Tu-160 "White Swan"

GarryB wrote:

[What r the chances of the B-1B re-modified to be nuclear capable & thus closer to the Tu-160M in performance, like the original B-1 that President Carter cancelled?

It is too small and too underpowered to be a Tu-160 performance class aircraft. You are comparing an aircraft with 60-65 tons thrust with an aircraft that currently has about 100 tons thrust and may get 30% more with improved engine versions.

Agreed, but 2 B-1s can be used for 1 Tu-160M. But besides them & the B-52s, the USN has the advantage in surface & subsurface naval asset #s to launch Ash/LACMs, so it's not "the end of the world" as far as the USAF is concerned!

Agreed, but 2 B-1s can be used for 1 Tu-160M. But besides them & the B-52s, the USN has the advantage in surface & subsurface naval asset #s to launch Ash/LACMs, so it's not "the end of the world" as far as the USAF is concerned!

Doesn't really work that way...

For 2 x B-1Bs to perform the same mission as one Tu-160M it would need 2 or three inflight refuellings to get the range... a refuelling on takeoff and then a refuelling half way through the mission and another refuelling on the way home.

Most strategic bombers get a topup just after takeoff to maximise fuel load, but refuelling again over Siberia is going to be an issue.

In comparison the Tu-160M getting a topup after takeoff and then not needing more fuel until landing back in Russia means it is much easier and much safer to support because you don't need forward deployed tankers operating in enemy airspace.

Basing the B-1Bs in Europe or Asia to attack Russia or China would be a useful role, but remember the B-1b had all its nuclear capability removed in the 1990s to save money and because they knew they could not keep inflight refuelling them all the way to the target and back.

The introduction of cruise missiles to the B-1B has made it safer in terms of standoff use but it is not a strategic bomber.... any more than the Tu-22M3 could be.

Look at Tu-22M3 raids into Syria.... they carry about 9-12 bombs in the 250-500kg range, so at most we are talking 6 tons of bombs, but actually more likely 3 tons of bombs... about the max bomb weight of a Yak-130 trainer aircraft.

Obviously when delivered with accuracy you don't need to carpet bomb, but the key is the flight range it can deliver these bombs to.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

Militarov wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

Militarov wrote:
They wont fly forever, borts are oldish.

No, Su-34 wont fill strategic roles of Tu-22M but rather roles where Tu-22M perfroms as tactical platform.

.

Here I can agree but still 8tons vs 24 tons of payload.
Besides Tu-22 in new edition is going to have same avionics/EW/engines as Tu-160M2. As well as scaled down Kh-102 cruise missiles.  So maybe not that fast going down? .

Anti ship roles for an example too fit alot better with Su-34 rather than  Tu-22M..

Kh-32 is not strategic but hypersound anitship heavy missile.  Deep upgrade of  Kh-22. Tu-22 can carry 3 of them.  Somehow I cannot imagine what Su-34 can have against AC groupings?

Brahmos variants for an example.

Its not about payload, its more about roles. Its weird to use Tu-22M in tactical roles, when you can for the same money basically fly 6 Su-34s.

RussianAF  does  not use Brahmos  

So you want to trade you want instead of 3xKh32 - hyper-sound speed, 1,000kg warhead, 40,000 m ceiling and 1000km range on 1 Tu-22M3M (radius 2,400km)

to

to  2 z 220kg  warhead on  2,5Ma missile with range of 300km  (brahmos derivative) on Su-34 (1100km mradius) ?

In this role unlikely.


As for tactical bombing - guess depending on range I guess otherwise nobody would fly Tu-22 to bomb terrorist scum in Syria.

And this is how i see you never served. Military, everything looks though bang for the money, from the food to fuel consumption especially when your money is limited. US shouldnt be used as etalon as they spend and dont care.

There is reason why we dont have 200 Tu-160 split between conventional and cruise carriers and no Su-34s and Tu-22Ms, because, duh, Tu-160s can carry more and fly longer. And you should go back and read again where i said "part of the roles", they will be split, as there wont have anything in between in weight or performance class, and thats what will happen, Brahmos, no Brahmos, KH-32 or no KH-32.

