Od combining civil and military aircraft occur only positive effects

One of the last interviews Mikhail Petrovich Simonov, chief designer of OKB Sukhoi, one of the main founders of the Su-27. Simonov died March 4, 2011. Fond memory.

In the interview revealed a variety of topics including the prospect of aircraft in Russia

Mikhail Petrovich kindly gave me this interview before the show in a distant Asian country. The show opened the next day: working actively erected and made out stands, and the managers and specialists of the participating firms followed the accuracy and speed of their actions, have placed the exhibits and put up posters. In those days, senior leaders do not visit a new venue — they only appear when you’re done. Chief Designer "Dry" behaved differently. Despite the difficulties many hours of flight and old age, Mikhail Petrovich came to see the exhibition of the prepared in advance. Bright sunny day allowed a good look congregate here from all over the world latest aircraft and helicopters, in a relaxed manner to talk with their crews. In general, the general designer of had something to do — work with people of his caliber is always rife. In this case, Simonov always found a way to talk to reporters, willingly shared his vision of the situation, calmly explained to them the subtleties of the moment. Although from the time of this interview has already passed a respectable time, the words of Mikhail Petrovich did not lose relevance today. I hope that they will help readers better understand and remember the great man who passed away March 4, 2011.

— During the Soviet period in the aircraft industry has undergone tremendous changes. Do you think they are going in the right direction?

— The question is wrongly put. If management has determined the direction — so time correctly. I draw your attention to this because all of our actions could occur spontaneously. In fact, today we have a — a change of course, bearing in mind the sailing course — tack. In general, a very interesting situation we have today.

First, today our largest aircraft manufacturer, including the "MiG", "dry", "Irkut", under the command of a single leader. He has the appropriate powers and perform its functions and the Director General, and as a chief designer. And here, of course, we are seeing progress. Because when I was in a similar situation to the last Soviet years, the difficulties were great. Well, I could not be both a general designer of OKB on "Dry" and the Deputy Minister. And today it is possible. This is confirmed by specific people, including Pogosyan.

Secondly, the structure of supply of our aircraft. Including due to combining the functions of leaders. Of course, the issue of export of military products, fighter, always associated with high politics. Of course, you can not deliver anything to anyone. But then the question arises: guys, what you’re doing what you’re doing? It arises because there is never enough money, and make them better than not earning.

Therefore, I think that things are developing quite well and correctly. Regarding the change or change of course: we are releasing series aircraft "Su" for combat aircraft at the aircraft plant in Komsomolsk-on-Amur and Irkutsk factory — do warplanes series at the two plants. In addition, there was the following question: for our country, Russia, still required and the production of passenger aircraft. You can argue differently. Anyway, we are at the company "Sukhoi" doing today passenger plane dimension of the order of a hundred places. And then, I think the passenger line will develop. And the military, in this regard, will not diminish or deteriorate, and will also be developed.

— From the height of the provisions of General Designer know what you think on the simultaneous development of one company and the military and civilian areas? It gives the company-developer? Portrayed in two views: the first — something the firm can receive from the combination of directions, three times — on the contrary, to lose, to "split", diversion of resources to the two areas of expertise.

— I think that by combining the two technologies, civil and military aircraft, there are only positive effects. There are no negative side I do not feel and do not see. Because in combat aircraft faster the development of, for example, power plants — are more sophisticated, more powerful and high-speed engines. In a civil aircraft — the other main direction of development. There engines are made more and more fuel-efficient.

Of course, the placement of orders for the construction of passenger aircraft at a plant in Komsomolsk (what today we implement) — this, at least, improve the economic situation in the factory and the social in the city of Komsomolsk. Moreover, both military and civilian production in Komsomolsk is the calculation meet the needs of not only our country, but also foreign customers. It is clear: the more our country earns money on the international market, the better it provides a level of well-being of their workers. I think this is the main reason we combine military and civilian areas.

— It is believed that the military orders may not be enough to ensure the stable operation of large plants in Komsomolsk and Irkutsk.

— No, it’s not that — lack of military orders.

