According to the position of the fuselage during takeoff and landing.
The development of GDP aircraft first began in the 1950s, when the appropriate technical level of turbojet and turboprop engine construction was achieved, which aroused widespread interest in aircraft of this type both among potential military users and in design bureaus. A significant impetus for the development of VTOL aircraft was the widespread use of high-speed jet fighters with high takeoff and landing speeds in the air forces of various countries. Such combat aircraft required long runways with a hard surface: it was obvious that in the event of large-scale military operations, a significant part of these airfields, especially front-line ones, would be quickly disabled by the enemy. Thus, military customers were interested in aircraft that could take off and land vertically on any small platform, that is, virtually independent of airfields. Largely thanks to such interest of representatives of the army and navy of the leading world powers, dozens of experimental aircraft were created. different systems. Most of the structures were manufactured in 1-2 copies, which, as a rule, suffered accidents already during the first tests, and no further research was carried out on them. The NATO technical commission, which announced the requirements for a vertical take-off and landing fighter-bomber in June 1961, thereby gave impetus to the development of supersonic aircraft in the Western countries. It was assumed that in the 1960s - 70s, NATO countries would need about 5 thousand of these aircraft, the first of which would enter service in 1967. Forecast of such large quantity products caused the emergence of six GDP aircraft projects:
After all the projects were approved, a competition was to take place, in which, from all those proposed, they had to choose best project to launch into mass production, however, even before the projects were submitted to the competition, it became clear that it would not take place. It turned out that each state has its own concept of the future aircraft, different from others, and will not agree to the monopoly of one company or group of companies. For example, the British military did not support their own companies, but the French project, Germany supported the Lockheed project, and so on. However, the final straw was France, which declared that, regardless of the results of the competition, they would work on their Mirage III V aircraft project.
Political, technical and tactical problems influenced the change in the concept of the NATO commission, which developed new requirements. The creation of multi-purpose aircraft began. In this situation, only two of the submitted projects left the preliminary design stage: the Mirage III V aircraft, financed by the French government, and the VJ-101C aircraft, financed by West German industry. These aircraft were manufactured in 3 and 2 copies, respectively, and were tested (4 of them died in accidents) until 1966 and 1971. In 1971, by order of the US Navy Aviation Command, work began on the third supersonic aircraft in Western countries - the American XFV-12A.
As a result, only the Sea-Harrier VTOL aircraft created and produced was actively and successfully used, incl. during the Falklands War. The modern development of VTOL aircraft is the American F-35, a fifth-generation fighter. In the development of the F-35 as a VTOL aircraft, Lockhead Martin applied a number of technological solutions implemented in the Yak-141.
However, the disadvantages of VTOL aircraft also turned out to be significant. Piloting this type of aircraft is very difficult for the pilot and requires him to have the highest qualifications in piloting techniques. This especially affects flight in hovering and transition modes - at the moments of transition from hovering to horizontal flight and back. In fact, a VTOL jet pilot must endure lift, and, accordingly, the weight of the car - from the wing to the vertical gas jets of thrust or vice versa.
This feature of piloting technology poses difficult challenges for the VTOL pilot. In addition, in hovering and transitional modes, VTOL aircraft are generally unstable and subject to lateral slip; the greatest danger at these moments is the possible failure of the lifting engines. Such a failure often caused accidents in serial and experimental VTOL aircraft. Disadvantages also include the significantly lower payload capacity and flight range of VTOL aircraft compared to conventional aircraft, high fuel consumption in vertical flight modes, the overall complexity and high cost of VTOL aircraft design, and destruction of runway surfaces by hot gas engine exhaust.
These factors, as well as a sharp increase in oil prices (and, accordingly, aviation fuel) on the world market in the 70s of the 20th century led to the practical cessation of developments in the field of passenger and transport jet VTOL aircraft.
Of the many proposed VTOL jet transport projects, only one was practically completed and tested [ ] Dornier Do 31 aircraft, however, this aircraft was not mass-produced. Based on all of the above, the prospects for widespread development and mass use of jet VTOL aircraft are very doubtful. At the same time, there is a modern design tendency to move away from the traditional jet design in favor of VTOL aircraft with a propeller-driven group (usually tiltrotors): in particular, such machines include the currently mass-produced Bell V-22 Osprey and being developed on its basis
For many years, talk has continued about the possible construction of a new Russian aircraft carrier, which, however, has not yet led to the start of real work. In the context of such development of the fleet, the issue of an aviation group for a promising ship is also often discussed. Various proposals are being made, including the most daring ones. For example, in the past it has been repeatedly proposed to resume work on vertical take-off and landing aircraft. According to some statements by officials, such a proposal may be implemented in the distant future.
