Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


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

    Share

    wilhelm

    Posts : 227
    Points : 231
    Join date : 2014-12-09

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

    Post  wilhelm on Thu Dec 10, 2015 10:02 am

    Aren't strategic bombers the most expensive platforms generally? Look at the B1 and B2 programmes. I would quite imagine that the Tu-160 was probably the most expensive platform from the Soviet Union.

    As stated before, an additional reason, as well as those good ones given above, is that the US is currently also in the early stages of a new bomber design.
    It might make sense to also keep an eye out on what the other guy is doing, which might refine the direction you yourself might take, hence a small delay of a few years.
    It might or might not be the case, but it is worth considering. They might come up with some good ideas, and others that turn out to be silly.
    These new bomber programmes are always eye-wateringly expensive, so getting it right within the context of what the opposition is doing seems a logical thing to do.

    avatar
    Berkut

    Posts : 190
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2015-05-05

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

    Post  Berkut on Thu Dec 10, 2015 2:53 pm

    OminousSpudd wrote:But Shoigu said test flights by 2019. How does a project get delayed past 2023 if it was supposed to be in pre-production phase by 2019.

    2019 was thrown around for PAK-DA before all this Tu-160M2 nonsense. It was never realistic. Tu-160M2 was always 2023.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16397
    Points : 17012
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

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

    Post  GarryB on Fri Dec 11, 2015 4:18 am

    But Shoigu said test flights by 2019. How does a project get delayed past 2023 if it was supposed to be in pre-production phase by 2019.

    Depends on the decision with putting the Tu-160M2 into production... if they do do that then it takes pressure off the PAK DA.

    The Tu-95 is able to do the job fine but it is not a new design.

    The Tu-160 is also able to do the job fine but is more expensive to operate and maintain and there are simply not enough of them to be a viable force.


    The Tu-22M3M is not part of this discussion because it cannot perform strategic missions, but becomes related when you recognise that it also needs replacing too.

    The question is... do you replace all three with the PAK DA, or restart production of the Tu-160 and use that and the PAK DA.

    The question that has been answered... why bother with PAK DA at all when you are going to be building more Blackjacks why not replace all three aircraft (Tu-22/95/160M) with Tu-160M2?

    If Tu-160M and Tu-160M2 don't have bomb capability then a bomber is needed.

    Restarting production of Tu-160 will take time and money which will delay everything but will allow for instance the potential for the PAK DA to use some new emerging techologies.... like expanded widebody design for a large volume flying wing shape... even variable cycle jet engine that can operate in scramjet mode for high speed flight, and indeed photonic radar technology.

    But Shoigu said test flights by 2019. How does a project get delayed past 2023 if it was supposed to be in pre-production phase by 2019.

    Or even a more sophisticated wing shape allowing a fixed wing design with perhaps warping technology to allow variable lift without conventional wing surface controls...

    Aren't strategic bombers the most expensive platforms generally? Look at the B1 and B2 programmes. I would quite imagine that the Tu-160 was probably the most expensive platform from the Soviet Union.

    Even per weapon delivered I suspect the nuclear subs would be the most expensive... including bases...

    Now that they have been given upgrades I rather suspect the strategic bombers will have rather more practical use in conventional wars with conventional weapons... not something you can say for an SSBN or ICBM field.

    2019 was thrown around for PAK-DA before all this Tu-160M2 nonsense. It was never realistic. Tu-160M2 was always 2023.

    I rather suspect some department in Tupolev has always been working on new technology designs and wing/fuselage designs and propulsion configurations.

    I rather suspect they have supercomputers and software that would allow thousands of designs to be prototype tested in a few hours... with the most promising models just a 3D printer and a wind tunnel away from a test...

    I suspect their might be issues with the US likely to demand any PAK DA to be counted as a strategic bomber even if it is a joint strategic/theatre bomber which will effect deployable numbers.


    _________________
    “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

    wilhelm

    Posts : 227
    Points : 231
    Join date : 2014-12-09

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

    Post  wilhelm on Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:40 pm

    GarryB wrote:

    Aren't strategic bombers the most expensive platforms generally? Look at the B1 and B2 programmes. I would quite imagine that the Tu-160 was probably the most expensive platform from the Soviet Union.

    Even per weapon delivered I suspect the nuclear subs would be the most expensive... including bases...

