Is there a future for Russian ekranoplan projects?

11 September 2017 143

Two years have passed since the demonstration of the project of the high-speed E-080-752 high-speed wig-gun on the hydrofoil vessels (named after R. Alexeyev). Until now, the project has not found an investor who could translate the idea of Nizhny Novgorod designers into reality through project financing. And by and large, the project can be very promising.

Is there a future for Russian ekranoplan projects?

One of the reasons for the prospects of the project is that the ground-effect A-080-752 (type "C") is characterized by high dynamic performance with an impressive load capacity. Its capacity is 20 tons - at speeds up to 450 km / h. The ekranoplan, which received the working name of "The Seagull", at the same time can use for takeoff and landing as the surface of the water, and the usual strip of the airfield, capable of taking aircraft with the specified capacity.

The ekranoplan is designed for urgent transportation of cargo in coastal areas.

Overall length: 47,6 m
Overall width: 45,3 m
Height Overall: 13,5 m
Dimensional draft: 1,25 m
Full displacement: 100 t
Capacity: 20 t
Crew: 3 person
Cruising speed range (depending on flight options): 410-150 km / h
Range: 5000 km

Seaworthiness: during takeoff / during landing / during flight / while drifting: 2 m. Without restrictions to 3 m.

The Central Design Bureau im.R.E. Alekseev there are other projects in the segment of the construction of WIG. One of such projects is the marine multi-purpose two-deck cargo-and-crew ground-winged vehicle A-300-538, which is presented in the form of computer graphics that attracts attention:

Overall length: 72,1 m
Overall width: 56,2 m
Height Overall: 18,7 m
Dimensional draft: 1,97 m
Full displacement: 350 t.
Cruising speed range: when flying at the screen / when flying off-screen: 500 / 610 km / h
Passenger: 550 people
Crew: 8 people
Seaworthiness: during takeoff / during landing / during flight / while drifting: 2,5 / 3,5 / to 6,0 / to 6,0 m
Loading capacity, t (the transported cargo without passengers) 64 t
Flight range on the screen - up to 3 thousand. Km.

143 comments

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Trevis

+4

11 September 2017 18: 49

Beautiful pictures! It would not be bad to see such people alive.
1. DEPARTMENT
  
  +8
  
  11 September 2017 19: 00
  
  Quote: Trevis
  Beautiful pictures! It would not be bad to see such people alive.
  
  There are not only pictures .... Things are powerful and promising, that's just it all comes down to financing! I am sure that these projects are waiting in the wings, and not only in the military sphere.
  1. Simon
    
    +2
    
    11 September 2017 22: 08
    
    I think that for military purposes the ekranoplane is already considering its use, since it goes above water at an altitude of about 5-20 meters at a speed of 500 km \ h. It can carry troops, missiles and other equipment that it can land directly on the shore, moreover, it is not very visible to locators due to its low height. I think he has a great future.
    1. Reklastik
      
      +1
      
      12 September 2017 06: 25
      
      Are there any requirements for the underlying surface? And why are these devices still not used on a massive scale, and are they only being prospectively designed? Are there any cases of mass use of such machines in China, in the USA? Looking at the past of the ekranoplan, it is difficult to predict its promising future ...
      1. marder7
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 09: 31
        
        there are cases of mass use in the USSR, for example, landing ekranoplan "Eaglet" (7 pieces)
      2. serezhasoldatow
        
        0
        
        14 September 2017 21: 36
        
        And why do we need the experience of China, the USA? The USSR has much more experience.
2. 210ox
  
  0
  
  11 September 2017 19: 17
  
  Take a trip to Kaspiysk. I hope there’s still not a car dismantled.
  Quote: Trevis
  Beautiful pictures! It would not be bad to see such people alive.
3. Maz
  
  +1
  
  11 September 2017 19: 36
  
  There is a future, but why carry it on? And they consume a lot of fuel but you can build it. A couple of Americans to troll.
  1. Vita vko
    
    +5
    
    11 September 2017 19: 50
    
    Quote: Maz
    There is a future, but why carry it on? And they consume a lot of fuel but you can build it. A couple of Americans to troll
    
    All Russian developments have their future from the beginning in the West or East, and then all the Russians are “proud” that we had the first developments. This strange tradition developed back in the days of M. Lomonosov. For example, the ekranoplanes are now the most built in China. And they have up to one place not only American opinion, but also all sorts of amateurs from the homeland of these developments.
    http://www.abirus.ru/content/564/623/631/11303.ht
    ml
    1. Simon
      
      +1
      
      11 September 2017 22: 15
      
      You can build, but it will move or not. The Americans have been trying to build that year, only they are failing. And we have some experience with the construction, in addition, I am sure that the drawings and calculations have been preserved.
    2. Reklastik
      
      0
      
      12 September 2017 11: 47
      
      Even the link is not working?
  2. San Sanych
    
    +1
    
    11 September 2017 19: 59
    
    "a couple to let the Americans troll") well, but it’s unlikely to impress them when they have more than a dozen aircraft carriers, and in this case, is the game worth the candle?
    1. Yura
      
      +1
      
      11 September 2017 20: 12
      
      Quote: San Sanych
      a couple, to troll the Americans ") well, but it’s unlikely to impress them when they have more than a dozen aircraft carriers
      If using modern technology, to build one Wing type Wing per aircraft carrier, then Americans can put their aircraft carriers on a joke off the coast instead of pontoons so that there is a place for women to rinse their clothes.
      1. San Sanych
        
        +4
        
        11 September 2017 20: 29
        
        that’s how it is, but nevertheless, until now, aircraft carriers “rule” the sea, as if it weren’t pleasant to someone, but it’s a fact (at least until now), unless these aircraft carriers zircons "will be reset (I would like very much), but again, for these" zircons "we need a reliable real-time target designation system, for aircraft carriers, with their" hockeys "it is much easier to provide
  3. San Sanych
    
    +3
    
    11 September 2017 20: 05
    
    although the idea is certainly attractive, these ekranoplanes, but only “oats” are still expensive, despite the fact that oil prices have fallen, they cannot yet compete not with the Air Force, and not with the “citizen” by the criterion of “price-effectiveness” "but in the Ministry of Emergencies they would be welcome
    1. Yura
      
      +1
      
      11 September 2017 21: 10
      
      San Sanych, I wrote you a detailed commentary on this topic, but something didn’t go through (I have very unstable Internet in the last month), and figs with it, so briefly - everything is solved if there is a real goal that promises a result.
      1. San Sanych
        
        +1
        
        11 September 2017 21: 25
        
        “everything is decided, if there is a real goal that promises a result,” I can agree with you, but at the same time we need to add another well-known quote: “frames decide everything”
        
        Reklastik
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 11: 48
        
        and add: "the state cannot live without reserves"
    2. db1967
      
      +1
      
      12 September 2017 08: 12
      
      Well, why are you ... The same Seagull described above - the cost of delivering kmk cargo will be less than aviation.
  4. JD1979
    
    +1
    
    11 September 2017 23: 29
    
    Quote: Maz
    There is a future, but why carry it on? And they consume a lot of fuel but you can build it. A couple of Americans to troll.
    