Where i said that Brahmos is in Russian service? And who says it wont be? I clearly said "Brahmos variant", after all its based on Russian designs its all natural that it will enter service eventually on Su-30 and its variants.

Furthermore: http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/archive-world-worldwide-news-air-force-aviation-aerospace-air-military-defence-industry/global-defense-security-news/global-news-2016/september/2912-russian-air-force-shows-interest-for-air-launched-variant-of-the-brahmos-missile.html

Flying to Syria is not tactical bombing, its air interdiction mission as it strikes mostly targets that are of high strategic value but are in not direct contact with friendly forces.

Militarov wrote: And this is how i see you never served.

Shoigu never did  too    

Militarov wrote:
Military, everything looks though bang for the money, from the food to fuel consumption especially when your money is limited.

And this is secret knowledge of former military?! cough cough      

Militarov wrote:
There is reason why we dont have 200 Tu-160 split between conventional and cruise carriers and no Su-34s and Tu-22Ms, because, duh, Tu-160s can carry more and fly longer. And you should go back and read again where i said "part of the roles", they will be split, as there wont have anything in between in weight or performance class, and thats what will happen, Brahmos, no Brahmos, KH-32 or no KH-32.

That's  why Tu-22 were modified and Kh-32 deeply modernized to be fulfill its tasks till PK DA/ Zircons become operational I presume.





That is an artistic vision or Brahmos kind of attack. This is be,low something like  Kh-32. But with different that ceiling is 40,000m and speed is about 5,400 km/h... none if other existing missiles ca od the trick on 1000km range.

Militarov wrote:
Where i said that Brahmos is in Russian service? And who says it wont be? I clearly said "Brahmos variant", after all its based on Russian designs its all natural that it will enter service eventually on Su-30 and its variants.

Furthermore: http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/archive-world-worldwide-news-air-force-aviation-aerospace-air-military-defence-industry/global-defense-security-news/global-news-2016/september/2912-russian-air-force-shows-interest-for-air-launched-variant-of-the-brahmos-missile.html

and this interest keeps being interesting for last 2 years without progress right?

Militarov wrote:
Flying to Syria is not tactical bombing, its air interdiction mission as it strikes mostly targets that are of high strategic value but are in not direct contact with friendly forces.

Yup, and I am sure Su-34 with 3,000kgs of bombs could not do it locally.

That chart showing the details of the missiles is wrong.

The Kh-32 has a speed of mach 4.5 at high altitude, not 3.

Also the Brahmos is a Yakhont with improved electronics.

Any improvement the Indians and Russians worked on together to create the Brahmos could easily be applied to the superior Onyx which has no range limit or warhead size limit, so I would assume the new build Onyx missiles will be built for the Russian navy with the electronic and software upgrades applied to Brahmos.

Zircon likely also already has such improvements too.

GarryB wrote:

Agreed, but 2 B-1s can be used for 1 Tu-160M. But besides them & the B-52s, the USN has the advantage in surface & subsurface naval asset #s to launch Ash/LACMs, so it's not "the end of the world" as far as the USAF is concerned!

Doesn't really work that way... The introduction of cruise missiles to the B-1B has made it safer in terms of standoff use but it is not a strategic bomber any more than the Tu-22M3 could be....

Well, the US Joint Forces Command gave 2 B-1Bs to STRATCOM which then sent them from CONUS to bomb Libya: http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2011/July%202011/0711libya.aspx
So, IMO, tactical B-1Bs & Tu-22M3s (once given IRPs, if the treaty is tossed) can be pressed to do strategic-like missions. Another trick is to fly at slower speeds to save fuel, &/ increasing the # of bombers carrying less armament but more fuel to extend their range.

GarryB wrote:That chart showing the details of the missiles is wrong.

The Kh-32 has a speed of mach 4.5 at high altitude, not 3.

Apologies I did not write where is speed.

Размах крыла - wingspan
Mаксимальная скорость на траектории  - max flight speed on trajectory


Table says: 5400 km/h which on 40,000m is actually slightly more than  5Ma ... Tu-22 can carry 3 of them.  I wonder how many of them is required to destroy AC group.

