Does Russia need an unmanned "faithful wingman" Yak-141


In 2017, the profile Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov said that work on vertical take-off and landing aircraft, which could be based on aircraft-carrying ships of the Russian Navy, was resumed in Russia. However, a lot of criticism immediately appeared that vertical take-off and landing aircraft would always yield in performance characteristics to conventional horizontal take-off and landing aircraft, and therefore there is no need to add an unmeasured amount of budget billions to a "dead-end" project. There is some truth in this, but is everything as clear-cut as it seems at first glance?


Obviously, we are talking about the development of the concept of the Soviet project SKVVP Yak-141, which was ahead of its time, and then was undeservedly forgotten. We'll come back to this plane later, but for now let's talk about what is the "bottleneck" in aviation. Surprisingly, this is by no means the design and serial production of aircraft. The hardest part is preparing combat pilots for them.

Robots, not people, do their work.


Training takes many years and is very expensive. An experienced pilot is worth its weight in gold, especially a carrier-based aircraft pilot who has to sit on the swinging deck of an aircraft carrier, even in adverse weather conditions. Military pilots have to train for a long time before they turn into effective combat units, and then they retire on a well-deserved retirement, and everything has to start over. The loss of an aircraft in a battle or in a plane crash is always a disaster, but the loss of a pilot is an irreparable tragedy in every sense.

For this reason, one of the most promising areas in the aircraft industry is the drone drone programs. UAVs are always cheaper than manned aircraft:

At first, they save the lives of pilots, and at the same time save huge amounts of money on their many years of training. For remote control of the drone, an ordinary operator with a joystick may be sufficient.

Secondly, due to the absence of a living organism in the cockpit of the aircraft, the safety and comfort of which must be taken care of, UAVs can theoretically be operated with powerful accelerations and overloads during maneuvers, which increases their performance characteristics beyond the capabilities of the human body.

Thirdly, UAVs can be quickly reproduced and put into operation, compensating for losses, which cannot be done promptly in manned aircraft.

Today, there are three main directions for the development of unmanned aircraft: remote control of the operator, the "faithful follower" format, and the use of artificial intelligence (AI). The latter is technically the most difficult and poses serious ethical problems. However, the first concept is already being successfully used, and the second is being actively tested, including in our country. In Russia, this is a program of interaction between the fifth generation Su-75 fighter and the S-70 Okhotnik heavy attack UAV, which serves for reconnaissance, target designation and fire support, increasing the power of the slave aircraft. Boeing Australia is testing a Loyal Wingman UAV with similar functionality.

Unmanned fighters?


A recent video advertising the capabilities of the fifth-generation Su-75 light fighter has prompted some pretty interesting considerations. A completely unmanned version of the aircraft was demonstrated there, even without a cockpit for the pilot. Of course, this is the future, but very promising. Let's say Rostec masters a fully unmanned version of the Su-75. What will it give?

A lot: it will be possible to use the fifth-generation Su-75 heavy fighter and the Su-75 fifth-generation light unmanned fighter in tandem, where the second will act as a "loyal wingman." Or not one, but several Su-75s at once. It turns out that just one Su-57 pilot will be able to take several planes into battle at once, loaded to capacity with missiles and bombs, which are not so scary to lose due to their unmannedness and relatively low cost. Imagine how much the effectiveness of the actions of the RF Aerospace Forces will increase then.

Very tempting. Alas, there are some limitations. For aircraft with horizontal take-off and landing, a good runway is required. In the event of the outbreak of active hostilities, military airfields will be destroyed first. If we talk about the use of an unmanned fighter in the fleet, then a horizontal landing on a relatively small deck of a ship swaying on the waves may become too difficult a task for automation and even for a remote control UAV operator. However, things can change for the better if you "marry" the option of "faithful slave" and remote control with vertical / short takeoff and vertical landing.

Here we again return to the Yak-141. Indeed, a vertical takeoff aircraft has the worst performance characteristics, since it spends a lot of fuel on such takeoff and landing, which reduces its combat radius and combat load. It would seem, why bother with them at all? But no. Imagine that on the basis of the Yak-141 a completely unmanned SKVVP fighter is made with the functions of a "faithful slave" and remote control of the operator. What will it give? Much. Very, very much.

First of all, by removing the pilot with the entire cockpit and life support systems for him, we will seriously lighten the fighter itself. This will allow you to save fuel and at the same time perform the most extreme maneuvers of the aircraft. The option of short or normal horizontal takeoff instead of vertical takeoff can also reduce fuel consumption. But at the same time, the Yak-141 can still be lifted into the air and planted vertically on almost any patch. This will allow it to be used as a front-line unmanned fighter, if airfields and highways are destroyed, and also as a carrier-based one. The remotely controlled Yak-141 can be made to take off in a shortened scheme with a TAVRK or UDC, and then safely land in vertical mode. Automation or AI will be able to cope with this. The "faithful wingman" option will allow the use of UAVs in conjunction with manned fighters, which will increase the effectiveness of Russian aviation.

