For more than six months there had been heavy fighting on land, at sea and in the air. Soviet soldiers and creators of domestic weapons - designers of tanks, guns, ships and aircraft - accumulated front-line experience. The year 1942 began...
Our military equipment, created in the last pre-war years, passed the most difficult test. In quantitative terms, it was still not enough. Many factories were evacuated to the east. It took time to get them up to full power. Every machine, every detail was registered. The Supreme Commander-in-Chief personally distributed aircraft between the fronts.
In these harsh days, the designers did not stop for a minute the work on further improving the machines, only all improvements were now made taking into account the immutable law: the quantitative production of aircraft should in no case decrease. So in the design bureau of A. S. Yakovlev, after the Yak-1, the Yak-7, Yak-7B appeared. Yak-7V and finally Yak-9.
The main differences between the new fighter and previous models were: a wing with all-metal duralumin spars, increased fuel tank capacity and a lowered fuselage garrot, which gave the pilot visibility from the rear. The Yak-9 received its baptism of fire in the skies of Stalingrad in the fall of 1942.
In the Design Bureau of General Designer A. S. Yakovlev, the Yak-9 fighter, which took part in battles with the Nazis, is carefully preserved as a priceless relic. The commander of the Yakov regiment, Major Ivan Kleshchev, fought in this machine with 14 red stars on board - the number of German planes shot down. A. S. Yakovlev remembers him and other glorious Soviet pilots with great respect and warmth in his book “The Purpose of Life.”
The new fighter served as the basis for the creation of a whole family of aircraft. Thus, one of the modifications was the heavy Yak-9T, and the word “heavy” did not refer to the vehicle, but determined the caliber of the gun, which was installed in the camber of the V-shaped engine and provided extraordinary firepower. Suffice it to say that a shell fired from this 37 mm cannon could penetrate 48 mm tank armor, and there was no need to even talk about aircraft.
Externally, the Yak-9T differed from other vehicles by having the cockpit canopy moved 400 mm back. Moreover, the weight of the new aircraft has remained virtually unchanged, and for a fighter this is a matter of paramount importance. Subsequently, the Yak-9T was equipped with a 45 mm gun, and then a 57 mm gun.
Another direction of work on the Yak-9 aircraft was to increase the flight range. The need for this became greater the faster the advance of the Soviet troops developed. The lack of prepared airfields in the newly liberated territory, in close proximity to the front line, which was continuously shifting to the west, left our troops without air cover, since the fighters could not stay in the combat area for long enough, spending most of the fuel flying from the airfield and back.
The Yak-9D fighter most fully met the requirements of the time, on which it was possible, with minimal modifications, to increase the fuel supply from 300 to 480 kg, and the range from 1000 to 1400 km.
On the modified Yak-9DD aircraft, the fuel supply even reached 630 kg. In the control flight, test pilot P. Ya. Fedrovi flew 2300 km without landing, which confirmed the calculations of the designers. Moreover, the entire increase in range was obtained without the use of external external fuel tanks, as was usually practiced, that is, without deteriorating the aerodynamics of the fighter.
These aircraft showed their best side during an unprecedented flight to Italy over Nazi-occupied territory. Here, in the city of Bari, which had just been liberated by the Allies, the Yak-9DD division was based. It provided escort for American "Flying Fortress" and "Liberator" heavy bombers on shuttle flights landing at an airfield near Poltava and bombing oil refineries in occupied Romania. The division's aircraft supported the combat operations of the Yugoslav partisans from the air, carrying out up to 180 sorties per day.
The Yak-9 B fighter-bomber had an ability that was not quite usual for this type of aircraft - to lift up to 400 kg of bombs on an internal sling! In the bomb bay behind the pilot's cabin it was possible to place four 100 kg caliber bombs or cassettes with small PTAB anti-tank bombs of 1.5-2.5 kg each for a total of up to 128 pieces. Flights of the experimental aircraft were carried out in March 1944, and in the fall the Yak-9B, already as part of an entire aviation division, underwent military tests on the 3rd Belorussian Front.
Around the same time, the aircraft creators received an excellent gift from the chief designer of aircraft engines, V. Ya. Klimov - the VK-107A engine. The new engine developed take-off power of 1650 hp. With. versus 1250 on the M-105PF with a slight increase in weight and practically the same dimensions. The installation of the VK-107A on the Yaks gave a significant increase in flight speed: up to 720 km/h on the Yak-3 and 700 km/h on the Yak-9U. Soviet pilots ended the war on these “yaks” and Lavochkin’s newest La-7 aircraft.
In total, over 16,700 Yak-9s of various modifications were produced - it was the most produced fighter of the Great Patriotic War.
Design and description of the Yak-9 fighter
The fuselage is a welded truss structure made of steel pipes, covered with duralumin sheet in the front part and fabric in the rear part. Large removable panels on both sides provide good access to the internal equipment.
The canopy of the pilot's cabin is of a typical Yak design, with a sliding middle part and a faceted front bubble.
The wing is one-piece, two-spar design. Wing profile CLARK UN 15% at the root and 8% at the tip of the wing.
The ailerons have a metal frame and fabric covering. Below in the middle part of the wing, a landing flap is suspended from a ramrod loop.
The tail is cantilevered, all-metal. Elevator and steering wheels with fabric covering.