GarryB wrote:
Also the Brahmos is a Yakhont with improved electronics.

Zircon likely also already has such improvements too.

Unlikely that Brahmos is more advanced bot software and HW from Onyx.

Unlikely that Brahmos is more advanced bot software and HW from Onyx.

Yakhont is a down graded missile designed for export that is based on the Onyx.

Brahmos is an upgrade of that downgraded for export missile.

Onyx and Yakhont were anti ship only and so the software and sensors and equipment were designed for anti ship use.


The role of Brahmos expanded that to include land attack capability, so the brahmos would have had that feature over the Onyx too.

It seems all of the Russian heavy missiles including Granit and Vulkan and Onyx now have land attack capability and I suspect that was directly from the adaptation of Brahmos developed software and hardware upgrades that were likely applied to Russian domestic missiles.

GarryB wrote:

Unlikely that Brahmos is more advanced bot software and HW from Onyx.

Yakhont is a down graded missile designed for export that is based on the Onyx.

Brahmos is an upgrade of that downgraded for export missile.
.

still lacking range (290 vs 600 km)


.

Onyx and Yakhont were anti ship only and so the software and sensors and equipment were designed for anti ship use.

.

nope, in Syria they attacked land targets

The role of Brahmos expanded that to include land attack capability, so the brahmos would have had that feature over the Onyx too.

It seems all of the Russian heavy missiles including Granit and Vulkan and Onyx now have land attack capability and I suspect that was directly from the adaptation of Brahmos developed software and hardware upgrades that were likely applied to Russian domestic missiles.

Unlikely, like Russians did not develop land attack ability on their own before? Indians are doing software export so massive because they are cost effective and there is enormous human capital there (9 x times of Russia population) . Not because they are superior to other nations. Inferior neither, they are in pair.

BTW Kh-35 seems to have land attack capability now too.

still lacking range (290 vs 600 km)

Sorry, I wasn't clear.... the Brahmos is a greatly improved model of a downgraded export model Soviet missile.

The Russians wont adopt the Brahmos for their own service because of the limitations in warhead weight and flight range for Brahmos that don't apply to the missiles they make for their own air force.

Very simply they will take all the upgrades developed for Yakhont to make it into a brahmos missile and apply those changes to Onyx, so they will get the more sophisticated guidance and other improved features but also longer range and heavier warhead.

nope, in Syria they attacked land targets

You misunderstand... Soviet anti ship missiles had little or no land attack capability by design.

Since designing the Brahmos together with India they have since developed hardware and software for their missiles to allow them to be effective against land targets.... remember now they have an operational GLONASS system.... something they didn't have in the 80s and half the 90s.

They have also use Granit against land targets too.

Unlikely, like Russians did not develop land attack ability on their own before?

They didn't have a dedicated land attack capability or requirement before.

The old Sandbox in its domestic version had radar and IR sensors and in the export model with IR sensors I believe the Indian military used them to successfully attack large oil tanks in the evening as they had been heated by the days sun, so they were still hot in the early evening when the land around them cooled rather faster so the tanks became a huge IR target.

If it had been a large building out in the middle of the desert they might have been able to target it with radar, or a big bridge.

They developed land attack capability for their nuclear cruise missiles and then with India too on the Brahmos and then added that capability to their anti ship missiles to make them fully multi purpose weapons.

Notice most things they are making are multi use too.... it has become a theme for the Russian navy.

Indians are doing software export so massive because they are cost effective and there is enormous human capital there (9 x times of Russia population) . Not because they are superior to other nations. Inferior neither, they are in pair.

I dislike it when people say this country or that country is good at something... they say the best chefs are French but I really don't like French food,and that does not mean all french people are good cooks or that a person from a different country is not better... say the US or Italy or whereever.

There are a lot of good Indian programmers, but I doubt the software for the Kh-101 and Kh-102 were based on software from Brahmos... and likely neither would have been as effective without GLONASS in place and operating and ring laser gyro technology being perfected and a thousand other things.

The Russian Navy clearly wants multirole ships with multirole weapons.... it is not the first.... the SS-N-14 had a torpedo designed to hunt subs but the rocket propelled carrier for it had IR and radar sensors so it could be used against ships or subs...