If you "marry" unmanned control systems and technology short / vertical take-off and landing, this will open up a lot of new opportunities for the RF Ministry of Defense.
62 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Michael1950 Online Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 25 November 2021 16: 33
    +1
    - The problem is the absence of an engine like the F135 in Russia:
    http://airwar.ru/enc/engines/f135.html
    which would allow the implementation of a scheme similar to the F-35B. The scheme with additional lifting engines Yak-141, firstly, is much more dangerous if one of them fails (instant inevitable somersault of the aircraft due to longitudinal imbalance), and secondly, these two lifting engines in flight are tinkering just like ballast.

    1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 16: 42
      +1
      And it seemed to me that it was the Yankees who "cut off" a lot of things. smile
      Counter proposal: to make such lifting motors that will not refuse. How do you like the idea?
      In the unmanned version of the aircraft, "ballast" will probably not be such a problem.
      1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunner miner) 25 November 2021 20: 11
        -6
        And who will make not uncle from the UEC! At least make a squadron manned. Yakovlevites are engaged in MS-21 (trunk aircraft of the 21st century). All the rest of the Yakovlevskoe is buried. Well, and a little cruise missiles and satellites. 141 world records were set on the Yak-12 during the tests.
        Harrier became an excellent attack aircraft only thanks to the unique Rolls-Royce F402-RR-401 engine. This was not the case in the USSR, and the UEC will not be able to do it.
    2. mark1 Offline mark1
      mark1 25 November 2021 16: 47
      +3
      There is no particular problem with the PD, or do you think that the fan with the transmission in the F-35 is much lighter than the PD in the Yak-141? You probably know that the variant with a lift fan was considered in the Yakovlev Design Bureau, but based on a set of characteristics, they decided that it was preferable to PD
      1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 16: 57
        +2
        So it's like they are writing to us from Israel. It is not often that you can hear something good about Russian weapons from there. Bindyuzhnik will not let you lie. wassat
        1. Binder Offline Binder
          Binder (Miron) 25 November 2021 18: 36
          -4
          Quote: Marzhetsky
          It is not often that you can hear something good about Russian weapons from there. Bindyuzhnik will not let you lie.

          Well, if Mr. Marzhetsky considers the fair opinion of SW Michael1950 that the Russian engine building is not able to create an analogue of the F135 as something good, then he has a clear lack of understanding of the printed text. bully However, the author is generally far from the aviation theme as the Chukchi are from the tropics.

          Quote: Marzhetsky
          In the unmanned version of the plane

          Marzhetsky, drones are initially created according to different principles, it makes no sense to build a full-fledged fighter and then mold AI on it. And yet - despite the loud victorious reports, the only real UAV in the Russian Armed Forces is still the unfading Outpost, which is just a licensed copy of an old Israeli Searcher, assembled in the Russian Federation using the screwdriver assembly method from Israeli components. And all these hunter-Orion-Altair simply do not exist, like the Su-75, and the lonely Su-57 has not yet become a combat unit.
          1. S WITH Offline S WITH
            S WITH (N S) 25 November 2021 23: 36
            +1
            we do not need an analogue of an engine whose blades burn out
            https://naukatehnika.com/problemyi-s-lopatkami-dvigatelej-na-istrebitelyax-nevidimkax-f-35.html
      2. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunner miner) 25 November 2021 20: 12
        -4
        There is no particular problem with PD

