"Су-27. История истребителя"

 

A.F.

втянувшийся

Коллеги! Сейчас готовится 3-е издание книжки "Су-27. История истребителя" (первое вышло в 1999 г., 2-е - в 2000 г.). Третье издание должно появиться в июле этого года и будет достаточно сильно переработано и дополнено, будут исправлены ошибки прежних изданий (общий объем ориентировочно - 356-372 стр.). В связи с этим обращаюсь ко всем, кто хочет высказать свои замечания по предыдущим изданиям! Особенно интересуют мысли по разделу "В строю". Заинтересованным в восстановлении "исторической истины" о службе Су-27 в ВВС и авиации ПВО в 80-90-е гг. в СССР, России и ближнем зарубежье готов выслать по мылу раздел об эксплуатации (в том виде, в котором он существует сейчас - с учетом уже сделанных поправок и дополнений) для получения ваших откликов, замечаний и дополнений. Также приветствуются любые фотки на данную тему. Надеюсь, найдутся тут те, кому это покажется небезынтересным! Ваше участие обязательно будет отражено в книге (если не будет возражений). Ну и, конечно, гарантирую саму книжку (смогу передать в Москве или выслать по почте в июле-августе). Опережая вопрос о возможном "разглашении", сразу скажу, что перед сдачей в типографию, как и раньше, все материалы книжки проходят экспертизу в соответствующих органах ГШ МО и получают разрешение на опубликование в открытой печати. Заранее спасибо!

Андрей Фомин
 
+
-
edit
 

SwingKid

новичок
Thank you for asking. :)

Of course your book is, in my opinion, the best publication in the world about Su-27, and it's foolish for an amateur to make suggestions to the master, how to change his art. I have very little information to offer as help, and in most cases I don't know the answers to my own questions. But if it helps you, and you'll forgive me for writing in English, then I'm happy to share the questions that remain after reading the first and second editions!


DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
(1) Su-27S? Su-27P?

The second edition says that the ground-attack capability was added to Su-27, and then removed to comply with the CFE Treaty. Yefim Gordon, however, refers to two separate versions of Su-27 - Su-27P for PVO, with no ground attack capability, and Su-27S for VVS, with ground attack capability. In cockpit photos, some Su-27 have a black weapons panel including the ground attack controls (as in Su-33), and others have a blue weapons panel with only the air-to-air controls. Is it true that these are the different Su-27P and S versions?

(2) N-001 radar

The two-mirror Cassegrain radar antenna was difficult for me to understand, and the description is not detailed. Much text is spent describing the "Myech" radar, with the conclusion - "for some reason the Myech radar was abandoned in 1982 and the Cassegrain antennas carried by the production Su-27 aircraft were very much like those in use with the MiG-29 radars, but with different characteristics. However, this is another dramatic moment in the Su-27 story to be told in a later chapter."

Here, IMHO there is much room for improvement. First, the "later chapter" should be identified - in this case I could only find the story continued in "The Su-35 and Su-37 - New Performance". Second, the promised description of service Cassegrain N-001 story should actually exist. In fact, it's described only as a one-sentence introduction to the story of the Su-35 radar, with phased array. And the description of the N-001 in "Design, Systems and Weapons" is only 6 sentences - just some ranges, angles and altitudes in which the equipment can be used.

Mr. Fomin, the radar is one of the most important parts of the interceptor, it really deserves more attention. And the Cassegrain antenna is especially interesting, since it's so different from western designs. It would be good to start with some historical context, development of such antennas on basis of earlier Soviet development:

http://dit.perm.ru:81/003/03/real_BRLS.htm

Maybe some basic principles of Cassegrain radar antenna operation (from MiG-23):

404

It should be explained how a monopulse radar antenna offers protection against ECM, the gyro-stabilization (isolation from aircraft bank and roll) of the antenna should be described, the radar modes of operation (is it true that Su-27 only works in track-while-scan mode?), the problems with perpendicular targets, sidelobe compensation at low altitudes, advantages and disadvantages compared with planar antennas, the exact reasons that the Myech was abandoned, whether the radar can engage only one or two targets simultaneously (see below), why there is a "Xenon bulb", etc. Here there is a potential ocean of material for filling a third edition and educating the reader!