Present and plans
At the moment, the carrier-based aviation of the Russian Navy cannot be called numerous. The pilots have only a few dozen Su-33 and MiG-29K fighters at their disposal. All these machines are designed to take off from a deck equipped with a springboard. Landing is carried out using an arresting device. Such a grouping is sufficient to complete the only existing aircraft-carrying cruiser, but the construction of new aircraft carriers will require ordering a certain number of additional aircraft.
Yak-141 in flight
Currently, the Russian military department is studying the prospects for the development of carrier-based fighters, and is already forming some preliminary proposals. Thus, an interesting option for the further development of naval aviation was proposed last year. During the international aerospace salon MAKS-2017, Deputy Minister of Defense of Russia Yuri Borisov touched upon the topic of the distant future of naval aviation. As it turned out, the Ministry of Defense has very interesting plans.
According to Yu. Borisov, the existing Su-33 and MiG-29K aircraft will gradually become obsolete, as a result of which in about 10 years the development of new aircraft will be required. At the same time, the military department already has plans in this regard. They provide for the development and production of new aircraft with short or vertical take-off and landing. It is assumed that the new vertical take-off aircraft will become a kind of continuation of the line of similar equipment that was previously developed at the A.S. Design Bureau. Yakovleva.
The Deputy Minister of Defense indicated that the promising aircraft will serve on a new aircraft carrier, the construction of which could begin in the mid-twenties. Other details of the hypothetical project from the future have not yet been announced. Apparently, the development of the new aircraft has not yet begun, and specialists from the military department and the aviation industry do not yet know what the new Russian carrier-based aircraft might be like.
Successes of the past
Statements from a Defense Ministry spokesman last year did not reveal any details, but did provide an interesting hint of possible further development events. According to Yu. Borisov, the new carrier-based fighter will be a continuation of the family of Yakovlev Design Bureau vehicles. If such a proposal is chosen for implementation, then the aircraft from the future may turn out to be similar to some well-known developments. This allows you to make predictions and try to predict what the new technology will be like.
Let us recall that the Yakovlev Design Bureau began studying the topic of vertical takeoff back in the late fifties. By the middle of the next decade, an experimental Yak-36 project was created. Prototypes of this type showed the main features of the new class of equipment and made it possible to begin the development of full-fledged combat vehicles. Based on developments on the Yak-36, the Yak-38 carrier-based attack aircraft was created. It had built-in weapons and could also carry missiles and bombs. At the end of the seventies, the Yak-38 was put into service and became part of the aviation groups of a number of ships of the USSR Navy. Several projects for modernizing such a machine have also been developed.
Without waiting for the Yak-38 tests to be completed, design department began developing a new aircraft with similar takeoff and landing characteristics, but with expanded combat capabilities. The new Yak-41 (later the project was renamed the Yak-141) was supposed to be a multi-role fighter capable of gaining air superiority and also striking ground or surface targets. As part of the project, designers from several organizations had to solve a large number of quite complex tasks, which led to a certain delay in work. Preparation for testing experienced equipment started only a decade after the start of design.
The first flight of one of the experimental Yak-41s took place in March 1987. Over the next few years, the prototypes carried out various flight programs, which made it possible to test the operation of all on-board systems. At the very end of 1989, the first hovering flight took place, and in June 1990, the first vertical takeoff and vertical landing took place. After new flights from the land airfield, checks on the deck began. At the end of September 1991, the first Yak-141 landing on an aircraft carrier took place. A few days later they took off.
In early October, during another test vertical landing, one of the experimental aircraft exceeded the vertical speed, which led to structural destruction and a fire. This incident was fatal for the project. There was no possibility of building a new prototype to replace the lost one, and soon the decision was made to close the project. Work officially stopped in 1992. The remaining Yak-141s were still shown at various exhibitions, but these machines no longer had a future.
One of the options for the appearance of the Yak-201
Economic problems and specific views on military-political issues led Russia to abandon the creation of new vertical/short takeoff and landing aircraft in the early nineties. However, the Yakovlev Design Bureau did not stop developing promising ideas and continued to work on its own initiative. In the mid-nineties it was proposed new project multi-role carrier-based fighter Yak-201.