        If there was no problem, there would be drumming at all corners, and a second barn would be built in Dubai, with cologne.
        1. mark1 Offline mark1
          mark1 25 November 2021 20: 26
          +1
          It's not about the problem, it's about the approach. Why attach PD to chess if initially it is a commercial project mainly for countries that do not particularly think about verticals. There are also a couple of dark horses, it is possible that Yakovlev's design bureau was involved.
          And yes, according to the following - we have no failures in the UAC, we have a painstaking development of competencies
          1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
            gunnerminer (gunner miner) 25 November 2021 20: 49
            -5
            UAC failures - Su-57, Il-112V, Mi-28N, SSZH-100, Il-76MD-90A, Il-78MD-90A, Be-200 UEC failures - Il-112V, Il-114-300 engines, engines Be-200, An-124 engines, Tu-160M2, Tu-22M3M, Su-57 engines.
            The silence of Yuri Slyusar is not surprising, because the corporation is working in the red. The total debt of the United Aircraft Corporation, accumulated since 2015, exceeds the structure's revenue. The corporation owes 535 billion rubles to banks alone, although the company's revenue is several times less, not to mention the profit. The last time the state made a profit from the activities of the United Aircraft Corporation was in 2014. In 2019, the company's net loss amounted to 60 billion rubles, but this is most likely not the limit. The company's main problem is that it is not only unable to produce quality products, but also to sell them.
            The debts of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) to banks amount to about 530 billion rubles, Anatoly Serdyukov, head of the Rostec aviation cluster, admitted in an interview with RBC in 2020.
    3. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
      gunnerminer (gunner miner) 25 November 2021 20: 05
      -5
      Manned would do .... Too many failures in the UAC, with avionics, with engines.
      1. S WITH Offline S WITH
        S WITH (N S) 25 November 2021 23: 32
        0
        with avionics? would you first compare the performance characteristics of the Irbis with afar f22
        1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
          gunnerminer (gunner miner) 25 November 2021 23: 56
          -3
          Serial radars with AFAR cannot be produced in Russia. One of the reasons for the Indian Defense Ministry's jump out of the FGFA program. You can revel in the individual characteristics of radars with PFAR for as long as you like, but this will not give any idea about their relative advantages or disadvantages to competitors.
          The radar with AFAR (active phased array), which NATO countries have been armed with for twenty years, and which are installed on Chinese aircraft, is the same as a powerful racing motorcycle compared to a moped! In short, the AFAR systems have many times better performance compared to the PFAR at the same power. The AFAR radar is much less susceptible to interference, and itself can work as a means of electronic warfare. AFAR is devoid of all the disadvantages of PFAR in terms of the formation of several beams, since it is a complex of thousands of transceivers, each of which is controlled individually. AFAR has a significant advantage in tracking targets on the pass - during shelling, their number remains exactly the same as in the survey mode. At PFAR, during shelling, the number of tracked targets is reduced - the cyclogram is overloaded, and it is no longer possible to squeeze in the positioning of the beam for each target simultaneously with the illumination of the targets being fired into the scan cycle.
          You are trying to pass off the poverty of the KLA and Rostec as a virtue.
          1. S WITH Offline S WITH
            S WITH (N S) 26 November 2021 00: 18
            0
            afar su57 protein is the world's first afar made of gallium nitride microwave modules, they can withstand more power than afar f22 based on gallium arsenide, as a result, su57 has a large detection range
            1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
              gunnerminer (gunner miner) 26 November 2021 00: 44
              -3
              The squirrel was made at the Phazotron Research Institute for the exhibition. Then it did not go. NATO law enforcement and intelligence agencies blocked the stream of electronic components. Crews will not converge in horse-to-horse battle. NATO has dozens of AWACS and U systems. Their operators will open the situation, distribute targets, There are only four A-50Us in the Russian Air Force, so NATO's range is fine. And the Su-57 is not mass-produced, like the Belka. KNAAZ could not. The KRET concern could not.
    4. S WITH Offline S WITH
      S WITH (N S) 25 November 2021 23: 31
      0
      before the development of the yak141, the Yakovlevites shoveled all the options for the vertical, including the fan lift, but settled on the option with two simple light engines, if you look closely at the su75, you can see that its fuselage is significantly longer than f35, which means that two lifting engines will fit behind the cabin , it remains only to move the front chassis forward and widen the air intakes
      1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunner miner) 25 November 2021 23: 57
        -4
        The Su-75 is just a plywood shed; there is nothing to look closely at; not even a prototype, like with the Su-57.
        1. S WITH Offline S WITH
          S WITH (N S) 26 November 2021 00: 04
          0
          you can repeat this a hundred times before going to bed, but he will still go into the series as su57
          1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
            gunnerminer (gunner miner) 26 November 2021 00: 08
            -3
            Serial production of the Su-57 failed for well-known reasons. KNAAZ is interrupted from bread to water. Because the piece production of prototypes of the Su-57 does not make money. The Su-75 was even offered an "open architecture." modern battle. But this kunstuk did not work. Even the new cologne did not help.
  2. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 25 November 2021 18: 02
    0
    Fantasies that have arisen after articles about the conversion of old aircraft in China and America.

    question1. basic.
    How many yak 141 are in stock? Not one?

    Question 2. How many aircraft carriers / UDC do we have? none., in perspective 3.

    Question 3. Is there any development of heavy drones instead of yak? yes, even without a vertical.

    Question 4. Do UAVs need high-speed verticals, taking into account that it is expensive, weak, and small ammunition?
    Depends on the economy.
    The Returned CR trend will completely replace.
    1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 18: 25
      0
      Fantasies that have arisen after articles about the conversion of old aircraft in China and America.

      I hear it for the first time. And not fantasies, but reasoning on the topic. These are two different things.

      question1. basic.
      How many yak 141 are in stock? Not one?

      The relevant Deputy Prime Minister announced the revival of the project. He knows better than you, probably? No? Here is a quote from him:

      "Now we are working on a conceptual model, prototypes. Of course, this is the future. For all types of aircraft carriers, a new fleet of aircraft will be needed. For this, various technologies are used that allow for shortened takeoff and landing or simply vertical takeoff. Conceptually, such work is underway. in the Ministry of Defense since last year, "he said.
      According to the Deputy Prime Minister, the timing of the creation of the new aircraft is determined by the technological cycle.

      “As a rule, it is seven to ten years, if you go into series,” explained Borisov.