The power plant consists of a V-shaped liquid-cooled engine M-105PF with a power of 1250 hp. With. with variable pitch propeller VISH-61B or VISH-105. The engine and propeller are controlled from the pilot's cabin using cable rods in a tubular sheath.
Fuel is stored in tested fuel tanks installed in the wing root between the spars. To prevent a fire or explosion of the tanks, cooled exhaust gases from the engine are used, which fill the space vacated by fuel (in different versions of the aircraft, the number and capacity of fuel tanks were different).
The oil cooling radiator was initially located in the forward part of the fuselage under the engine, and on later models - in the root part of the wing. Below the fuselage, behind the trailing edge of the wing, there was a water radiator to cool the engine.
gear is retractable, with a tail wheel. The main struts fold along the wingspan towards the fuselage, the tail spike is retracted back during flight.
The system for retracting and releasing the landing gear, landing flap and wheel brakes is powered by compressed air. There is an emergency system.
The Yak-9's equipment is the minimum required for a front-line fighter. The instrument panel is mounted on shock absorbers. The rest of the cabin equipment is on the side and onboard consoles. On the starboard side, above the console, there is an oxygen device. For communication in the air - VHF transceiver radio station type RSI-4.
The armament and armor of the aircraft changed significantly during the production process. In different versions, the Yak-9 was equipped with aircraft guns of 20, 23, 37, 45 and 57 mm caliber, and UB machine guns of 12.7 mm caliber. As noted above, the Yak-9B variant was unique - a fighter-bomber with internal bomb suspension.
The armored seat back and front and rear armored glass protected the pilot from bullets and shrapnel.
The typical coloring of Yak-9 aircraft is olive green with dark green or brown streaks, camouflage on top and light blue below. Various types of digital designations, order and guards badges were applied to aircraft of different air formations; It was practiced to paint the propeller spinner red. The stars are red with a red and white border.
The side projection of the Yak-9D also corresponds to the Yak-9DD, Yak-9T, Yak-9M, Yak-9K aircraft (the latter with the exception of the cannon).
On late series Yak-9 aircraft (all modifications) the wingtip is the same as on the Yak-9U.
Yak-9 aircraft of all modifications had the same cockpit. Only the aircraft control stick has changed (see drawing).
The VISH-105SV propeller was also installed on Yak-9 aircraft (see “M-K” No. 4, 1975).
Fighter history
The first air battles took place during the First World War, when there was a need for special aircraft to destroy air targets. The first fighters are reconnaissance vehicles, which were re-equipped for air combat. Their flight speed was 150 km/h. The crew consisted of two people: a pilot and a gunner. At that moment, the navigator used weights, cannonballs and metal bars as weapons. The fighter approached the enemy aircraft from above and dropped heavy objects on it. Less than a month later, air combat improved - the navigator began to take a machine gun or pistol with him.
A little later, engineers came up with a new device - a turret, which allowed the machine gun to rotate 360o. It was installed behind the pilot. Although the shooter fired at the rear hemisphere, he could not fire in the most relevant frontal zone for the fighter. The course machine gun was not mounted due to the screw. But soon the French pilot R. Garros came up with a system that allowed him to shoot through the propeller. The design of the device was as follows: metal corners were installed at the base of the propeller blades. They were fastened in such a way that when a bullet hit, it ricocheted into an area that was safe for the plane and the pilot. The main drawback was the loss of 10% of ammunition. Inventor A. Fokker came up with a firing synchronizer, which made it possible to shoot directly through the plane of the propeller without catching it and without losing ammunition.
After the end of the First World War, many states realized the value of such a formidable weapon and began to model and improve new types of fighters. Thus, plywood biplanes became all-metal monoplanes with enclosed cockpits. The first representative of the new generation - Junkers DI At that time, the new fighters carried several machine guns and reached speeds of up to 450 km/h.
By the beginning of World War II, fighter aircraft were a well-established class of military equipment. The major world powers possessed several basic types of fighter aircraft. In Germany, Me-110 and Bf-109 of various modifications are especially noted. The I-16 and I-153 were located in the USSR, and the Hurricane and Spitfire were located in England. Japan, the USA and France were more developed in this regard. By the beginning of hostilities in Europe, the designers had not yet figured out the most important advantage of fighters - maneuverability or speed. At that time, it was difficult to create something combining the two characteristics, which is why the designs of certain aircraft differed from each other. After the start of the war and gaining experience during air combat, everyone realized that one engine is much better than two. Almost throughout the entire war, the main industrial states never produced a single modification of biplane fighters. Only the American Lightning has received relative development.
The enormous demand for fighter aircraft during World War II was based on the need for constant support for attack and bomber aircraft. It was during this period that the basic methods and tactics of using military aircraft, and especially fighters, were clarified. Further development led to the creation of the Yak-9B, which was planned as an improved model with more effective strike capabilities. It was this aircraft that became the first step towards the appearance of fighter-bombers.
With the further development of fighter aircraft, piston models were simply upgraded to their latest capabilities. But a propeller-powered plane could not break the sound barrier, which is what the designers really wanted to achieve. At the end of the war, Germany was the first to begin producing jet fighters - Me-262, Non-162, and missile fighters - Me-163. They were faster than anything in the world at that time, and, naturally, had significantly better flight characteristics. But the end of the war was close, the anti-Hitler coalition was already at the walls of Germany and a huge part of the military plants and factories was destroyed. The small batches of new fighters produced were unable to make a significant contribution to further developments.