According to known data, the Yak-201 project included the construction of an airframe made using stealth technologies, which made it possible to sharply reduce the visibility of the aircraft in flight. The vehicle was planned to be equipped with one engine designed for vertical takeoff/landing and horizontal flight. It was proposed to take off by changing the thrust using a rotating nozzle. Since the engine was placed at the rear of the vehicle, it had to be supplemented by an auxiliary lifting system. Among other things, the option of installing an additional rotor in the forward part of the fuselage, driven by an extended engine shaft, was being explored.
A specific engine for the Yak-201 was never chosen, which is why most of the flight performance data was not accurately calculated. The aircraft was supposed to have an automatic cannon and internal cargo compartments for missiles or bombs. It was proposed to transport what was being dropped on four suspension points. Perhaps the fighter could also receive external pylons.
For obvious reasons, the Yak-201 project never left the preliminary development stage. The potential customer did not show interest in such equipment, and in addition, did not have the financial ability to order its development and construction. As a result, another promising proposal went into the archives.
According to statements by Yu. Borisov, the existing fleet of carrier-based aircraft will become obsolete in the distant future, and they will need replacement. VTOL/STOL aircraft are currently being considered, which may offer some advantages. However, it has not yet been specified what they will be like and what opportunities they will receive. However, it is indicated that the military department intends to continue the development of the old ideas of the A.S. Design Bureau. Yakovleva. Thus, you can try to imagine what a promising carrier-based fighter will look like.
A look into the future
Of all the projects of vertical take-off aircraft under the Yak brand, the most recent one, proposed in the mid-nineties and not reaching full-fledged design work, may be of greatest interest. While working on the appearance of the machine of the future, the Yakovlev Design Bureau proposed a very interesting aircraft, which even now looks quite modern. Certain components of this project may require significant reworking in accordance with current trends, but a number of common features can be preserved.
It should be noted that a number of the main features of the Yak-201 project bring to mind the American Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II fighter, which has the capability of short takeoff and landing. The Russian and American projects included reduced visibility for enemy detection systems, used a combination of a main engine with a rotary nozzle and a lifting rotor, and also proposed internal placement of all weapons. As the current state of affairs with American aircraft shows, this version of the technical appearance of the equipment justifies itself and is suitable for solving the assigned tasks. It should be noted that obtaining the desired results within American project was associated with many technical difficulties, delays in work and rising program costs.
Since the Yak-201 was developed in the nineties, and the design of a new similar aircraft will not start until the early twenties, direct borrowing of certain design solutions is virtually excluded. One of the main differences of the new project should be widest application modern materials and technologies created after the abandonment of the preliminary design of the Yak-201. The same approach should be applied when creating an on-board radio-electronic equipment complex.
Museum Yak-141
It is obvious that the airframe of a promising aircraft should be built taking into account reduced visibility. It is quite possible that its optimal configuration will be similar to the airframe of the fifth generation Su-57 fighter. However, in any case there will be the most serious differences. According to known data, several versions of the aerodynamic appearance of the stealth vehicle were developed within the framework of the Yak-201 project. In particular, the front and rear placement of the horizontal tail was studied.
Of all known variants power plants that provide vertical or short take-off, the most advantageous is the one proposed in the Yak-201 project and implemented on the F-35B aircraft. The main propulsion engine, showing sufficient performance, must have a rotating nozzle. In this case, its shaft should be connected to the front rotor, which is responsible for creating thrust under the nose of the airframe. The machine also needs gas-jet controls on three axes in vertical mode and when transitioning to horizontal flight.
Current progress in the field of radio-electronic systems allows us to look into the future with optimism. A radar with a phased antenna array, including an active one, optical-location detection equipment and a modern sighting and navigation system may appear on board the promising aircraft. In accordance with current requirements, avionics must be fully compatible with existing and future military communications and control systems.
The composition of the weapons will be determined in accordance with the wishes of the military and the intended combat missions. Domestic vertical take-off and landing aircraft were equipped with a built-in 30-mm automatic cannon and could carry a variety of aircraft weapons. Thus, the Yak-141 project provided for the use of various air-to-air missiles, including medium-range products. A wide range of guided and unguided missiles and bombs were proposed to hit ground or surface targets. The same capabilities can be transferred to a promising aircraft. At the same time, its most important feature will be the presence of internal cargo compartments for weapons, allowing to reduce visibility in flight.
