Russian Military Aviation

The main bays are 4.5m long, 0.7m deep and 1.2m wide. The side bays are 4m long, 0.5m deep and 0.8m wide. The main bay allows carriage of 2xmeteor and 2xASRAAM in staggard manner. The two side bays can carry 2xMeteor each. I have kept the design LO and not gone for VLO to provide for 2xASRAAM on wingtips. The wingtips of the design can be easily replaced to achieve VLO design on line flying.

Is it possible to eject wing tip pylons after missile is fired?
Bringing Lo to VLO in flight?
 
The main bays are 4.5m long, 0.7m deep and 1.2m wide. The side bays are 4m long, 0.5m deep and 0.8m wide. The main bay allows carriage of 2xmeteor and 2xASRAAM in staggard manner. The two side bays can carry 2xMeteor each. I have kept the design LO and not gone for VLO to provide for 2xASRAAM on wingtips. The wingtips of the design can be easily replaced to achieve VLO design on line flying.

I thought you planned on having 4 independent smaller side bays rather than 2. But having 2 does save up on all that extra weight.

Will 4.5m give you enough clearance for placing the K-77M in tandem?
 
I thought you planned on having 4 independent smaller side bays rather than 2. But having 2 does save up on all that extra weight.

Will 4.5m give you enough clearance for placing the K-77M in tandem?
I can increase the main bay length by 20cms very easily. But anything beyond that will make things very difficult. However reducing the sidebay length will make things very simple for me from undercart retraction consideration.
 
I can increase the main bay length by 20cms very easily. But anything beyond that will make things very difficult. However reducing the sidebay length will make things very simple for me from undercart retraction consideration.
Why don't you pitch a design for TEDBF? We already have a clear idea about all the requirements and constraints.
 
Why don't you pitch a design for TEDBF? We already have a clear idea about all the requirements and constraints.
I have met everyone within the establishment. They liked my idea and also used them but refused to help. Now I need to make these designs myself to prove my ideas. Once I do that, every idiot who had spoken ill of me and also DRDO and ADA will know their place under the sun.
 
I can increase the main bay length by 20cms very easily. But anything beyond that will make things very difficult. However reducing the sidebay length will make things very simple for me from undercart retraction consideration.

Modifying the side bays will be much more intersting. Even without touching the main bays, you can increase the missile load to 8 missiles. Or even the standard 4 BVRs and 2 WVRs in the side bays, leaving the main bays for heavier stuff.
 
Modifying the side bays will be much more intersting. Even without touching the main bays, you can increase the missile load to 8 missiles. Or even the standard 4 BVRs and 2 WVRs in the side bays, leaving the main bays for heavier stuff.
The problem with side bays is with the missile placed higher. It will hit the loads on inner most pylon while being ejected. So it will be ejected at a steeper angle compared to the lower missile. This change in the angle of ejection requires higher clearance between the two side bay missiles. Otherwise I can easily fit three of them in each side bay.
 
The problem with side bays is with the missile placed higher. It will hit the loads on inner most pylon while being ejected. So it will be ejected at a steeper angle compared to the lower missile. This change in the angle of ejection requires higher clearance between the two side bay missiles. Otherwise I can easily fit three of them in each side bay.

What about PAK FA style side bays?
 
What about PAK FA style side bays?
They add to the drag and also RCS. I am of the opinion that we must fire an IR WVRAAM only in LOBL mode. In a large force merge, LOAL mode can result in shooting down own aircraft as well. For LOBL mode it is impostant that the seeker is locked before firing and for that its head must be exposed to look for targets. Such thing will not be available if IR WVRAAMs are carried in internal bays. Moreover, there is always a chance for snap shoot. You sometimes pick up a target very late and in such situations even fraction of a second is crucial. A missile carried externally can be fired in a much shorter time compared to the one carried in the internal bays for obvious reasons.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: _Anonymous_
They add to the drag and also RCS. I am of the opinion that we must fire an IR WVRAAM only in LOBL mode. In a large force merge, LOAL mode can result in shooting down own aircraft as well. For LOBL mode it is impostant that the seeker is locked before firing and for that its head must be exposed to look for targets. Such thing will not be available if IR WVRAAMs are carried in internal bays. Moreover, there is always a chance for snap shoot. You sometimes pick up a target very late and in such situations even fraction of a second is crucial. A missile carried externally can be fired in a much shorter time compared to the one carried in the internal bays for obvious reasons.
Missile can discriminate unless stupid.
 
Thank you! Many forumers around the world forgot about the interest of LOBL vs LOAL (specially F-35 fanboys community)
This comment worries me. If the IRST of your missile can't discriminate between friendly and enemy aircraft, then can the IRST on the Rafale?
which missile is this? Is it BVRAAM? what is its range?
It's actually just an R-77 part way through build.
Would be interesting if that turns out to be the K-77M.


The below picture shows the production line of R-77 which was taken in 2007.

Inside Russia’s Vympel Missile Factory
A short version of the R-77 was called a new air-to-air missile but may be just a stage in the production cycle.



1575542826973.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: randomradio
A few more years: why Russian drones lag behind

After several years of delays, NATO began to form an Alliance Ground Surveillance (AGS) surveillance system, part of which are strategic unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) of the RQ-4 Global Hawk Block 40, equipped with a new generation multi-platform radar with an active MP- phased array RTIP

AGS will become a means of round-the-clock monitoring of land and water surface in real time. It is believed that it will provide greater detail intelligence data than satellites.

Similar technologies are of undoubted interest for other countries of the world, striving to create similar unmanned systems with both reconnaissance and strike functions.

It is worth noting that, since the return of Crimea to Russia, the Russian military has discovered reconnaissance drones more than a thousand times near the peninsula.

“Since March 2014 - after the reunification of Crimea with Russia - intelligence activities at our southern borders have been steadily increasing. The average number of reconnaissance aircraft detected by the air defense duty personnel in this region for the year is about 250 air targets, ”said Major General Nikolai Gostev , commander of the 4th Air Force and Air Defense Army of the Southern Military District, in an interview with Krasnaya Zvezda newspaper.

Mostly recorded flights of American reconnaissance aircraft EP-ZE Aries and P-8A Poseidon, as well as strategic reconnaissance unmanned aerial vehicles RQ-4B Global Hawk, he added.

As for Russia, work in the sphere of drones of the middle and heavy class is currently being carried out in several directions.

So, in April 2019, the Russian airborne forces first used Orion-E type unmanned aerial vehicles when attacking terrorist units in the Syrian province of Hama.

Initially, Orion was developed as a reconnaissance vehicle of long flight duration. In 2017, it was demonstrated at the MAKS air show and the Army forum. During the development of the device, it was decided to give shock functions. Prior to this, on the equipment of the Armed Forces of Russia (unlike the US Armed Forces, Israel, China), there were simply no shock UAVs.

The wingspan of the Orion-E is 16 meters, the length of the vehicle is 8 meters, and the UAV is capable of carrying up to four air-to-ground missiles. The cruising speed of Orion is in the range from 120 to 200 km / h. The practical ceiling is 7500 meters. The maximum flight duration is 24 hours, the radius of combat use is up to 300 km.

An integrated reconnaissance-strike version is being considered for arming units of the Russian aerospace forces after gaining experience in combat use in Syria.

As for heavy strategic unmanned aerial vehicles such as Global Hawk, the number of countries capable of creating such systems is relatively small. At present, Russia is among them.

Denis Fedutinov , editor-in-chief of Unmanned Aviation magazine, told Gazeta.ru that the Russian Ministry of Defense once set the task of creating an unmanned complex capable of performing the entire spectrum of reconnaissance missions using optical, radio engineering, and radar equipment.

The development of UAVs with such characteristics, called "Altair" (the theme "Altius"), was conducted by OKB im. Simonov (formerly called OKB "Falcon") since 2011. Research work cost more than 1 billion rubles.

Then, a contract was signed with the developers for development work with a total value of about 3.6 billion rubles. Three stages completed and accepted by the customer for this work were paid in the amount of about 3 billion rubles.

“However, then OKB im. Simonova faced with a number of difficulties, both technical and organizational plan. They, in turn, entailed financial problems - there were not enough funds not only for work, but also for settlements with contractors for already completed work, ”said Denis Fedutinov.

According to the interlocutor of the publication, already at the third stage, the contractor had certain difficulties that threatened the implementation of the project. And the delivery of the fourth stage - factory tests, which was supposed to be completed at the end of 2017, was completely disrupted by the Design Bureau. Simonova.

According to informed sources, at about the same time it became clear that additional funding was needed for the project. According to some estimates, about 1 billion rubles were required.

“The Russian military department was, to put it mildly, in a difficult situation. It was obvious that, despite the significant costs involved, the high-altitude UAV project with a long flight, which had high hopes, was in jeopardy, ”said Denis Fedutinov.

According to the expert, the list of companies capable and ready to take up the continuation of unfinished work turned out to be relatively small at that stage. Among them was Ural Civil Aviation Plant JSC, which is part of the United Engine Corporation owned by Rostec.

“In 2012, UZGA began licensed assembly of Israeli Searcher Mk II unmanned systems (developed in the 1990s) under the designation Outpost,” added Konstantin Makienko, deputy director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies .

Initially, kits shipped from Israel were assembled, and later localization of production began. These complexes were actively used in Syria. The complex includes three aircraft and a control station. The UAV mass is 436 kg, it is capable of reconnaissance from a height of 5 km for 16 hours. The production of BirdEye 400 unmanned systems has also been launched all from the same Israeli concern Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), which in Russia received the name "Outpost".

In 2019, the Ministry of Defense received the Outpost version, assembled exclusively from domestic components and with original technical solutions. Earlier it was reported that the testing of the shock version of the device ("Outpost-M") is being completed. For this, the complex will receive radar, optical systems and guided bombs.

However, everything was far from simple.

“The leadership of Tatarstan expressed a desire to leave this work and the corresponding acquired competencies in the republic. As a result of negotiations between the parties involved in the rescue of the Altair project, a compromise decision was made that the new contractor would also implement it in Tatarstan. Based on these requirements, UZGA in the city of Kazan created a separate division of the Ural enterprise, ”said Fedutinov.

Deputy Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation Alexei Krivoruchko at that time noted that it was expected that the car would be lifted into the air already in 2019. Then the indicated period seemed to many too optimistic.

The staff of the Kazan unit were employed abbreviated in OKB im. Simonova key specialists.

“The Kazan division of the Ural enterprise completely“ stood on the wing ”and continues to work on creating an improved version of the heavy UAV,” added the editor-in-chief of Unmanned Aviation magazine.

Glider UAV "Altair", said Fedutinov, is made according to the normal aerodynamic design with a highly located wing of a large scope and a V-shaped plumage. The take-off weight of the device, according to reports, reaches 7.5 tons, wingspan - 28.5 m. The UAV used a three-leg retractable retractable wheeled chassis.

On the wing consoles of the device are two diesel engines A03 / V12 turbocharged and liquid cooled with a capacity of 500 liters. from. each. In the design of UAVs, composite materials are widely used.

According to available data, the UAV should be able to fly up to two days. The range of action is not limited to the direct visibility communication channel in connection with the use of the satellite channel as well.

As a payload on the Altair UAV, an optical-specific reconnaissance station and a side-view radar can be used. Presumably, the device is equipped with a gyrostabilized optoelectronic surveillance system (GES) consisting of a thermal imaging channel with an uncooled detector and high-resolution cameras of the visible range mounted on a gyro-stabilized turntable. The radar is probably located in the central part of the fuselage. The total mass of the payload in this case may exceed a ton.

UAV "Altair" was finalized, the operability of all its systems was checked, a cycle of ground tests was conducted. On August 16, 2019, the updated Altair, as Krivoruchko predicted, took to the sky and completed its first flight. It took 32 minutes at an altitude of 800 m in fully automatic mode at one of the test aerodromes.

“Now Altair UAV is actively undergoing flight tests. Meanwhile, a lot of work still remains to be done to debug the systems and fine-tune the UAV to the characteristics specified by the customer, ”the editor-in-chief of Unmanned Aviation magazine emphasized.

“However, questions are raised about the use of A03 diesel engines by the German company Red Aircraft GmbH on Altair,” added Denis Fedutinov.

Firstly, according to some information, questions arose for them on a number of parameters, including the resource. Secondly, the use of non-localized foreign engines in UAVs, which is supposed to be used for strategic intelligence, has obvious risks due to political circumstances.

“A possible solution to this problem could be the transition to a fifth-generation turboshaft engine VK-800S, the mass production of which can be deployed at the production facilities of UZGA. However, this approach will lead to many necessary changes in the design of the UAV, ”said Denis Fedutinov.

“Thus, we can assume that for the successful completion of this project and the fulfillment of existing customer requirements, it will take several more years,” Denis Fedutinov believes.
 
They add to the drag and also RCS. I am of the opinion that we must fire an IR WVRAAM only in LOBL mode. In a large force merge, LOAL mode can result in shooting down own aircraft as well. For LOBL mode it is impostant that the seeker is locked before firing and for that its head must be exposed to look for targets. Such thing will not be available if IR WVRAAMs are carried in internal bays. Moreover, there is always a chance for snap shoot. You sometimes pick up a target very late and in such situations even fraction of a second is crucial. A missile carried externally can be fired in a much shorter time compared to the one carried in the internal bays for obvious reasons.

Thank you! Many forumers around the world forgot about the interest of LOBL vs LOAL (specially F-35 fanboys community)

That's actually why the Chinese came up with this.
a7a45bbcgw1e2z5uzszvwg1.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: vstol Jockey
Vijainder K Thakur (@vkthakur) Tweeted:
Russia has finally mastered moncrystalline turbine blade technology, a technology that India continues to covet, which so far has been mastered by the US, France, UK, Germany, Russia & China only. Please correct me if I am wrong. В Рыбинске открыли новое производство лопаток газотурбинных двигателей ( )

We have it as well. But without Kaveri or an alternate program, they will just sit around uselessly. The other countries named are using it in their engines.

I hope HAL will be the first to use it in their engine.

Anyway, monocrystalline blades simply means single crystal blades.