Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Share

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  TR1 on Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:27 am

    I am talking about the Tu-160.
    Part of the increase of the force in the 2000s was them finishing a high-readiness bird at KAPO.
    I think there may have been two other unfinished birds, but they were not as close to being completed. And that was in the early 2000s....what state do you think they are in by now? Wouldn't be surprised if anything high value...dissapeared. And even if not, the entire supply chain is long fooked. The costs are just not worth it, especially when you consider Russia never has much more than half to 2/3rds of the Blackjack force flight worthy at one time.
    Would be much cheaper to get the fleet readyness up without this new production madness...

    Re: MIG-31s:
    I'd believe it, I have seen photos of Sokol when shit hit the fan, and there were quite a few fuselages laying around unfinished.
    HOWEVER:
    1.) Sokol can't make squat right now, as far as MiG-31s are concerned. I've been to the factory, it needs major money to do anything serious, and that is an understatement. There is a good photoreport out on the web about the MIG-31 construction parts of the factory....it is so degrade you would not believe it.
    2.) Russia has stored, relatively low hour MiG-31s. If more planes are badly needed, they can just yank several dozen more and BM them.

    That modification of my sig looks pretty awesome.
    Any chance you can add some Kavkaz-strong to it, Dagestan flavor perhaps?
    Gonna wear it with pride.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:41 am

    I too heard of Sokol plants degrading due to being ignored (they survived from MiG-29 modernization contracts and MiG-29K).  I think the more modern plants are the NAPO plant for the Su-34's or correct me if I am wrong.  A good investment into modernizing Sokol should be needed, since there is a growing demand for MiG-31's and eventually MiG-31's replacement that they are looking at.

    If anyone has a recent photo op of the plant, could you please link it?

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  TR1 on Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:45 am

    Knaaz is definitely more modern than NAPO; they make more sophisticated military products to date (Su-35, T-50 etc)
    NAPO does have some civilian product going on though, they are part of the Superjet chain.

    I would put Irkut over NAPO in terms of modernization as well...they benefited from good export sales before getting MOD orders...

    Compared to Sokol NAPO is of course rolling in bank.
    Not sure why they yanked Yak-130 production from Sokol....

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:48 am

    I recall last year or maybe year before of a major upgrade to the plant to pump out twice the amount of Su-34's. Interesting info on the civil aircraft parts also coming from NAPO, I thought that plant only did modernization of Su-24's and Su-34's manufacturing! Good to hear they are aiming at other things. Sokol is getting nearly no love, yet it is Mikoyans only manufacturing plant, isnt it? I can imagine if orders are placed for MiG-35's, they will definitely need to modernize the plant for sure. I know Sokol is going to be manufacturing the big UAV's with Transas, so I imagine there will be revenue from that too.

    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1946
    Points : 2117
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  Cyberspec on Thu Apr 30, 2015 7:51 am

    If it happens it won't be just 1-2 extra airframes....to be fair, Shoigu has only asked for a feasibility study for restarting production....so we'll see.

    Now all that's left is to re-install aerial refueling capability on the Backfires and the 'filthy imperialists' are truly fuked Cool russia

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  GarryB on Thu Apr 30, 2015 1:00 pm

    The problem with the tu-160 design... which was actually its advantage.... is that it has an enormous aluminium box structure for the swing wing assembly that needs to be cast in one piece and the only factory that could do it is in the Ukraine.

    this is truly a precision casting and to rebuild a new factory to do it for maybe a dozen more aircraft just isn't worth the enormous cost.

    That is why production of the Tu-160 was never restarted and likely wont be unless they could develop a more sophisticated wing design that does not require a swing wing... a serious redesign that would likely need as much testing as a brand new from scratch design and therefore also likely not worth it.

    Equally I rather doubt more MiG-31s will be built... they will more likely concentrate on a replacement instead.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Firebird
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 909
    Points : 941
    Join date : 2011-10-14

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  Firebird on Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:04 pm

    But I wonder if there are alternative options today? Perhaps more use of titanium and carbon fibre/exotic alloys.