    ... Another of the sect "many guzzling" ekranoplanes ....
    1. edge
      
      0
      
      12 September 2017 05: 11
      
      Quote: JD1979
      .Another one of the sect is "many guzzling" ekranoplanes ....
      
      a project always carries out a set of developments satisfying customer requirements ..... when new production facilities are organized and scaled up
  5. edge
    
    0
    
    12 September 2017 05: 09
    
    Quote: Maz
    but you can build. A couple of Americans to troll.
    
    expensive fake coming out.
marshes

+2

11 September 2017 18: 49

To the question to the article, no.
If about 50 Lyamas of the population do not live in the Far East and one-time pokatushki to the islands, they will not start to make a profit.
1. Herculesic
  
  +3
  
  11 September 2017 18: 55
  
  Everything will depend on the price of the ticket for the passenger, otherwise they will break such a one that it is cheaper to go on foot across the country!
  1. marshes
    
    +4
    
    11 September 2017 18: 59
    
    Quote: Herkulesich
    Everything will depend on the price of the ticket for the passenger, otherwise they will break such a one that it is cheaper to go on foot across the country!
    
    Exactly, although what to do there on the islands, by the way tourists are the most haggard people, if they need to visit something, they will find the cheapest way.
corporal

+2

11 September 2017 18: 50

The ekranoplan is designed for urgent transportation of cargo in coastal areas.

That's just for urgent maneuver lapel from obstacles, in the form of a variety of waterfowl troughs, is not intended.
1. marshes
  
  +2
  
  11 September 2017 18: 55
  
  Quote: Corporal
  That's just for urgent maneuver lapel from obstacles, in the form of a variety of waterfowl troughs, is not intended.
  
  He’ll leave, because it’s not in vain that they tested the Caspian onboard radar to help him. And he thought for the Pacific Open spaces, the Chinese would buy. Or create something like that.
  1. corporal
    
    0
    
    11 September 2017 19: 25
    
    Quote: marshes
    Will leave
    
    With sudden interference, no.
    1. marshes
      
      +2
      
      11 September 2017 19: 31
      
      Quote: Corporal
      With sudden interference, no.
      
      They can just pull the helm on themselves, because their ceiling is 4,5 km.
      And, like the film adaptation of flights above the surface, it was calculated by your scientists. Here the planes like his Italian that you worked on B did not want to land.
      1. corporal
        
        0
        
        11 September 2017 19: 43
        
        Quote: marshes
        They can just pull the helm on themselves, because their ceiling is 4,5 km
        
        Where did you find this? Do not confuse with ekranoletami?
        
        marshes
        
        +4
        
        11 September 2017 20: 07
        
        Quote: Corporal
        Where did you find this? Do not confuse with ekranoletami?
        
        Not those machines have such an opportunity. Of course, cruising speed is only above the water, by the way the film adaptation of the flight above the water surface saves aircraft fuel, this was noticed during the operation of the Su-24, they did not dare to 22.
        My father had a pravak that was with the SEV Fleet, they wrote off what he was telling. And there were also those who flew on the MIG-25 r, pravaks.
      2. Herculesic
        
        +2
        
        11 September 2017 20: 15
        
        Bolot not about Bartini do you write an hour? ??
        
        marshes
        
        0
        
        11 September 2017 20: 47
        
        Quote: Herkulesich
        Swamps are not about Bartini. Do you write for an hour? ??
        
        It was about him that his planes had a very low landing speed, although they were more than a dozen tons fun.
      3. 113262a
        
        0
        
        11 September 2017 22: 27
        
        Bartini. Was like that
  2. edge
    
    0
    
    12 September 2017 05: 14
    
    Quote: marshes
    .A thought for the Pacific Open spaces, the Chinese will buy. Or create something like that.
    
    both Chinese and Koreans are already working on production ...
2. venaya
  
  +1
  
  11 September 2017 19: 23
  
  Quote: Corporal
  That's just for urgent maneuver lapel from obstacles, in the form of a variety of waterfowl troughs, is not intended.
  
  If desired, this "flaw" can also be corrected. It is possible that this will require some complication of the design, but not significant. Everything can be done, and for today's simplified design - the usual "childhood" disease that is quite realistic to cure, and not a fundamental flaw.
3. demo
  
  +5
  
  11 September 2017 19: 42
  
  And it interests me.
  At what height from the surface of the water does this thing go?
  And how quickly can she dodge tankers in the Strait of Malacca, say?
  1. corporal
    
    +1
    
    11 September 2017 20: 18
    
    Quote: demo
    At what height from the surface of the water does this thing go?
    
    1,5 - 5 meters
    Quote: demo
    And how quickly can she dodge tankers in the Strait of Malacca, say?
    
    For "Lunya" EMNIP, the turning radius is 3 km. According to the ones presented in the article, I don’t know, for some reason the authors modestly kept silent
  2. edge
    
    0
    
    12 September 2017 05: 16
    
    Quote: demo
    And how quickly can she dodge tankers in the Strait of Malacca, say?
    
    why dodge, drown if you don’t drive yourself
4. 34 region
  
  +5
  
  11 September 2017 20: 18
  
  18.50. Corporal! And why are hydrofoils not running here? Also a problem to dodge? But during the Soviet era, shipping was more intense. Plus private boats which were like cars today. And after all these ships were rushing like GAZelle minibuses today! But even these small vessels are not visible today! Do you have cruise river liners today? Decks 3-4. Well, or double-decker went with the wheels on the sides. Today we even build a simple wheel ship, an impossible task! And about the more technological and say nothing.
Baloo

+3

11 September 2017 18: 53

Are such giants needed at all? What about the efficiency of engines, the price of flight, will such a monster be in demand?
1. cniza
  
  +3
  
  11 September 2017 18: 58
  
  That's really 550 passengers, where is it?
  1. Fei_Wong
    
    +3
    
    11 September 2017 19: 41
    
    In Pearl Harbor. Or at least to Okinawa.
    1. ZVO
      
      0
      
      11 September 2017 20: 56
      
      Quote: Fei_Wong
      In Pearl Harbor. Or at least to Okinawa.
      