      This is not the first time I have already pointed out to you, by the way, that in arms you must first think about why you need it, and only then do it. And for some reason this truth does not reach you.

      Question 2. How many aircraft carriers / UDC do we have? none., in perspective 3.

      Aircraft carrier 1 is under repair. It will last another 14 years at best, then for scrap. There will be nothing to base aircraft with horizontal takeoff and landing. The UDC will remain, where only SCVVP can be operated.
      UDC is planned 2, in 2026-2027 somewhere. Just about then the Yak-141 can fly, if they do not lie that they are doing.

      Question 3. Is there any development of heavy drones instead of yak? yes, even without a vertical.

      There is a Hunter and Altius, but they are SUBSONIC, and the Yak-141 is SUPERSONIC. Feel the difference. By the way, it is precisely because of her that it is not entirely clear how exactly the Hunter should interact in battle with the Su-57. But with the Su-75 or Yak-141 unmanned as a slave, it's understandable.

      Question 4. Do UAVs need high-speed verticals, taking into account that it is expensive, weak, and small ammunition?
      Depends on the economy.

      Why is it weak? Why is the ammunition small? Normal ammunition there, like that of a fighter, which makes it head and shoulders above any conventional UAV, and at the same time in all performance characteristics. What is the advantage of the KVVP version, I seem to have explained in detail in the article.
      Expensive? Well, the result is worth it, isn't it? Now it is the most promising direction in aircraft construction.
      It depends not only on the economy, but more on the tasks set for aviation.
      1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunner miner) 25 November 2021 20: 18
        -4
        The relevant Deputy Prime Minister announced the revival of the project. He knows better than you, probably? No? Here is a quote from him:

        He can say a lot of things. It is not for him to be responsible for the final result. There is either a padishah, or a donkey. The Yak-141 had, despite better than the Yak-38, performance, a very short range (690 km when taking off like an airplane) and loitering time (1,5 hours when taking off on an airplane). How could it be otherwise? Both the Harrier and the F-35 have one powerful engine, while the Yak-38/141 has three. Two of them fly after takeoff and landing by passengers. You can boast of the Yak-141 as a technical achievement in the absence of a good engine. But do not try to build a unique combat fighter-bomber out of the Yak-141. Both in the first and in the second, it is unsuccessful and does not withstand competition with Western and Soviet competitors. Probably, American aircraft designers could borrow something from the Yak-141 for the F-35 project. Why not, if the opportunity arose to work together in 1994. But they can only say that they can "copy" from the Petrosyan workshop.

        and Yak-141 - SUPERSONIC

        Which will lead to a reduction in flight time, and a decrease in flight range.
      2. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunner miner) 25 November 2021 20: 50
        -5
        Aircraft carrier 1 is under repair.

        Aircraft-carrying cruiser, half-dead.
      3. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
        Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 25 November 2021 21: 50
        0
        Eco you mix everything. And what's right and what's wrong together

        not fantasies, but reasoning

        on the topic - if only they were not linked with the old Yak 141, but with something newer and simpler., such as a hunter or a modernized Yak-130, then yes.

        said the profile deputy prime minister

        - Promising does not mean getting married.
        And Rogozin promised a lot, and Chubais, and Putin. They don't take it seriously anymore
        Rather, there will be a bet on the "non-semimetric answer"

        weapons first need to think about why they need it, and only then do it.

        - General elementary yes.
        But if they don’t do it, then it’s unnecessary in terms of price and quality. You never know, wrapped up after some development

        for some reason this truth does not reach you.

        - this is just a crap from the authors.
        Not the first time

        in 2026-2027 somewhere. Just about then the Yak-141 can fly,

        This is no longer Yak-141, but something else. And first - a pilot one, if it looks like a real plane, and not like a "hunter" -type UAV

        Feel the difference.

        - and how much supersonic it gave out? 20 minutes a little? There is not much difference in a modern rocket.
        And who's stopping to upgrade the hunter / upgrade to a supersonic SV Hunter for the same 7 years? It already exists, new engines promise, the ways are known, it is cheaper.
        But not a vertical, yes.

        Why weak?

        - it is well known that verticals are much worse in performance characteristics than conventional fighters.
        Even for ordinary aircraft they write in the performance characteristics - either, say, 8 tons of weapons and 3 tons of fuel, or vice versa. And with verticals - even more so. Earlier it was more critical, but now the F35 with a "shortened takeoff" is noticeably more puny than its counterparts.

        In general, if without rudeness, a normal modified maritime Supersonic UAV will be much cheaper and angrier. IMHO, the cost of an analogue of the Yak-141 will fit at least 3 pieces
        1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) 26 November 2021 12: 04
          +1
          In general, if without rudeness, a normal modified maritime Supersonic UAV will be much cheaper and angrier. IMHO, the cost of an analogue of the Yak-141 will fit at least 3 pieces

          Cool. Or you can drop the link to normal modified maritime supersonic UAV
          What kind of animal is this that does not exist in nature?
          1. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
            Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 26 November 2021 13: 14
            -1
            Ie do not mind the rest?

