific and practical groundwork. An obstacle to the introduction of the method of spatial detection in the nuclear submarine is the fragmented nature of the existing scientific and technical groundwork.

    I emphasize once again that there is simply no groundwork for R&D on the new complex, there are separate experiments, but objectively: just in order to obtain a high-quality product (search complex) in a reasonable and fairly short time, special studies and tests are needed. And getting involved in OCD without them is another gamble, the result of which will be obviously crooked and oblique.

    I repeat - "the problem is solved not by the glider (of the aircraft), but by the complex"!

    "Shooting milk from wooden machine guns" - about anti-submarine weapons of the Navy

    The problem of complete disregard by our Naval Aviation of the practical use of weapons has already been raised - "Anti-submarine aviation of the Russian Navy: simulated targets and blanks instead of weapons" :

    In order not to "spoil the statistics", the Naval Aviation went to a complete refusal to use new practical torpedoes (with homing systems on and their real guidance at target submarines), replacing them with throwing torpedo shells.

    Anti-submarine weapons of naval aviation are torpedoes, aviation submarine missiles (APR), gravitational underwater shells: corrected anti-submarine aerial bombs (GPS KAB PL) and conventional anti-submarine aerial bombs.

    Taking into account the timing of weapons of the 1st and 2nd generations, only the UMGT-1 torpedo with a water-activated silver-zinc battery and a powerful low-frequency homing system (CLS) "Waterfall" (alas, having extremely low noise immunity) remained in the naval aviation. The service life of the UMGT-1 torpedoes is obviously near-limiting, and the efficiency in the conditions of using the SGPD is extremely low. The use of UMGT-1 is impossible in areas with shallow depths and in the Baltic Sea (due to insufficient salinity for the use of the battery).

    That is, the basis of the ammunition is the APR-2, which, although it has an outdated SSN, but with good noise immunity. However, the APR-2 has an extremely short cruising range, and, accordingly, very high requirements for target designation accuracy. Her service life is also close to the limit.

    Here it is necessary to emphasize once again that the Naval Aviation of the Navy does not have any statistics on the practical use of UMGT-1 and APR-2. All cases of their practical application are only in the form of periodic industrial tests and the only case of using UMGT-1 in the early 90s at the Pacific Fleet on the initiative of the Anti-Submarine Weapons Directorate of the Navy. In fact, the price of such “combat training” (in quotes) is similar to “voice shooting from wooden machine guns” in the infantry. Of course, replacing the actual firing from a machine gun with a tree and a "tra-ta-ta" voice - and in a nightmare not a single land commander will dream, so high-ranking of them should still ask how the fleet (with its aviation) got to "Life like this" and the complete discrediting of their combat training?

    At the same time, taking into account the extremely low noise immunity of the UMGT-1 for a real war, only APRs are of value, however, the question of accurate target designation arises sharply on them. This question is quite solvable, already resolved: in the old teaching staff (the times of the USSR) and new ones - the development of experienced specialists ("Novella").

    However, for the same Ka-27M, everything turns out very badly. "Kema" does not develop an aiming point, that is, an attack based on the data of passive buoys is impossible. What remains is the OGAS - with the development of firing data of the KTS based on its data. The problem here is that the work of the OGAS is not secretive, and since there are no idiots on the submarines, they perfectly understand what will happen after the close operation of the OGAS (with a short range). Accordingly - change of course and evasion ... After which the APR simply does not have enough range in order to compensate for the submarine's evasion.

    There are similar problems with GPS.

    In general, it was an ingenious invention of the times of the USSR, and the key factor here was the noise immunity factor: if ordinary airborne torpedoes confidently went to the SGPD, having extremely small chances of a real defeat of submarines in combat conditions, then the GPS with high-frequency and vertically oriented SSNs had almost absolute noise immunity, and accordingly - a high probability of hitting a target in real combat conditions (counteraction).

    However, it is not just the 21st century, the first quarter of it is already coming to an end, and taking this into account, the GPS themselves look quite antique. The solution, which for a long time not just hung in the air, but was worked out in detail - equipping the GPS with a small-sized propulsive complex with a sharp increase in performance characteristics and efficiency, was never implemented.

    Classic anti-submarine bombs, despite the extremely low probability of hitting conventional submarines in the ocean, still remain relevant for shallow depths, hitting submarines lying on the ground and targets such as subversive midget submarines and underwater means of movement of saboteurs.

    So, UMGT-1 and APR-2, which were the basis of anti-submarine aircraft ammunition, are not just outdated, but simply at the limit of their service life.

    The Tactical Missile Armament Corporation (KTRV) has begun mass production of the latest APR-3ME anti-submarine missiles, KTRV General Director Boris Obnosov said in an interview with TASS at the 10th International Maritime Defense Show (IMDS-2021). According to the head of KTRV, work is underway to create new models of aircraft anti-submarine torpedoes.