    Its also interesting to note that once the Tu-160 was up and running, plans were being made for the Tu-260 and Tu-360.

    I think that one problem of the Tu160 was its running cost. Perhaps a major revamp could change this.

    Finally, I think provided it has fair levels of stealth (and I dont mean total stealth) a Tu-160's speed must have various uses. Whilst I can understand the idea of the Pak Da being subsonic, I still believe a Tu160/updated equivalent would have various uses.

    15 or so Tu-160s just sounds expensive to maintain. Thats why I reckon new production would make sense. They could have many uses including satellite launches as well. And I also wonder if Russia is thinking of a cargo carrying Tu-160 too (altho ofcourse the fuselage is rather narrow for various arms).

    TheArmenian
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1511
    Points : 1674
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  TheArmenian on Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:04 pm

    TR1 wrote:
    That modification of my sig looks pretty awesome.
    Any chance you can add some Kavkaz-strong to it, Dagestan flavor perhaps?
    Gonna wear it with pride.

    Here is your f-ed up Kavkaz-strong signature with an authentic Kizlyar knife from Dagestan.


    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3182
    Points : 3310
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  flamming_python on Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:26 pm

    TheArmenian wrote:
    TR1 wrote:
    That modification of my sig looks pretty awesome.
    Any chance you can add some Kavkaz-strong to it, Dagestan flavor perhaps?
    Gonna wear it with pride.

    Here is your f-ed up Kavkaz-strong signature with an authentic Kizlyar knife from Dagestan.


    Come on Armenian that's so amateur it's embarrasing to look at lol!


    Last edited by flamming_python on Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:27 pm; edited 1 time in total

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  TR1 on Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:27 pm

    Yeah, I think I'll pass on that.

    Instead I will add a transparent Imam Shamil next to the Eagle Wink .

    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3182
    Points : 3310
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  flamming_python on Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:29 pm

    TR1 wrote:Yeah, I think I'll pass on that.

    Instead I will add a transparent Imam Shamil next to the Eagle Wink .

    Hmm do an Imam Shamil with the Soviet red banner maybe? I'm sure he'd have approved.

    Or just that famous pic with the Soviet soldier hoisting the banner over the Reichstag.

    a89
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 107
    Points : 114
    Join date : 2013-01-09
    Location : Oxfordshire

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  a89 on Sat May 02, 2015 1:35 am

    15 or so Tu-160s just sounds expensive to maintain. Thats why I reckon new production would make sense. They could have many uses including satellite launches as well. And I also wonder if Russia is thinking of a cargo carrying Tu-160 too (altho ofcourse the fuselage is rather narrow for various arms).

    I find the whole idea not very feasible. I am not sure KAPO still has the capability to produce them anymore, as aircraft production in the last +20 years has been very low at this plant. Components produced in Ukraine should be replaced. It is a shame the 10 Ukrainian ones that were scrapped.

    I wonder if it would be better to activate some Tu-95. It is an obsolete platform, but nowadays it's more and more about the weapons.

    In any case, a strategic bomber is a good candidate to get the chop during a financial crisis.




    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  sepheronx on Sat May 02, 2015 1:40 am

    a89 wrote:
    15 or so Tu-160s just sounds expensive to maintain. Thats why I reckon new production would make sense. They could have many uses including satellite launches as well. And I also wonder if Russia is thinking of a cargo carrying Tu-160 too (altho ofcourse the fuselage is rather narrow for various arms).

    I find the whole idea not very feasible. I am not sure KAPO still has the capability to produce them anymore, as aircraft production in the last +20 years has been very low at this plant. Components produced in Ukraine should be replaced. It is a shame the 10 Ukrainian ones that were scrapped.

    I wonder if it would be better to activate some Tu-95. It is an obsolete platform, but nowadays it's more and more about the weapons.

    In any case, a strategic bomber is a good candidate to get the chop during a financial crisis.




    What?

    No. Just no.