    Now that they have been given upgrades I rather suspect the strategic bombers will have rather more practical use in conventional wars with conventional weapons... not something you can say for an SSBN or ICBM field.


    Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant aviation platforms.

    ult

    Posts : 648
    Points : 688
    Join date : 2015-02-20

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

    Post  ult on Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:50 pm

    http://eng.itogi2015.mil.ru/quality2015
    REPORT ON RESULTS ON THE RUSSIAN DEFENCE MINISTRY ACTIVITIES FOR 2015

    This year, the Strategic Nuclear Air Force has been equipped with 10 modernized aircraft, including 2 Tu-160, 3 Tu-95MS, and 5 Tu-22M3.



    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10358
    Points : 10829
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

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

    Post  George1 on Wed Jan 20, 2016 12:44 am

    Video of the explosion and fire on take-off of a strategic bomber Tu-95MS of Russian Air Force (hull number "05 Red", registration number of the RF-94181) on the airfield Ukrainka (Amur region) late evening June 8, 2015.



    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10358
    Points : 10829
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

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

    Post  George1 on Fri Jan 29, 2016 2:10 am

    5th modernized Tu-160M. thumbsup

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1707137.html


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2505
    Points : 2543
    Join date : 2010-08-18

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

    Post  franco on Fri Jan 29, 2016 2:43 am

    George1 wrote:5th modernized Tu-160M. thumbsup

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1707137.html

    Read the other day that there are only 30 some Tu-95MS's still active. Had read at one point last year there were 43 left in action. That would explain the reports of only 80 bombers to be modernized by the end of 2020 (~ 15 Tu-160, 35 Tu-95MS and 30 Tu-22M3). Not a lot of info out there on this subject.

    Firebird

    Posts : 946
    Points : 978
    Join date : 2011-10-14

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

    Post  Firebird on Fri Jan 29, 2016 12:50 pm

    George1 wrote:Video of the explosion and fire on take-off of a strategic bomber Tu-95MS of Russian Air Force (hull number "05 Red", registration number of the RF-94181) on the airfield Ukrainka (Amur region) late evening June 8, 2015.


    Wasnt this caused by contaminated fuel acc to the RuAF?
    Just looking at the name "Ukrainka".
    I dont believe in "coincidences".
    I wonder if it was a terror attack?
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 1545
    Points : 1583
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

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

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Wed Feb 03, 2016 1:57 am

    Shoigu: resuming production of the Tu-160 is a priority

    http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20160202/1368663568.html
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

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

    Post  sepheronx on Wed Feb 03, 2016 2:34 am

    franco wrote:
    George1 wrote:5th modernized Tu-160M. thumbsup

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1707137.html

    Read the other day that there are only 30 some Tu-95MS's still active. Had read at one point last year there were 43 left in action. That would explain the reports of only 80 bombers to be modernized by the end of 2020 (~ 15 Tu-160, 35 Tu-95MS and 30 Tu-22M3). Not a lot of info out there on this subject.

    They should update all Tu-22M's to newest. These bombers would be ideal. Work with Tu-160 and phase out the Bear altogether.
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 748
    Points : 766
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

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

    Post  Big_Gazza on Wed Feb 03, 2016 1:23 pm

    sepheronx wrote:
    franco wrote:
    George1 wrote:5th modernized Tu-160M. thumbsup

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1707137.html

    Read the other day that there are only 30 some Tu-95MS's still active. Had read at one point last year there were 43 left in action. That would explain the reports of only 80 bombers to be modernized by the end of 2020 (~ 15 Tu-160, 35 Tu-95MS and 30 Tu-22M3). Not a lot of info out there on this subject.

    They should update all Tu-22M's to newest.  These bombers would be ideal.  Work with Tu-160 and phase out the Bear altogether.

    I disagree strongly. The Tu-95 main drawcard is its stupendous operating range (~15,000km unrefuelled) making it an unrivalled platform for maritime patrol, and has an unparalleled loiter time when used as a strike bomber with long range ALCMs. The Tu-160 has about 12,000-ish km range and is simply too valuable to waste its engine hours on maritime patrol. The Tu-22M is under 7,000 km so its useful as a medium range tactical bomber or a fast-reaction maritime strike bomber but is next to useless for patrolling the open seas.

