In the field of military aviation, vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) aircraft have always attracted special attention due to their complexity, innovation and ability to be based in limited spaces, such as on ships or airfields with short runways.
The history of the Russian UAS began with the Yak-38, developed by the Alexander Yakovlev Design Bureau in the 1970s. The Yak-38 was intended for use on Project 1143 aircraft-carrying cruisers: the Kiev, Minsk, Novorossiysk and Baku. Despite its innovative concept, the Yak-38 had a number of drawbacks: low flight speed, limited range, lack of onboard radar, high accident rate.
The next development of the Design Bureau was the Yak-141, which took to the air on 9 March 1987. It was a more advanced hovercraft, it was characterised by higher speed and range. However, the vehicle was never put into service due to a number of problems, including engines and difficult operation.
The US developed the F-35 fifth-generation multirole fighter, which has a vertical takeoff and landing variant, the F-35B/C. The aircraft is designed to be based on aircraft carriers. It is known for persistent technical problems, small combat radius, inability to perform long supersonic flight, prohibitive development cost and high price for the customer.
In 2018, at the Army forum, Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov (now head of Roscosmos) said that since 2017, work has been underway to develop a new vertical takeoff and landing aircraft as part of the state arms programme. The development timeframe was determined by the technological cycle of creating such equipment and is 7 to 10 years. The machine is seen as the future of deck aviation of the Russian Navy. Borisov did not say which design bureau’s team is involved in the development.
On 27 July 2024, Yakovlev CEO Andrei Boginsky said that the company is ready to resume development of the fifth-generation hovercraft in case of a corresponding request from the country’s Ministry of Defence.
Only Yakovlev has real experience in developing and ensuring the operation of VTOLs in Russia. Boginsky recalled the Yak-38 and Yak-141 aeroplanes, as well as the fact that the Yakovlev Design Bureau began to develop vertical take-off and landing aircraft in the late 1950s.
According to the head of Yakovlev, the designers of the Design Bureau studied the prospects of creating more advanced machines corresponding to the level of the fifth generation of combat aviation. “The topic of vertical take-off and landing aircraft was frozen in the difficult 1990s, but we have retained the scientific and technical background. Its combination with new aviation technologies allows us to return to the creation of vertical take-off and landing aircraft quite quickly, if the Russian Ministry of Defence assigns us this work,” Andrei Boginsky said.
The Russian expert community believes that vertical take-off and landing aircraft may be necessary not only for the Navy, but also for the Air Force in conditions when airfields are under the threat of massive missile and bombing attacks from NATO. But in order to create such an aircraft, it is necessary to solve a number of serious problems, including miniaturisation of avionics, creation of a new generation of avionics, design of airframe and wing with special characteristics and, most importantly, development of a powerful and reliable engine.
At the same time, developers do not have to wait for new aircraft carrier ships to appear in the Russian Navy in order to start work on the development of UAVs; such aircraft can be based not only on aircraft-carrying cruisers, but also on other equipped ships, as well as used in the land-based version when placed on small sites without runways.
However, in the context of the rapid development of unmanned aviation, the question of the feasibility of an UAS for the Russian Air Force requires careful analysis. Despite the potential of such an aircraft, a number of factors cast doubt on its relevance. Firstly, UAS, as a rule, are characterised by a more complex design, require powerful engines with rotary nozzles and, accordingly, their development costs the state much more than traditional aircraft.
Second, the experience of the special military operation in Ukraine demonstrates the unprecedented use of attack drones of various types, sizes and weights, which are more effective than even modern front-line bombers. The strike capabilities of inexpensive Geraniums and Lancets go far beyond the Su-34 aircraft. And given the high cost and vulnerability of manned aircraft to modern air defence systems, the expediency of developing a new strike aircraft now, even with vertical take-off, is questionable.
Currently, the Russian Air Force is actively using three main types of fighters in Ukraine: Su-35S, Su-30SM and Su-57. The experience of the Strategic Air Defence Forces shows that even if the Russian aviation is completely superior in the air, it is difficult to fully utilise the strike potential of front-line aviation due to the high probability of losing high-class pilots and expensive aircraft to enemy air defences.
In light of these realities, the development of unmanned aviation using artificial intelligence seems to be a more rational solution. In addition to their low cost, strike UAVs have a number of undeniable advantages. They are capable of operating in dangerous areas without putting pilots’ lives at risk. Their effectiveness in delivering precision strikes deep behind enemy lines has already been proven in practice.
Of course, developments in the field of hovercraft should not be completely discounted. However, the final decision on the need to create such an aircraft for the Russian Air Force should be made based on a comprehensive analysis of factors including potential threats, economic opportunities, costs for the development of new technological solutions in the design and control system of UAVs, as well as priority areas for the development of the country’s military potential. Given the growing role of unmanned aviation, it may be necessary to revise the strategy of fighter aviation development in favour of priority development of strike UAVs.