            And about that - just read the comment more carefully.
            the same place earlier: "And who prevents the modernization of the hunter / upgrade to a supersonic SV Hunter for the same 7 years? It already exists, new engines promise, the ways are known, it is cheaper."
            1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
              Marzhecki (Sergei) 27 November 2021 08: 05
              0
              I object. It's just too lazy to re-paint.
              Do you know how much the Hunter costs? 1 billion rubles apiece. Subsonic UAV. For comparison, for a supersonic fighter Su-75 they ask for 2 billion rubles. Do you see what I'm getting at?
              If you make the Hunter supersonic, it will be, for the price, like a full-fledged fighter.
              Why is this necessary? If you can make a piloted and unmanned version of a fighter at the same time?
              1. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
                Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 27 November 2021 09: 44
                -1
                That is why these are all fantasies, not "reasoning"

                Compare insured individual hunter - "After the start of mass production, the cost will be reduced by 40-50 percent." and a non-existent vertical landing aircraft / UAV, which will obviously be more expensive than the non-existent Su75 ???

                It all depends on the complexity. The classic "hunter" is positioned as an "unmanned bomber", or an expensive "station wagon", with a good transonic speed
                If your favorite radar, reconnaissance gunner, interceptor is being developed, then it may be cheaper. (Purely by analogy with airplanes)
                1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
                  Marzhecki (Sergei) 27 November 2021 09: 50
                  0
                  Compare insured individual hunter - "After the start of mass production, the cost will be reduced by 40-50 percent."

                  Look, here you believe the developers' statements, but you don’t believe in other things. Oh well.

                  and a defunct vertical landing aircraft / UAV

                  On the Yak141 project, all R&D has been carried out for a long time, by the way. The plane was and flew. It doesn't need to be created from scratch.

                  If your favorite radar, reconnaissance gunner, interceptor is being developed, then it may be cheaper.

                  I don't quite understand why some kind of radar has become my favorite? Are you talking about the AWACS aircraft? so our military needs it, not me personally.

                  It all depends on the complexity. The classic "hunter" is positioned as an "unmanned bomber", or an expensive "station wagon", with a good transonic speed

                  A subsonic UAV makes no sense in conjunction with a supersonic aircraft. he is simply useless as a follower. It only makes sense to transform the fighter itself into a UAV, in manned and unmanned versions.

                  Okay, continuing the conversation doesn't make any sense.
                  1. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
                    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 27 November 2021 10: 20
                    0
                    On the Yak141 project, all R&D has been carried out for a long time, by the way. The plane was and flew. It doesn't need to be created from scratch.

                    Yak141 is the old Yak141. even if the entire technological chain is restored, no one will make the old plane. Only new to develop.

                    A subsonic UAV makes no sense in conjunction with a supersonic aircraft.

                    - however, the media stubbornly associate the hunter with su 57.
                    The hunter is transonic in itself.
                    These can act quite by themselves around the ship. As amerovsky earavschiki UAVs, for example.

                    by the way, according to wiki and media, the speed of the Yak141 is less at the ground than that of the hunter 1250 km / h versus 1400
    2. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
      gunnerminer (gunner miner) 25 November 2021 20: 13
      -3
      Depends on the economy.

      With a resource-based rental economy, such an aircraft cannot be created, and even with a new engine.
      1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) 26 November 2021 12: 02
        0
        And with what to create?
        1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
          gunnerminer (gunner miner) 26 November 2021 16: 39
          -3
          Balanced, not raw, not rentable. As in the USA, as in Japan, as in South Korea.
          1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
            Marzhecki (Sergei) 27 November 2021 08: 05
            0
            How exactly does a resource-based rental economy get in the way of building an engine?
            1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
              gunnerminer (gunner miner) 27 November 2021 10: 02
              -2
              На создание двигателей не остается средств.Не может такая экономика выделить необходимые средства на развитие фундаментальной науки, на оборудование лабраторий, на подготовку современных инженеров, на приобетение нужных материалов, на зарплаты квалифицированным рабочим, на привлекательные зарплаты молодым рабочим и инженерам.Сырьевая экономика совершенно не ценит знания, отмечается в исследовании. Поэтому и материальных стимулов осваивать «сложные» профессии немного. Так, врач в России зарабатывает в среднем всего на 20% больше водителя. Для сравнения: в США разница составляет 261%, в Германии — 172%, в развивающейся Бразилии — 174%.75% выпускников питерских ВУЗ работают не по специальности.
              History says that if a country agrees to its raw material orientation, that is, to be in the role of an appendage of the world community, then this country will not lead to anything good. We extract and sell raw materials, and in Western countries, including even Belarus, they process it and sell a ready-to-use product, including to us. Following the logic of mercantilism, smart countries seek to reap the benefits of foreign trade by selling goods with significant added value to other countries at high prices in exchange for cheap purchases of raw materials.
  3. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 November 2021 18: 38
    -2
    Quote: Bindyuzhnik
    Well, if Mr. Marzhetsky considers the fair opinion of SW Michael1950 that the Russian engine building is not able to create an analogue of the F135 as something good, then he has a clear lack of understanding of the printed text. However, the author is generally far from the aviation theme as the Chukchi are from the tropics.