      It's easier there. cheaper and better on two An-124
      1. Fei_Wong
        
        +1
        
        11 September 2017 21: 10
        
        And those. Will Ukraine extend the life of the An-124 to us? Well, I understand you.
    2. tlauicol
      
      0
      
      12 September 2017 05: 39
      
      Quote: Fei_Wong
      In Pearl Harbor. Or at least to Okinawa.
      
      you look at its range - and then on a piece of paper
Herculesic

+5

11 September 2017 18: 53

That is why our state does not lobby for such ideas? Why not build at least 10 pieces for the army — the machine you need, especially in the Black Sea region, or in the Baltic?
1. marshes
  
  +3
  
  11 September 2017 19: 01
  
  Quote: Herkulesich
  Is the machine necessary, especially in the Black Sea region, or in the Baltic?
  
  There, aviation covers everything, and regular flights are enough for tourist exchange.
2. Ulan
  
  +4
  
  11 September 2017 19: 04
  
  The answer is simple. Our government does not need this. They lobby projects where there are kickbacks.
3. Tatarin83
  
  +4
  
  11 September 2017 19: 54
  
  What makes you think that the car you need?
  There was not so long ago a miscalculation on combat ekranoplans. Aviation is much more efficient and cheaper. But the ekranoplan has no advantages over aviation.
  1. 34 region
    
    0
    
    11 September 2017 20: 24
    
    19.54. Tatar! But what about the economics of a submarine and a surface ship? Is the substrate probably more voracious than a surface ship of a similar volume? But damn it, they build substrates! Build! Why?
    1. tlauicol
      
      0
      
      12 September 2017 05: 44
      
      Stealth. And what is EP except gluttony?
      1. 34 region
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 11: 31
        
        05.44. Tlaikol! Speed, stealth for radars, do not care for sea mines.
    2. Tatarin83
      
      +2
      
      12 September 2017 11: 08
      
      ES is visible as far as a surface ship, while its speed is 3-4 times less than the TU-22.
      Tu-22 has 2 engines, while Lun had 8 of the same engines
      Plus control complexity (one wrong move and khan)
      Plus, special coastal infrastructure is needed.
      Etc.
      
      The problem with ES is that it is compared with a ship, where it looks better, although you need to compare it with an airplane, because in technology and carrying capacity, it is much closer to it. And he loses the comparison with the plane in general in all respects.
      1. 34 region
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 11: 33
        
        11.08. Tatar! Everything is as if true. Is there really no pluses?
        
        tlauicol
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 11: 36
        
        There is. He's cool
        
        34 region
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 11: 49
        
        11.36. Tlauikol! When the first phone appeared, it was also very cool. They had no idea where and how to use it. What about the costs? And offer to refuse communication today ?!
        
        tlauicol
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 13: 44
        
        It’s very funny, but now imagine that Bell invented a phone that is heard only in the next quarter and which is 4 times more expensive
        
        Tatarin83
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 11: 51
        
        Perhaps a large carrying capacity (not sure), the ability to land on water (with a small wave). I don’t see more advantages, to be honest.
        
        Maybe EP has an application in small aircraft in difficult passable regions, but without numbers on hand it’s difficult to speak. But as a combat vehicle, IMHO, WIGs are not needed.
        
        There were no fools in the Soviet Ministry of Defense, they counted all the pros and cons, outweighed the cons, they didn’t go for this series of EPs.
        
        alstr
        
        +2
        
        12 September 2017 14: 21
        
        Answer a simple question: Do you need Bison (this is the one that is hovercraft)?
        The answer is obvious in principle.
        The ability to land on the coast at a speed of 4 times more than the Bison (400-500 against 100-130 km / h) with the same capacity (at least in terms of personnel) is a very topic. If they also provide the declared range (3000 km instead of 500 for the Bison), then it’s absolutely nonsense.
        
        This is just one example.
        
        And about gluttony, you just need to understand that almost 40 years have passed and the engines have seriously changed, as well as aerodynamics. Therefore, gluttony can be provided at the level of a conventional aircraft, if not lower.
        
        Those. the main advantage of ekranoplanes (new) is its high speed compared to ships, while losing a little in terms of its cargo capacity (for high-speed landing ships).
        At the same time, yielding to planes in speed, ekranoplanes win in the minimum flight altitude and the ability to land on the coast / river without a parachute method, a comparable amount of personnel. And also part of the technique is possible.
        
        If we talk about places of application, then on all seas such a device is useful. And in the Arctic, this would not be replaceable at all.
        
        Tatarin83
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 15: 43
        
        Well look:
        The carrying capacity of Orlyonok is 28 tons, the carrying capacity of IL-76 is 60 tons.
        All modern operations are done using stationary aerodromes; the times of operations like Overlord are long gone
        
        Tatarin83
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 15: 57
        
        ... and if you really want to land on an unequipped coast, then the Mi-8 will help you. 5-6 Mi-8 will replace one Eaglet. True, without tanks, but then they will be delivered by ships or aircraft.
        
        alstr
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 16: 41
        
        They will not be replaced if the distance then the landing site is more than 300 km (i.e. the radius of action).
        And at the same Orlyonka it will be 700 km. those. TWO times further.
        The same Bison has a range of 300 miles (i.e. approximately 550 km).
        By the way, the dimensions of Orlyonok and Bison are comparable.
        
        This is a purely practical task - landing on the beaches of Istanbul on the Black Sea. The distance from Sevastopol to Istanbul is 550 km.
        Helicopters and Bison - this is a one-way flight.
        Airplane - do not land - just drop it. But not everything can be reset.
        
        And if you use landing ships (the same Gren), then at a speed of 18 knots it will trail for 15 hours.
        Eaglet 6 times reeling back and forth during this time.
        
        Mimoprohodil
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 17: 10
        
        Quote: alstr
        By the way, the dimensions of Orlyonok and Bison are comparable.
        Bison load capacity of 150 tons, it's like the whole Eaglet
        
        Tatarin83
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 17: 17
        
        Well, Istanbul is a very bad example. You yourself understand that no one will ever land there, and if you really need to go into Turkey, then they will go by land. And so, when landing on a protected shore, all these Eagles from ATGMs or from simple artillery are clicked. They are suitable for landing on unprotected coasts, but where to find them, so as not to be protected and in our interests.
maai

+6

11 September 2017 19: 15

Quote: Herkulesich
Is the machine necessary, especially in the Black Sea region, or in the Baltic?
Northern Sea Route. There, along the coast and over the mainland, the region itself is developed. And loads and people.
It's just that those in power have neither mind nor imagination. For them, the Kerch bridge is the limit of perfection. The Soviet Union created monumental and breakthrough projects in months, and here decades of bathing. For bankers, only the numbers on their accounts are important. They do not know how to create anything, and most importantly do not give others.
Born to crawl fly flights.
1. marshes
  
  +2
  
  11 September 2017 19: 37
  
  Quote: maai
  Northern Sea Route. There, along the coast and over the mainland, the region itself is developed. And loads and people.
  
  By the way, the smartest koment, he himself did not attach any importance. That due to temperature changes the northern route will be open as well as the possibility of an enemy appearing, not only will military models be required for patrolling and, if possible, civilian communication with the countries of the Arctic region can also be established We have two-dimensional thinking, where you need to think about the three-dimensionality of the world. Plus, the fourth vector is time.
2. In100gram
  
  +1
  
  11 September 2017 19: 56
  
  Quote: maai
  Northern Sea Route. There, along the coast and over the mainland, the region itself is developed.
  
  And how does it sit in case of an accident? Water can always be splashed. And on the ice?
  1. 34 region
    
    +1
    
    11 September 2017 20: 28
    
    19.56. Instagram! On our helicopters, wheels, on amertious skids. How do the vile take off? What if you need to take acceleration to take off? If you put the skids, then they probably can slide on the ice.
    1. In100gram
      
      +1
      
      11 September 2017 20: 35
      
      Quote: Region 34
      If you put the skids, then probably they can slide on the ice
      
      And in hummocks ?? Also skiing, only humpbacked? After all, there is not always prepared airfield with cleared runway from snow
      1. 34 region
        
        +1
        
        11 September 2017 20: 40
        
        20.28. Instagram! It is logical! But planes land on cleared strips. They don’t carry an alternate aerodrome with them! And pilots hummocks, forests, rocks and other obstacles for some reason do not care.
        
        In100gram
        
        +1
        
        11 September 2017 20: 53
        
        Quote: Region 34
        And pilots hummocks, forests, rocks and other obstacles for some reason do not care.
        
        Pilots have much more time to make a decision. The height is different. This time. The advantage of the ekranoplan is only in low visibility and relatively high speed. But in terms of security, they will flop from 3-4 meters in case of failure .. I’m talking about this. Anyone will sit on prepared sites. And in the conditions of the Arctic coast it is cheaper to use airplanes on prepared sites. The whole charm of the ekranoplan — is reduced at any point (almost, depends on the wave) of the water surface — is lost.
        
        sabakina
        
        +5
        
        11 September 2017 21: 08
        
        Yol-paly, did you watch the video then?
        
        In100gram
        
        +1
        
        11 September 2017 21: 30
        
        Quote: sabakina
        Yol-paly, did you watch the video then?
        
        I looked. There was nothing about the Arctic. And I did not see any contradictions with what I wrote above.
        
        34 region
        
        0
        
        11 September 2017 21: 25
        
        20.53. Instagram! The reasoning is correct. But why use only northbound? And in the Caspian, in the Black Sea? And in the tundra? The shortest path is the direct one. Use on rivers with bends will probably be costly. And if you break through a clearing in the forest and go! We have no roads. And so will the direction! And the cost of the road is minimal. It is not necessary to lay down asphalt and rails. Already what savings in the transport direction! In order not to go on the highway in Kamaz, put up fences. In the event of an accident, a relatively flat strip. But asphalt is not to be patched, snow is not to be removed, sand is not to be sprinkled either! There will be two lanes, in each direction along the lane, with a division between the lanes of a hundred meters. I think a very economical project. We don’t do roads and we won’t do so, as well as a minimum of costs for road infrastructure!
        
        In100gram
        
        +1
        
        11 September 2017 21: 57
        
        Quote: Region 34
        And if you break through a clearing in the forest and go!
        
        Clearing a thousand kilometers is cheaper to build, even than a primer. But it is also necessary to take care of it (cut down the shoot). And this is infrastructure, if not cool, and costs. It may be cheaper than ground transportation, but I think more expensive than a plane. For southern maritime countries, the prospect is unconditional. But in our realities of the north, with our small non-freezing waters . Although it may be for special tasks, some amount will be beneficial.
        
        tlauicol
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 05: 46
        
        in addition to clearing in the forest, the relief must also be pierced - tens of thousands of kilometers on the tracks. It’s business - to hitch the hills, right?
        
        marder7
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 10: 36
        
        hills why squeeze? Yes, and clearings in the tundra are not needed there are no trees above 2 meters! the ekranoplan flies around the surface roughness in this and the "screen effect" consists almost like an air cushion. nothing to squeeze! he will overtake the main thing in the power transmission tower not to enter!
        
        tlauicol
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 11: 04
        
        The tundra is not a flat table. Open google
        
        marder7
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 15: 38
        
        open google yourself. I roamed the tundra for half a year, I had seen enough! for an ekranoplan, differences of 100-200 meters are not a problem if they are smooth enough and it flies 20-30 meters and not 5. think about it.
maai

+3

11 September 2017 19: 22

Quote: Balu
Are such giants needed at all? What about the efficiency of engines, the price of flight, will such a monster be in demand?

Firstly, not a monster, and secondly, since then, both materials and engines have gone far ahead. On our leadership, maybe a turnip will start scratching only when Asians and Americans occupy this niche. Not long left.
Fools, they think that the "western", "imported", "foreign" are always the best promising and necessary. And mine is shit. A dull and shortsighted, treacherous point of view. Although, our people most likely don’t think about anything at all ... if we forget about the Apple fan and so on. Otherwise, these devices would have been preparing for the series for a long time. At least for the Ministry of Emergencies, and for border guards, and for the military. Not to mention the transportation of passengers beyond the Urals and other vast regions of our homeland, deprived of all kinds of roads and airfields.

PS Little if we had exclusive and promising models of equipment, including dual-use, which were simply cut into scrap metal under the close supervision of the Americans!
1. Alexey RA
  
  +1
  
  11 September 2017 19: 30
  
  Quote: maai
  Otherwise, these devices would have been preparing for the series for a long time. At least for the Ministry of Emergencies, and for border guards, and for the military.
  
  And why are they military? Carry goods?
  1. Fei_Wong
    
    +1
    
    11 September 2017 19: 43
    
    Quote: Alexey RA
    And why are they military? Carry goods?
    