During the 60s, supersonic fighters began to enter the ranks of the air forces of different countries of the world. They could reach speeds almost twice as fast as sound. The practical ceiling has increased to 20 km. And the new equipment used were radar stations and air-to-air missiles. This development was not accidental. The main driver of such modernization was considered to be the Cold War between the USA and the USSR. This or that country could easily send bombers to carry out bombing with nuclear weapons. Therefore, new supersonic fighters were required for fast and effective interception. Thus, in conflicting countries, including Europe, aircraft began to appear that, although they differed in some data, still belonged to the second generation of fighters in terms of flight performance and overall design characteristics.
A special contribution to further development was made by the modernization of anti-aircraft missiles, which completely removed the possibility of bombing ground targets from the air. Naturally, accompanying aircraft also began to change in quality. The third generation of fighters began to appear - the Mirage F-1, J-37 Wiggen, MiG-23. This was followed by the building up of aviation muscle in terms of the emergence of the fourth generation. The first power that managed to launch such a fighter was the United States - the F-4C Phantom. After it, the F-15 Eagle, F-15A, and Sparky TF-15A began to appear. The USSR also did not lag behind - Su-27, MiG-29 and -31.
But the United States managed to take over the initiative to create the most formidable fighters in the world. The fifth generation, the F-22 Raptor, began to be developed back in 1986 and was completed only in 2001. Two years later it was adopted. In parallel with their American colleagues, the development of the fifth generation fighter was carried out by engineers from the Sukhoi Design Bureau. The first tests of the Russian T-50 began in 2009. The characteristics of the new aircraft are still unknown.
However, modern combat vehicles of this type are becoming more and more versatile, gradually turning into fighter-bombers. As for interceptors, they have almost disappeared - they have been replaced by air defense missile systems.
Among modern fighters, three large classes can be distinguished:
- front-line fighters designed to gain air superiority over the battlefield
- fighter-bombers , multi-role fighters
- carrier-based fighters based on aircraft carriers.
Since the appearance of the first jet fighters, four generations of these combat vehicles have already passed. The first samples of fifth-generation aircraft have recently appeared.
Experts call a generation all types of military equipment produced in different countries that have similar combat capabilities. This technique was developed at approximately the same time, and similar technical solutions were used in its creation.
The first generation of fighters, which was born in the 50s of the last century, included machines that flew at subsonic speeds, did not have electronic means of detecting the enemy - radars, and were armed primarily with small-caliber guns.
A typical example is the American F-86 fighter, which had a ceiling of 15 kilometers and a speed of about a thousand kilometers per hour. During the Korean War, this aircraft was the only serious opponent for the Soviet-made MiG-15. The second generation of fighters included many famous aircraft with outstanding technical characteristics.
It developed in the late 50s - early 60s of the last century. These vehicles could exceed twice the speed of sound, had delta wings, radars for target acquisition and guided missiles as their main weapons. In the third generation of fast-moving combat vehicles, the battle of electronic technology began. The speed and altitude characteristics of the aircraft have not changed much, but their ability to detect and destroy the enemy at long distances has increased. At the same time, models with variable wing shapes appeared, as well as those capable of vertical takeoff and landing, that is, not requiring large airfields.
Fourth generation multirole fighters have fantastic speed and maneuverability. They reach speeds of up to 2,5 thousand km/h, can fly at altitudes of up to 20 kilometers, and gain this altitude in just one minute. These aircraft can hit up to a dozen targets at once within a radius of more than seven hundred kilometers using high-precision modern weapons.
Fifth generation fighters are the future of aviation. Much of them is aimed at creating maximum safety for the pilot and providing him with complete information about the air and ground space. Modern hull and wing materials make these aircraft stealthy for radar and night vision devices.
All control elements of the aircraft and the weapon system are concentrated in one unit and are controlled by a central computer. The maneuverability of these aircraft is an order of magnitude superior to even advanced aircraft of the third and fourth generations. Currently, only one fifth-generation fighter is in service, the rest are in the testing and development stage.