    And here is Bindyuzhnik himself.

    Marzhetsky, drones are initially created according to different principles, it makes no sense to build a full-fledged fighter and then mold AI on it. And yet - despite the loud victorious reports, the only real UAV in the Russian Armed Forces is still the unfading Outpost, which is just a licensed copy of an old Israeli Searcher, assembled in the Russian Federation using the screwdriver assembly method from Israeli components. And all these hunter-Orion-Altair simply do not exist, like the Su-75, and the lonely Su-57 has not yet become a combat unit.

    An evil Israeli clown in his repertoire.
    1. Binder Offline Binder
      Binder (Miron) 25 November 2021 19: 01
      -4
      Quote: Marzhetsky
      An evil Israeli clown in his repertoire.

      A kind Russian liar-dreamer. What have I misrepresented in my comment? lol
      1. The comment was deleted.
  4. zenion Offline zenion
    zenion (zinovy) 25 November 2021 18: 59
    0
    And now a powerful drone rips the air to shreds, covering the rocket speed and at the same time getting rid of the excess, the tail, wings and everything from the inside.
  5. Michael1950 Online Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 25 November 2021 19: 09
    -1
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    And it seemed to me that it was the Yankees who "cut off" a lot of things. smile

    - This is a fairly typical Soviet, and then Russian delusion, intensely fueled by the officialdom ... smile

    Counter proposal: to make such lifting motors that will not refuse. How do you like the idea?

    - H-ha! laughing "Easy to say" ... But "miracles in this world", in the words of one of the Strugatsky heroes, "there are only nasty"...

    In the unmanned version of the aircraft, "ballast" will probably not be such a problem.

    - In terms of security - of course. Only "iron" perishes. But it is better when the engine power can be completely switched from the fan to the longitudinal thrust. This is a more progressive method - it affects both the combat radius and the carrying capacity ... winked
  6. Michael1950 Online Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 25 November 2021 19: 15
    -3
    Quote: mark1
    There is no particular problem with the PD, or do you think that the fan with the transmission in the F-35 is much lighter than the PD in the Yak-141?

    a) safer;
    b) it is energetically (and tactically) more useful.

    You probably know that the variant with a lift fan was considered in the Yakovlev Design Bureau, but based on a set of characteristics, they decided that it was preferable to PD

    - Yeah, they probably had an engine similar to the F135 lying around in their warehouse: 19.5 tons of thrust on afterburner at the start "by airplane", or "the fan takes the power of 29 thousand hp and creates the maximum thrust 9072 kg, and 7122 kg of vertical thrust is created by the gas jet of the engine. Side nozzles create thrust along 884 kg each "? lol
    http://airwar.ru/enc/engines/f135.html
    1. mark1 Offline mark1
      mark1 25 November 2021 20: 56
      +2
      Quote: Michael1950
      Yeah, they probably had an engine similar to the F135 lying around in the warehouse: 19.5 tons of thrust on the afterburner at the start "by airplane",

      What is it that you Misha, are fixated on the "unique" F-135 - is it okay, the takeoff masses of the aeroplanes are very different? So the 15500 kg thrust of the R-79go in the shortened take-off / vertical landing mode is quite enough for the Yak-141 with a fan, and on the way there was a modification with a thrust of 17500 kg
      And at the expense of safer and more tactically / energetically more useful - your conjectures against the results of the research of the profile design bureau. And by the way the plane was a VTOL aircraft against a castrated UVVP
  7. Michael1950 Online Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 25 November 2021 19: 18
    -1
    Quote: Bindyuzhnik
    Marzhetsky, drones are initially created according to different principles, it makes no sense to build a full-fledged fighter and then mold AI on it.

    - It makes sense (I can't always agree with my half-brother. laughing) So it is planned at first on a number of models, including NGAD ...
    1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 26 November 2021 11: 59
      +2
      Of course it makes sense smile Bindyuzhnik is just really Russophobe
      1. Binder Offline Binder
        Binder (Miron) 26 November 2021 14: 05
        -6
        Marzhetsky, Bindyuzhnik is not a Russophobe, but a realist. smile
        1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) 26 November 2021 14: 09
          +1
          I would tell you who you are, but there is censorship laughing
          well you know yourself
          1. Binder Offline Binder
            Binder (Miron) 26 November 2021 14: 22
            -5
            Marzhetsky, your negative attitude warms my soul more than any other praise. hi
            1. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
              Marzhecki (Sergei) 27 November 2021 10: 05
              +1
              I don't think you have a soul at all smile You sold it long ago for a barrel of jam and a box of cookies.
              1. Binder Offline Binder
                Binder (Miron) 27 November 2021 11: 00
                -3
                Your thoughts are completely indifferent to me. bully
                1. The comment was deleted.
  8. Michael1950 Online Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 25 November 2021 19: 23
    -2
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    Fantasies that have arisen after articles about the conversion of old aircraft in China and America.