As follows from the known data, so far Russian ministry defense is only considering the possibility of resuming the development and construction of vertical take-off aircraft. Such proposals will only be able to turn into real projects in a few years, and then a certain time will be required to carry out all necessary work. As a result, ready-made carrier-based aircraft will appear no earlier than the second half of the twenties. By this time, it is expected to begin construction of a new aircraft carrier, on which new aircraft will serve.
The development of a new aircraft for the Russian Navy aviation, apparently, has not yet begun, and this circumstance is an excellent reason for making forecasts and expressing various versions. In the meantime, experts from the military department and the aviation industry can evaluate the prospects of the existing proposal and decide what to do next. If the fleet really needs an aircraft with unusual takeoff and landing characteristics, then its development will begin in the near future.
Based on materials from sites:
http://rg.ru/
https://ria.ru/
http://tass.ru/
http://airwar.ru/
http://yak.ru/
http://avia.pro/
One of the Pentagon's most expensive "toys" - the F-35B fighter-bomber - this week took part in joint US-Japanese exercises aimed at cooling the DPRK's nuclear missile fervor.
Despite the wave of criticism about the need to resume production of machines of this class in Lately they are increasingly spoken in Russia. In particular, Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov recently announced plans to build vertical take-off and landing aircraft (VTOL).
Read about why Russia needs such an aircraft and whether the aviation industry has enough strength to create it in the RIA Novosti material.
The most popular domestic vertical take-off and landing combat aircraft was the Yak-38, which was put into service in August 1977. The aircraft has earned a controversial reputation among aviators - out of 231 aircraft built, 49 crashed in accidents and aviation incidents.
The main operator of the aircraft was the Navy - the Yak-38 was based on the aircraft-carrying cruisers of Project 1143 "Kyiv", "Minsk", "Novorossiysk" and "Baku".
As veterans of carrier-based aviation recall, the high accident rate forced the command to sharply reduce the number of training flights, and the flight time of Yak-38 pilots was a symbolic figure for those times - no more than 40 hours per year.
As a result, there was not a single first-class pilot in the naval aviation regiments; only a few had second-class flight qualifications.
Combat characteristics were also questionable - due to the lack of on-board radar station he could only conditionally conduct air battles.
Using the Yak-38 as a pure attack aircraft seemed ineffective, since the combat radius during vertical takeoff was only 195 kilometers, and even less in hot climates.
Supersonic multi-role vertical take-off and landing fighter-interceptor Yak-141
To replace " difficult child“A more advanced vehicle, the Yak-141, was supposed to arrive, but after the collapse of the USSR, interest in it disappeared.
As you can see, the domestic experience in creating and operating VTOL aircraft cannot be called successful. Why has the topic of vertical take-off and landing aircraft become relevant again?
“Such a machine is vital not only To the Navy, but also to the Air Force,” military expert, captain of the first rank Konstantin Sivkov told RIA Novosti.
The main problem of modern aviation is that a jet fighter needs a good runway, and there are very few such airfields; it is quite easy to destroy them with a first strike.
During a period of threat, vertical take-off aircraft can be dispersed even across forest clearings. Such a system for using combat aircraft will have exceptional combat stability.”
However, not everyone sees the feasibility of using VTOL aircraft in the land version as justified. One of the main problems is that during vertical takeoff the aircraft consumes a lot of fuel, which greatly limits its combat radius.
Russia is a large country, therefore, to achieve air supremacy, fighter aircraft must have “long arms.”
“The implementation of combat missions of fighter aircraft in the conditions of a partially destroyed airfield infrastructure can be achieved through a short take-off of conventional aircraft from a section of the runway less than 500 meters long,” says Oleg Panteleev, executive director of the Airport agency.
Another question is that Russia has plans to build an aircraft carrier fleet, so the use of vertically taking off aircraft will be the most rational. These may not necessarily be aircraft carriers, they may also be aircraft-carrying cruisers with the lowest cost parameters.”
F-35 fighter
By the way, the F-35B today is a purely naval aircraft, its main customer is the US Marine Corps (the aircraft will be based on landing ships). British F-35Bs will form the basis of the air wing of the newest aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth, which was recently commissioned.
At the same time, according to Konstantin Sivkov, Russian design bureaus do not have to wait for new aircraft carriers to begin work on creating a Russian analogue of the F-35B.
“Vertical take-off and landing aircraft can be based not only on aircraft carriers. For example, a tanker is equipped with a ramp and becomes a kind of aircraft carrier, in Soviet time we had such projects.