Military aviation
Designations on parts
1 — inscription “OIL”, 2 — spare compartment hatch (the compartment was used to transport a mechanic during relocation), 3 — serial number 0815385 (the font of the inscriptions is the same as on the Yak-3, see “M-K” No. 4, 1975), 4 — the inscription “DO NOT HANDLE”, 5 — ANO lights, 6 — inspection hatch, 7 — the inscription “LIFT HERE”, 8 — battery hatch (inscriptions: “128-5-24”, 2nd line — “AIR 50 at.”), 9 — inscription “GASOLINE DRAIN”, 10 — water radiator nacelle, 11 — inscription “WATER DRAIN”, 12 — oil cooler fairing, 13 — oil cooler, 14 — water radiator, 15 — water radiator flap, 16 — oil cooler flap, 17 — fuel tank filler neck, 18 — gas meter, 19 — landing flap (control of the flap is the same as on the Yak-3), 20 — elevator trimmer, 21 — bomb bay flaps of the Yak-9B aircraft (bombs were inserted into the vertical ones are rough and held by the flaps), 22 — aileron control rod (at the end of the aileron), 23 — the inscription “SPACE FOR TRAGS,” 24 — gas tanks, 25 — LDPE. 26 — engine suction pipes, 27 — trimmer control wheel (black), 28 — rearview mirror, 29 — handrail, 30 — oil cooler flap control wheel (black), 31 — machine gun, 32 — front armored glass, 33 — collimation sight (gray ), 34 — lamp (black), 35 — rear armored glass, 36 — FAB-100 bombs (4x100 kg), 37 — control rods for the radiator flap, 38 — gun, 39 — ventilation control knob, 40 — oxygen cylinder (blue), 41 — cartridge belt for 7 missiles (brown leather), 42 — electrical panel (black), 43 — engine control levers, 44 — armored seat back (covered with a cover made of light gray leather), 45 — steering wheel for controlling the water radiator flap (black), 46 - sight installed on the Yak-9 of the first series, 47 - windmill bomb fuses, 48 - control stick on aircraft with a shifted cockpit (Yak-9D, Yak-9K, Yak-9T, Yak-9M, Yak-9U), 49 - oxygen device (blue), 50 — instrument panel and consoles (matte black, cockpit sides and seat — gray), 51 — landing gear control valve, 52 — machine gun reload handle, 53 — radio station control panel (on first series aircraft, radio station and oxygen equipment Not installed), 54 — brake hose (gray), 55 — “soldier” (white with red stripes), 56 — landing gear closing mechanism, 57 — “breakable strut” (chassis and landing gear niches — gray), 58 — retracting pneumatic cylinder main landing gear, 59 — splined joint, 60 — dual-brake wheel 650X200, 61 — ratchet for starting the engine with an autostarter, 62 — upper landing gear shield (fixed), 63 — guide rod, 64 — eye, 65 — lower shield mounting bracket, 66 — spring, 67 — lower landing gear flap (gray inside), 68 — locks for the retracted position of the flap (to prevent suction in flight), 69 — closing mechanism of the crutch flaps, 70 — pneumatic cylinder for retracting the crutch” 71 — rubber shock absorber, 72 — wheel 300X125, 73 — 45 mm caliber gun.
Drawings by V. Kondratiev
Similar materials
Light fighter?
Not so long ago, D. Rogozin announced the creation of a new light fighter in Russia. Let's try to figure out how justified this statement is. To begin with, let’s define the terminology, what exactly can be understood as a light fighter and what kind of fighters generally exist in the world. Four classes can be distinguished: 1) Ultralight MiG-21 class. The upper limit both in weight and price for this class can be taken as the Swedish Gripen with an empty weight of the single-seat modification JAS 39 Gripen C of 6800 kg. This machine is equipped with one engine based on the popular GE F404. In addition to this, this class includes:
- Chinese FC-1, also known as JF-17, empty weight about 6.5 tons, Russian RD-93 engine, variant of RD-33, which is used on the MiG-29. A very cheap and rather primitive aircraft; - Indian single-engine (GE F404) HAL Tejas, empty weight of about 5.5 tons, which still will not begin to replace the Indian MiG-21. Unlike the previous car, this is a project with claims, making extensive use of composite materials; — combat versions of the South Korean supersonic UBS T-50 Golden Eagle, empty weight up to 6.5 tons, based on the same GE F404 engine; - twin-engine F-5E with an empty weight of 4.3 tons. Formerly one of the most popular combat aircraft in the world; - twin-engine Taiwanese AIDC F-CK-1 with an empty weight of 6.5 tons.
Why is empty weight used? This is a more objective indicator. For most vehicles, the maximum take-off weight is approximately 2 times empty, but there are exceptions in both directions.
When fully refueled, these vehicles are capable of carrying 2-2.5 tons of fuel, 4-6 missiles, a number of small-caliber bombs, in general, about 2 tons of combat load (for the F-5E, about a ton), and reach speeds of up to 1700-2200 km / h with a practical ceiling of 15-16 km and a combat range of the first few hundred kilometers. If the FC-1 and F-5E are essentially export models that were looked down upon in their country of origin, then all the rest are attempts at homegrown developments of countries that do not even come close to the definition of an “aviation power.” They all use imported engines, usually from a heavier fighter.
For comparison: the Yak-130 has an empty weight of 4.6 tons.
2) Lightweight ones are precisely those machines that form the basis of the air force fleet of developed countries. Let's start from the bottom.
— Single-engine Mirage 2000, with an empty weight of 7.5 tons. — Later versions of the single-engine F-16. Conceived from the experience of the Vietnam War as an analogue of the MiG-21, the most popular fighter of the 4th generation has noticeably grown fat, the empty later versions weigh more than 9 tons, and have learned a lot. — French twin-engine Rafale, empty weight 9.5 tons. — Twin-engine Eurofighter Typhoon. Empty weight 11 tons. — Chinese J-10. One engine from the Su-27. Empty weight 8.8-9.8 tons (various data). Actually, this is the basis of the Chinese Air Force. — The twin-engine F/A-18C/D can now be considered a historical model. Empty weight about 10 tons. — The single-engine MiG-23 and its derivatives are still found here and there, but this is essentially a museum exhibit. Weight is also about 10 tons. — MiG-35, 2 engines, 11 tons of empty weight.