— Mikhail Petrovich, one time you offered a very interesting project C-21, a supersonic business jet (Supersonic Business Jet, SSBJ). Then he went, and now there is another surge of interest in the SSBJ. In your opinion, what caused it? What can the company "Sukhoi"?

— In my office on the desktop is a model of a supersonic passenger aircraft, which will serve the Eurasian continent. Perhaps, then coverage will increase, but we believe that the range of about 7,000 km is sufficient for the first time. If you need to organize a meeting of economic emergency, a plane will come in handy. There may be other reasons, the aggravation of the international situation, for example. Therefore, we are now projecting a plane together with the institutions of the aviation industry.

— The project continues to be known as S-21, or it’s a different program?

— This is — the same project. As when he called, when the C-11, C-21 when, there were other names. This is not important, but the essence of the work. By reading magazines and visiting aircraft at air shows, I see that similar work is being done abroad. Sometimes, indeed, there is a lack of interest, and then you look — on the topic again drawn the attention of various aircraft manufacturing firms. It’s hard to tell what’s going on at other firms, because they determine the direction of their development based on their own understanding of the market. And why on "Dry" this issue is still on the agenda — it is clear.

First, we study the very long approach to the supersonic passenger aircraft (Supersonic Transport, SST). Moreover, I believe that we, in Russia, we have excellent geographical conditions for the application of supersonic passenger aircraft, and even hypersonic.

Second, we have 15 or more years ago, have reached an agreement with the Ministry of Civil Aviation on the establishment of high-speed passenger aircraft for the Euro-Asian theater. In particular, they could serve the direction of Paris — Tokyo. Moreover, given that the earth is round, the Russian territory provides the best in geographic and economic terms, flying in our skies. Because, if you fly on the great circle (and in the air there is such a thing) — we have good opportunities and conditions.

— Example Concorde has convincingly shown that the creation of supersonic passenger aircraft — on forces aircraft manufacturers. Then why today they are not operated by the airlines?

— Indeed, the development of aerodynamics, gas dynamics, and other sciences led to the creation of technologies that allow a supersonic aircraft to operate in the airlines. However, aircraft manufacturers have to take into account the different views in the community for the establishment, construction and operation of airline supersonic technology. In particular, there is an official position of the U.S. Congress. It consists in the fact that it is impossible to have supersonic aviation vehicles. Congressmen fear that under the guise of civilian, this technique will get "wrong" hands.

At the time, Boeing led the research and development work on its own SST (refers to the Boeing project in 2707, 1966, 1971 he., — Note VK). Thus the project was difficult, amid speeches opponents supersonic technology, which assured the public that this technique — not environmentally safe, that the cows are milked worse, chickens are no longer carry the eggs and so on. These people and their moods generated by the North American public have shaped the official position of the United States of America. And, based on this position, opponents blocked the development of the SST supersonic passenger aircraft at home, at Boeing. And not only that they were trying to block and European Concorde, a joint effort between England and France.

The Soviet Union developed its own project. In my understanding, the Tu-144 — this is the swan song of Andrei Tupolev. I think in this direction we have to continue to work, and be sure to bring the project to a practical result. I believe that the Tu-144 — the best in the world supersonic passenger plane ever built among and flies. Meanwhile, Concorde went into service, a long fly on the lines, although the airline was given a very small number of such vehicles.

We thanks to the leadership of the company (most of Kolmogorov on this exhibition was not) — untrained, decided at the next show in Le Bourget repeat in a set of aerobatics, had just completed Concorde. That was done, but not enough prepared. I try to choose the words softly, so as not to offend the people who carried out extensive work on the project. And aviation — she is, needs attention, very careful, thoughtful approach.

Our senior management, I mean Dmitri Ustinov also acted no better … Well, there was an accident. And aviation — it is this: when something happened, the incident is a great public outcry. Picture this: You are driving in a car and you have flat tire. Well, what a tragedy! He got up, took out a jack, a tire changed to spare. Or slowly drove to the booth that says "tire". In aviation — not so.