    “In the future, to replace the APR-3ME, it is planned to develop a small-sized aircraft anti-submarine torpedo, significantly superior to the existing models in terms of cruising range,” Obnosov said.

    Apparently, things are not going very well with underwater weapons with KTRV, if torture to the APR-3M series is presented in the media as an achievement.

    In essence, the APR-3M is actually transferred to the modern technological base of the APR-3 developed in the 70s - 80s (with a slight increase in characteristics). In the same 90s, much more advanced APRs were developed in the "Region", however, due to a lack of funds, their development was then discontinued in favor of the openly budget APR-3M.

    APR-3M (right) and dropping by a helicopter of the PLA Navy APR-3E (mid-90s)

    However, the main problem of APR-3M is test statistics.

    From the article “The price of torpedo crew. To ensure the combat capability of the Navy, the cost of testing and firing is important ”, the former head of the torpedo operation department of the 28th Research Institute of the Navy L. Bozin:

    A serious drawback in the development of torpedoes in the USSR is the small volume of tests, as a result of which this type of weapon was produced with serious flaws. The massive use of torpedoes during combat training was essentially a continuation of state tests. In the first five to six years of the development of this weapon by the fleet , serious shortcomings are discovered and various modifications are made, including to achieve the technical characteristics declared during the development. There are a lot of examples of this.

    Difficult conditions of the application environment categorically require large statistics of torpedo firing, including in situations close to real combat ...

    Example: during the testing period of the StingRay mod.1 torpedo, 150 firings were carried out. However, it should be borne in mind that during the development of the first modification of the StingRay mod.0, about 500 tests were carried out. Reducing this number of firing for mod.1 allowed the system for collecting and recording data of all firing and the implementation on its basis of a "dry range" for preliminary testing of new CLO solutions based on these statistics.

    Mr. Obnosov should have heard on this issue not the so-called “effective managers” of the “Region”, but the chief designer of the APR-3M. This is a very experienced specialist at a respectable age with a quiet voice, whose tough questions managers try very hard not to hear. I believe that after clarifying the situation with the chief designer himself, BV Obnosov's public statements would have been much more accurate and careful.

    Here it will be appropriate to recall again the article of 2015 "Marine Underwater Weapons (MPS): Realities and Prospects" :

    ... a critical problem is people, at the level of Chief Designers, who are able to pull on themselves new topics and directions. In fact, the topic of new work is objectively determined by the presence of the Chief Designer or Scientific Director of the research work, who is really able to do the Case. There is an extremely limited, literally piece number of such people, often these people are of a great age, and it is critically necessary not only to "launch the topic", but to do it in such a way that talented youth can be connected to it and teach it from the "bison". If we fail to do this, we will lose the "bison", and with them, we have touched off in a number of areas.

    And the result ( link ):

    01/10/2020. When I wrote this in 2015, I meant absolutely specific people. One of them, Arseny Fyodorovich Myandin, passed away on January 7 ... Not just a person left, not just a “part of history", A huge scientific and technical backlog was covered (to a large extent - still of the Soviet era). For "Region" this is, to put it mildly, "knockdown" ... You can forget about the promising "superPackage" (an ultra-small product of which should have a speed of more than 65 knots and a range of about 5 km (the idea of ​​the product and the models for using the complex is mine, but the calculations for the power module, speed and range - Arseny Fedorovich, still 2012), and about a lot of other things ... One feeling - seething rage on the faces, strangling promising topics until their meaning is lost due to the death of key developers ...

    Due to the fact that the declared characteristics (for an ultra-small product) have raised doubts among a number of specialists, I will specially cite an excerpt from A.F.Myandin's rough calculations:


    The last time it was reported to the decision of the management of the Corporation "TRV" and inclusion in the list of promising jobs in the fall of 2015, but was buried by "effective managers" of the "Region" (the phrase of one of them - "we have so much money now that we do not need anything" ).

    Now, after the death of Myandin, we can forget about it, because “starting with what is left” is at least 10 years of hard work with a mass of failures and failures (as it was in reality in recent history on this topic), and today no one of the customers will not allow “to pass this road again”.

    Commentary (ibid.) Of an official with the DOGOZ of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation:

    Another of the "bison" KB-1 Research Institute PGM - NPO "Region" left. Very, very sad news. The blessed memory of AF Myandin ... You know, it seems to me that for the current "Region" this is not a knockdown - as developers, they have been in a deep knockout for 10 years already. And the degradation of the "Region" as a developer is, unfortunately, a natural result of the choice made in favor of the development of the "Region" mainly as a serial enterprise ... In the abbreviation GNPP, the letter N is superfluous. Sad.