Some comparisons can be made. Turning to the specifications of the Indian tender vehicles (in order not to compare vehicles of different modifications) and comparing the thrust-to-weight ratio of empty vehicles, we find that the MiG-35 is 16% superior to the JAS-39 Gripen NG in terms of thrust-to-weight ratio. At the same time, the MiG-35, although in prototype form, flies, and the Gripen NG exists only on paper.
In general, representatives of this class carry 4-5 tons of fuel and approximately the same amount of combat load. They have a maximum speed of up to 2400 km/h and a practical ceiling of 17-19 km. The kids don't look good compared to the high school students. Almost the only car that comes to parity with high school students in terms of thrust-to-weight ratio is the very light Tejas.
3) Medium fighters. We will include in this class everything that is heavier than 12 tons, but lighter than the Su-27 (16.3 tons). The definition is purely formal; many classify these machines as heavy.
— F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. A proportionally enlarged version of the previous “hornet”. The Hornet has become 30 percent heavier. — F-15 variants. — The remaining experimental Mirage 4000. Yes, we take 2 engines from the Mirage 2000 and make a larger aircraft, weighing 13 tons. — The first Su-37, the Soviet JSF, a well-protected single-engine vehicle with 18(!) hardpoints, a relatively low maximum speed, but high strike capabilities. The project was closed in the 90s. — F-35. Everyone already knows “Penguin”, and almost everyone criticizes it. The empty weight of the land version is 13.3 tons, the deck version pulls 15.8 tons. So claims about its lightness are greatly exaggerated. — Apparently, J-31. — From attack aircraft Su-17M4, Tornado.
Such cars were purchased mainly by wealthy buyers like Japan and Saudi Arabia. According to flight data, they do not exceed the light class, but carry 6-7 tons of fuel and up to 8 tons of combat load.
4) Really heavy cars. All of them are twin-engine.
— Su-27 and its variations, the weight of the Su-35S reaches 19 tons. — PAK FA, 18.5 tons. — F-22, 19.7 tons. — The J-20 is estimated at 17 tons, although who knows, the Chinese. — F-14, 19.8 tons. — MiG-31, 21.8 tons. — MiG 1.44, 18 tons.
Half of the MiG-29, the Chinese FC-1 ultra-light fighter with the RD-33 engine
Now let's move on to the question of why heavy fighters are needed at all. Their advantage in carrying capacity is obvious. But it's not that simple. In aviation, there is such a concept as the equation of existence of an aircraft, from which it follows that the specific weight of each component of the aircraft among machines of the same purpose with the same flight data is the same. That is, if we have an aircraft weighing 10 tons, carrying 4 tons of combat load, and we want to increase this parameter to 5 tons while maintaining flight data, then at the end we will get a new aircraft weighing 12.5 tons. What does the airplane consist of? Fuselage, wing, engines, actual payload: fuel, cockpit, other equipment like radar or radio station, weapons. Let's compare the weight of the cockpit for a fighter of 6 tons and a fighter of 18 tons. The pilot's build does not depend on the type of vehicle; the ejection seat and controls are similar. It turns out that the weight of the equipment the pilot needs on both machines will be approximately the same. GSh-30-1 cannon, standard armament of Russian tactical fighters, weight 50 kg. I don’t know how much a belt for 150 shells weighs, well, let’s say 150 kg. Total, 200 kg for both heavy Su-27 and light MiG-29. In general, on aircraft of different weight categories there is a significant amount of various equipment, the weight of which does not depend in any way on the weight category of the aircraft; for a heavier aircraft, this is a gain in payload and internal volumes, which can be used in different ways. On the other hand, if you take half the power plant from a MiG-29 or F-15, you cannot take half a pilot in half a cockpit, half a gun, or half of some microprocessor unit. Something has to be done. If the kids of the MiG-21 category carry about 40% of their empty weight, light vehicles carry about 50%, then the Su-27 carries 57.7%. The Gripen, with its 3,200 km ferry range with PTB, can only nervously smoke on the sidelines, looking at the Su-27 flying 3,600 km without any additional tanks. The MiG-31 carries even more fuel, due to which it can fly for a long time with afterburner. You can install additional equipment on a large aircraft and assign a co-pilot to service it, without a serious drop in flight data, as was done on the F-14. The two-seat Su-30 became a bestseller, and the Su-27UB was very popular with Soviet pilots on long flights; the huge machine did not lose much from the additional load. The F-15E is also a two-seater, which is very important for an attack aircraft; for comparison, the MiG-29UB had to remove the radar to accommodate the two-seat cockpit. Or you can use the excess fuel for a more powerful engine, which compensates for aerodynamic and other concessions in favor of stealth. For example, using a flat nozzle not only increases the rate of cooling of gases from the nozzle, but also consumes a certain amount of thrust at the point where the engine's circular cross-section changes to rectangular. Well, since we are striving for stealth, we also need to find a place in the fuselage to hide the weapons.
Engine thrust also strongly depends on air density, and in the highlands, especially when the air temperature is 30-40 degrees, thrust can drop so much that the load will have to be seriously limited, for example, the Su-17M4, which is not a small plane, only a couple of FABs were carried in Afghanistan -500, the third bomb was taken only in winter. That is, the reserve of thrust and fuel does not last in the pocket.