    I hear it for the first time. And not fantasies, but reasoning on the topic. These are two different things.

    question1. basic.
    How many yak 141 are in stock? Not one?

    The relevant Deputy Prime Minister announced the revival of the project. He knows better than you, probably? No? Here is a quote from him:

    "Now we are working on a conceptual model, prototypes. Of course, this is the future. For all types of aircraft carriers, a new fleet of aircraft will be needed. For this, various technologies are used that allow for shortened takeoff and landing or simply vertical takeoff. Conceptually, such work is underway. in the Ministry of Defense since last year, "he said.
    According to the Deputy Prime Minister, the timing of the creation of the new aircraft is determined by the technological cycle.

    “As a rule, it is seven to ten years, if you go into series,” explained Borisov.

    This is not the first time I have already pointed out to you, by the way, that in arms you must first think about why you need it, and only then do it. And for some reason this truth does not reach you.

    - IMHO: Russia (washed by numerous seas and oceans) makes sense to have aircraft with a short take-off run and vertical landing, because it is possible for them to make a lot of aircraft carriers of relatively small tonnagewhile the Russian economy simply "cannot afford it" to build aircraft carriers of the Ronald Reagan type.
  9. Panikovsky Offline Panikovsky
    Panikovsky (Mikhail Samuelevich Panikovsky) 25 November 2021 21: 04
    +2
    This plane does not exist. The project was closed in 1992, i.e. 30 years ago. Perhaps some developments will be used in promising aircraft, but this is the business of specialists and designers and, of course, MO.
    1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
      gunnerminer (gunner miner) 26 November 2021 00: 01
      -3
      In an optimistic scenario, this will take 30 years of hard work, and if there is a short bloody war in the Western, Southern, Eastern military districts, then there will be no such aircraft or UAVs at all.
  10. Michael1950 Online Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 26 November 2021 01: 52
    -1
    Quote: S S
    with avionics? would you first compare the performance characteristics of the Irbis with afar f22

    - Let's compare, for fun ?! wink I'm just afraid that according to the results of the comparison, someone would not go to hang themselves in the toilet ... laughing lol
  11. Michael1950 Online Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 26 November 2021 02: 29
    -2
    Quote: mark1
    Quote: Michael1950
    Yeah, they probably had an engine similar to the F135 lying around in the warehouse: 19.5 tons of thrust on the afterburner at the start "by airplane",

    What is it that you Misha, are fixated on the "unique" F-135 - is it okay, the takeoff masses of the aeroplanes are very different? So the 15500 kg thrust of the R-79go in the shortened take-off / vertical landing mode is quite enough for the Yak-141 with a fan, and on the way there was a modification with a thrust of 17500 kg

    - HM...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-141#Specifications_(Yak-41)
    Wing area: 31.7 m2
    Empty weight: 11,650 kg
    Max takeoff weight: 19,500 kg

    Powerplant: 1 × Soyuz R-79V-300 afterburning vectoring-nozzle turbofan, 108 kN thrust dry, 152 kN with afterburner
    Powerplant: 2 × RKBM RD-41 turbojets, 41.7 kN thrust each canted rearwards from vertical
    Maximum speed: 1,800 km / h
    Ferry range: 3,000 km
    Service ceiling: 15,500 m
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II#Specifications_(F-35B)
    Wing area: 43 m2
    Empty weight: 14,729 kg
    Max takeoff weight: 27,200 kg
    Fuel capacity: 6,123 kg internal
    Powerplant: 1 × Pratt & Whitney F135-PW-600 afterburning turbofan, 125 kN thrust dry, 191 kN with afterburner
    Maximum speed: Mach 1.6 at altitude (1700 km / h)
    Combat radius on internal fuel: 935 km
    Service ceiling: 15,000 m
    ====================
    Yak-141:
    19,500-11,650 =7,850 kg
    F-35:
    27,200-14,729 =12,271 kg
    What can be compared here? lol

    And at the expense of safer and tactically / energetically more useful - your speculations against the results of the research of the profile design bureau.

    - This is not my speculation. And bullshit should not be passed off as "the result of research" - "we did so because we considered this option the best". As if the Yakovlev Design Bureau had the opportunity to make such an option as Lockheed Martin! laughing tongue

    And by the way the plane was a VTOL aircraft against a castrated UVVP

    - So he was not. He was would... First flight 9 March 1987, passed 34 years, Russia has earned trillions of petrodollars since then. But he is not ...
    1. mark1 Offline mark1
      mark1 27 November 2021 13: 28
      +1
      Quote: Michael1950
      As if the Yakovlev Design Bureau had the opportunity to make such an option as Lockheed Martin!

