In line with the directive of the Council of Ministers dated 5 February,
1962, a provision was made both to further develop the E-155
R15B-300-powered aircraft in the reconnaissance aircraft and interceptor
variants and to convert two E-152s for testing elements of the S-155
intercept system being under development. In accordance with that, it was
envisaged to fit the E-152/1 with new R15B-300 engines and carry out its
flight trials. Besides, a decision was taken to equip the E-152/2 with the
Smerch-A radiocontrol and homing system, as well as with K-80 missiles in
order to test and prepare them for the E-155P interceptor.
In 1962, a working draft was developed with all necessary drawings issued.
The work on conversion of the E-152/1 into the E-152M/1 began after the
world records had been set on it. The R15B-300 engines, featuring enhanced
thrust and an all-mode nozzles, were installed on the aircraft. Extra fuel
load was added. It was housed by three detachable grotto tanks and by the
first fuselage tank. It was envisaged to install foreplanes. Due to this,
the E-152/1 fuselage's fore and rear sections were redesigned. The work had
been finished by the end of 1962, but sub-standard engines had to be
mounted. The completion of the second prototype was also delayed due to the
lack of the engines. It was assembled only in the first half of 1963,
equipped with sub-standard engines, too, and was sent to the factory flight
testing on 14 June, 1963. The E-152M/2 aircraft was equipped with R15B-300
engines and two K-80 all-aspect homing missiles, mounted on the wing tips.
The aircraft was equipped with the Smerch-A radar with the radio
interception system, SAU-1I Polyot automatic control system with flight
navigation devices, Lazur-M command link system, RSBN-2 Iskra short-range
navigation and landing system and the KSI compass system.
The R15B-300 engine ?8, delivered in November 1963 and installed on the
E-152M/1, ensured only the ground test programme, with the engine started.
The flight trials were not carried out due to the ban on operating the
engine in the air. In 1963-1964, the flight tests failed to begin because
there were no R15B-300 flight-ready engines on hand. That is why further
work on them was cancelled, and it was the E-152A aircraft that was used for
experiments.
In conclusion, it is necessary to note that the aircraft with the factory
designation E-155 was, at first, slated for operating as part of the
Uragan-5 intercept system. In accordance with the above resolution of the
Council of Ministers of 4 June, 1958, three E-155 interceptors powered by a
combined powerplant (turbojet engine + liquid-propellant rocket engine) were
to be submitted for factory flight trials in the second quarter of the 1960.
They were designed to intercept targets at an altitude of up to 30-35 km at
a 140-170 km range. Their maximum speed was to be 3,500-4,000 km/h. At the
first stage of the testing, the armament was to consist of K-9 missiles, and
further K-155 missiles. Besides, development of four unmanned reusable STOL
interceptors, designed to operate from unpaved airstrips, was planned and
produce them for tests in the fourth quarter of 1961. However, it did not
proceed beyond the conceptual design stage.
Can I assume that it used blown flaps? Would it still work after being subjected to the heat from flying in Mach 2.8-3 (if that was the intended maximum speed)?hesham said:Hi,
The E-155UVP as STOL aircraft project.
The wing of the bizjet model appears to be different from the stubbier wing of the MiG-25 as built. The model as shown by Belyakov/Marmain has an Aeroflot-text above the passenger windows, but I recall from years ago Soviet military transports often wore Aeroflot-livery.Ye-155 bizjet project
Studied in 1963-65, this would have had a wing of increased span and a new forward fuselage equipped with up to seven passenger seats or up to 1,000kg (2,205lb) of urgent cargo. The entrance door was on the left behind the cockpit. The fuselage was slightly wider, increasing fuel capacity to give a range of up to 3,500km (2,175 miles) at Mach 2.35. The VVS showed some interest, but the work was mainly funded by the OKB, which decided that the probable market did not justify the large design effort.
XP67_Moonbat said:Looking at this idea, it couldn't have been a comfortable ride.
Hi Motocar, would you share the cutaway in this thread please?I have the cutaway drawing...!
Yes the cutaway is entirely fictional.Here's the cutaway I think Motocar is referring to. However you need a big pinch of salt. In the book seating is one abreast down the LHS with an aisle to the right. The drawing shows two and an aisle something would have to be quite tiny....
New link for the Flight article https://www.flightglobal.com/class-struggle/48677.article
I feel the same way. There are two models and two sets of drawings and they seem to show two stages of the same design. The cutaway drawing shows both versions as models. As it was never built it's likely there were several design stages as different problems surfaced.I feel the cockpit was different ?.
It's the same model all over againI feel the cockpit was different ?.
what was those bombs ?.