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2129
    Points : 2244
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  higurashihougi on Sat May 02, 2015 8:38 am

    Sorry a bit Off Topic Off Topic but I wonder the people prefer calling Tu-160 as "White Swan" or "Blackjack" ?

    Giulio
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 144
    Points : 167
    Join date : 2013-10-29
    Location : Italy

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  Giulio on Sat May 02, 2015 1:27 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:Sorry a bit Off Topic Off Topic  but I wonder the people prefer calling Tu-160 as "White Swan" or "Blackjack" ?

    Aslong as he doesn't lay eggs, for me he remains the Tupolev Tu-160. (And I sincerely hope to never see its eggs).
    And I still have to understand if they will restart the production of new Tu-160s, or it is impossible or economically detrimental.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  GarryB on Sat May 02, 2015 2:08 pm

    But I wonder if there are alternative options today? Perhaps more use of titanium and carbon fibre/exotic alloys.

    If you want to give up the supersonic performance and large fixed wing and thicker body profile would probably allow a huge increase in payload and range... or a more sophisticated large wing... ie compare the MiG-23s wing with the PAK FA but scaled up... it might work and would not need the huge central box structure for the swing wings...

    Its also interesting to note that once the Tu-160 was up and running, plans were being made for the Tu-260 and Tu-360.

    I was more interested in the Tu-160P plans... Twisted Evil

    15 or so Tu-160s just sounds expensive to maintain. Thats why I reckon new production would make sense. They could have many uses including satellite launches as well. And I also wonder if Russia is thinking of a cargo carrying Tu-160 too (altho ofcourse the fuselage is rather narrow for various arms).

    I think a few more minor upgrades and then PAK DA will be ready to replace it...


    Come on Armenian that's so amateur it's embarrasing to look at

    Presented with the Mona Lisa and you say... it needs more in the background and what is with the smile... don't expect the result to be the artists best work... pirat

    In any case, a strategic bomber is a good candidate to get the chop during a financial crisis.

    The Sky is not falling... compared with submarines I am sure the aircraft are fairly cheap and of course are much more flexible than SLBMs and ICBMs in that they can be used with conventional weapons in conventional wars and they can be called up in a way that they can be called back too, yet the visibility of their deployment can cause your potential enemy to realise you mean business and wont back down.

    And I still have to understand if they will restart the production of new Tu-160s, or it is impossible or economically detrimental.

    Only compete redesign would allow production again... makes more sense to just spend money on PAK DA and upgrades of existing types.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Giulio
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 144
    Points : 167
    Join date : 2013-10-29
    Location : Italy

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  Giulio on Sat May 02, 2015 3:06 pm

    Thanks and is it true this "story" about the color of the engine exhaust during the take off? White in water injection, blue without water?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  GarryB on Sat May 02, 2015 3:23 pm

    Yes...





    Note water injection to increase power on B-52s makes the sky dark... russia


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2521
    Points : 2654
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  kvs on Sat May 02, 2015 8:13 pm

    NO2 from the combustion of aviation fuel has a natural reddish-brown hue. People confuse this with soot and think it
    means poor combustion. A lot of NOx is emitted during combustion since a lot of N2 and O2 (99% of the air) goes through
    the engines and see very high temperatures.

    The colour of the flames is a different thing and here we see the H2O injection.

    Does anyone have any information that explains the use of H2O?

    Giulio
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 144
    Points : 167
    Join date : 2013-10-29
    Location : Italy

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  Giulio on Sat May 02, 2015 9:27 pm

    I'm an everyman, but, for those who do not already know these things better than me, some times ago I heard a joke, but which explained (for me very well) the operation of a turbine engine. A jet should work like this: "suck, squeeze, bang, blow" ... Suck and Squeeze should be the compressor, Bang the combustion chambers, Blow the turbine. I don't know if this is correct, but it is all I know about it.
    Two things govern everything: first, the flow rate of the fluid accelerated through the engine (more fluid in unit of time, more thrust) and, second, the temperature of the engine (heat not good for the thrust).
    The water injection in front of combustion chambers should do two things: first, drops down the engine temperature, so increases thrust and, second, the water increases also the volume of the fluid (air + water) through the engine and also this should increase the thrust.