    The PAK-DA of course will likely be an entirely different story....
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16397
    Points : 17012
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

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

    Post  GarryB on Thu Feb 04, 2016 3:08 am

    I have to agree with Big Gazza here... many look at the bear and its propellers and think WWII bomber... in fact those engines are turboprops... jet engines that turn propellers at their fronts to propel the aircraft.

    At moderate subsonic speeds and in a wide range of altitudes it is vastly more efficient than a turbojet or turbofan engine, and being a jet engine is much simpler and cheaper to maintain than a piston or radial engine.

    It has another enormous advantage over the Tu-22M3M in that it has inflight refuelling, so it can take off with reduced fuel to allow a heavier payload and then in flight on the way to the target area it can be topped up.

    It is the cheaper potential bomb truck with greater range than the Backfire or the Blackjack.

    Hopefully the PAK DA will be even cheaper to operate though likely more expensive to buy... and they were made in the 1980s and 1990s so they are still very young airframes.

    Perhaps the new NK-32 based turbofans for the new PAK DA could be used on upgraded Tu-95s to further improve performance... two engines instead of four could further improve range and fuel economy, with a reduction in weight and having only two engines instead of four.

    Would be an indirect poke in the eye to the US who has been trying to reduce the number of engines on the B-52s from 8 down to 4 for decades...


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 919
    Points : 1081
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    reply

    Post  d_taddei2 on Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:40 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:
    franco wrote:
    George1 wrote:5th modernized Tu-160M. thumbsup

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1707137.html

    Read the other day that there are only 30 some Tu-95MS's still active. Had read at one point last year there were 43 left in action. That would explain the reports of only 80 bombers to be modernized by the end of 2020 (~ 15 Tu-160, 35 Tu-95MS and 30 Tu-22M3). Not a lot of info out there on this subject.

    They should update all Tu-22M's to newest.  These bombers would be ideal.  Work with Tu-160 and phase out the Bear altogether.

    I disagree strongly.  The Tu-95 main drawcard is its stupendous operating range (~15,000km unrefuelled)  making it an unrivalled platform for maritime patrol, and has an unparalleled loiter time when used as a strike bomber with long range ALCMs. The Tu-160 has about 12,000-ish km range and is simply too valuable to waste its engine hours on maritime patrol.  The Tu-22M is under 7,000 km so its useful as a medium range tactical bomber or a fast-reaction maritime strike bomber but is next to useless for patrolling the open seas.

    The PAK-DA of course will likely be an entirely different story....


    i also back up with what you have said, the Tu-95 has more uses than the Tu-22M's due to range, if anything aircraft was to be removed then i would go for the Tu-22M, if the Tu-22M could be upgraded to provide better range or given in flight refuelling probes. Dontget me wrong the Tu-22M still has its uses, just not as many as the Tu-95. But like all aircraft they will eventually be replaced (sad day when it does).
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10358
    Points : 10829
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

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

    Post  George1 on Thu Feb 04, 2016 4:47 am

    Tu-95's range is 15.000km but with how many missiles carried?


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10358
    Points : 10829
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

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

    Post  George1 on Tue Feb 09, 2016 3:46 pm

    Excellent!!

    Deputy head of the Ministry of Defense: The resumption of the production of Tu-160 goes according to plan


    Production of engines for "White Swan" resumes


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    wilhelm

    Posts : 227
    Points : 231
    Join date : 2014-12-09

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

    Post  wilhelm on Tue Feb 09, 2016 4:51 pm

    So from reading that, the first new improved engine, which will be used for qualification, has been built and is entering testing, and 4 others which will be production variants are in the process of manufacture?
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

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

    Post  sepheronx on Tue Feb 09, 2016 5:03 pm

    George, dont forget to update the website when you got a chance! 

    You guys are awesome.  Whilhelm, you got any technical data on the new engines?

    wilhelm

    Posts : 227
    Points : 231
    Join date : 2014-12-09

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

    Post  wilhelm on Tue Feb 09, 2016 10:42 pm

    sepheronx wrote:George, dont forget to update the website when you got a chance! 

    You guys are awesome.  Whilhelm, you got any technical data on the new engines?

    I don't unfortunately.
    When they say improved or upgraded, to my mind that could only mean one or more of 3 things:
    1. More thrust
    2. Better fuel consumption
    3. Longer life/less maintenance

    Or a combination of 1, 2, or all 3.