Here Concorde runs up on the strip, and not by accident or chance, the band appeared on the iron, steel part. This steel part fell under the wheel, ricocheted off the tire flew into the fuel tank. A Concorde — afterburner aircraft (takeoff was carried out under the conditions of the afterburner engines Rolls-Royce/SNECMA Olympus 593 — approx. VK), and the fuel pouring out of the shattered vessel, ignited the torch from the engine. As a result, the plane took off in the fire, fell to the hotel burned down a lot of people. Thus, the aircraft is on a very dangerous and require a lot of attention and work, these phenomena. It was necessary to make the Tu-144, to develop the project further, and we would have a great car.

— When the C-21 pledged, it was believed that the main issue — engines, they must be multi-mode, to provide approximately the same rate at subsonic and supersonic flight conditions, reasonable expense, environmental parameters, and so on. It is known that the Tu-144 and the "Concord" were the difficulties associated with their power plants, in particular, the fuel consumption of these aircraft was enormous.

— No, I do not agree. Do not see a big obstacle. Of course, engine builders will do a great job, but special, there is no insurmountable difficulties. I think we should resist that old agreement, which we, aircraft manufacturers have had with the Ministry of Civil Aviation. Its essence was as follows. The Americans on the one hand — the Pacific Ocean, on the other — the Atlantic. And if they need to locate the area of supersonic flight, they can place it above the water surface.

Our situation is — is different: in Russia is quite a large area, it is located on a large number of zones of flight tests. Well, take, for example, the Moscow area. It exists, and there are held supersonic flights. And no one complains. At least, I never never read about that in a certain suburban farm, farm or agricultural enterprise chickens carried protest by reducing oviparous. In Russia — the big land and, of course, that can be placed on them (and placed) zone of supersonic flight. And the chickens, cows, and other animals, it seems to me, are sensitive to this fact. So we fly supersonic military aircraft. I think that prevail in the U.S. point of view on the supersonic passenger airplanes … it, like, speculative. This point of view has any scientific basis.

— If you go back to the issues of the power plant. The best practices for multi-mode engines on the C-21 have been made on AESTC "Union". You can use them on the SST or SSBJ? Or is it better to use western engines and technology to create a new power plant supersonic aircraft?

— I have not played well here. There are different managers, engineers, designers, and they have different points of view. I believe that Russia is capable of using any technology to perform the development of any machine, including engines. And you can certainly agree, for example, with the French: "Let’s make the engine — well, let’s!" But this can not be a justification for conversations like "You made the engine together with the French, because they themselves could not." They could, and now we can. The case is due to different financial approach. Together will be cheaper together will be faster. My opinion is: it is better to make the engine itself, in this case, for a supersonic passenger aircraft.

— And the plane itself, by itself or together with someone?

— Also themselves.

— The aircraft must conform to the standards of airworthiness. Here, too, the tone is set U.S., in particular, a very powerful structure FAA (Federal Aviation Administration). Gradually, the U.S. achieved recognition of its rules of airworthiness FAR worldwide. Could it happen that a supersonic aircraft will be made, but will not meet the requirements that impose FAA? A valid airworthiness standards were written by subsonic aircraft.

— No, I think not. First, the airworthiness standards are not written by any aircraft, and develop from event to event. If there was any trouble, as, for example, mentioned the case of the Concorde, — the analysis, the findings are reflected in the new versions of the rules. For example, they record is written: "The strength of the tire must be at least such a set, the tire should not scrap its punch bottom panel of the fuel tank and cause a fire." Vpisyvanie such requirements gradually develops standards of airworthiness. I do not see compelling moments.

Moreover, we are well-known firm-developer of aircraft, interact with FAA. We are currently considering a proposal to FAA. They offer: let’s get together we "otsertifitsiruem" sport aircraft. Well, why not? Can be together, "otsertifitsirovat" our sport aircraft by U.S. standards.

Have their own requirements and the Europeans — they are called JAR. Europeans strongly promoted in the world has its own rules. You can "otsertifitsirovat" aircraft and European r
equirements. But another thing is that the situation is developing in such a way that if you have a certification of FAR, you can sell the aircraft in any market.

— Do not you think that a supersonic aircraft must specifically write a new chapter FAR or JAR?

— Of course not.

— That is to certify the SST should not be taken FAR 25 and FAR c some other number?

— Well, not necessarily — maybe 25th FAR. But with a caveat or an index.