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2521
    Points : 2654
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  kvs on Sun May 03, 2015 1:23 am

    Giulio wrote:I'm an everyman, but, for those who do not already know these things better than me, some times ago I heard a joke, but which explained (for me very well) the operation of a turbine engine. A jet should work like this: "suck, squeeze, bang, blow" ... Suck and Squeeze should be the compressor, Bang the combustion chambers, Blow the turbine. I don't know if this is correct, but it is all I know about it.
    Two things govern everything: first, the flow rate of the fluid accelerated through the engine (more fluid in unit of time, more thrust) and, second, the temperature of the engine (heat not good for the thrust).
    The water injection in front of combustion chambers should do two things: first, drops down the engine temperature, so increases thrust and, second, the water increases also the volume of the fluid (air + water) through the engine and also this should increase the thrust.

    Thanks, this is basically what the other source on the web say. It seems to be used during low altitude flight such as take offs.

    Depending on how much water you use, it produces lots of soot due to poor combustion:


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  GarryB on Sun May 03, 2015 2:06 am

    Water injection has been used in both reciprocating and turbine aircraft engines. When used in a turbine engine, the effects are similar, except that normally preventing detonation is not the primary goal. Water is normally injected either at the compressor inlet or in the diffuser just before the combustion chambers. Adding water increases the mass being accelerated out of the engine, increasing thrust, but it also serves to cool the turbines. Since temperature is normally the limiting factor in turbine engine performance at low altitudes, the cooling effect allows the engine to be run at higher RPM with more fuel injected and more thrust created without overheating.[3] The drawback of the system is that injecting water quenches the flame in the combustion chambers somewhat, as there is no way to cool the engine parts without cooling the flame accidentally. This leads to unburned fuel out the exhaust and a characteristic trail of black smoke.

    The above is from wiki regarding water injection.

    As a side note very fast planes like the MiG-25 used intake sprays that put alcohol into the air intake to cool down the air going into the engine so more thrust could be generated out the back. So much alcohol was used by the aircraft its nickname was restaurant...

    A jet should work like this: "suck, squeeze, bang, blow" ... Suck and Squeeze should be the compressor, Bang the combustion chambers, Blow the turbine. I don't know if this is correct, but it is all I know about it.
    Two things govern everything: first, the flow rate of the fluid accelerated through the engine (more fluid in unit of time, more thrust) and, second, the temperature of the engine (heat not good for the thrust).

    Not bad but not right in some areas... first of all Heat IS thrust... the hotter the better, but too hot damages components in the engine so heat is limited to reduce chances of damage... if the engine parts could take it you would make it as hot as you could for a turbojet. A turbo fan moves volume air for thrust so it does not need to be so hot.


    Anyway think of a turbojet engine as being a tube that starts out wide... gets a bit narrow in the middle and opens out again at the rear. Put a shaft down the centre and mount blades on the shaft.\

    At the front the blades suck air into the engine.

    Where the tube narrows the air is naturally compressed... as well as being pushed through by the air coming after it through the intake.

    then the air is blasted out the rear as thrust.

    the part where the tube narrows is called the hot section... that is where fuel is added and burned to generate even more heat and pressure and in the rear more fuel can be sprayed into the exhaust and ignited... the latter is called the after burner or reheat.

    the shaft from the hot section is connected to the front blades so if you increased the fuel added in the hot section the natural result is the blades in the hot section and the front blades spin faster.

    that is basically a turbojet engine.

    A turbo fan engine has another tube around the outside so the front blades suck air into both tubes, the air going through the core is heated and fuel is added but at the rear the cold air going around the outside hasn't been heated yet and has had no fuel burned in it so it is dense heavy air that is oxygen rich so when it reaches the after burner or reheat section it can generate a lot more thrust because it has a lot more mass and is able to burn more fuel because it is still oxygen rich.