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Лунь_(экраноплан)
    1. Alexey RA
      
      +7
      
      11 September 2017 19: 54
      
      Fine. And who with this outstanding design, the size of an RTO, attack? More precisely, who will be so blind that they will miss her at the launch range? The target is low flying, low speed, low maneuverability.
      Let me remind you that a probable enemy from the 70s of the last century sharpened air defense against the much smaller overall supersonic missile defense DD and much more maneuverable supersonic Tu-22 / M / M3. Attacking at about the same altitude.
      Although ... I know - against whom the rocket ekranoplan is a child prodigy. This, sadly, is the Navy of the USSR and the Russian Federation, the ships and formations of which were (and still are) limited in detecting targets and using missile defense with a radio horizon. Against him - yes, the ekranoplan is an inconspicuous and almost unaffected target.
      And if you take a probable enemy, he will detect an ekranoplan long before reaching the range of use of these weapons. Because the radar of a patroller or an early warning radar is very difficult to miss such a dimensional target, which, to facilitate the work of the SDC, moves at a speed exceeding the speed of the ships (but still does not reach normal attack aircraft). And then ... further the hornet will direct the target, and he will launch a couple of some heirs to the “phoenix” - heavy RVV. For a relatively fragile ekranoplan, a warhead gap of 60-80 kg is enough.
      1. Fei_Wong
        
        +3
        
        11 September 2017 20: 03
        
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Fine. And who with this outstanding design, the size of an RTO, attack? More precisely, who will be so blind that they will miss her at the launch range?
        
        For its time, the creation of the TTX “Lunya” and its “Mosquitoes” allowed him to successfully go undetected to the distance of launching missiles at the carriers of the “probable partner”. And technology does not stand still, so that a modern ekranoplan can be made no worse (especially with the tremendous progress of ship missiles).
        The target is low flying, low speed, low maneuverability.
        
        Ekranoplans are primarily qualified as ships. And not for nothing. They were not stupid to give such a classification. Now imagine MRC, having a speed of at least 10 times the speed of any ship in the world. In this case, not afraid of torpedoes and mines.
        
        ZVO
        
        +1
        
        11 September 2017 21: 08
        
        Quote: Fei_Wong
        
        For its time, the creation of the TTX “Lunya” and its “Mosquitoes” allowed him to successfully go undetected to the distance of launching missiles at the carriers of the “probable partner”. .
        
        Well, you will probably tell us how images in the Caspian puddle were not detected by Lun aircraft carriers of the "probable partner" ...
        It is very interesting to hear this tale.
        
        Quote: Fei_Wong
        
        Ekranoplans are primarily qualified as ships. And not for nothing. They were not stupid to give such a classification. Now imagine MRC, having a speed of at least 10 times the speed of any ship in the world. In this case, not afraid of torpedoes and mines.
        
        But any racket of the P-73 or Sidewinder level has the full probability of ditching the ekranoplan.
        Any Sino-Japanese-Vietnamese junk that is not visible on the radar will easily dispose of his belly with his mast.
        Etc.
        
        Fei_Wong
        
        +1
        
        11 September 2017 21: 27
        
        Quote: ZVO
        Well, you will probably tell us how images in the Caspian puddle were not detected by Lun aircraft carriers of the "probable partner" ...
        
        In the "Caspian puddle" under the USSR (and even now) were some aircraft carriers? What a twist!
        Quote: ZVO
        But any racket of the P-73 or Sidewinder level has the full probability of ditching the ekranoplan.
        
        P-73? Those. offer to shoot at your own? In general, study the materiel: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Р-73
        Designed specifically for highly manoeuvrable near air battle
        
        Well, Sidewinder is similarly close combat. I will add also that this rocket can NOT attack targets at a standard altitude of the movement of an ekranoplan (~ 5 m). Too close to the surface. Only R-73 can, but this is her threshold. And these missiles are precisely air-to-air. Do you understand the extent of your ignorance?
        And another piece of thought ... Here, last year there was a sea of pride for our Caspian IRAs, who were harassed by beards in Syria with “Caliber”. Imagine one more Caspian, but flying RTOs and with more than ten times the speed - instantly went to the position, shot with “Caliber”, instantly returned to the base. And it’s much more difficult to intercept such an RTO than the traditional RTOs (the “Caliber” fly more than 1,5 km, who is here and where did they decide to shoot the Sidewind from their 18 km range in the front hemisphere? because they are air-to-air, not air-to-ship ... Even anti-ship missiles will have difficulties, because they are not designed for the speed of ekranoplanes. And, finally, it is possible to put "Gauges" on the ekranoplanes, since this SHIPSrather than airplanes. INF Treaty is NOT violates).
        So where are the cons?
        PS
        Any Sino-Japanese-Vietnamese junk that is not visible on the radar will easily dispose of his belly with his mast.
        
        Google the word "ekranolet". And the visual surveillance tools have also not been canceled. Tea, not sitting in the bunker.
        
        Gata magogi
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 09: 42
        
        Quote: Fei_Wong
        And finally, it’s possible to put “Gauges” on the ekranoplans, because these are SHIPS, not planes. This does NOT violate the INF Treaty).
        Cruise missiles can be put on airplanes, and this doesn’t violate the contract. The Caliber airplanes did not take off, but Tactical Missile Corporation is going to make cruise missiles with a range of 1000 km
        
        Alexey RA
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 11: 28
        
        Quote: Fei_Wong
        For its time, the creation of the TTX “Lunya” and its “Mosquitoes” allowed him to successfully go undetected to the distance of launching missiles at the carriers of the “probable partner”.
        
        Yeah ... provided that all the Hokai crews suddenly fell ill. And fighters too. And basic patrolmen too. Those same patrolmen whose radar is detected by the periscope of the submarine. But he doesn’t see the ekranoplan, yes ...
        The launch range of the RCC ekranoplan is no more than 120 km. This is not even the near air defense zone of AUG - this is already the zone of operation of an escort air defense system. And in order to reach the launch range, the ekranoplan must by some miracle pass 500 kilometers of the AUG air defense zone.
        Quote: Fei_Wong
        WIGs are primarily qualified as ships. And not for nothing.
        
        If the ekranoplan had the strength and survivability of the ship - he would displacedbut did not fly. Unfortunately, the survivability of the ekranoplan is close to the airplane.
        Quote: Fei_Wong
        Now imagine MRC, having a speed of at least 10 times the speed of any ship in the world. In this case, not afraid of torpedoes and mines.
        
        Yeah ... and forced to stay in a narrow zone of the screen effect for this, when lost, it turns into a pile of scrap metal.
        