— And what about the requirements of the noise level? Apply existing or write special? It appears that the requirements of Chapter 4 of supersonic aircraft will be impossible.

— We’ll see. I say vaguely, because the noise in our concept is diverse. Well, the first: acceleration of aircraft on the runway during takeoff. Second, landing on the strip. Finally, high-altitude flight at supersonic speed. Now we firmly believe that you can fly at supersonic speed — it is permissible for the society and from the standpoint of environmental protection. By the way, Boeing has recently announced that it continues to study on the establishment of a supersonic passenger aircraft. True, they were given a very narrow range of the Mach number of the flight. It is quite possible (and not only possible, but I have personally seen a plane flight on the number of M = 1.19), which is no shock and negative effects on the earth’s surface will not be observed.

— Mikhail Petrovich, you probably remember well the time when the exhibition in Paris crashed Su-30MKI "board 01"? There was a time when an arbitrary decision, following the example of the Tu-144, could not stop the theme of flight using thrust vector control (UHT). But that did not happen: the people making decisions in Russia, and then the Indian customers react to the loss of "beads 01" with understanding. Since a few years, and I would like to ask, but whether at the time the decision was made to use UHT combat aircraft?

— The decision proved to be correct. We go step by step, try. Why? Because everyone wants to have the whole car after the flight, and not broken. Well, let’s say, a simple version of the thrust vector control. Viktor Pugachev was the first test pilot EDO "Dry" who tried UHT in the air. In the pilot single-engine plane we put a thrust vector control, and the second left standard, a standard. Tried — turned out well. Then on began to develop the engine with thrust vector control, the plane made two such engines.

I’d like to translate our conversation to another related topic. So: in the case of the Tu-154 crash near Donetsk, we have a baseline situation. At an altitude of 12,000 feet we have a plane that flies, so, on what does not "supported", but air. So we can say that the Tu-154 had to be able to go out flight mode "flat spin" mode in horizontal flight. And thereby save the lives of the passengers and crew.

Today, basically, all the new fighters "Dry" are equipped with thrust vector control. They normally piloted in and out of any kind of spin: a flat, tough, direct and inverted. In this regard, I believe that the development of authoritarian rule passenger aircraft led to the fact that there are a number of aircraft spin characteristics which "do not match". I think you and I would not want to be on the board of such a "non-conforming" aircraft that are unable to exit the flat spin. And no one probably would not want to.

Then let’s ask ourselves the following questions. Military pilot, which his country is paying a lifetime "for fear of" flying on an airplane, in the face of the Su-30MKI and Su-30MKM. These machines have a thrust vector control system and flight control system, allowing for the safe withdrawal of the aircraft pilot’s life from any types of spins. Hence the question. And why in this case the passengers who buy airline tickets, fly planes that can not safely continue the flight after getting into a tailspin?

Today we are releasing combat aircraft, on which all this is done. Question: why civil passenger aircraft, there is no flight control system at high angles of attack? Why is there no system prevents stalling in a tailspin, with steep and flat spin, and spin the output mode to horizontal flight?

So I personally believe that the time has come to aviation rules stated: passenger plane has is obliged to have a flight control is that it ensure complete safety of the passengers and crew.

— Probably still not necessarily thrust vector set on a passenger plane …

— Well, these are details — the thrust vector, this requirement provides or not.

— Is it possible so you understand what the question about the use of shock wave therapy on the next-generation fighter has already been solved?

— Yes, it is possible, at least in regard fighter "dry". But that’s not all. Following the appointment of Fedorov in 2003 and it was the ratio of the firm Mikoyan to aerobatics changed. Yes, so much has changed, my dear wife, after a demonstration of aerobatics in the MiG-29OVT with family ehidtsey says, "Well, Mike, you udelali Mikoyan?" Confirmed: "Yes, udelali." First, because then along came a good leader — Fedorov. Second, they have a good designer — Barkovskiy. They went right to the question for the MiG-29 flight control system developed and thrust vector control system. And when it will go on the following models of fighters "MiG", then for sure, maybe they will do better than their predecessors. I think not likely to do worse! Well, looking at them, and the company "Sukhoi" will try to go forward.

Vladimir Karnozov

Like this post? Please share to your friends: