Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+53
AMCXXL
Kiko
lancelot
The-thing-next-door
Cyberspec
jaguar_br
Singular_Transform
RTN
marcellogo
owais.usmani
miketheterrible
Isos
Arrow
kvs
archangelski
SeigSoloyvov
ult
dino00
Tsavo Lion
Hole
magnumcromagnon
Stealthflanker
GunshipDemocracy
mnztr
LMFS
hoom
PapaDragon
Svyatoslavich
T-47
ATLASCUB
franco
AlfaT8
Odin of Ossetia
Firebird
JohninMK
Honesroc
ExBeobachter1987
Vann7
nemrod
zepia
flamming_python
collegeboy16
d_taddei2
Viktor
Big_Gazza
TR1
George1
Hoof
Austin
GarryB
USAF
Russian Patriot
Sukhoi37_Terminator
57 posters

    Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11275
    Points : 11245
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  Isos Fri Oct 27, 2023 8:33 am

    Hole wrote:
    The training exercise also involved Tu-95MS long-range aircraft, which fired air-launched cruise missiles.
    Not sure why those are tested. Looking at the SMO they seem to work pretty fine.

    During wartime, with all the experience gained, enginerrs become much more creative.

    Who knows what they really tested.

    Hole likes this post

    Hole
    Hole


    Posts : 10507
    Points : 10485
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 47
    Location : Scholzistan

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  Hole Fri Oct 27, 2023 11:46 am

    New hypersonic turboprops. lol1
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38765
    Points : 39261
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  GarryB Fri Oct 27, 2023 11:07 pm

    I know you are joking, but making very fast propeller blade tips is very easy... the longer the blades the faster the tips move.

    The problem is that when they reach supersonic speeds they mostly just make noise.

    I think someone complaining about the noise a Bear makes obviously hasn't heard a Huey UH-1 or for that matter a Harvard trainer... because of tip speed they really make a loud noise.

    kvs likes this post

    kvs
    kvs


    Posts : 15049
    Points : 15186
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Turdope's Kanada

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  kvs Sat Oct 28, 2023 4:00 pm

    I do not understand why they are not using curved tip propellers on the Tu-95. This reduces tip speed and noise. There is no loss of performance that
    I am aware of. In fact, the transition supersonic tip regime is a loss of thrust performance.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scimitar_propeller

    It is worse than the article describes. At speeds where supersonic shocks are generate there is also cavitation. Similar to the submarine problem.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contra-rotating_propellers

    Contra-rotating propellers make more noise but there is no discussion of a bad mix with curved blades. It is possible curved blades would amplify the
    noise associated with the contra-rotating configuration. But I think the trans-sonic shock regime is worse for noise generation, considering cavitation.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38765
    Points : 39261
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  GarryB Sun Oct 29, 2023 3:51 am

    It is not like they don't know how to make propeller blades... the blades on the engines on the An-70 are optimised for thrust for takeoff at heavy loads, but they are not optimised to fly at the speeds the Bear flys at... no other propeller driven aircraft flys at the speeds the Bear flys at, which is why other propeller driven aircraft have different looking blades.

    I suspect they are optimised to generate sufficient thrust for high speed flight at the altitude the aircraft operates at... and changing them to increased thrust on the ground for takeoff like the D-27 propfans for the An-70 might help with take off but might also reduce top and cruising speed at operational heights.

    A turboprop based on the PD-35 that has twelve blades on the front and 8 blades at the rear might generate enormous thrust but reduce top speed flight performance and be slower than the blades and engines currently being used.

    Scorpius likes this post

    avatar
    Arrow


    Posts : 2671
    Points : 2663
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  Arrow Tue Feb 13, 2024 3:07 pm

    How long does Russia intend to leave the Tu95MS fleet in service? Are all components for these planes produced in Russia or were they made in Ukraine, which may cause problems during renovations? To what extent can actions in Ukraine exploit these bombers?
    ​Tu-95MS is still the basic machine of Russia's nuclear triad, and of course it is a great bomber for conventional ALCM attacks.
    d_taddei2
    d_taddei2


    Posts : 2905
    Points : 3079
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland Alba

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  d_taddei2 Tue Feb 13, 2024 3:23 pm

    Arrow wrote:How long does Russia intend to leave the Tu95MS fleet in service? Are all components for these planes produced in Russia or were they made in Ukraine, which may cause problems during renovations? To what extent can actions in Ukraine exploit these bombers?
    ​Tu-95MS is still the basic machine of Russia's nuclear triad, and of course it is a great bomber for conventional ALCM attacks.

    They were made by Aviakor s an aviation plant located in Samara, Russia, they apparently filed for insolvency in 2017 but it's believed that the government now own it, but not confirmed. The fact that these have been upgraded over the years and Russia seems to have plans to keep them in service for now. I would think they are fully geared up to keep them going. They have proved their worth in Syria and Ukraine. Their reliability and range are their keys strengths, currently doing their job as they should.

    GarryB, Arrow, Big_Gazza, kvs, JohninMK, Eugenio Argentina, lancelot and jon_deluxe like this post

    lancelot
    lancelot


    Posts : 2642
    Points : 2640
    Join date : 2020-10-18

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  lancelot Tue Feb 13, 2024 5:39 pm

    The NK-12 turboprop engines are made by Kuznetsov. Also a Russian company in Samara. The designs have been digitized and the engines are now built with modern CNC machine tools instead of the old process. The Russian state must have spent a pretty penny on this. Kuznetsov had its factory totally modernized after decades of neglect. The engine is also used in oil and gas pumping facilities, at least it used to, but there are other alternatives today.

    Kuznetsov basically reverse engineered the NK-12 and NK-32 from paper schematics and made them with modern processes and tools.