      Had ... And, Mishan, who ripped off whom? You at least do not confuse the chronology of events and do not mislead others. One follows from the other and not the other way round.
      All your other comparisons also do not make sense, but only a simple distortion.
  12. Netyn Offline Netyn
    Netyn (Netyn) 26 November 2021 11: 49
    0
    we are talking about the development of the concept of the Soviet project SKVVP Yak-141, which was ahead of its time, and then was undeservedly forgotten

    Why is it forgotten? Even went into the series

  13. Marzhecki Online Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 26 November 2021 11: 59
    0
    Quote: Michael1950
    - IMHO: Russia (washed by numerous seas and oceans) makes sense to have aircraft with a short take-off run and vertical landing, because it is possible for them to make a lot of aircraft carriers of relatively small tonnage, while building aircraft carriers of the "Ronald Reagan" type for the Russian economy is simple " it is too expensive".

    I totally agree. For a transitional period. I write about this on a regular basis.
  14. Cat Offline Cat
    Cat (Sergei) 26 November 2021 19: 21
    0
    Of course HE will be. And certainly not soon. And why? Yes, because in the presence of such modern GZPKR as "Zircon" from our aircraft carrying ships such a BZ as "Strikes of manned aircraft on the enemy's KUG / AUG" is removed. But to fight off dozens of enemy anti-ship missiles, you won't be enough of the S-400 alone, since the best missile defense system at a distance of 400 km is just our anti-ship missile fighter, etc. GDP with a dozen missile defense missiles!
    1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
      gunnerminer (gunner miner) 26 November 2021 19: 49
      -3
      Zircon is just an ammunition, not adopted for service, without a hypersonic ramjet engine. Without an active guidance system. It is launched as a missile defense system. On a pair of accelerators, with acceleration into hypersound for a couple of minutes. Without a heat-resistant cap. That such ammunition hit a mobile target. it is necessary to fulfill the conditions for the whole list. Most of this list, the Civil Code of the Russian Navy is not able to provide its subordinates.
  15. Michael1950 Online Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 27 November 2021 13: 45
    -2
    Quote: mark1
    Quote: Michael1950
    As if the Yakovlev Design Bureau had the opportunity to make such an option as Lockheed Martin!

    Had ...

    - Well, damn it with two! There is still no such engine as the F135 in Russia. On the basis of what the Yakovlev design bureau could even think about the F-35 scheme ??

    And, Mishan, who ripped off whom?

    - ripped off what?? Will you also tell me that the Wright brothers tore off the scheme from the Mozhaisky plane? wink

    You at least do not confuse the chronology of events and do not mislead others. One follows from the other and not the other way round.

    - I repeat: the Americans bought a license for the Yak-141 rotary nozzle for extremely ridiculous money - there is no more "not a single rivet" in the F-35 from the Yak-141 ...

    All your other comparisons also do not make sense, but only a simple distortion.

    - Come on ... There are not only "teapots" on the forum, there are people who understand, - do not make them laugh with propaganda flood ...
  16. Michael1950 Online Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 27 November 2021 13: 46
    -1
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    Quote: Michael1950
    - IMHO: Russia (washed by numerous seas and oceans) makes sense to have aircraft with a short take-off run and vertical landing, because it is possible for them to make a lot of aircraft carriers of relatively small tonnage, while building aircraft carriers of the "Ronald Reagan" type for the Russian economy is simple " it is too expensive".

    I totally agree. For a transitional period. I write about this on a regular basis.

    - So this is completely natural ...
  17. Michael1950 Online Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 27 November 2021 13: 52
    -2
    Quote: Cat
    Of course HE will be. And certainly not soon. And why? Yes, because in the presence of such modern GZPKR as "Zircon" from our aircraft carrying ships such a BZ as "Strikes of manned aircraft on the enemy's KUG / AUG" is removed.

    - And who told you that the Aegis air defense system, continuously being modernized, will not be able to shoot down ANY missiles - even a BR, even an ICBM, even a hypersonic one? Completely vain hopes.

    But to fight off dozens of enemy anti-ship missiles, you won't be enough of the S-400 alone, since the best missile defense system at a distance of 400 km is just our anti-ship missile fighter, etc. GDP with a dozen missile defense missiles!

    - The S-400 is not able to destroy the stealth before they are bombed - mark yourself somewhere?

  18. Siegfried Offline Siegfried
    Siegfried (Gennady) 27 November 2021 18: 09
    0
    relying on remote control of an unmanned fighter, whether it is a ground operator or as a follower, carries great risks of losing this controllability. The EW capability race between the West and Russia is far from Russia's perceived advantage, especially when it comes to onboard EW systems on airplanes or containers. It will be enough for the enemy to find a way to neutralize the control signal in order to deprive Russia of all its fighter UAVs (and not only them). True combat stability will only be achieved with the full autonomy of an AI-based fighter. It is necessary to strive for this already now. Even without a platform, you can start working out AI algorithms on existing devices. Why not take the Yak-130, make an unmanned version of it and give birth to the Russian AI of fighter aircraft on it.