In addition, VTOL aircraft can be used from warships capable of receiving helicopters, for example from frigates,” our interlocutor said.
Meanwhile, it is obvious that the creation of a Russian vertical take-off aircraft will require impressive resources and funds. The cost of developing the F-35B and its horizontal take-off cousins, according to various estimates, has already reached $1.3 billion, and several countries participated in the creation of the vehicle.
According to experts, to produce a vehicle comparable in performance to the F-35B, it will be necessary to solve a number of serious problems: miniaturization of avionics, creation of a new generation of on-board systems and design of an airframe with special characteristics.
The Russian aviation industry has the potential for this, especially since many systems can be unified with the fifth-generation Su-57 aircraft. At the same time, one of the most labor-intensive components can be the car engine.
“The engine developer for the Yak-38 has ceased to exist. If any documentation on the rotary nozzle, including the afterburner, is probably still preserved, then people with practical experience the creation of such components and assemblies will most likely no longer be found.
Here we have probably lost competencies,” says Oleg Panteleev. “In general, I believe that the aviation industry will be able to give a worthy response in the form of a capable VTOL project if the customer, represented by the Ministry of Defense, makes a decision on the aircraft-carrying fleet and its aviation component.”
UDC "Priboy"
Russia will be able to begin building aircraft carriers in the foreseeable future. According to the Ministry of Defense, the keel of the Project 23000 Storm heavy aircraft carrier is expected to be laid down in 2025–2030.
By this time, the Russian Navy intends to receive two new universal landing ships “Priboy”, capable of carrying aircraft with vertical take-off and landing.
Vadim Saranov
Vertical take-off aircraft appeared when the era of jet aviation began, this was the second half of the fifties. Initially they were called turboplanes. At that time, designers began to develop devices that were capable of taking off with minimal takeoff or without it at all. Such devices do not require a special runway; a flat field or helipad is sufficient for them.
In addition, humanity at that time was very close to the exploration of outer space. Development has begun spaceships, capable of landing and taking off to other planets. Any development ends with the construction of a prototype, which undergoes comprehensive testing for the further creation of serial equipment. The first turbo aircraft was created in 1955. He looked very strange. This type of vehicle had neither wings nor a tail unit. It was equipped with only a turbojet engine directed vertically downward, a small cabin and fuel tanks.
It rose upward due to the jet stream of the engine. Control was carried out using gas rudders, i.e. the jet stream coming out of the engine, which was deflected by flat plates located near the nozzle. The first device weighed about 2340 kg and had a thrust of 2835 kg.
Vertical takeoff and landing photo
The first flights were carried out by test pilot Yu. A. Garnaev. Test flights were very unpredictable, because there was a very high probability of capsizing, and the device did not have much stability. In 1958, the device was demonstrated at an aviation festival in Tushino. The device went through the entire testing program and a huge amount of material for analysis was accumulated.
The collected material was used to create the first full-fledged Soviet experimental vertical take-off aircraft. This aircraft was named Yak-36, and the modified Yak-38 aircraft went into production. The main location of the aircraft was aircraft carriers, and it performed the tasks of an attack aircraft.
Due to the development of the technical side of turbojet engines in the 50s of the last century, it became possible to create an aircraft with vertical take-off. A big impetus for the development of VTOL aircraft was the active development of jet aircraft in the advanced countries of the world. It should be noted that these devices had a high speed during landing and takeoff; accordingly, it was necessary to create a long runway, and accordingly they must have a hard surface. This requires additional cash injections. During hostilities, there were very few airfields that could accommodate such aircraft, so the creation of an aircraft with vertical takeoff and landing could solve a lot of problems.
During these years, a huge number of variants and prototypes were produced, which were built in one or two copies. In most cases, they crashed during testing, after which the projects were closed.
The NATO Commission in 1961 put forward requirements for a fighter with vertical landing and take-off, this gave additional impetus to development this direction aircraft industry. After this, they planned to create a competition to select the most promising designs. But the competition never took place, since it became clear that each advanced country had its own versions of such an aircraft.
Under the influence of technical and political problems, the NATO commission changed the concept and put forward new requirements for the apparatus. After this, the design of multi-purpose machines began. Ultimately, only two options were selected. The first was the aircraft of the French designers "Mirage" III V", 3 aircraft were created and the designers of the Federal Republic of Germany VJ-101C produced 2 copies. After the tests, 4 devices were lost. Because of this, it was decided to develop a fundamentally new vehicle, the XFV-12A.