    I don't for example see things such as improved throttle response etc as being particularly useful on a platform such as a strategic bomber.

    I wonder if it has new engine controls/updated FADEC...
    I would be very interested in what has been aimed for....I guess we'll have to wait.
    Good news.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16397
    Points : 17012
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

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

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:48 am

    The Tu-95MS16 was the best upgrade, but used the old smaller Kh-55SM cruise missile with a nuclear warhead and a 3,000km range. The conventionally armed Kh-555 has a shorter range.

    Both these missiles are in the 1.2-1.5 ton range and are much smaller than the newer Kh-101 and Kh-102, which have the choice of nuke or conventional warheads and 5,000km flight range.

    The difference is that the Tu-95MS16 can carry 6 of the smaller missiles (Kh-55/-555) in an internal rotary launcher, but it can carry a further 10 missiles under its wings on pylons (two pylons under each wing holding three and two cruise missiles each respectively.

    That means the Bear can carry 6 Kh-55 or Kh-555 missiles internally and 10 of the same or the newer Kh-101/-102 missiles under its wings for a total of 16 cruise missiles.

    In comparison the Backfire is not known to carry cruise missiles though some reports claim 8 can be carried externally on four hard points... but I have never seen this.

    I have seen 6 Kh-15 short range attack missiles internally and up to three large Kh-22m missiles externally.
    The Blackjack can carry 12 cruise missiles including the Kh-101/102 in its internal weapon bays (which are huge.)


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1943
    Points : 2060
    Join date : 2013-05-20

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

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:49 am

    I think an engine that was developed for Tu-160 that was drop-in-compatible with the NK-321 was NK-74. It probably was a more efficient, variable-geometry engine.
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2969
    Points : 3000
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

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

    Post  max steel on Wed Feb 10, 2016 2:00 pm

    Production of Tu-160 bombers to resume by 2023

    The plan to resume production of Tu-160 bombers is alive and well. Reporting on a visit of the deputy defense minister to the Kuznetsov plant in Samara, the ministry of defense press service said that preparations are underway, although not everything is going smoothly. The plan is to begin production of new aircraft no later than 2023. The new bomber, while still Tu-160, is expected to be almost a new plane, which is not surprising given that the design is more than 30 years old. There was no word on the number of planes that will be produced this time.

    Meanwhile, Russia continues to upgrade its current Tu-160 fleet. In December 2015, the Gorbunov Aviation Plant in Kazan completed an overhaul of the Vasily Senko bomber. According to the CAST blog, it's the fifth Tu-160 aircraft that underwent deep modernization:

    2006: Valentin Bluznyuk, 19 red, RF-94113, serial number 2-02
    2011: Valery Chkalov, 17 red, RF-94110, 5-04
    2014: Andrey Tupolev, 18 red, RF-94111, 6-05
    2015: Vasily Reshetnikov, 02 red, RF-94102, 7-02
    2015: Vasily Senko, 11 red, RF-94114, 6-02

    This appears to be the process of deep modernization that is supposed to be completed by 2019. Or maybe not - it appears that some bombers go through a different kind of overhaul. For example, neither Aleksei Plokhov, which returned to service in 2009, nor Ivan Yarygin, returned in 2010, is not on the CAST list.

    wilhelm

    Posts : 227
    Points : 231
    Join date : 2014-12-09

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

    Post  wilhelm on Wed Feb 10, 2016 6:05 pm

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:I think an engine that was developed for Tu-160 that was drop-in-compatible with the NK-321 was NK-74. It probably was a more efficient, variable-geometry engine.

    The NK-74 sounds interesting...do you have any further info on it? When was it developed or designed?
    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1943
    Points : 2060
    Join date : 2013-05-20

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

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Thu Feb 11, 2016 8:49 am

    wilhelm wrote:
    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:I think an engine that was developed for Tu-160 that was drop-in-compatible with the NK-321 was NK-74. It probably was a more efficient, variable-geometry engine.

    The NK-74 sounds interesting...do you have any further info on it? When was it developed or designed?

    Yefim Gordon mentions it in his "2003" book on Tu-160, but, of course, NK-74 was developed a long time before.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10358
    Points : 10829
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

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

    Post  George1 on Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:19 pm

    VKS got a modernized Tu-95MS strategic bomber

    https://t.co/aRz7xRxLnt


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    Sponsored content

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

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:07 am