Of course, not everyone is lucky enough to live in the largest country in the world, and not everyone needs cars capable of flying 1000 km with 4-5 tons of rocket and bomb load and returning back with one internal refueling. And so the Mirage 4000 died; little France turned out to be too small for it. And if the need arises, they get out of it at the cost of reducing flight data due to suspended / conformal fuel tanks and in-flight refueling.
If we return to Russian conditions, then first of all we need to ensure our own air defense, and if strike aircraft in the event of a threat of war can be transferred to the threatened direction, then air defense fighters must be ready to take off at any moment. Huge spaces in a sparse airfield network make relying on heavy vehicles justified; at least, it makes sense to have a lot of them, and it is not a fact that it is more expensive than using mainly light equipment, since the latter will require more. And many pilots are trained for one aircraft built during its service; a lot of money is spent on each one even before he sits in the cockpit of the aircraft in which he will serve for the first time. And the notorious ratio - 70% light, 30% heavy - was taken from the air. There were other opinions, for example, 2/3 heavy, but “why should we build more battleships than cruisers?” If you look at the history of the Soviet and then Russian Air Forces over the past 30 years, you can see that, contrary to allegations about the evil Pogosyan, who is strangling the MiG and light fighters as a class, the topic of LFI itself did not go beyond pictures in the USSR, but the MiG 1.44 even made a couple of flights, and statements that the PAK FA will replace the Su-27 and MiG-29 are quite frequent. The S-54/55/56 family did not find support. For the MiG-31, despite its “wrong” origin, a modernization program was developed, which is now being implemented. It seems to me that Poghosyan has nothing to do with it, and the choice of machines for modernization is determined by their practical value. The MiG-31 has a powerful avionics system, the Su-27 has a huge range with a good service life, and the MiG-29... in 2008, as you know, an aircraft of this type crashed due to the destruction of the tail, after studying the entire fleet, only 30% of the vehicles had no signs of corrosion, and the MiG-29 carries only 4300 liters of fuel, which is very little for a vehicle of this size. It is characteristic that the MiG-29M's fuel supply increased by 1,500 liters, reaching the level of other vehicles of the same class. In conditions where there is a shortage of everything, it is quite logical to rely on the most combat-ready, and it is precisely as an interceptor that the MiG-29 of old modifications is not of great value.
Whether or not the next version of the MiG-29 should be adopted into service, I will not say, because I do not have all the information about the project. But if the car is noticeably cheaper than “dryers”, then it is worth sealing the air defense of densely populated areas with it. In the end, it is not the Arctic deserts that need to be protected first; a minimal presence there will suffice. The production volume may well justify the costs of modification and introduction into production, since the MiG-29K is already being built in series. The MiG-35 will also be able to fill the empty niche of the MiG-27. The decision must be made based on calculations.
Su-37 is the first to be serious
The question with a hypothetical promising LPI is more interesting. Obviously, it makes sense to develop and put into production a new aircraft only if it promises a sharp increase in combat capabilities compared to the modernization of existing models. All sorts of radars with AFAR can be installed on an old modernized aircraft, thereby saving a lot of resources on R&D and production restructuring. Compared to any modifications of the Su-27, the PAK FA has two serious features that are, in principle, inaccessible to the latter:
1) The PAK FA was initially designed for long-term supersonic flight, unlike the Su-35, which can reach supersonic speed without afterburner only in certain modes and clearly has the same restrictions on the use of weapons at such speeds as the Su-27. You need to understand that the aircraft flies in different modes, and optimization of the PAK FA for supersonic flight may mean that in subsonic modes it is not superior to the Su-35 with the same engines, if not inferior, but the very high flight speed itself already gives an advantage when approaching the enemy. In general, we can assume that if there is a lag behind the Su-35 at low speeds, then it is not critical, and will only appear when the battle drags on and previously accumulated energy is wasted. In addition, achieving a higher speed with the same engine thrust increases the flight range and capabilities of the aircraft as an interceptor.
2) Implementation of the most important measures to reduce radar signature. It should be taken into account that the radar range is proportional to the fourth root of the EPR. However, reducing the detection range and especially the capture range of missile seekers by at least a few tens of percent is already a great achievement. Combined with high flight speed and the ability to place fairly large ammunition in the internal compartments, low visibility makes the PAK FA an ideal vehicle for a first strike and air defense suppression. For air combat, the ammunition placed inside the vehicle apparently reaches 8 missiles.
It is logical to expect that the LFI should also seriously surpass the MiG-35 in stealth and dynamic characteristics, but the possibility of achieving this seems doubtful. Just because of the size of the car. After all, in order to achieve stealth, the weapon must be placed somewhere inside the fuselage, and this immediately imposes certain dimensional restrictions on the aircraft. By making a bomb bay, from the point of view of strength, we add a huge hole to the fuselage, i.e. a weak point, and for the weapon it is necessary to provide mechanisms for its launch. That is, while maintaining the same fuel reserve, the weight of the car will increase slightly, and it may no longer hold up in the light class. The equation of existence dictates that we should look for similar fighter aircraft as a guide. Now only the F-35 and J-31 can be considered such. There is little information about the Chinese; all that remains is to focus on the F-35. And here we see that the F-35’s ability to transport weapons inside is not impressive, 2200 kg, i.e. a couple of bombs and 2 missiles for options A and C. For option B only 1300 kg (you still like “verticals” ?), and the maximum mass of bombs does not exceed 450 kg. Well, or if there are no bombs at all, then you can hang 4 missiles. The question immediately arises: how can such an aircraft be used in a stealth configuration? It is obvious that the first strike bomber, 2 of the same bombs, carried the F-117 at one time. There are already problems with smaller ammunition; they need to be placed somehow, i.e., as a front-line bomber, the vehicle is so-so, as is a fighter with 4 short- and medium-range missiles. The car turns out to be niche, the F-117, which at one time occupied this niche, only 59 production copies were built...