It meant that while the Udaloy was an anti sub ship it could also take on enemy surface ships too if it needed to.

First test flight of upgraded Tu-160M2 bomber scheduled for January, says deputy PM

The Russian Defense Ministry reported earlier that the serial production of Tu-160M2 bombers should begin in 2023

MOSCOW, January 5. /TASS/. Russia’s upgraded Tupolev Tu-160M2 strategic bomber will perform its first test flight in January 2018, ahead of scheduled February, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said on Friday.

"The Tupolev Design Bureau actually promises to take the plane into the air earlier - at the end of January," the deputy prime minister wrote on his Facebook page.

At a working meeting with President Vladimir Putin in November, Rogozin said the maiden flight of the strategic bomber was planned for February.

The Russian Defense Ministry reported earlier that the serial production of Tu-160M2 bombers should begin in 2023. The Russian Aerospace Force intends to purchase no less than 50 such aircraft.

The Tu-160 is the Soviet strategic missile carrier armed with cruise missiles that can carry nuclear warheads. Along with the Tu-95MS missile carrier, the Tu-160 makes part of Russia’s strategic nuclear forces along with the ground-based missile systems and submarines.


More:
http://tass.com/defense/984082

New Tu-160M  ''Petr Deinekin'' completed first flight (ahead of schedule)

https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/103163/

The new Tu-160 began flight tests

According to our blog, in the last days of 2017 in Kazan made the first flight completed by construction at the Kazan Aviation Plant named after PS. Gorbunova PJSC "Tupolev" for VCS of Russia strategic bomber Tu-160 with serial number 08-04 (own name "Peter Deinekin"). The plane was completed from the Soviet reserve and pumped out on November 16, 2017.



On January 24, 2018, the TASS agency confirmed the start of the flight tests of the Tu-160 aircraft with serial number 08-04, although with reference to the "source in the Russian defense industry complex" claiming that the aircraft "took off for the first time last week."

Also, the TASS scribe said that the new aircraft is not an experimental model of the modernized version of the bomber. "Only a small modernization was carried out on the plane, the glider and engines remained the same.Fully digitized documentation for the new missile carrier will be released not earlier than the middle of this year, and without it, the construction of the Tu-160M ​​is impossible."

On the bmpd side, we point out that the new Tu-160 with serial number 08-04 became the 35th copy of the Tu-160 (including flight prototypes), built in 1981.

http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/4902193

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3063777.html

New one

I knew that there were about 16 Tu-160 in service with russian air force. And a dozen stationed in Ukraine that were destroyed. So there are some airframes in resreve from soviet era? and how many of them?

George1 wrote:I knew that there were about 16 Tu-160 in service with russian air force. And a dozen stationed in Ukraine that were destroyed. So there are some airframes in resreve from soviet era? and how many of them?

There should have been 4 unfinished frames left, this one is built from one of those so 3 more remaining

After that they will be making them from scratch

PapaDragon wrote:

George1 wrote:I knew that there were about 16 Tu-160 in service with russian air force. And a dozen stationed in Ukraine that were destroyed. So there are some airframes in resreve from soviet era? and how many of them?

There should have been 4 unfinished frames left, this one is built from one of those so 3 more remaining

After that they will be making them from scratch

Νιce, so the first four will be completed quite soon i guess

im wondering if there is any visual differences between the old and new ones? maybe a slightly longer fuselage? some changes on the wings etc??

Project Canada wrote:im wondering if there is any visual differences between the old and new ones? maybe a slightly longer fuselage? some changes on the wings etc??

None whatsoever

Interior components on the other hand are completely different

They are looking at a civillians version of this bomber. Probably to keep production lines going after the completion of these bombers.

Would be interesting and cool to see a supersonic jet make a second attempt at the civil airline industry. Would make my flights to Asia much better.

Do new Tu-160Ms extend the bomb bay and revise the rotated launchers for longer missiles like Kh-101/102?

Do they have the revised engines in production yet? I heard they plan to order 10 for the first batch and produce 50 in total.

Yeah, last I heard the NK engines are ready for production.