lun-class ekranoplan!

[HROBOS]

Ekranoplan a special type of device (it has no relation to the ship or aircraft and is based on quite different principles.)
Type of transportation - a flight to midget height (over water and land surfaces).

Russia is the only country having the technology development and production of these machines. Planned, construction ekranoplan: anti - ship, amphibious and antisubmarine warfare.

Ekranoplan despite his unusual appearance (a very dangerous opponent.)
1. Ekranoplan barely noticeable. Aircraft seek to pull over to the ground to avoid detection (but it is very limited in this maneuver.) Ekranoplan specially created for these modes of flight.
2. Ekranoplan not subject to defeat mines (minefields).
3. Ekranoplan not subject to defeat anti-ship missiles (missiles can not capture such a target).
4. The difficult goal for aviation (low height, agility, speed is much smaller than a jet aircraft).

The collapse of the Soviet Union interrupted those plans.
Adopted, there were two types of ekranoplan first generation.
1. "Orlenok". Landing ekranoplan (capable of carrying 20 tons of cargo, and materiel BTR60/70/80).
2. "Lun". Impact ekranoplan, six anti-ship missile carrier "Mosquito." His volley is capable of sinking any aircraft carrier is guaranteed.

Especially for those who laugh in the name of or interested in their interpretation.

1. "Orlenok".
Орлёнок rus., Orlenok lat., Eagle.

2. "Lun".
Лунь rus., Lun lat., Harrier.
Harrier - bird of prey.
Detachment - Falconiformes.
Family - hawk.
Rod - harriers.

 

[Don Jaguar]

lun class,

If it was a missile boat then it will be more hilarious "lun class missile boat"

 

[HROBOS]

by the way, what will the future for this plane be? i heard russia was going to restore it and take it back to service again in 2012, can someone give us any information on that. and especially people from russia here in the forum, can you provide any information!

Ekranoplan a weapon to strengthen combat capabilities ("muscle"). Russia is developing a new "skeleton" (submarines, corvettes, frigates, destroyers and cruisers upgrade). Ekranoplanes have to wait their turn. All will depend on funding.

 

[Mosamania]

Still don't you think that such a weapon is very weak to fighter jets?? I mean a fighter jets can send two modern missiles to it and it is done for right? Unless I am mistaken.

 

[HROBOS]

Still don't you think that such a weapon is very weak to fighter jets?? I mean a fighter jets can send two modern missiles to it and it is done for right? Unless I am mistaken.

1. In this situation it is difficult to judge the effectiveness of missiles, air - air. Low altitude goal 2-5 meters + spray cloud or a cloud of dust. Rocket air - air created for other conditions of use. Ekranoplan not a plane. Ekranoplan has a greater margin of safety, the loss of several motors are not fatal for him.
2. Ekranoplan will maneuver and fight fire their anti-aircraft artillery.
3. It is necessary that someone brought a fighter on his goal (ekranoplan barely noticeable).
4. Anti-ship missiles are useless against ekranoplana.
5. No specialized weapons against ekranoprlanov.
Ekranoplan it "trump ace" in the Soviet sleeve (the main reason for the secrecy of accommodation ekranoplan in the Caspian Sea).

 

[Thomas]

1. In this situation it is difficult to judge the effectiveness of missiles, air - air. Low altitude goal 2-5 meters + spray cloud or a cloud of dust. Rocket air - air created for other conditions of use. Ekranoplan not a plane. Ekranoplan has a greater margin of safety, the loss of several motors are not fatal for him.
2. Ekranoplan will maneuver and fight fire their anti-aircraft artillery.
3. It is necessary that someone brought a fighter on his goal (ekranoplan barely noticeable).
4. Anti-ship missiles are useless against ekranoplana.
5. No specialized weapons against ekranoprlanov.
Ekranoplan it "trump ace" in the Soviet sleeve (the main reason for the secrecy of accommodation ekranoplan in the Caspian Sea).

I understand your blind devotion and patriotism for this thing. Especially since other countries don't have anything similar. But you need to stand back and look at it from a common sense view.