Perhaps the Americans do not envisage stealth mode as the main one, because in total the F-35A carries 8278 kg of fuel and 8150 kg of missile and bomb load, the maximum take-off weight reaches 31750 kg. For comparison, the F/A-18E with an empty weight of 14.5 tons has a maximum take-off weight of 29.9 tons (specification data for the Indian tender), the 11-ton MiG-35 and Typhoon have a maximum take-off weight of 23.5 tons, the ratio of the maximum to empty is a little more than 2, and the 19-ton Su-35 generally does not pretend to be more than 34.5 tons of maximum take-off. The ratio of maximum and takeoff weight is close to the F-35 Rafale - 24.5 tons with 9.5 tons of empty weight. Interestingly, like the F-35, the Rafale was conceived as a single aircraft. An abnormally large maximum take-off weight, in general, does not mean anything good for flight performance, either the machine must have increased strength so as not to fall apart from overloads, or the requirements for flight performance are reduced. On the other hand, for the Su-35 there is a desire to save weight; in absolute numbers, its combat load is already very high. It is not surprising that the overweight Penguin does not fly very well, turning into an inconspicuous high-tech barge for transporting bombs. Adding to the problems is the impossibility of using the area rule, since due to the weapons compartment it is problematic to tighten the fuselage. Perhaps this is the reason why the F-35 cannot exceed the speed of sound without afterburner. If the Americans think that they need a barge, and low ESR and smart electronics will help there, then this may not suit us, and such a small number of missiles on the internal sling is not very impressive. We need a vehicle more for air defense; in the next 30 years the Su-34 will perform strike functions; in addition to it, there are heavy bombers, and they even promise to create a PAK DA. In the F-35, you can reduce the fuel reserve, the load on the external sling, and use the freed internal volume for additional weapons, or tighten up the vehicle, increasing the flight data while maintaining a small supply of missiles. But carrying a lot of weapons and at the same time flying well is unlikely to work.
For smaller models, the idea of placing weapons inside should be immediately discarded as unpromising; such an aircraft will no longer be a penguin, but a pregnant cow. Of course, you can try to make do with little expense and not bother with the internal placement of weapons, especially since a container has already been presented for the F/A-18E/F that allows you to hide some of the ammunition if necessary, but then the most effective thing would be to simply gradually modernize the existing generation 4 fighters +.
However, in order to build an aircraft of a certain size, you must have a suitable power plant. The F-35 uses the F135 engine with a monstrous 19.5 tons of thrust, we don't have anything like it. Like the Chinese, by the way, 2 RD-93 engines are only 16.6 tons of thrust, even the newer RD-33MKV from the MiG-35 will not produce more than 18 tons, but they will weigh more than one F135. Perhaps the J-31 is just an experimental vehicle. You cannot hang more than 60% of its weight on half of the PAK FA power plant, and this is a maximum of 11 i.e., that is, it is not possible to take a ready-made engine, as is often done. But no one will create another engine in addition to the RD-33, AL-31F and AL-41F families at the existing technological level; the most reasonable thing in the current situation is to finalize the second stage engine for the PAK FA and after that design an engine with the required traction. And the engine of the second stage will not appear soon. It is unlikely that it should be expected before 2025. However, it will be necessary to develop not only the engine, but also all other equipment that cannot be taken from the PAK FA. And then do the work of “installing microcircuits in aluminum.” How long might this take? The Su-35, which is not fundamentally new, made its first flight in 2008, 3 flight prototypes were built, one of which was destroyed, despite this, in 2009 a contract was signed for the Su-35, the first 10 vehicles assembled according to this contract, they left for the testing program, and the first squadron should be expected only in 2014, i.e., technically, not the most complex project required 6 years from the first flight to appearance in combat units. How much more time it will take to eliminate childhood diseases, only God knows. With LFI everything will be much more difficult.
That. the LFI project can very easily eat up years of work of the most qualified engineers and give rise to something unintelligible as a result, and is not suitable for a full-fledged stealth like the PAK FA, and is too expensive for the mainstream like the MiG-35. In general, for air defense, stealth is not a supercritical characteristic. How are the F-22 and F-35 supposed to be used in air combat? Shooting from a long distance, that is, exclusively ambush tactics in the style of the MiG-21 in Vietnam, but no matter how the successes of the MiG-21 are described, it should be admitted that the “Phantoms” carried out the task of knocking Vietnam into the Stone Age very successfully. The Vietnamese attacked from ambushes not because it was so effective, but because there were few planes. In general, the success of air defense operations is measured very simply: if a strike is made on a protected object, the air defense has not completed its task. For example, in World War II, Finnish aviation with its huge number of aces could not prevent the Soviet Air Force from bombarding Finland with bombs, and the air defense of the Third Reich, despite more than 200 aces shot down, completely failed in its task. Who needs a downed plane when bombed cities and factories are burning on the ground? It is obvious that it is impossible to effectively prevent enemy aircraft from shelling from 90 km, most of the missiles simply will not hit anywhere, and the attackers have enough means of protection against such stings. You need not to hit and run, but to attack aggressively until the attacker, as in the famous song, flies to meet the coffin, or to his base. And the pilot must be prepared for the fact that he will have to fight seriously, and not just shoot from a safe distance. That is, flight data and more rockets with kerosene are much more important. It may be difficult to justify that instead of the inexpensive MiG-35 or the powerful Su-35, you need a machine with missiles in its belly, which will still unmask itself at the moment of attack.
Another very important question relates to the possible production volume. The Americans plan to build more than 3,000 F-35s, of which about 800 will be distributed among the countries participating in the project. The Russian Air Force now has 38 fighter squadrons. This gives a staffing strength of 456 vehicles. With a complete replacement with PAK FA and LFI in a 1:2 ratio, LFI accounts for only 300 vehicles. And with such a production volume, will the savings from LFI even cover the costs of its development? At the same time, we will have a weaker air force. Of course, there is also export, where LFI should have an advantage over PAK FA due to its lower price. Well, on this occasion I can immediately say: “Good luck!” The largest contracts for the supply of combat aircraft usually amount to several dozen aircraft. For example, the Typhoon's production volume is only 518 vehicles, of which the majority, as many as 143 units, are intended for Germany. France, having invested a lot of money, developed the Rafale, its own need for it is about 200 vehicles, the Indian contract for 126 vehicles, which can also be cancelled, is the only salvation for the French. Countries that could theoretically buy a hundred modern fighters from us in the world can be counted on one hand: India, China, Indonesia. India ordered 3 hundred Su-30s, but contacted the French in order to purchase a light fighter, China is trying to do its own thing, Indonesia could have bought it a long time ago, but apparently it’s not really necessary. Vietnam, with its large population and very serious friction with China, purchased 48 Su-30s, while other buyers took from 6 to 24 vehicles in different configurations. That is, as soon as the Indian market closes, you can forget about serious exports of combat aircraft.
It is interesting that exports of ultra-light aircraft are also not going well: 50 JF-17s were purchased by Pakistan, the Swedes supplied as many as 44 Gripens to different countries, however, Switzerland should buy another 22 aircraft, which is typical, according to the Swiss, of Rafale and Typhoon performed much better, but the cost outweighed them. Now Gripen has won a Brazilian tender for 120 vehicles, albeit on very interesting terms, first the delivery of all the machines, and then only money, this is in addition to the usual agreements for such contracts to respect the buyer and invest a couple of billions in his industry. The Korean “golden eagle” has currently managed to sell 24 vehicles to Iraq, and 16 vehicles to Indonesia, but these are training variants; the combat FA-50 is not needed by anyone except South Korea itself. Most of the world is simply not able to buy a large batch of combat aircraft; at best, they buy some used junk, or a Chinese F-7, this is a variant of the MiG-21.
In this regard, the persistent desire of individual citizens to make a combat aircraft based on the Yak-130 cannot but cause surprise. Such an attempt will lead to an inevitable increase in the weight and size of the machine and will actually lead to the creation of a completely new aircraft. So if we want to create a reincarnation of the MiG-21, then we won’t need the Yak-130. But you will need an RD-33. But in our Air Force, which has experienced the Su-27, such a machine will not find a place for itself, and we have already considered the prospects on the world market.
Another idea, to make a light attack aircraft out of the Yak-130, also cannot but cause a smile, especially since we have long had a simple subsonic attack aircraft - the Su-25. The most logical thing would be to reproduce it at a modern technical level. And there is no doubt that the car will not change conceptually. It is of little use to chase bearded men in the mountains with KABs; you will still have to hit areas, and gliding bombs from a distance of 120 km are unlikely to frighten the air defense systems covered by Tunguskas, which hit everything that has risen above the radio horizon within a radius of tens, or even hundreds of kilometers. So our promising light attack aircraft will still have to fly at low altitudes, with corresponding requirements for passive protection. And if we try to implement these requirements, not to mention the missile and bomb load, then the resulting vehicle will grow exactly to the size of the Su-25. You can, of course, try to increase the thrust of the engines by 10-15 percent, leave the combat load at the level of the Yak-130 (a couple of packages of NURS or small-caliber bombs), expand the avionics by eliminating the co-pilot's cabin, and install a cannon. And then write funerals for the families of the pilots shot down from the ancient DShK. It is not surprising that our Air Force refused such dubious happiness.
Thus, we can conclude that the feasibility of developing LFI is currently not obvious due to difficulties in implementing in this size class the key elements of stealth technology used in the F-22 and PAK FA. And also the absence of a large guaranteed market that would justify the huge investments in the development of the machine. In addition, there is no suitable engine for LFI and will not appear in the near future.
S-21 Sukhoi Design Bureau amazes with its perfection of form