        It doesn’t even need to kill the HPLC - just damage the glider or control so that the ship leaves the screen.
        Wouldn’t it be easier instead of an ekranoplan to give the Navy a Su-34 squadron? And even though the Onyxes are suspended under them ...
      2. 34 region
        
        +2
        
        11 September 2017 20: 32
        
        19.54. Alexei! Well then, according to your logic, helicopters should not fight either. The same problems. But after all, turntables are intensively used today. Why?
        
        tlauicol
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 05: 54
        
        the spinner is more maneuverable, the spinner will sit down and take off from the patch. A pinwheel will fly over the mountains of the city forest (if you start to stutter about ekranoleta, show me at least one not drawn). 100t EP takes 20t? Yeah 30-ton helicopter takes the same amount - tell your grandmother about the cost-effectiveness of the wunderwaffe
      3. xtur
        
        0
        
        16 September 2017 13: 35
        
        > And if we take a potential enemy, then he will detect the ekranoplan long before reaching the range of using this onboard weapons.
        
        the speed of the EP is no less than that of Hokai, including all the arguments about the EP one to one apply to Hokai, however, it flies and it is he who discovers all the targets. and with EF you can launch a helicopter or a drone, and get the control system quite comparable to Hokai, albeit more expensive, but also more universal
    2. Großer feldherr
      
      +1
      
      11 September 2017 20: 08
      
      And who needs this miracle when the same task is much cheaper and with a lower risk of losses a couple of bombers will accomplish ?!
  2. In100gram
    
    +2
    
    11 September 2017 20: 06
    
    Quote: Alexey RA
    And why are they military? Carry goods?
    
    I think so too. The operating costs are more than for the aircraft, and sea transport. We are not a maritime power like China, Australia or the Americans. Almost the entire water area is cold. For us more Bison is more interesting. And on the non-equipped shore can go for landing operations, although such are not expected. We do not wage aggressive wars.
    1. alstr
      
      +1
      
      12 September 2017 14: 36
      
      Lun could go to an un equipped beach. Even participated in the exercises.
      Those. where the Bison will go - there and WIG can. But it will still deliver the landing force 4 times faster. At the same time, the ekranoplane can also go to the river bank, if necessary, in the depths of the land, which the Bison can hardly do.
      Those. at least ekranoplans as an addition (just like, but not instead of) to the Bison is a very good help. Theoretically, everything may look something like this:
      1. First comes the first wave on ekranoplans - we land personnel (that is, so that the delivery time would be minimal)
      2. Bison with equipment is suitable (there you can still push tanks in there)
      3. Next, larger ships are already suitable.
      Well and further fast delivery of reinforcements and ammunition is also an option for an ekranoplane (the speed of cargo delivery, if not near the airfield, is higher than that of other possible delivery vehicles).
2. tlauicol
  
  0
  
  12 September 2017 05: 49
  
  Will the latest materials and engines be put on airplanes when you already understand this? Why spend it on a flying piano with poor aerodynamics?
  1. marder7
    
    +2
    
    12 September 2017 09: 49
    
    the aerodynamics of the ekranoplan are no worse than the Be-200s. what is the hangover you decided it was bad? ekranoplan is essentially a kind of seaplane. in any case, the case is exactly the same.
    1. Alexey RA
      
      +1
      
      12 September 2017 11: 39
      
      Quote: marder7
      aerodynamics of the ekranoplan is not worse than that of the Be-200
      
      Which the fleet was imposed on Shoigu - according to the old Ministry of Emergency Situations. And which, as it turned out, the fleet does not need.
      At "VO" there was already a discussion about the Be-200. Which, as it suddenly became clear, for basing not only a bay with a hydroaerodrome is needed, but also a regular runway. Because the bay freezes. there may be excitement in the bay, etc. - and readiness for take-off should always be. And it turned out that the amphibian, which has worse characteristics than a regular patrol or rescue aircraft, requires the same runway + hydroaerodrome for its base. And why such a miracle?
    2. tlauicol
      
      0
      
      12 September 2017 11: 42
      
      Worse, look at the power ratio and range and draw conclusions. The power of the SU is higher, and the range is less. And over the mountains-forests does not fly. Worse than a seaplane, slightly better than an ostrich
APASUS

+2

11 September 2017 19: 29

The whole paradox of the situation is that such a project does not have an investor. This is essentially an incomprehensible structure of Chubais, there is money, but for the invention in which Russia can become the ancestor of a whole kind of transport there are no funds!
Where are these funds, where is the money, oh yes, exactly .... the US budget needs them more
1. 34 region
  
  0
  
  11 September 2017 20: 36
  
  12.29. Apasus! Investors !? Everyone thinks to the extent of his depravity. If I thump, everybody thump. If I steal, everyone steals. Based on this logic, investors do not. I’ll invest, and they will plunder! Why? I do it myself! Other businessmen do it! Everyone does it! The whole business does it! The whole business is built on this!
  1. APASUS
    
    +1
    
    12 September 2017 17: 02
    
    Quote: Region 34
    I’ll invest, and they will plunder! Why? I do it myself!
    
    This is already becoming the prestige of the state, this type of transport can become on a par with RPGs, AKMs, Gagarin’s flights. And our businessmen are not ready to invest such money with a long turnaround. We have the whole business as in that film:
ALLxANDr

+3

11 September 2017 19: 45

The ekranoplanes, as they were piece goods, will remain to them. Like for example gyros. From the point of view of alternative designs - it’s very interesting, you look and will give new technologies, but from the point of view of practice it is too troublesome. They’ll invent a gravitational platform faster than launch such a series. IMHO.
BVS

+3

11 September 2017 19: 47

Quote: venaya
Quote: Corporal
That's just for urgent maneuver lapel from obstacles, in the form of a variety of waterfowl troughs, is not intended.

If desired, this "flaw" can also be corrected. It is possible that this will require some complication of the design, but not significant. Everything can be done, and for today's simplified design - the usual "childhood" disease that is quite realistic to cure, and not a fundamental flaw.

And how did you find that the departure from waterfowl is “some design complication will be required, but not significant”? Are you a constructor?
Machete

0

11 September 2017 20: 27

Everything has a future. It is only necessary to realize this future.
bsk_una

0

11 September 2017 20: 30

Need an investor? Weird! And where are the priorities of the state !? Why is the government unable to follow the path of economic development? And is there a need for a bunch that doesn’t touch anything?
corporal

0

11 September 2017 20: 32

In general, comrades, here they already broke spears for 400+ comments:
https://topwar.ru/91147-ekranoplan-neobhodim-kak-
pokoyniku-kaloshi.html
Who cares, please read.
Ncplc

+3

11 September 2017 20: 37

As a passenger or cargo ship, it’s possible even as a lifeguard, but as a military man it does not represent anything, maybe I forgot something in piloting, but in order to turn it away with a pancake (and it’s impossible to roll it for a normal turn), what radius does it even need at 300 km / h? So for all he wakes up a poorly maneuvering target and, as a result, a rocket in the cockpit!
1. garri-lin
  