(3) R-27 missile development

The absence of inertial guidance and radio-correction from R-27T versions is known from the absence of receiver antennas (you can see them on the sides of the missile R-27R, behind the control surfaces), and I understand this will already be corrected. Some other topics that would be interesting:

(a) contributions of R-23/4 and K-25 to the K-27 design. How is the R-27R head different from R-23/4R head? What improvements did the new hydraulic control offer to the new missile, above the pneumatic control of R-23/4? Consider the context of development history:

http://dit.perm.ru:81/003/03/real_AAmissile_2.htm

(b) note that even though the N-001 uses a monopulse Cassegrain antenna, Agat's 9B-110K head of R-27R uses a phased array monopulse radar antenna. Because it's monopulse, the R-27R is also able to capture a source of radio interference.

© Arsenal's "Mayak" head for the R-73 is described, but it would be good to know more about the "36T" head of R-27T also. Is it the same head used in the R-27ET? R-60M? R-60MK? R-40TD? R-40T? R-24T? R-23T? K-13? Do they all use nitrogen cooling, with the bottle stored in the suspension bracket? It seems there may be a long and very interesting history of these infrared receivers.




(d) The AIM-7 can use a ballistic trajectory "loft" flight profile to increase its maximum range. This is one of the most important, but least-discussed, parameters of missile development. Is there a known history of ballistic trajectory research and testing for Soviet air-to-air missiles? Do the pilots ever pitch the aircraft upwards to launch the missile, or does the missile always perform its own climb?

(e) The R-27E version doesn't only have a larger motor, but also two different regimes of thrust - accelerate ("boost") and cruise ("sustain"). Are there details of this development? How much time is preferred for each stage? Is it used in other Soviet missiles? For most western missiles, the time of motor burn is not secret.

Ok, it's enough for the first chapter.. more thoughts later. :)

-SK
 
+
-
edit
 

SwingKid

новичок
Dear A.F.,

I received an e-mail, but unfortunately, I can't reply to it. My software doesn't support the Cyrillic symbols in the return address. Do you have a different e-mail address with Latin symbols?

For the moment, I will continue my thoughts here:




PRODUCTION
(1) KnAAPO Su-27, Su-27P

In the section about KnAAPO, is described "repair and servicing the Su-27, Su-27M, Su-27P, ..." So, it seems KnAAPO agrees that there are two such animals - "Su-27" and "Su-27P". Somewhere in the book, it would be good to explain, what is the difference (or at least, what KnAAPO believes is the difference :) between Su-27P and Su-27(S?).

(2) Two targets for Su-27?

Again from Efim Gordon is the claim that during production of the Su-27, there was an added new capability to the weapon system. He claims that all "Su-27P", and recently-constructed "Su-27S", have the ability to engage two targets simultaneously and guide missiles to them. For a long time I thought that this was some mistake, that Gordon confused N-001 radar with stories about the cancelled "Myech" with electronic scanning. But recently there are opinions circulating (by people who worked on the Kuznetsov) that Su-33 does have this capability. What is the truth? This seems like a very interesting story. How is it technologically possible, when the antenna uses mechanical scanning, and the missiles are not active radar? Does it require use of R-27EM missiles, or it can be done with normal R-27R/ER? It requires the use of track-while-scan mode, or maybe the radio communication datalink from other radars? Is it really effective?


SHIP-BORNE FLANKER
(1) Aerodynamic comparison to Su-27

Su-33 uses the same engines as Su-27, is heavier, but has canards. It would be interesting to know the pilot's opinion - does this combination make the Su-33 more, or less maneuverable than Su-27? Are the folding wings responsible for reduced maximum G? Do the canards and extra weapons hardpoints reduce the maximum speed or operating altitude?

(2) Problems with RWR (СПО-15)

The description of Kuznetsov's Mediterranean cruise does not include the story of Su-33 interception by Israeli F-16s, when it was "discovered" that the SPO-15 was insufficient to detect F-16 radar transmissions. The story is especially interesting now, because the Su-33 is being upgraded, but not with the new radar, RVV-AE and Moskit as originally proposed, but rather - with new L-150 RWR. I guess it was decided, that replacing the RWR is a higher priority. Questions:

(a) If the SPO-15 didn't detect Israeli F-16, how did Russia decide they actually had their radars turned on, and weren't guided "silently", by Israeli E-2 AWACS?