    The latest Tu-95 upgrade seems to use similar electronics to the Tu-160 and Tu-22M3. They basically unified the radar and other systems.

    In theory the PAK DA should be able to do much the same missions though. Whenever it enters service.

    GarryB, Arrow, d_taddei2, Big_Gazza, kvs, zardof, Eugenio Argentina and like this post

    avatar
    Arrow


    Posts : 2671
    Points : 2663
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  Arrow Tue Feb 13, 2024 7:31 pm

    So the Tu 95MS fleet may remain in service for a long time. Tu-160 production resumed.
    The PAK DA will probably also carry cruise missiles, which the B-2 and B-21 do not.

    d_taddei2, Big_Gazza, Eugenio Argentina and jon_deluxe like this post

    d_taddei2
    d_taddei2


    Posts : 2905
    Points : 3079
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland Alba

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  d_taddei2 Tue Feb 13, 2024 10:45 pm

    I think we will see a mixture of Tu-160, Tu-22M, Tu-95 and Pak Da, and eventually after some years Tu-22M and Tu-95 will be phased out, I have a feeling Tu-22M might be phased out before the Tu-95 despite the age.

    GarryB, George1, Eugenio Argentina and jon_deluxe like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38765
    Points : 39261
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  GarryB Wed Feb 14, 2024 4:59 am

    So the Tu 95MS fleet may remain in service for a long time. Tu-160 production resumed.
    The PAK DA will probably also carry cruise missiles, which the B-2 and B-21 do not.

    The Tu-95 and its engines are all Russian made and kept up to date with modern production and design.

    It is not in urgent need of replacement but the PAK DA is the theoretical replacement for both the Bear in the strategic role with cruise missiles and the Backfire over theatre ranges with bombs and missiles.

    They are going to make 50 plus new Tu-160s for a fleet of perhaps 60-70 maybe, and the PAK DA will enter production and replace Bears and Backfires respectively as they are made.

    They might be expensive to make but operational costs should be quite minimal as much of their stealth is shape related as a flying wing is inherently stealthy already.

    The engines are up to date and modernised... didn't the recent upgrades reduce vibration by 50% which is staggering...

    But once sufficient PAK DAs and Tu-160s enter service they will likely retire their Bears and Backfires and possibly divert them to other roles where they might be suited... remember these aircraft are relatively new for strategic and theatre bombers... the Tu-22M3 is an 80s-90s aircraft and their Bears are too... it is a very young fleet... and there is no urgency to replace them.

    The Backfire would be a good platform for delivering glide bombs... the four external mounts for bombs are designed to hold conventional bombs and the glide kits I have seen have been designed to fit to bombs mounted on standard wing pylons... including bombs with the glide kits mounted on the bottom of the bombs so there are no mounting and clearance issues... which should work just fine with the MER on the Backfire.

    With 9 positions on each MER and four locations for MERs on the Backfire you could carry 36 bombs externally with the internal bomb bay able to carry some heavier bombs or just more light bombs.

    The external MERs can carry up to 9 x 500kg bombs but I understand each weapon pylon can also carry two FAB-3000s... or possibly a single FAB-5000 or maybe three FAB-1500.

    I think we will see a mixture of Tu-160, Tu-22M, Tu-95 and Pak Da, and eventually after some years Tu-22M and Tu-95 will be phased out, I have a feeling Tu-22M might be phased out before the Tu-95 despite the age.

    Have to say I would agree, but a Tu-22M3 with an internal rotary launcher for big AAMs and work on semi conformal belly weapon locations and a modern AESA radar in the nose could make an interesting interceptor... especially if you convert it to the same engines as the new Tu-160s which they will be making and supporting anyway.

    I think the Backfire has real potential and I am rather surprised the Chinese and Indians didn't buy any.

    I remember on that Auspower website the experts there seemed to think rather favourably of the aircraft with one guy who loves the F-111 basically compared it favourably with two F-111s with inflight refuelling support. Kopp was his name I think.

    I suspect when the PAK DA replaces the Backfire in the theatre strike role they might send them back to the growing navy for the anti ship role... but then they might want a version of the PAK DA for that role eventually anyway.

    Being able to carry 11m long cruise missiles internally would mean the PAK DA would be useful for carrying long range anti ship weapons too...

    psg, d_taddei2, Big_Gazza and Eugenio Argentina like this post

    lancelot
    lancelot


    Posts : 2642
    Points : 2640
    Join date : 2020-10-18

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  lancelot Wed Feb 14, 2024 9:15 am

    We heard about the Tu-22M3M upgrade. A couple airplanes were rolled out some years ago. Then nothing.
    It was also supposed to use the NK-32 engine instead of NK-25. But it looks like the NK-32 engine wasn't physically compatible with the existing airframes. So it still uses the NK-25. I wouldn't be surprised if they also had workforce issues because of the huge rampup of Tu-160M construction at the same time Tu-95MSM and Tu-22M3M program and PAK DA prototype construction is happening. It is just too much stuff at the same time. And now they had to make them produce the Tu-214 in larger numbers as well.
    avatar
    mnztr


    Posts : 2730
    Points : 2768
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  mnztr Yesterday at 7:06 am

    I would say the TU-160 was much more critical as they are building new airframes, and the current fleet is below critical mass. TU-22 is fine as it is for now, and NK-32's need to go to the TU-160 for now. Once its all in full swing the TU-22 upgrade can happen if it still make sense. Perhaps the TU-160 with 12 Tsirkons is such a crushing machine the TU-22 can be sunseted and the SU-34 + TU 160 + TU-95 is sufficent.

    Sponsored content


    Tu-95MS "Bear" - Page 13 Empty Re: Tu-95MS "Bear"

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Mar 29, 2024 5:42 am