Compared to a ship it is definitely fast. But from a defensive standpoint it is a large not very maneuverable monstrosity. It is not armored, has limited defense systems, and Gives off a HUGE radar and IR signature. It is to fast for fleet ships to stay up with it. This removes it from the fleet defense umbrella somewhat. Also with those engines it is going to be a massive fuel hog. It does have some nice anti ship capability. But the money would be better spent on submarines with as much offensive firepower and much better survivability. And contrary to what you think the thing is vulnerable to anti ship missiles. As well as a range of heat seeking missiles. Those engines would be real easy to take out making it dead in the water.

Russia would be far better to put the money into hunter killer subs.

 

[HROBOS]

I understand your blind devotion and patriotism for this thing. Especially since other countries don't have anything similar. But you need to stand back and look at it from a common sense view.

Compared to a ship it is definitely fast. But from a defensive standpoint it is a large not very maneuverable monstrosity. It is not armored, has limited defense systems, and Gives off a HUGE radar and IR signature. It is to fast for fleet ships to stay up with it. This removes it from the fleet defense umbrella somewhat. Also with those engines it is going to be a massive fuel hog. It does have some nice anti ship capability. But the money would be better spent on submarines with as much offensive firepower and much better survivability. And contrary to what you think the thing is vulnerable to anti ship missiles. As well as a range of heat seeking missiles. Those engines would be real easy to take out making it dead in the water.

Russia would be far better to put the money into hunter killer subs.

I also understand your blind American patriotism. In addition, you do not have such equipment. Patriotism for one's country is good quality.

1. Call me anti-ship missile capable of destroying the target, moving at a speed of 500 km / h (no such missiles).
2. The effectiveness of missile air - the air is highly questionable (low altitude targets, water splashing over the sea, a cloud of dust over land).
3. Very maneuverable - compared to what? On the plane? Ekranoplan not an airplane.
4. Most of visibility. At the time he was quite a barely noticeable. At the time of their creation in the non-white world of modern technology invisibility. Even now it is difficult Lun vulnerable target. For those who do not know. These models have recently been decommissioned. They are quite well served in the Caspian Sea, but all equipment has a life span.
When Russia will build a new ekranoplan, they will have a very different kind of (invisibility technology, thermal protection engine, new weapons and electronic equipment).
5. Reservations. Ekranoplan can not fly, they can only plan at low altitude (although this is offset by twice the payload than a similar aircraft). You can protect motors, drivers, and major units armor (like the Su-25 or Su-34).
6. Price engines. Price Engines ekranoplan = price of scrap metal. WIG design allows the use of engines (worn out in the air and subject to change). Aircraft engine has a specific warranty period of work, sometimes several times smaller than the real (this is done for the safety of aviation). For the ekranoplan is not dangerous. Even if all engines (which is impossible in principle), it will lose speed and splash down safely.
7. Do I need to build Russian ekranoplan?
It is necessary, but a little later.

When we first met me she also made a double impression. As singles all fell into place.
Ekranoplan is an unusual technique to it you just get used to.
Russia has the technology and it should use return.

 

[ali_raza]

one thing is missing in this guys,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,that is .................................D,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[lcloo]

US equivalent would be the Pelican ULTRA, Ultra Large Transport Aicraft, studied by Boeing Phantom Works but the proposal did not materialised.

[/URL][/IMG]

Ground Effect Vehicles

Written by Greg Bjerg on 27 April 2006


Boeing PelicanA concept aircraft currently under development at Boeing’s Phantom Works Research and Development unit might be the largest airplane to ever fly, but it won’t set any altitude records. Its called the Pelican and it would have a normal cruising altitude of only twenty feet because it uses the concept of ground effect to achieve lift.

Performance specifications say this ground effect vehicle (GEV) will have a wingspan of 150 meters and be able to carry up to 1,400 tons of cargo. By comparison the current giant of the skies, the Russian An-225, has an 88.4-meter wingspan and can lift 250 tons.