The first aircraft of this class in the USSR was the Yak-36, which the Yakovlev Design Bureau began to develop in 1960. For this purpose, a training stand was made. The first flight was carried out in March 1966, in this test a vertical take-off was carried out with the transition to horizontal flight, after which the machine landed vertically. After this, the Yak-38 and the more famous Yak-141 were created. In the 90s, another project was started with the designation Yak-201.
Depending on the position of the fuselage
Vertical.
With screws.
Reactive.
Using thrust directly from a propulsion jet engine.
Coleoptera (ringed wings).
Horizontal arrangement
With screws.
Rotary wing and propellers.
The propellers are located at the end of the wings.
The jets from the propellers are deflected.
Reactive.
Rotary type motor.
Gas jets from the main engine are deflected during takeoff
Lifting motor.
At the same time, a similar aircraft was being developed in England. In 1954, the Harrier vertical take-off aircraft was built. It was equipped with two engines with a thrust of 1840 kg. The weight of the aircraft was 3400 kg. The plane turned out to be extremely unreliable and crashed. Look vertical takeoff and landing.
The next step in the development of such devices was the American aircraft, built in 1964. The construction coincided with the development of the lunar program.
Despite the fact that breakthroughs in the field of aircraft manufacturing do not delight us every day, there are a lot of new developments in the field of civil aviation. A typical example of this is the development of a modern vertical take-off passenger airliner.
The main features of vertical take-off aircraft are, first of all, that the aircraft does not require large space- it should only slightly exceed the dimensions of the aircraft, and from here there is a very interesting conclusion that with the development of airliners with a vertical take-off system, air travel between different regions will become possible, even those where there are no airfields. In addition, it is not at all necessary to make such airliners roomy, because those seats 40-50 pieces are enough, which will make air travel as cost-effective and comfortable as possible.
However, most likely it will not be famous for its speed, since even in military aircraft it does not exceed 1100 kilometers per hour, and given that the passenger vertical take-off aircraft will transport a relatively large number of people, then most likely its cruising speed will be about 700 kilometers per hour. However, on the other hand, the reliability of air travel will increase significantly, since in the event of any unforeseen situation vertical take-off aircraft can easily sit on a small flat area.
Today, there are a number of concepts for future passenger airliners with a vertical take-off system. Until recently, they seemed incredible, but modern developments in the field of aircraft manufacturing indicate the opposite, and it is quite possible that in the next ten years, the first modern aircraft with vertical take-off will begin to transport their passengers.
Without exception, all devices of this type were created for military needs. Of course, the advantages of such machines for the military are obvious, since the aircraft can be operated in small areas. Airplanes have the ability to hover in the air and at the same time make turns and fly sideways. Comparing with helicopters it is clear that biggest advantage aircraft is a speed that can reach supersonic levels.
However, VTOL aircraft also have significant disadvantages. First of all, it is difficult to control; this requires high-class pilots. Special skill is required from the pilot during the transition of modes.
It is the complexity of control that poses many challenges for the pilot. When switching from hovering mode to horizontal flight, it is possible to slide to the side, which creates additional problems when holding the device. This mode requires high power, which can lead to engine failure. The disadvantages include the small carrying capacity of the VTOL aircraft, while it uses a huge amount of fuel. During operation, specially prepared sites are required that are not destroyed under the influence of gas exhaust from engines.
| A |
| B |
| IN |
| G |
| D |
| AND |
| TO |
| L |
| ABOUT |
As you know, a combat aircraft is most vulnerable on the ground and during takeoff, and expensive runways are perhaps the main expense item of the modern Air Force and the primary target for enemy aircraft. Therefore, aircraft designers struggled with the problem of vertical takeoff for decades, but they were able to solve it only by mastering the technology of thrust vector control, on the basis of which the first mass-produced VTOL aircraft were created - the British Harrier and the Soviet Yak-38. Very similar in appearance, these vertical take-off and landing aircraft had completely different fates. Having undergone a long evolution and turning from a clumsy "jumper" into an effective fighting machine, the Harrier made its debut during the Falklands conflict, took part in many local wars, from the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan to the Balkans, and remains in service to this day. Unlike the Yak-38, which took off later than its western counterpart, but was withdrawn from service by the early 1990s. Why was his service so short? Why is this technology, which seemed so promising, unable to supplant traditional machines even in carrier-based aircraft? And do vertical take-off aircraft have a future - or are they a dead-end branch in the development of the aviation industry?