(b) Why does this seem to be a Su-33 problem? Don't Su-27, MiG-29, and Su-25 all use the same SPO-15? Wouldn't it make sense to upgrade Su-27 RWR first, so it can be tested independently of aircraft carrier operations? Or, the SPO-15 has this problem only on Su-33? How?

(3) Weapons system comparison to Su-27

One difference between Su-27 and "upgraded" Su-33 weapon system is described as the ability "to intercept aerial targets with the support of the aircraft-carrier's command-and-control means". What does this mean?

(a) There are stories now that the Su-33 can engage two targets simultaneously (see above). Does this regime perhaps require the support of the aircraft-carrier's command-and-control means?

(b) Is the aircraft-carrier's command-and-control means really operational? How does it work? Many people say that the Kuznetsov's large "Sky Watch" radar was an unsuccessful design, and is not operational. For example - "Varyag" was constructed without antennas for this radar. And one person says even the large square antennas on Kuznetsov are not antennas, but actually "concrete slabs" to fool spies. Is it true? The An- and Yak- carrier-borne AWACS aircraft were cancelled, and the Ka- AWACS helicopter was tested, but is not actually purchased by Russian Navy. So what is the basis of the carrier's "command-and-control" system? And...

© ...how is it different from the normal ground control system used with Su-27? Different communication frequencies? Or really different capabilities? Why not use a unified system for both? For example, Soviet naval surface-to-air missiles and ground surface-to-air missiles usually use the same technology.

(4) ASM-MSS/"Moskit"/3M80

It's interesting that the Su-33 was photographed with ASM-MSS "Moskit" on a weapons hardpoint at an airshow, but it was never photographed with RVV-AE. What is the real story of Moskit development? There is even a pylon! One person told me that the Su-33 flew carrying a model Moskit for aerodynamic tests, but the missile (not the aircraft) was never finished, and it was never launched from Su-33. Is a new radar and weapon system required, or can the Moskit receive
radio datalink target designation from the Tu-22/142 aircraft with sea attack radar, or radar satellite guidance, or the Kamov AWACS through the carrier's command-and-control system? Can the Su-33 really take off from the carrier with Moskit and air-to-air missiles? What would be the maximum allowed fuel load and combat range in such configuration?

(5) R-27EM

This missile is designed to intercept low-altitude targets over the sea, and it's never mentioned that Su-27 can use it - only Su-35, and Su-33. It's true? Has it been tested with Su-33? Su-33 weapon system seems to be more similar to Su-27, than to Su-35, so it's surprising to think that Su-33 could use R-27EM, but Su-27 could not. Or, do they refer to Su-33 only after the "proposed" weapons upgrade?




Thanks again for your interest, more thoughts later...

-SK
 

A.F.

втянувшийся

Dear SK! Thanks for your thoughts. I'm really surprised at the cyrillic e-mail address provided for your by AIRBASE :) Up to now I considered that all e-mail addresses had only Latin spelling :) So, try this one 4 example: andreyairfleet.ru.
I'll try to find the answers to most of your qeustions. Thank you for your attention!
 
+
-
edit
 

Mishka

модератор
★★★
А можно будет как-нибудь людям, находящимся в дальнем зарубежье, купить и получить книгу? Я бы с удовольствием приобрел ее.
 

A.F.

втянувшийся

2 Mishka
Конечно можно. Если будете ждать 3 издание на русском языке - где-то в июле-августе. Если прямо щас горит, то теоретически можно попробовать найти предыдущее. А если В Англии живете скажем - то англ.издание (2000 г.) пока там еще можно купить, могу сказать где :) Пишите в мыло или аську - попробую помочь
 
+
-
edit
 

serbor

опытный

Кстати, как вариант, а в электронном виде за меньшие деньги продавать не собираетесь? Чтоб не скопировали, можно пробовать в .pdf (хотя конечно можно и тут копирнуть, но возни больше).