Because the plane skims the surface during flight, it is only practical over large, smooth bodies of water. Flying close to the water, the wing’s downwash angle and tip vortices are suppressed, resulting in a greatly reduced drag which leads to outstanding cruise efficiency. This would translate into a range of 10,000 nautical miles in trans-oceanic flight. Operating from paved runways, the plane has thirty-eight fuselage-mounted landing gears with seventy-six tires to distribute the weight.

The Pelican is designed to be a hybrid GEV, allowing it to also fly at higher altitudes up to 20,000 feet. But the range would be greatly reduced to 6,500 nautical miles when not using the ground effect.

While the Pelican is yet to become a prototype the concept is hardly a new one. For decades the Russians have experimented with aircraft they called WIG (Wing In Ground-effect) planes. A WIG craft, like the Pelican, sits on a cushion of air created by aerodynamics rather than by an engine. Orlyonok A90This means that it can only fly when the WIG craft has sufficient forward speed. This is called a dynamic air cushion as opposed to the hovercraft’s static air cushion.

The Soviets had great plans for these planes. Just like Boeing’s Pelican they discovered the high efficiency of ground-effect craft. The only difference from the Russian WIGs and the Pelican is that the Soviet craft did not have the ability to fly higher than 20 feet. They would be restricted to use over large bodies of water.

Two WIG planes are especially interesting. The Orlyonok A90 is a large WIG prototype with one huge turboprop mounted high at the tail fin for cruise thrust and two turbofans for takeoff, acceleration, and landing. Two hydro skis are mounted at the underside of the fuselage, one in the front, and another at the center of gravity.

Designed in 1974, the original plans were to build 120 Orlyonoks as troop transport and assault vehicles, but only four were built– one of which has been used for static tests only. But the WIG craft had a troubled service history; the first Orlyonok crashed during a VIP demo flight in 1975. In October 1979 the Orlyonok entered service in the Soviet Navy, where one was lost in a crash in 1992. Unfortunately the crew didn’t survive the accident. The last flight of the Orlyonok took place in October 1993, and currently the remains of the last Orlyonoks are rusting and falling apart at their base.

There have been plans to modify one of the surviving Orlyonoks as a transport, carrying up to 150 passengers in a single deck layout or up to 350 passengers in a twin deck layout. A cargo version of the craft was planned to have a payload of thirty tons.

LunThe Soviets also started a WIG warship program called the Lun in 1970, but assembly of the first Lun did not start until 1983. In July 1986 it was launched into the Volga River. During Spring 1987 sea trials commenced on the Caspian Sea.

The first Lun was designed and built as a missile launching strike craft primarily for anti-submarine tasks. It carried 6 missile tubes for this mission, and had a top speed of 500 kilometers per hour. The second Lun was under construction during the collapse of the Soviet Union and the project was abandoned. In 1997 Russian television showed the Lun half sunk in the water at Kaspiisk Naval Air Base.

The Russians built a whole range of WIG aircraft ranging from eight-engine monsters to small pleasure craft. Today in the United States and Europe there are several homemade ground-effect planes usually seating no more than four passengers.

If Boeing’s enormous Pelican ever flies, it won’t be until the end of the decade at the soonest.

 

[Chogy]

Despite Hrobos' enthusiasm for the Ekranoplan concept, the USSR abandoned it for very sound reasons.

It was first developed in the late 1960's, early 1970's. At that time, pulse-doppler radars were in their infancy, and the F-4 provided fleet defense with it's primitive AI radar.

Before the F-14 and other pulse-doppler systems, airborne radars could only look up to shoot their long-ranged missiles. Objects near the ground are lost in ground clutter. In this case, the Ekranoplan could be an effective missile carrier. But with the F-14 came the ability to look down from altitude and engage targets at any height, at extreme range, using the AIM-54. Overnight, the Ekranoplan became obsolete. The system has the radar signature of a cargo ship. It's extraordinarily vulnerable, a super high-value target that would have little chance of getting within range of enemy ships.

 

[HROBOS]

Despite Hrobos' enthusiasm for the Ekranoplan concept, the USSR abandoned it for very sound reasons.

It was first developed in the late 1960's, early 1970's. At that time, pulse-doppler radars were in their infancy, and the F-4 provided fleet defense with it's primitive AI radar.

Before the F-14 and other pulse-doppler systems, airborne radars could only look up to shoot their long-ranged missiles. Objects near the ground are lost in ground clutter. In this case, the Ekranoplan could be an effective missile carrier. But with the F-14 came the ability to look down from altitude and engage targets at any height, at extreme range, using the AIM-54. Overnight, the Ekranoplan became obsolete. The system has the radar signature of a cargo ship. It's extraordinarily vulnerable, a super high-value target that would have little chance of getting within range of enemy ships.

1. You are, in principle, reject the appropriateness of a modern war (boats with missile weapons and landing craft air cushion)?
2. The range of weapons of modern ships (20-25km for artillery 100/127/130 mm). What hurt to make missile launching WIG from a distance of 120-150km? I say again, there is no anti-ship missiles capable of hitting the target (moving at a speed of 500 km / h).
3. When you compare the characteristics of the Russian aviation and the U.S. (you project combat the MiG-21 and F-22)? Who told you that new ekranoplan (in terms of visibility would be, like its predecessors)?
4. You can destroy anything.
a) If all the aircraft carrier the whole group will be hunting for a pair of WIG (yes, they will destroy them).
b) If the carrier battle groups will attack (surface ships, submarines, aircraft and ekranoplan) is a completely different situation.
c) If ekranoplan will act in an ambush (hiding on the ground, among the reefs, or ice)?
Sudden missile strike (osnavnaya problem ekranoplan).

 

[nomi007]

complete information is available at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lun-class_ekranoplan

 

[Chogy]

1. You are, in principle, reject the appropriateness of a modern war (boats with missile weapons and landing craft air cushion)?

Too broad. Air cushion vehicles are appropriate in limited circumstances. But no one has proposed outfitting the U.S. Marines hover landing craft with large anti-ship missiles. That is what guided missile warships are for.

2. The range of weapons of modern ships (20-25km for artillery 100/127/130 mm). What hurt to make missile launching WIG from a distance of 120-150km? I say again, there is no anti-ship missiles capable of hitting the target (moving at a speed of 500 km / h).

And fleet defense aircraft can combat sortie 1,000 km from the carrier battle group. An Ekranoplan with a RCS of about 1,000 square meters is as easy a target imaginable. A single air to air missile can destroy a $200 million aircraft and perhaps hundred men and valuable anti-ship missiles.

Consider - an AIM-120 will utterly destroy the Ekranoplan. What would an AIM-120 do to a warship? Scratch the paint?

3. When you compare the characteristics of the Russian aviation and the U.S. (you project combat the MiG-21 and F-22)? Who told you that new ekranoplan (in terms of visibility would be, like its predecessors)?

I compared military technology then, and explained WHY the USSR smartly abandoned it. That hasn't changed. We still have (now even better) AA missiles, look-down pulse-doppler radar, and a fragile target that is very vulnerable.

Nowhere did I project MiG-21 vs F-22 combat... and what does that have to do with the Ekranoplan?

4. You can destroy anything.
a) If all the aircraft carrier the whole group will be hunting for a pair of WIG (yes, they will destroy them).
b) If the carrier battle groups will attack (surface ships, submarines, aircraft and ekranoplan) is a completely different situation.
c) If ekranoplan will act in an ambush (hiding on the ground, among the reefs, or ice)?
Sudden missile strike (osnavnaya problem ekranoplan).

What can the Ekranoplan possibly do that couldn't be done infinitely better with a Tu-22 or Tu-95?

U.S. planners were very concerned with anti-ship missiles on swarms of Tu-95. Again, why limit the aircraft to wave-top heights? At one time, low altitude flight was effective in denying a defense a good shot. Today, modern fighters don't care what altitude a target is at. It doesn't matter one bit.

The concept is expensive, vulnerable, and unneeded, as anything it carries could be better carried by either Tu-22 (if speed is needed) or surface warships.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Whatever the reasons, it sure looks scary and badass!

 

[Last Hope]

Who ever made the name must be a Dark guy from Asia