Ever since man began to design and build airplanes capable of moving relatively safely and quickly in space, he has been haunted by one significant limitation: an airplane requires a fairly significant amount of space on the ground for takeoff and landing. The larger and heavier the flying car than more people and the load it can lift, the more space it requires. As more and more modern aircraft were created, the requirements for the length and quality of runways increased, imposing significant restrictions on the area practical application aviation. This problem seemed especially acute to the military - after all, the bombing of runways by enemy aircraft could easily paralyze the actions of their own aircraft. But man is a stubborn and resourceful creature, and from the very beginning of the era of heavier-than-air aircraft, he has tried to make them take off, if not vertically, then with the shortest possible takeoff.
Attempts to create a helicopter, made from the very beginning of the 20th century (including by Igor Sikorsky back in the Kiev period of his activity), were initially unsuccessful - these devices simply lacked engines with a sufficiently high specific power, a number of other technical problems were awaiting their solution. A gyroplane using the principle of autorotation of the main rotor and the thrust of a conventional aircraft engine seemed more promising. Such a device could not take off vertically, but the takeoff, and especially the mileage, were radically reduced. Autogyroplanes created under the leadership of Juan de la Cierva in the 20s - 30s. gained considerable popularity, they were built under license in foreign countries, and the military experimented with might and main with the use of the new “toy” for their own purposes. Soon. however, it turned out that these machines were also by no means ideal - they could not take off vertically or hover in the air, and the payload of gyroplanes was insignificant. And although during the Second World War such devices even took part in battles (for example, the Soviet gyroplane-spotter A-7-ZA or the German unmotorized gyroplane Fa 330, used on submarines), this participation was only sporadic and in no way threatened the aircraft monopoly.
In the 40s on the new technical basis rapid progress in helicopter manufacturing begins. Over the following decades, helicopters have occupied a very important place in both military and civil aviation. The Staz helicopter is a very successful attempt to create an aircraft - in addition to vertical takeoff and landing, it can hover in the air. It turned out to be ideal for many tasks that were beyond the capabilities of airplanes. However, a helicopter also has its limitations. Yes, it is capable of taking off and landing from platforms of minimal size, and flying in almost arbitrary planes and directions. But it does not fly as fast as an airplane, nor as high, nor as far. A helicopter is incapable of approaching the speed of sound - let alone. to surpass it.
It soon turned out that there was still a need for an aircraft capable of at least partially combining the characteristics of a helicopter (vertical takeoff and landing, free controlled hover) and a classic airplane (high speed, large ceiling and flight range). And while civilian operators could do without such a device, the military was extremely interested in creating a vertical take-off and landing combat aircraft. After all, although armed helicopters became a very formidable weapon over the battlefield, they could not replace multi-role fighter-bombers either in air combat or when isolating a combat area. An ordinary fighter, which successfully coped with these tasks, required a runway - at least in the form of an aircraft carrier deck.
The problem of creating a vertical take-off combat aircraft seemed insoluble - as the Americans could see, for example, when they tried to create a propeller-driven vertical take-off fighter, the Convair XFY-1 Pogo, a strange machine that took off from a standing position on its tail. However, the solution to the problem lay in a completely different plane, and the way to it was opened by the idea of applying in practice the phenomenon of thrust vector control, known in principle. Like every new invention in aviation, the path to its implementation was difficult, tortuous and, alas, generously sprinkled with the blood of test pilots. But, in the end, the concept of thrust vector control turned out to be quite viable, and all production designs of vertical take-off and landing combat aircraft are based on it: the British (later became American-British) Harrier, and the Soviet Yak-38, and the only modification of the American Lightning II being introduced into production - the F-35B. These machines differ not so much in the design and technical solutions themselves, but in the way they approach the problem and its solution. Let's take a closer look at the phenomenon called thrust vector control (VTC), or the English abbreviation VTC (Vector Trust Control).
If we try to give the simplest definition of the term included in the title of the section, we get something like this: thrust vector control is the ability of an aircraft to deflect the thrust generated by its power plant from the longitudinal axis of the aircraft. This concept applies primarily to jet-powered aircraft (not only airplanes, but also missiles), but can also be applied to propeller-driven aircraft (piston or turboprop - for example, the MV-22 Osprey).