  +1
  
  11 September 2017 21: 26
  
  But what about a MILITARY SHIP? Reinforcements or ammunition? Quickly and inconspicuously (on a scale of the ocean), get to the rendezvous point with a strategic submarine of oranges and bring fresh children, spare parts for urgent repairs, and a bored / sick sailor to pick up.
  Recently, much has been said about underwater reconnaissance gliders with great autonomy (for a month or more), an ekranoplane in the quality of the “spreader” and “collector after the end of the autonomy term” is best suited.
  The military has a job for ekranoplanes. And this work is not the least important thing is to make a strong-willed decision and start operating new equipment. At the same time during operation and technology develops faster. And then we'll see. Maybe Lun 2 will be put into operation in an unmanned version with a case made of composites and 10 zircons as a “gift”. By the year 20 .....
2. AlexKP
  
  +2
  
  12 September 2017 08: 16
  
  It’s all about the tactics of application, coastal over-the-horizon radars gave a bearing, moved at a high speed to the approximate square of the target, made additional reconnaissance with its detection means, performed a launch, returned to base. And you don’t need to maneuver anywhere, and with its carrying capacity it can carry quite powerful eb and traps for missiles. A kind of ship moment 31.
Bronevick

0

11 September 2017 21: 30

It seems that the thing is good, but they don’t know what to do with it.
1. Fei_Wong
  
  0
  
  11 September 2017 21: 46
  
  Put "Gauges". Because ekranoplans are ships. Those. There is no violation of the international treaty, and ekranoplans can be riveted much faster than even RTOs, and much cheaper. Those. this is an easy way to quickly increase the number of launchers and the total power of a missile launch vehicle of a KUG of any fleet.
  1. Bronevick
    
    0
    
    11 September 2017 21: 57
    
    I heard that the excitement on the water affects the ekranoplanes very badly
    1. Fei_Wong
      
      +1
      
      11 September 2017 22: 05
      
      Well, for example, our “hero” of the news is an ekranolet, not just an ekranoplan (which is already immediately evident even from its appearance). If necessary, it will be able to climb several kilometers. And yes, the excitement of the sea is important only for launch and landing (although specifically A-080-752 can land / take off from airfields). In flight, it’s not really, if it’s really not a storm (but there any small ship would have a hard time).
      1. tlauicol
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 06: 05
        
        Quote: Fei_Wong
        Well, for example, our “hero” of the news is an ekranolet, not just an ekranoplan (which is already immediately evident even from its appearance). If necessary, it will be able to climb several kilometers. And yes, the excitement of the sea is important only for launch and landing (although specifically A-080-752 can land / take off from airfields). In flight, it’s not really, if it’s really not a storm (but there any small ship would have a hard time).
        
        not a single ekrolet is built. NO ONE !
        Well, if you want to build on the drawn Pepelats, "who fly when they want" - Ok:
        -Zatra we carry the goods from point A to point B. Tickets are expensive, but exotic: taiga, riverbed, etc.
        “But there are barges and two bridges along the road !?”
        - garbage, take off higher (though the cargo will have to be left, or there will not be enough fuel)
        - and on the turn, well, where are the power lines? and then another hes?
        - Well, there we’ll jump, we will cross the hills and back to the riverbed. True, passengers will have to be left, otherwise we won’t get there! Well, how are the tickets sold?
        A curtain
        
        marder7
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 10: 01
        
        so that such a scenario does not happen, there is such a super tricked out device as a LOCAL CARD. and super-duper cool character NAVIGATOR. Have you heard about this? or do you think that planes with helicopters fly blindly ???
        
        tlauicol
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 10: 57
        
        How will the navigator or map of the terrain change the terrain? The plane will fly over the Himalayas, and the ep at the first turn of the river will stop. And then according to the scenario - see the map and fly without cargo, if at all you fly above the screen
    2. garri-lin
      
      0
      
      11 September 2017 22: 20
      
      WIG is much stronger than conventional aircraft. Like any seaplane. They need at least some seaworthiness. This makes the design heavier and accordingly it is a minus.
      1. Fei_Wong
        
        0
        
        11 September 2017 23: 00
        
        You AGAIN make a fatal mistake, considering the ekranoplan an airplane. This is a SHIP. And it’s not just that people are smarter than I have decided so. And not only in Russia, but throughout the world.
        WIG - NOT a "flying boat" (which was and remains a subclass of aircraft). Those. it’s not a plane that can splash down, but shipthat can fly. Let it be "now-now." (c) It combines both dignityAnd shortcomings И aircraft И ships, but it’s closer to the ships. Therefore, it is foolish to rest on its "airplane" flaws. Better consider the "ship" merits.
        
        Fei_Wong
        
        0
        
        11 September 2017 23: 17
        
        And about the "seaworthiness" ...
        That's nonsense. First, find and read what "seaworthiness" is, and then sit and think about how sideways this marine term refers to ekranoplanes that go NOT over the sea, but over it. I will even help, I will give a brief excerpt of the main parameters that determine seaworthiness:
        
        Seaworthiness - a set of qualities that determine the ability to walk and use mechanisms and equipment to certain conditions of the sea: wave height and wind power. The seaworthiness of a ship is determined, first of all, by the nature of its rolling. Includes:
        Germination on a wave - the ability to overcome a wave (especially a storm) without dangerous consequences (for example, without burying). Depends on the contours and the height of the side in the bow.
        Floodability - the amount of water taken on deck and superstructures in a certain state of the sea.
        Sprayability - the amount of spray taken onto the deck and superstructure in a particular sea condition.
        Wind protection - the conditions of operation of the vessel and the work of the crew at a given wind strength.
        
        I note that for three out of four points, the ekranoplanes do not have the slightest problem.
        
        garri-lin
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 21: 14
        
        The word seaworthiness in its entirety as applied to ekranoplanes is appropriate at the time of take-off and the moment of landing.
        And at that moment, absolutely all of the factors you listed. (As well as forgotten) factors are of importance.
        To consider an ekranoplan as a ship is an excuse. From which most of the troubles flow.
        WIG is a subspecies of the AIRPLANE narrowly specialized for movement on the "screen"
        And seaworthiness is present in him, like in any seaplane.
        
        tlauicol
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 05: 59
        
        a plane with disgusting aerodynamics or a ship carrying 20 tons of cargo? Straight solid advantages - now try to sell this shit and do not be surprised why they do not take
        
        AlexKP
        
        +2
        
        12 September 2017 08: 47
        
        Ships carrying 20 tons at a speed of 450 as it is not observed.
        
        tlauicol
        
        +1
        
        12 September 2017 09: 16
        
        What about airplanes? Farther and faster.
        