И еще, я бы и такой и такой вариант купил бы. Так как я в Риге (по крайне мере 50% времени). то можно попробовать организовать несколько местных участников из Риги, если заинтересуются и получить книгу одной посылкой, что будет дешевле.
 

A.F.

втянувшийся

Да копирование электронной версии не проблема. Даже если ее и не будет, один Ваш бывший земляк, небезызвестный в области авиационного книгоиздания, просто сосканит с книжки и будет использовать по собственному усмотрению. Только времени больше потратит :)
Дело не в копировании, а в том что у нас рынок коммерческих электронных продуктов не развит ИМХО, да думаю и не разовьется никогда. Менталитет, как модно говорить теперь, не тот :)
Но специально для Вас устроить можно будет, думаю
 

MABP

втянувшийся
Сорри за оффтоп, но может кто на хорошем английском спросить Свинга, на основании чего он сделал вывод о неэффективности СПО?
Обныкновенный русский негр
 
+
-
edit
 

serbor

опытный

SwingKid, You wfote some data on СПО-15 - could You please find some more precise data on this question and clarify the situation? What Your idweas are based on?
 

Vale

Сальсолёт

Электронную версию надо продавать на диске ;)
"Не следуй за большинством на зло, и не решай тяжбы, отступая по большинству от правды" (Исх. 23:2)  
+
-
edit
 

SwingKid

новичок
"Nonetheless, the cruise revealed numerous shortcomings of both the ship and her aircraft. E.g., the Su-27K's radar and electronic support measures (ESM) gear were not working as they should, rendering the fighter vulnerable to attack. On one occasion a Su-27K was jumped by Israeli Defence Force/Air Force fighters off the Syrian coast. The IDF/AF jets began hemming the Russian fighter in, as though attempting to force it down on Israeli territory, and the pilot had to make violent manoeuvers to break away. The Flanker's avionics failed to detect the Israeli jets, and the pilot didn't realize he had company until it was almost too late."

E. Gordon, "Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker Air Superiority Fighter," 1999

-SK
 
+
-
edit
 

Valeri_

опытный

>The IDF/AF jets began hemming the Russian fighter in, as though attempting to force it down on Israeli territory, and the pilot had to make violent manoeuvers to break away.

Опять... :(

Не читайте на ночь израильских газет, а тем более их пересказы.

 
+
-
edit
 

SwingKid

новичок
Israeli sources are not necessary. A.F. himself has written about the recent Su-33 upgrade. What did Russia finally decide to upgrade first in the Su-33?

A new radar with ground mapping? No.
Precision-guided ground-attack weapons? No.
R-77 capability? No.
"Moskit"? No.

First priority, more important than all of the above - to replace СПО-15 by Л-150 "Пастель".

-SK
 

Cojet

новичок
Если можно, то хотелось бы увидеть информацию по ЭДСУ и системам управления различных модификаций Су-27. Они же у Су-27, -33, -35 различаются между собой, а достоверной информации о том, чем же именно, найти пока не удалось.
 
RU Дм. Журко #16.04.2004 23:54
+
-
edit
 

Дм. Журко

опытный

Здравствуйте, уважаемый A.F.

К изрядному прискорбию, не читал я эту книгу. Наши — калининградские — магазины балуют только томиками АСТ — бестолковыми. Потому не могу и обсуждать.



Кто о чём, а я... Насколько подробно описаны поиски облика Су-27? Мечтаю, чтоб хоть какой-нибудь проект описали б начиная с выработки требований и поиска тактики. Да учли бы мировой и исторический контекст, политические условия.

Сейчас пытаюсь разобрать трудные французские буквы на этой вот замечательной страничке:



Возможно ли нечто подобное прочесть в этой книге?

Дмитрий Журко
 
+
-
edit
 

SwingKid

новичок
A.F.,

Вы получили мои e-mails на вашу адресу?

-SK
 

A.F.

втянувшийся

Andrew, все получил, спасибо большoе. Analising...
 

в начало страницы | новое
 
Поиск
Настройки
Твиттер сайта
Статистика
Рейтинг@Mail.ru