From a practical point of view, thrust vectoring has two main areas of application:
Increasing the aircraft's capabilities in horizontal flight (primarily in terms of controllability and maneuverability);
a significant reduction in takeoff and mileage or complete elimination of these stages of flight - that is, vertical takeoff and landing.
Design approaches in these two cases are very different. If in the first, the deviation of the thrust vector from the axis of the aircraft ranges from several to several tens of degrees (usually within 25-35 degrees), then for the second, especially if the power plant must provide the aircraft with vertical takeoff and landing, it is necessary to direct the thrust downward, that is, with a horizontally installed engine, the thrust vector deviation should be about 90 degrees (the fact is that the thrust deviation angle, due to thermodynamics, should not or cannot be exactly 90 degrees from the horizontal).
Let us dwell in a little more detail on the first case, denoted in English language as Vectoring in Forward Flight (VIFF), that is, thrust vector control in horizontal flight. Its purpose (in relation to combat aircraft, primarily multirole fighters) is to improve the aircraft’s maneuverability and reduce its radar signature, which in total leads to an increase in its survivability on the battlefield. In addition, the length of the takeoff and run is significantly reduced. And although this may seem strange, a deviation of the thrust vector by 20-30 degrees is, from a technological point of view, a solution much later and more difficult to implement than a deviation of an amount close to 90 degrees. This solution is used in practice only in combat aircraft of the latest generations, although it promises undeniable advantages. The coordinated operation of aerodynamic control surfaces with a change in the thrust vector significantly enhances the effect of the aerodynamic control surfaces. The aircraft becomes capable of sharper maneuvers - in principle, the only limitation is the resistance of the pilot's body and the aircraft structure to overloads. In addition, when maneuvering with thrust vector deviation, the aircraft consumes less fuel than when maneuvering using only aerodynamic control surfaces - which means the flight range increases. Reducing the length of the takeoff and run makes it easier to operate from short runways (for example, those damaged during combat operations), field airfields or aircraft carriers.
The use of thrust vector control in horizontal flight can also significantly affect the design of the airframe. It opens the way to the development of tailless aircraft, devoid of not only horizontal, but also vertical tail. The absence of tail reduces aerodynamic drag and weight of the airframe (that is, fuel consumption again decreases and flight range increases). In addition, the effective dispersion area of the aircraft is reduced, giving it the characteristics of a “stele”.
Thrust vector control also has its drawbacks, which should not be forgotten, at least at the current level of development. aviation technology. The most significant of them include complex design and a fairly large mass of thrust vector control devices.
At the current stage of development of the design of combat aircraft, the priority is the use of thrust vector control in order to ensure vertical takeoff and landing or significantly reduce the take-off run (an aircraft with thrust vector control may not have the ability to launch vertically, or may be able to take off vertically only up to a certain take-off weight) while maintaining the possibility of vertical landing. It is these characteristics that are implemented in the Harrier and Yak-38.
So, let's return to the “verticals”. The use of thrust vector control in such aircraft is aimed at significantly changing the take-off and landing of the aircraft. It significantly reduces these two flight phases compared to aircraft with classic power plants (jet or propeller). In the launch phase, this concerns, first of all, the take-off run, that is, simply put, the path that the aircraft must cover until the moment when its wings create sufficient load-bearing force capable of lifting the aircraft off the ground and lifting it into the air. During the landing phase we're talking about about the mileage, that is, the distance covered by the plane from the moment its wheels touch the ground until it stops. The take-off and mileage determine the requirements not only for the length, but also for the quality of the runway - after all, if the plane moves at high speed along a sufficiently long, but uneven or damaged runway, then it runs the risk of serious damage and even crashing.
If the aircraft is equipped with thrust vector control devices over a fairly wide range, then takeoff and landing will look completely different. Such aircraft, depending on their capabilities, are divided into several groups:
VTOL (Vertical Take off and Landing) - aircraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL);
STOL (Short Take off and Landing) - aircraft with short take-off and landing (STOL);
VSTOL (Vertical Short Take off and Landing) - aircraft capable of performing both vertical and short take-off and landing (VSTOL);
STOVL (Short Take off and Vertical Landing) - aircraft whose power plant power does not allow vertical takeoff, but allows vertical landing(after reducing weight by running out of fuel and resetting the external suspension).
The very first studies of the stability of a vertical take-off vehicle showed that during takeoff and landing, the vector of the load-bearing force must pass through the center of gravity of the aircraft, and its value must be at least 20% greater than the mass of the airframe.