        You can even call the EP a ship even a steam locomotive, the essence will not change - this is an aircraft that flies very poorly
        
        The comment was deleted.
  2. AlexKP
    
    +1
    
    12 September 2017 08: 45
    
    Short- and medium-range missiles can be installed on aircraft platforms, this does not violate the contract.
    1. tlauicol
      
      0
      
      12 September 2017 09: 21
      
      Put it on an airplane. They are cheaper further and fly faster. And not only above a flat surface
  3. Gata magogi
    
    0
    
    12 September 2017 09: 47
    
    The INF Treaty applies only to land-based missiles. So your arguments are in vain
Andrey1961

+1

11 September 2017 23: 22
Back in the 70s, ekranoplans were designed and created in the product, after the death of General Designer Alekseev, Rostislav Evgenievich died out with all the advantages of this transport!
One of the specimens was tested in the Caspian Sea and caused a stir in the USA and their friends !!!
1. Andrey1961
  
  +1
  
  11 September 2017 23: 25
  Lun in the Caspian
  1. tlauicol
    
    +1
    
    12 September 2017 06: 09
    
    what a beautiful picture. Now compare the speed range and carrying capacity of the devices presented on it. And do not forget about saving
    1. marder7
      
      +2
      
      12 September 2017 10: 05
      
      and then compare stealth and versatility and the ability to sit anywhere where there is a lake, or a river.
      1. tlauicol
        
        0
        
        12 September 2017 10: 52
        
        Yeah, now read about how many kilometers he needed to take a U-turn, and how many hours to get out and forget about safe landing on the river.
Music

0

12 September 2017 00: 07

Has it really come to civic ideas? Another question: where to fly? There are other countries in the Caspian.
Izotovp

+2

12 September 2017 02: 00

If you try to at least slightly expand the range of application and tie it to more specific theater, then there are quite sane answers to the question of why we need it. This is: a rescuer, border protection and marine bio-geological resources (try to get a smuggler away from this, and even if you put a heavy on-board infantry on it. A variant of a sea ganship.) This is also a carrier for air-to-surface, air-to-water, air- air with the possibility of ultra-fast deployment (by sea standards) and the occupation of key positions on a specific theater. This is also ensuring the secrecy of the exit of our ships / submarines by suppressing / destroying enemy sonars. This is also a variant of the carrier of a powerful jammer. A lot of things to come up with. You yourself know how many bottlenecks we have where we are controlled and can be locked. Remember how they locked the submarine fleet in the Baltic into the Great Patriotic War. How do they control us now and when leaving Severodvinsk and Kaliningrad and Kronstadt and ...
Slon1978

+1

12 September 2017 02: 46

I do not really understand the lack of interest of the military in these developments. If you design an ekranoplane with the ability to unload cargo at sea, for example, through the opening two-wing hatch in the upper part of the fuselage using a ship crane (the cargo can be in a special container), this is a very promising topic for supplying the ocean grouping with emergency cargo, rotation personnel, delivery of ammunition (the same Caliber, instead of returning the ship to reload to the base). Now the ships are accompanied by tankers, tugboats and floating workshops. The latter, by the way, also have limited capabilities. An ekranoplane that can take off from a coastal airfield, fly on a planing flight above the water, land near a ship’s group, moor on its own or the ship approaches it and unloads a cargo container with ammunition or emergency spare parts by a ship crane. If the rotation of personnel, then with the help of a ship working boat people can be removed from the ekranoplan. A helicopter for these same purposes has a much lower payload and range.
1. Alexey RA
  
  0
  
  12 September 2017 11: 47
  
  Quote: Slon1978
  If you design an ekranoplane with the ability to unload cargo at sea, for example, through the opening two-wing hatch in the upper part of the fuselage using a ship crane (the cargo may be in a special container), this is a very promising topic for supplying the ocean grouping with emergency cargo
  
  Which ocean grouping? OPESK died with the USSR. And now, in order to create, even for a short time, a miserable semblance of Soviet OPECs, it is necessary to assemble combat-ready ships from all fleets.
  Quote: Slon1978
  Now the ships are accompanied by tankers, tugboats and floating workshops. The latter, by the way, also have limited capabilities. An ekranoplane that can take off from a coastal airfield, fly on a planing flight above the water, land near a ship’s group, moor on its own or the ship approaches it and unloads a cargo container with ammunition or emergency spare parts by a ship crane.
  
  At the same time, tankers and tugboats still remain - for the regular supply of the squadron with the help of ekranoplanes will make its contents unbearable even for USN. A towing a ship ekranoplan ...
  And most importantly - if we have a coastal airfield, isn’t it easier to send a helicopter on board for emergency cargo already on board?
  1. alstr
    
    +1
    
    12 September 2017 14: 50
    
    And how much is the helicopter range? 500-600 km.
    Instead of 2000 thousand from the ekranoplan (this is from Orlenka)
    
    A load capacity of 4 tons versus .30.
    
    And this is the performance characteristics of devices developed more than 40 years ago.
    
    Therefore, if for the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea a helicopter will fly, then for the Pacific Ocean and the North it is no longer there.
Msta

0

12 September 2017 08: 11

I think no. As combat platforms, they are too vulnerable for enemy aircraft, in fact they are missile boats, without any air defense systems, and a modern submarine can easily destroy an ekranoplan with a missile. In addition, ekranoplans have severe restrictions on the use of sea waves, which makes their usefulness very doubtful
Archon

0

12 September 2017 08: 26

If there is no funding, then it is futile.
Or the money goes to more useful things like armata and t50
Evgeniy667b

0

12 September 2017 12: 23

The ekranoplanes of the classic "Airplane Scheme" do not represent perspectives for the armed forces. Other solutions are needed and they are!
tlauicol

0

12 September 2017 16: 54

Quote: marder7
open google yourself. I roamed the tundra for half a year, I had seen enough! for an ekranoplan, differences of 100-200 meters are not a problem if they are smooth enough and it flies 20-30 meters and not 5. think about it.

In which parallel universe does the screen effect persist 30m above an uneven surface? Wake up and walk on the tundra. Or by helicopter. Fiction on the second floor
alstr

0

12 September 2017 17: 46

Tatarin83,
At present, by land it’s through 2 states to go either through one, but only along the coast. This is from the east, and from the west through 4 states at all. And mountains are everywhere.
And about Istanbul - this is actually the only place where we have the historical background for the landing.

There are still options in the North: Svalbard, Novaya Zemlya. Caspian Sea - protection of our resources. Pacific Ocean - Kuril ridge.
alstr

0

12 September 2017 17: 49

Tatarin83,
By the way, I will reveal a terrible secret, if they don’t attack us, then we don’t need to land anywhere.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"