    A high bypass turbofan like on a jet airliner has a huge front fan and a small narrow turbojet to the rear... the turbojet is just there to turn the big turbofan and most of the thrust the engine generates comes from the big cold fan. As most of the air comes from the cold fan air rather than from the hot turbojet it is called a high bypass turbofan. It can generate a lot of thrust by moving lots of heavy cold air, but is no good if you want to go supersonic.

    Keep going in that direction and a turboprop like the engines used on the Bear use a turbojet to turn a large propeller in the front of the engine and it is the propeller that generates the thrust... very efficient for low level flying and of course only capable of subsonic flight. When the propeller blades break the speed of sound they create sound waves instead of pressure waves and lose efficiency.

    in the opposite direction if you take the shaft and blades out of a turbojet engine you have a ramjet engine where air coming in is naturally compressed by the narrowing tube... fuel is added and burned and comes out the rear as thrust.

    very simple and very light... many ramjet powered weapons like the KUB (SA-6 SAM), the Kh-31, and various anti ship missiles like Onyx and Brahmos use the column of empty space down the core of the weapon for a solid rocket booster to get the weapon in motion. Once in flight the solid rocket motor component is dropped, the intake opened to the air flow and the ramjet started... the speed of the ramjet is limited only by its ability to slow the air coming in to subsonic speed so fuel can be burned and then accelerating that air to high speed out the exhaust as thrust.

    The Scramjet, or supersonic combustion ramjet is basically the same hollow tube but designed so that the fuel can be burned at supersonic speed... this is the holy grail because as long as you can control the temperatures the scramjet as no upper flight speed limit.

    High bypass turbofans and turboprops are subsonic only. Turbojets and turbofans peak at about mach 2.8... any faster and the rotational speeds of the blades rip themselves apart... the SR-71 can fly at mach 3.5 for long periods because it uses bypass air as a ramjet with the main turbojet engines doing very little in the way of moving the aircraft through the air.

    A ramjet is good to mach 7-mach 9 or so, but scramjets can be used to orbital speeds... though they can't be used as scramjets in space if you take some liquid oxygen you could supply fuel and oxygen and use it as a rocket for propulsion.

    The water injection in front of combustion chambers should do two things: first, drops down the engine temperature, so increases thrust and, second, the water increases also the volume of the fluid (air + water) through the engine and also this should increase the thrust.

    Dropping engine temperature just protects it from damage when used at very high thrust settings at low altitude where the air is very thick and could cause damage to the intake by heating it too much.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1946
    Points : 2117
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  Cyberspec on Sun May 03, 2015 1:07 pm

    KRET is eager to take part in the possible resumption of production and modernisation of the Tu-160

    Regarding the possible resumption of the production of Tu-160, KRET is ready to equip them with a system of electronic warfare (EW), which has advanced features to overcome air defense systems.

    ...

    KRET has expressed it's willingness to begin production of avionics for the Tu-160

    The aircraft will be equipped with a piloting complex, airborne weapons control systems, sensors, fuel systems, display devices.

    In addition, the missile will be equipped with a strapdown inertial navigation system type BINS-SP (KRET development), as well as high-performance electronic warfare system with improved tactical and technical capabilities to overcome air defense systems.

    http://kret.com/ru/news/3777/

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2129
    Points : 2244
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  higurashihougi on Wed May 06, 2015 3:10 pm

    I don't know how to respond to this kind of arrogance

    http://nationalinterest.org/feature/russias-supersonic-tu-160-bomber-back-should-america-worry-12787

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  sepheronx on Wed May 06, 2015 3:45 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:I don't know how to respond to this kind of arrogance

    http://nationalinterest.org/feature/russias-supersonic-tu-160-bomber-back-should-america-worry-12787

    Didnt read. National interest..... lol. Who cares. The plane is awesome and as a cruise missile bomber can launch their arsenal outside US capabilities to engage. So they will need to worry.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Tu-160 and Tu-95MS ( Blackjack and Bears )

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 4:58 pm


      Current date/time is Tue Dec 06, 2016 4:58 pm