    So (while maintaining the existing technical policy of the "Region" and the Concern "TRV"), all that remains is to "eat up" the old groundwork created in the time of E.S.Shakhidzhanov (for more details, "Anti-torpedoes. We are still ahead, but they are already overtaking us" ), and Accordingly, for our aviation, the only option remains - the maximum forcing of work on the "packet" torpedo (based on experience and the groundwork for the "Answer" topic). This is the only real option, everything else is manilovism.

    A lively discussion on this topic developed during the round table. GB Tikhonov, a representative of KMPO Gidropribor JSC, voiced a proposal to carry out a “short R&D” project to develop an aircraft torpedo based on the MGT-1 small torpedo (product 294), a warhead of a broadband mine complex. It is categorically impossible to agree with this proposal, since the new small-sized torpedo of the "Packet" complex has significantly higher performance characteristics, and it is advisable to consider it as a single basic model of a small-sized torpedo of the Navy, with the provision of application from ships, submarines, aviation and as a PLUR warhead. At the same time, for this, it is necessary to introduce telecontrol and anti-torpedo mode on the modernized version of this torpedo (originally built into it in terms of power reserve).

    Well, in fact, the Naval Aviation itself should very carefully figure out what kind of cat in a poke she received (and "is there a cat in that bag at all").
    The practice of "testing weapons" (specially taken in quotation marks) today is the following link :

    On the basis of the "Decision on the procedure for conducting a flight and sea experiment of qualification tests of KAB PL products" approved by the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy on September 10, 2014 and in accordance with the "Program of qualification tests of KAB PL products" at sea ranges of the Black Sea Fleet in the period of October 16–31, 2014 qualification tests of KAB PL were carried out. The program of control flight tests provided for the dropping of five corrected bombs of the KAB submarine of practical execution ... The pilot ships provided the installation of a marker buoy, a hydroacoustic receiver, direction finding and buoying of the splashdown points of products, search, sprinkling and lifting of products from the ground.
    Based on the materials of video recording of the processes of dropping products from a helicopter, it was established that the products of the KAB PL on the air section of the trajectory worked normally, after splashdown they emitted probing signals and separated from the float in accordance with the specified operating mode. The terms of reference for flight and sea experiments under the Zagon-2 qualification testing program with the participation of specialists from our Center were completed in full and with high quality.

    "All is well, lovely marquise"?

    In the acts - yes.

    But in fact, very bad questions arise: why were such tests carried out without a real target submarine?

    Yes, at the time of testing there were no running boats in the Black Sea Fleet, but they were in other fleets! The above case is a clear example of outright hack, both with programs and test methods, and simply with the attitude to weapons in our anti-submarine aviation, and here the most stringent measures are needed to bring to life and realize the measure of responsibility and military duty for the task entrusted.

    At a minimum, we need extensive testing of all (I emphasize, all: both old and new) weapons of the naval aviation in the conditions of their actual use (including modern SGPD, shallow depths, etc.). Today our naval aviation is practically unarmed.

    PS

    Calling a spade a spade, all of the above means the actual non-combat capability of the anti-submarine aviation of the Navy.

    The point of this article is a public and harsh exposing of acute problems. For their subsequent solution and raking the Augean stables. In the current military-political situation, we simply have no right to be weak.

    These facts are only part of the picture of the grave state of the Russian Naval Aviation.

    At the same time, I repeat, there are positive changes, and in some cases, very dramatic.

    There is also an understanding that "it is impossible to continue living and serving like this." For example, Lieutenant Colonel V.P. Tyurkin, head of the research department (operation and application of hydroacoustics), PPI and PLC (MA Navy) ( link, pdf):

    … There is a need to urgently create completely new aviation complexes that meet modern requirements. To do this, it is necessary ... to adopt a new aviation patrol complex for solving: search tasks, anti-submarine tasks, shock and special tasks, and air reconnaissance tasks. As a platform for the complex, provide for both aircraft and helicopter carriers. Each of them should have a modern onboard multifunctional radio-electronic complex, built on the principle of "open architecture" in a modular design. The most important property of the complex should be information and technical compatibility with ship, coastal and aviation systems of reconnaissance, detection and target designation, thus the information and control system should be integrated into a single information space of the Navy , while having modern certified software and high-speed information exchange channels; the hydroacoustic subsystem should function both on new passive and active multistatic principles of operation, which ensure prompt detection of the underwater situation in large water areas, and on simpler, but previously well-tested spectral and energy methods.

    There are opportunities for solving the problems of Naval Aviation (even taking into account the difficult financial situation).

    There is still time.

    While there is, albeit a little.

    The question is in the actions of specific officials.

    The author is not familiar with them, but the fact that they decided to take responsibility for the Naval Aviation at a very difficult moment for it characterizes them positively.

    We wish them success in this.

    https://topwar-ru.translate.goog/188071-robkaja-nadezhda-est-li-buduschee-u-otechestvennoj-morskoj-aviacii.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=nui

    Sponsored content


    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 24 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Jan 22, 2022 6:27 am