Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    PAK-DA: News

    Share
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16536
    Points : 17144
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Aug 06, 2017 10:45 am

    Apologies to Eehnie, it is Vann that is the hypersonic bomber fan.

    Eehnie is the envelope pusher.

    He thinks if the next gen Russian bomber could be hypersonic then it should be...

    The problem now is the same problem as when the Tu-22M series was being developed... mach three bombers were possible then but expensive to make and to operate.

    The problem was that while they were harder to intercept than a slightly slower Mach 2 bomber they were hundreds or thousands of times more expensive.

    Things haven't changed much now.

    Having really fast bombers wont make them immune to interception, but it will make them so expensive that having enough would bankrupt Russia.... it would also quicken the bankruptcy of the US too if they tried to achieve a fleet of hypersonic bombers.

    The Sukhoi design bureau developed a new mach 3 bomber called the T-4... it was transferred to Tupolev to actually make because Tupolev has more experience in large heavy bombers and Tupolev pulled a fast one... they knew a mach 3 bomber would not be safe from air defences... S-300 could easily shoot down such a target in the early 1970s... just like an S-400 could easily shoot down a target moving at 4.8km per second... which is much faster than mach 10... the S-500 will shoot down targets moving at twice that speed...

    Don't get me wrong... high speed is a good goal, and new engines and new materials makes higher speeds much more practical to achieve... a scramjet means high speed is attainable without having to resort to rocket power... but it makes more sense to have large subsonic bombers with hypersonic long range cruise missiles and a supersonic bomber based on the Tu-160 to also deliver fast and subsonic cruise missiles on targets at enormous ranges.

    That is affordable and would be a formidable threat to the US or any other country on the planet.

    I really don't understand this pure bullshit discussion!!!

    Russian MoD said more than thousand times that PAK-DA will be a subsonic flying wing!!!

    Hypersonic bombers were nice concepts in cold war era, bringing dumb bombs with high speed to the specific target. In a few years we will see hypersonic cruise missiles and PAK-DA like Tu-160M2 are intended to be their carrier.

    The role of PAK-DA in a conflict with a dangerous foe (USA) will be similar to the nuclear submarine fleet! Acting as carriers for nuclear cruise missiles. Against a weak foe the PAK-DA will fully benefit from stealth!

    Advantages of PAK-DA will be a really long loiter time, big payload, low observable! A hypersonic bomber CAN'T be stealth, the loiter time is around 20 min (not hours!!!) and the payload is small (very small!).

    Garry is simply right!

    Yippie... someone gets it...

    If the PAK DA was going to be a supersonic bomber why bother making more Tu-160s?

    Why make a supersonic bomber AND a hypersonic bomber?

    They have clearly said pretty much every time they have mentioned the PAK DA that it would be a subsonic flying wing stealthy type.

    Personally I would have preferred they said a tailed flying wing with super cruising capability... but they didn't.

    Super cruising would mean high speed without the enormous cost in fuel and fuel weight/fraction yet have the aircraft move at a speed that makes it difficult to intercept by modern aircraft.

    The F-35 is able to fly at maybe mach 1.5 or so... which means a super cruising mach 1.4+ bomber would be a real problem to intercept for an F-35.

    Few interceptors operate at supersonic speed for more than 10 minutes... most would take 10 minutes to get to mach 1.8-2 and burn up most of their available fuel doing so...

    The Tu-160M2 will be a supersonic bomber... it might even be faster than the Tu-160M because it will be lighter and with more powerful engines, but it is not going to be more than a mach 2 bomber.

    The PAK DA will be a subsonic bomber with enormous range and large capacity of conventional bombs for theatre and strategic missions.

    The Tu-22M0 had the inflight refuelling equipment in its nose... look up a photo of that variant... it never went into production.

    The Tu-22M2 was the first model produced in any numbers with older weaker engines.

    The Tu-22M3 has the 25 ton thrust engines comparable but not the same as the engines in the Blackjack.


    _________________
    “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

    Vann7

    Posts : 3471
    Points : 3583
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vann7 on Mon Aug 07, 2017 6:53 am

    GarryB wrote:

    the point is that an ICBM warhead travels faster than any hypersonic bomber and they are vulnerable to being shot down too...

    .


    But you can't use an ICBM armed with nukes,that fly towards United States and later
    recall it ? can you ? say.. opps, it was a training.  . Rolling Eyes

    As i told you a million of TIMES. before...
    A hypersonic cruise missile or an hypersonic ICBM can't replace the roll of a Long range bomber.

    Suggesting that an ICBM or hypersonic cruise missiles from moscow to america can do the same shows you have no clue at all , of the discussion. or simply incredibly ignorant.


    If we use the basketball game analogy ,and the ball is the missile,What you are proposing will be comparable to a long court shot across the entire basketball court . with the difference that it will have the entire opposite team ,blocking his shot ,so the ball will be stopped quickly ,and the probabilities on the accuracy are small.

    IF Russia launch an ICBM from moscow to washington dc.. The US leadership will have easily 30 minutes or warning , and then Americans will be launching a retaliation strike before the missile hit.. and all us leaders will have plenty of time to hide.. and you can't abort the mission.

    see this? this is NOT a first nuclear strike at all.. Americans submarines in northen sea will be close to Russia. and will retaliate.. before the Russian ICBM hit US.


    What im saying is totally different.. to confuse your adversaries of your intentions..
    Because if you launch an ICBM is an automatic declared war as soon is launched.. without any knowledge if the missile will be intercepted or even hit its target with accuracy. So is NOT a first nuclear strike.

    A first nuclear strike of Russia in US, will have to come right next to American borders.
    but since American borders to east coast is the atlantic sea.. then it will have to be a plane.
    it could be done by warships ,but as soon they show up near US they will have many warships
    between the Russian warships and US coast.. But planes are different.. they can fly fast and position very fast in any place,and they can fly under the radars and evade radars.. see?

    So with a Hypersonic Mesosphere Bomber..that americans combat planes can't intercept , Russia can take a routine of every 3 days a week flying across the entire US eastern coast.. armed with nukes to the teeth.. and Russia will say is just a "training flight" you have nothing to be worry americans.. and the plane is even empty inside.. no armed with nukes. angel

    and the Russian intelligence manage to locate the positions of the top leadership ,in real time..
    and it happens that they are not in bunkers but in a conference in the open.. So if Russia understand that war can't be avoided ..and that americans are withing weeks to attack Russia.
    then a mesosphere Bomber will allow Russia to Strike FIRST without warning... and decapitate the leadership of any nation..and allow the plane to return unharmed. with a super slow plane like Pak-Da it will not hide forever from american radars.. and as soon detected on radars ,
    the americans will send F-22 and put the Bomber on cross hairs. threatening to shot down the plane if he launch a missile to its nation.. that is what a peaceful interception is..

    but if the plane fly 30km above sea.. then it can't be intercepted by any plane.. neither shot down by American NAvy.. only Thaad or Israel Arrow 3 or an S-500 like air defense can do it.. but you can't shot down a Russian plane flying in international space.. so see the difference?

    With a mesosphere bomber ,Russia can do a first strike decapitation strike ,on any nation leadership ,take them by surprise and the bomber escape unharmed.  but a Pak-da can't do that.. it will have many planes intercepting it.. stealth is only radar signal reduction but doesn't make the planes invisible. So PAK-DA will be TOTALLY USELESS ...!!!!!!  if the americans intercept the planes and position themselves behind ,warning them ,that if they fire a missile the planes will be shot down. see the difference?  Pak-da is not a deterrence any more than B2.  

    But american cruise missiles deployed right next to Russian border  close to Putin and general staff ,giving a speech in ST petersburg is a serious threat.

    So RUssia needs a bomber that can allow them to be very close to US capital .
    and that can't be intercepted . drop a missile and escape unharmed. and so far
    a mesosphere bomber is the only thing can do it..

    IF Russia had 10x mesosphere bombers.. it could wipe out 10 aircraft carriers in a surprise attack too. Flying right above the US aircraft carriers and they with nothing they could do.
    So is not about Destruction power the discussion.. is about taking by surprise your enemies.
    Launching an ICBM from moscow will not take by surprise anyone.. the most idiotic thing i have heard ever. the radars in norway can see all ICBM launch all the way to Siberia.. and this was told by putin.  Only way . Russia can take by surprise US leadership. in a nuclear strike
    against its leadership is being close.. there is no other way..

    It will be similar as to deploying snipers in the second floor of a house across the street in your neighborhood. so they will have a very huge headstart on you and it will be a huge deterrence because you will see ,they are aligned for a close shot on you and you will not know which day will pull the trigger.  A mesosphere Bomber is one of the ultimate deterrence that Russia can build , that will force Americans to a new treaty ,that will force americans to remove all their military bases and cruise missiles anywhere near RUssian borders.

    Submarines can do this same thing.. do a surprise attack near US eastern coast. but the problem is their time is limited..  speed very limited. and they very slow and can be chased. Russia neither have refueling military bases anywhere in the atlantic. But a mesosphere plane can do very quick flights and change position quickly in no time and position for a decapitation strike very easily if an order given and the leaders locations known.

    Again don't say an ICBM and a cruise missile fired from 10,000 km away is the same thing.
    is total idiocy. If you have intentions to do a first strike ,it will have to do it as close as possible
    to the target ,to keep the surprise.. so the enemies not alerted.

    It was you Garry who was saying "Nobody" can't attack Russia because have nukes..
    and Turkey did it.. Neutral  You simply are really awfully bad in strategy and tactics..and don't
    understand how Rules of Engagement ,Politics and public opinion, have a major role in how people do wars.  In wars speed and taking by surprise your enemies can be the difference
    between a quick victory or a major defeat.

    My point can be illustrated with a simple question..
    if Russia have ICBMs in moscow that can reach any part of US.. then why Russia bother
    flying with Old soviet bombers near US coast?. why Russia bother sending submarines near US Coast then? since they can reach US anyway from moscow no? Rolling Eyes

     if you can't see the tactical difference between bombers flying very close to US Coast..
    or ICBMs in moscow that can hit the same place.. the you better give up in military discussion if you know no shit.  one of them is Retaliation weapon.. and the other are for practice of first nuclear strike..  but they can't launch any missile if they intercepted and not ready to sacrifice
    their lives in a first strike shot ,while having an F-22 aiming your tail. this is where a bomber
    very hard to intercept comes to place..

    with a high altitude near space bomber ,Russia will the opportunity a big chance to fly over the airspace of 98% of the countries in the world. and even in case of a war fly deep inside US territory unharmed , if combined with courter electronics. It will allow Russia a Big opportunity
    to penetrate any part of US with a bomber..  because traditional combat planes can't intercept it..and only very expensive missiles ,like Thaad or S-500 could do it.. but US don't have many of them.  Patriot missiles top altitude is about 30 km to 35km.. so anything higher will be safe from them..
    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 528
    Points : 532
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Benya on Mon Aug 07, 2017 11:04 am

    Vann7 wrote:You simply are really awfully bad in strategy and tactics..and don't
    understand how Rules of Engagement ,Politics and public opinion, have a major role in how people do wars.

    Or maybe it's just you Vann who wants to know everything better than anyone.

    This isn't the first time you're doing this, you did the exact same thing to me in the Iskander vs ATACMS thread, in which most of your statements were bollocks, and have been debunked by Garry and me. And what have you done there? You told me that it's just me who "fail to understand military tactics 101".The best thing in that was I was talking about its tactical implementations, it was you who started crowing about a 300km rocket launcher over Iskander that Russia would never need.

    And then we have this hypersonic bomber... Good God. Another thing that Russia will never EVER need, as there are nuclear cruise missiles, ICBMs and SLBMs. Why would they need an expensive hypersonic bomber to fill the gap?

    And what would it do? Launch cruise missiles or drop free falling nukes?

    A first nuclear strike of Russia in US, will have to come right next to American borders.
    but since American borders to east coast is the atlantic sea.. then it will have to be a plane.
    it could be done by warships ,but as soon they show up near US they will have many warships
    between the Russian warships and US coast.. But planes are different.. they can fly fast and position very fast in any place,and they can fly under the radars and evade radars.. see?

    Pure bollocks. A nuclear first strike would be conducted with ICBMs, and ICBM warheads re-entering the atmosphere are much harder to intercept than any hypersonic bomber. Such bomber could only fly at Mach 4-6 while ICBM warheads are already travelling at 2-3 times faster in their re-entry phase.

    So with a Hypersonic Mesosphere Bomber..that americans combat planes can't intercept , Russia can take a routine of every 3 days a week flying across the entire US eastern coast.. armed with nukes to the teeth.. and Russia will say is just a "training flight" you have nothing to be worry americans.. and the plane is even empty inside.. no armed with nukes. angel

    Ok, let me be clear:

    1.) You clearly don't know what the mesosphere is. It starts at 50 kms above sea level, above the stratopause (edge of the stratosphere), and ends in the mesopause (92-100 kms above sea level), where termosphere starts.

    2.) US air defenses would intercept that bomber faster than fighters

    3.) "Russia will say it was just a training"... Hahahahaha lol1 lol1 lol1 Good joke!
    Tell this to the US forces already at DEFCON 1 at the time, please.

    4.) Why would Russia ever deliver a nuclear first strike? Their nuclear forces are mostly geared towards retaliation. Wake up Vann, this isn't the Cold War with trigger happy nuclear powers.

    With a mesosphere bomber ,Russia can do a first strike decapitation strike ,on any nation leadership ,take them by surprise and the bomber escape unharmed.  but a Pak-da can't do that.. it will have many planes intercepting it.. stealth is only radar signal reduction but doesn't make the planes invisible. So PAK-DA will be TOTALLY USELESS ...!!!!!!  if the americans intercept the planes and position themselves behind ,warning them ,that if they fire a missile the planes will be shot down. see the difference?  Pak-da is not a deterrence any more than B2.  

    Oh yeah, and Russia should have a 1:1 copy of the Death Star. Oh wait, you have just watched too much Star Wars.

    if you can't see the tactical difference between bombers flying very close to US Coast..
    or ICBMs in moscow that can hit the same place.. the you better give up in military discussion if you know no shit.  one of them is Retaliation weapon.. and the other are for practice of first nuclear strike..  but they can't launch any missile if they intercepted and not ready to sacrifice

    Tactics, tactical difference? We are talking about strategic weaponry FFS.

    IF Russia had 10x mesosphere bombers.. it could wipe out 10 aircraft carriers in a surprise attack too. Flying right above the US aircraft carriers and they with nothing they could do.
    So is not about Destruction power the discussion.. is about taking by surprise your enemies.
    Launching an ICBM from moscow will not take by surprise anyone.. the most idiotic thing i have heard ever. the radars in norway can see all ICBM launch all the way to Siberia.. and this was told by putin.  Only way . Russia can take by surprise US leadership. in a nuclear strike
    against its leadership is being close.. there is no other way..

    The US had the XB-70 plane in the Cold War, and it was proved to be a waste of money, even if that plane could fly at Mach 3. They have came to a conclusion, and they came to that conclusion for a reason, a good reason. This is the reason why you can't see any SR-71 Blackbirds in the US inventory, and the reason why there are no hypersonic projects anywhere in the world. Having these "wonder bombers" you're talking about, Russia would go bankrupt in no time.

    So Vann, please quit your sci-fi daydreaming and stay on topic.

    Vann7

    Posts : 3471
    Points : 3583
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vann7 on Mon Aug 07, 2017 12:10 pm

    [quote="Benya"]
    Vann7 wrote:
    The US had the XB-70 plane in the Cold War, and it was proved to be a waste of money, even if that plane could fly at Mach 3. They have came to a conclusion, and they came to that conclusion for a reason, a good reason. This is the reason why you can't see any SR-71 Blackbirds in the US inventory, and the reason why there are no hypersonic projects anywhere in the world. Having these "wonder bombers" you're talking about, Russia would go bankrupt in no time.

    So Vann, please quit your sci-fi daydreaming and stay on topic.

    Stop defending GArryB.. he is dead wrong.
    He claims ... that "Russia don't need neither a hypersonic bomber or neither a mesosphere bomber because guess what? because Russia ICBM are hypersonic and can do the same.. Laughing

    So he shows a complete Ignorance of military tactics..  If Russia understand that war
    can't be avoided...lets say that americans see ,their economy will crash in a couple of weeks
    and that only a war can save them.. So if Russia get intelligence that a major surprise nuclear strike is coming.. from insiders.. So what you will prefer? That Russia just wait to be attacked
    first with a major nuclear strike and their silos disable ,and then hope to retaliate ?  to play by UN rules and be wiped without a chance to properly retaliate ?
    or then then be the first one to strike?   If you choose to be the last one ,then you are an idiot.

    A mesosphere bomber i know fly from 50km to 80km.. i posted that before..
    But was just explaining that the Patriot missiles max range is 30km to 35km.. so you fly higher
    then you will be away of its range.. Aegis can't intercept a plane.. flying beyond that.. and in the mesosphere space..  you will need only THAAD to have a chance and those are very limited in US inventory. doesn't have lots of them.. So Russia with a high altitude mesosphere bomber have a lot of chance to wipe out US navy.. and even enter in US airspace an evade missiles with the right counter electronic defenses.

    about the SR-71.. it was not good enough.. when it was released ,Russia already had something to counter it.. But if Americans deployed the SR-71 , 10 tp 15 years  earlier ,it will had a field day in Russia. and will have been th soviets unable to intercept it..  with a mesosphere bomber today? which american warship can shot it down? Rolling Eyes

    Nothing is more expensive than losing a war.. US Government already declared economic war
    on Russia.. so what you want? you want Russia to just wait and sit down and do nothing?
    Russia better be prepared for a major war with americans ..Because their hostilities will only increase and increase and increase until they will provoke Russia into a major conflict. Not if ..but when.. they are desperate ,to destroy Russia and putin can't just ignore them. when you have someone already threatening to kill you ,you can't ignore that. you need to protect yourself and waiting he do the first shot on you ,only a moron will do that. Russia needs to take the initiative and IF. they realize through intelligence and confirmed through many channels
    the US is preparing to Attack Russia with a preventive nuclear major strike to disable their silos.. then Russia better not wait for those nukes to start falling and have a plan for be the first one to strike. The American Government care no shit about their people.. they have bunkers and they have properties in all over the world ,can return when the war is over ..and they were already running simulations of sacrificing up to 40 millions of american citizens and consider that acceptable if they manage to destroy Russia.  When you have someone trying to kill you and your family you need to stop them.. because if you ignore them ,it will be your fault if they manage to harm your family for doing nothing.. A retaliation after being attacked with a nuke will not guarantee that the war will end.. If Americans takes the decision to strike first ,is because they consider acceptable to lose several cities in the nuclear interchange ,but they think Russia will get the worse part.

    With a mesosphere stealth bomber Russia have the chance to AVOID A NUCLEAR WAR..
    if manage to decapitate the leadership and the government of US , once Russia is aware they are preparing for a first nuclear strike. So this is to avoid a full scale nuclear war , you strike first by surprise remove its leadership and top generals and if you do it well ,with help inside ,
    with precision and well organized ,no even nukes need, just conventional cruise missiles will decapitate the leadership of any nation.

    patriotic americans that understand need to take control of their nation before their leaders start a nuclear war ,take power and make peace with Russia .   Simply for a first nuclear/non nuclear strike you need to be close to US territory.. To claim than Russia can do a first nuclear strike from Moscow to washingtong DC is complete idiocy.. it will not be first at all .but second..and too late.. Because US have submarines all the time near Norway, waiting for an order to Strike Russia. and according to Putin in just 10 minutes can strike moscow.. and Death hand solves Nothing ,if it doesn't finish NATO and US NAVY too. and their capability to fight. the SR71 only failed because came at the wrong time ,was not fast enough to avoid Russian planes , not high enough to avoid interception.. and this is the whole point.. to develop a plane that can't be intercepted by NATO anywhere.. This also will make safer Russia Presidential plane , because NATO is now chasing Russia presidential planes.. if this is not a wake up call for you , that they pushing for awar and it will be a matter of time they will get it.. then nothing will.

    Russia needs to be prepared .. is as simple as that.. and Pak-Da will be TOTALLY USELESS
    if Americans can detect it by special radars and intercept it.. with an F-16..but a mesosphere bomber or any plane that flight at 50km altitude can't be intercepted with any plane. and with the right counter electronics will even evade THAAD missiles. so a mesosphere bomber will be the ultimate deterrence of all. Since it can't be chased by planes and will be flying every week
    near US coast , armed with hypersonic missiles that can hit their building in a couple of minutes..this will scare US leaders and force them to negotiate a new treaty ,so that Russia keep away those planes and NATO will have to remove their missiles and military bases from Russian borders.
    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 528
    Points : 532
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Benya on Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:27 pm

    Vann7 wrote:Stop defending GArryB.. he is dead wrong.
    He claims ... that "Russia don't need neither a hypersonic bomber or neither a mesosphere bomber because guess what? because Russia ICBM are hypersonic and can do the same.. Laughing


    Dead wrong? I think he is damn right, he backs up all his claims with facts, unlike you.

    So he shows a complete Ignorance of military tactics..

    Again, what do you think of yourself, who the heck are you, a God of War? Do you think that every military tactic is up to you to decide whether it is viable or not? Or the horseshit you're writing is the pinnacle of all military tactics and strategy of all existence?

    If Russia understand that war
    can't be avoided...lets say that americans see ,their economy will crash in a couple of weeks
    and that only a war can save them.. So if Russia get intelligence that a major surprise nuclear strike is coming.. from insiders.. So what you will prefer? That Russia just wait to be attacked
    first with a major nuclear strike and their silos disable ,and then hope to retaliate ?  to play by UN rules and be wiped without a chance to properly retaliate ?
    or then then be the first one to strike?   If you choose to be the last one ,then you are an idiot.

    What a paranoia.

    But was just explaining that the Patriot missiles max range is 30km to 35km.. so you fly higher
    then you will be away of its range.. Aegis can't intercept a plane.. flying beyond that.. and in the mesosphere space..  you will need only THAAD to have a chance and those are very limited in US inventory. doesn't have lots of them.. So Russia with a high altitude mesosphere bomber have a lot of chance to wipe out US navy.. and even enter in US airspace an evade missiles with the right counter electronic defenses.

    1.) If you're really a military know-it-all, then please develop a fuel type that enables your "wonder bomber" to fly in the mesosphere, where air is pretty much non-existent. At that speed it would burn shitloads of fuel, and will have to carry shitloads of fuel...

    2.) Even if that shit manages to fly in the mesosphere with hypersonic speed, US/NATO early warning radars would detect it in no time, misidentify it as an ICBM in its boost stage, therefore they will identify it as a first strike.

    3.) Future AEGIS missiles will be able to pick off such targets with ease.

    4.) Did you even think about the cost of this "wunderwaffe" for a second?

    about the SR-71.. it was not good enough.. when it was released ,Russia already had something to counter it.. But if Americans deployed the SR-71 , 10 tp 15 years  earlier ,it will had a field day in Russia. and will have been th soviets unable to intercept it..  with a mesosphere bomber today? which american warship can shot it down? Rolling Eyes

    Nothing is more expensive than losing a war.. US Government already declared economic war
    on Russia.. so what you want? you want Russia to just wait and sit down and do nothing?
    Russia better be prepared for a major war with americans ..Because their hostilities will only increase and increase and increase until they will provoke Russia into a major conflict. Not if ..but when.. they are desperate ,to destroy Russia and putin can't just ignore them. when you have someone already threatening to kill you ,you can't ignore that. you need to protect yourself and waiting he do the first shot on you ,only a moron will do that. Russia needs to take the initiative and IF. they realize through intelligence and confirmed through many channels
    the US is preparing to Attack Russia with a preventive nuclear major strike to disable their silos.. then Russia better not wait for those nukes to start falling and have a plan for be the first one to strike. The American Government care no shit about their people.. they have bunkers and they have properties in all over the world ,can return when the war is over ..and they were already running simulations of sacrificing up to 40 millions of american citizens and consider that acceptable if they manage to destroy Russia.  When you have someone trying to kill you and your family you need to stop them.. because if you ignore them ,it will be your fault if they manage to harm your family for doing nothing.. A retaliation after being attacked with a nuke will not guarantee that the war will end.. If Americans takes the decision to strike first ,is because they consider acceptable to lose several cities in the nuclear interchange ,but they think Russia will get the worse part.

    With a mesosphere stealth bomber Russia have the chance to AVOID A NUCLEAR WAR..
    if manage to decapitate the leadership and the government of US , once Russia is aware they are preparing for a first nuclear strike. So this is to avoid a full scale nuclear war , you strike first  by surprise remove its leadership and top generals and if you do it well ,with help inside ,
    with precision and well organized ,no even nukes need, just conventional cruise missiles will decapitate the leadership of any nation.

    patriotic americans that understand need to take control of their nation before their leaders start a nuclear war ,take power and make peace with Russia .   Simply for a first nuclear/non nuclear strike you need to be close to US territory.. To claim than Russia can do a first nuclear strike from Moscow to washingtong DC is complete idiocy.. it will not be first at all .but second..and too late.. Because US have submarines all the time near Norway, waiting for an order to Strike Russia. and according to Putin in just 10 minutes can strike moscow.. and Death hand solves Nothing ,if it doesn't finish NATO and US NAVY too. and their capability to fight. the SR71 only failed because came at the wrong time ,was not fast enough to avoid Russian planes , not high enough to avoid interception.. and this is the whole point.. to develop a plane that can't be intercepted by NATO anywhere.. This also will make safer Russia Presidential plane , because NATO is now chasing Russia presidential planes.. if this is not a wake up call for you , that they pushing for awar and it will be a matter of time they will get it.. then nothing will.



    Russia needs to be prepared .. is as simple as that.. and Pak-Da will be TOTALLY USELESS
    if Americans can detect it by special radars and intercept it.. with an F-16..but a mesosphere bomber or any plane that flight at 50km altitude can't be intercepted with any plane. and with the right counter electronics will even evade THAAD missiles. so a mesosphere bomber will be the ultimate deterrence of all. Since it can't be chased by planes and will be flying every week
    near US coast , armed with hypersonic missiles that can hit their building in a couple of minutes..this will scare US leaders and force them to negotiate a new treaty ,so that Russia keep away those planes and NATO will have to remove their missiles and military bases from Russian borders.

    Yeah, just go straight to the Kremlin, tell Putin about all your BS and he will fire Shoigu in that very moment, making you his next Minister of Defense, and replace all ICBMs (every single one) with this "wonder bomber" of yours, cease the development of Sarmat, cease the production of further Tu-160s and wipe out your ass with the blueprints of the PAK-DA!

    What a clown... clown jocolor
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2607
    Points : 2645
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  franco on Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:53 pm

    Vann thinks VP is stupid and incompetent also so your advise is wasted.

    Azi

    Posts : 122
    Points : 124
    Join date : 2016-04-05

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Azi on Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:48 pm

    Once and for all Vann...

    In era of Cold War, 50s to 70s AD systems had problems to intercept targets in very low and very high altitude.  Remember the U-2??? In the 21. century AD systems can easy intercept targets in very high altitude, S-400, S-500 and THAAD. It's exactly what Benya wrote, he is right!!!

    The intention of hypersonic bombers in cold war era was to fly high and fast above AD systems and then to drop dumb bombs. In 60s there was no really "smart bomb" existent, or a accurate cruise missile. Old ICBM were more inaccurate than accurate, but with a nuclear warhead it doesn't matter if you hit your target exact, plus minus 100 m...doesn't really matter! BUT, but, but in times of smart bombs and smart cruise missile everything changed!!! A modern cruise missile hit exactly in a radius of a meter the target and a modern cruise missile can fly maneuver to evade enemy AD systems. That's the 21. century!!!

    The concept of a hypersonic bomber makes really, really no sense in 21. century! You will have no loiter time, max. is 30 minutes not really more, so you simply CAN'T patrol US border with a hypersonic bomber, because after 30 minutes the fun is over! A hypersonic bomber will be hot, very hot, the engine of course and the edges of the plane, so very easy for every infrared sensor. The shape and surface must be optimized for hypersonic speed and CAN't be optimized for stealth, both is nearly impossible! With a hypersonic bomber you are easy to spot and easy to kill in reach of THAAD.

    The flying wing concept is far better! The flying wing gives a lot of uplift, in combination with good engines you can safe a lot of fuel. Flying wing concept is perfect for stealth, for example B-2 and B-21, so why change a good concept!? Subsonic speed gives a lot of loiter time, patroling a border makes sense with a slow plane not a fast!

    The PAK-DA concept combines the B-S stealth concept with your "hypersonic bomber", because it will use hypersonic cruise missiles!!! A hypersonic interceptor is something complete different, this concept makes sense but no hypersonic bomber!

    Nothing more to write!!!
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16536
    Points : 17144
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:11 am

    But you can't use an ICBM armed with nukes,that fly towards United States and later
    recall it ? can you ? say.. opps, it was a training.

    Actually you can... use their satellite network to send a self destruct code to destroy the warheads before they enter the atmosphere... but even then WTF are you talking about?

    Russia doesn't need some sort of piss them off stick... sending hypersonic bombers towards the US would mean the US will launch its ICBMs and send instructions to its subs to launch SLBMs... why the hell would you want to then recall or disable your attack?

    That sort of brinkmanship bullshit is how the world would end... only an idiot would consider that a useful feature.

    As i told you a million of TIMES. before...
    A hypersonic cruise missile or an hypersonic ICBM can't replace the roll of a Long range bomber.

    Suggesting that an ICBM or hypersonic cruise missiles from moscow to america can do the same shows you have no clue at all , of the discussion. or simply incredibly ignorant.

    Not only can an ICBM or a hypersonic cruise missile do a better job than a hypersonic bomber it can do it much cheaper.

    A missile is a payload of maybe 10 tons and does not need to make a return journey. The cost of launching a missile and maybe testing one ever 3-5 years to make sure they still work is a fraction of the cost of maintaining a bomber fleet.


    If we use the basketball game analogy ,and the ball is the missile,What you are proposing will be comparable to a long court shot across the entire basketball court . with the difference that it will have the entire opposite team ,blocking his shot ,so the ball will be stopped quickly ,and the probabilities on the accuracy are small.

    Basketball is a rubbish game, and of little use in comparison to an air defence network, but which member of that opposing team is 10 metres tall and can stop a supersonic shot at goal?

    IF Russia launch an ICBM from moscow to washington dc.. The US leadership will have easily 30 minutes or warning , and then Americans will be launching a retaliation strike before the missile hit.. and all us leaders will have plenty of time to hide.. and you can't abort the mission.

    Who cares? First of all they wont have 30 minutes warning... with SLBMs it would be less than 5 minutes warning... and have you ever been in a big city before? How far can you move in city traffic in 30 minutes? Even assuming you get a warning within a second of a launch?

    Unless the attack takes place during a meeting in a bunker of all the big officials a lot of those people wont make it.

    see this? this is NOT a first nuclear strike at all.. Americans submarines in northen sea will be close to Russia. and will retaliate.. before the Russian ICBM hit US.

    And the Russians don't have any SSBNs right...

    What im saying is totally different.. to confuse your adversaries of your intentions..

    Idiot.

    The last thing you want to do at a time of high tension where WWIII is a real possibility is to confuse the US of your intentions... that is the dumbest thing you have said today.

    The whole point of MAD is to make it clear that if they attack that the result will be their destruction too... anything less and you encourage them to attack.

    A first nuclear strike of Russia in US, will have to come right next to American borders.
    but since American borders to east coast is the atlantic sea.. then it will have to be a plane.

    Or an SSBN.

    it could be done by warships ,but as soon they show up near US they will have many warships
    between the Russian warships and US coast.. But planes are different.. they can fly fast and position very fast in any place,and they can fly under the radars and evade radars.. see?

    No Vann they can't. If they fly low then they are basically subsonic or very very short ranged...

    So with a Hypersonic Mesosphere Bomber..that americans combat planes can't intercept , Russia can take a routine of every 3 days a week flying across the entire US eastern coast.. armed with nukes to the teeth.. and Russia will say is just a "training flight" you have nothing to be worry americans.. and the plane is even empty inside.. no armed with nukes.

    And within a month russia will be importing oil to fuel the aircraft...

    and the Russian intelligence manage to locate the positions of the top leadership ,in real time..
    and it happens that they are not in bunkers but in a conference in the open.. So if Russia understand that war can't be avoided ..and that americans are withing weeks to attack Russia.

    There are rules regarding leadership in any country where the entire leadership of a country and its backup are never present in the same place at the same time... do you think the vice president of the US will just say... OK you killed trump... fair enough we surrender?

    Or do you think they will launch a full scale attack on Russia?

    then a mesosphere Bomber will allow Russia to Strike FIRST without warning... and decapitate the leadership of any nation..and allow the plane to return unharmed. with a super slow plane like Pak-Da it will not hide forever from american radars.. and as soon detected on radars ,

    We have been over this 1,000 times a super fast bomber is NOT faster than an ICBM... if they can see ICBMs coming they will see hypersonic bombers coming... whether it is an ICBM or a bomber approaching their airspace they will activate their defence forces and try to intercept... whether they actually do or not is not important because their ICBMs and SLBMs will get launch codes...

    the americans will send F-22 and put the Bomber on cross hairs. threatening to shot down the plane if he launch a missile to its nation.. that is what a peaceful interception is..

    PAK DA will not get within 3000km of the US so the F-22 wont be a problem.

    With a mesosphere bomber ,Russia can do a first strike decapitation strike ,on any nation leadership ,take them by surprise and the bomber escape unharmed.

    NO. The bomber alone does not make that possible. You need accurate information about the enemy government too... Saddam pretty much proved the whole idea of a first strike to decapitate a government using bombers is bullshit.

    but a Pak-da can't do that..

    Nothing can do that... look up the wiki page for the XB-70 and one of its roles was going to be taking out mobile ICBMs... something the B-1B and then B-2 were also supposed to be able to do but never had a chance.

    So PAK-DA will be TOTALLY USELESS ...!!!!!! if the americans intercept the planes and position themselves behind ,warning them ,that if they fire a missile the planes will be shot down. see the difference? Pak-da is not a deterrence any more than B2.

    PAK DA is not supposed to start WWIII. It is supposed to present the US with the view that if they start a war with Russia that the PAK DA will irradiate the US...

    A hypersonic bomber is totally useless... it will prevent war by bankrupting Russia before it could ever possibly be used.

    So RUssia needs a bomber that can allow them to be very close to US capital .
    and that can't be intercepted . drop a missile and escape unharmed. and so far
    a mesosphere bomber is the only thing can do it..

    Bullshit.

    That would never work as they would see that bomber coming as soon as it took off and in the hour it would take to get to being near the US coast they could shift everyone that might be worth killing in a first strike.

    If it flys low to evade radar then it will take 8 hours to get there...

    IF Russia had 10x mesosphere bombers.. it could wipe out 10 aircraft carriers in a surprise attack too. Flying right above the US aircraft carriers and they with nothing they could do.

    Really? Nothing they could do? Except for shoot down the weapon those bombers try to use to destroy those carriers...

    So is not about Destruction power the discussion.. is about taking by surprise your enemies.
    Launching an ICBM from moscow will not take by surprise anyone.. the most idiotic thing i have heard ever. the

    Russias nuclear arsenal is not about surprise... it is about retribution. It does not need to be secret... it just needs to work and not cost too much.


    It will be similar as to deploying snipers in the second floor of a house across the street in your neighborhood. so they will have a very huge headstart on you and it will be a huge deterrence because you will see ,they are aligned for a close shot on you and you will not know which day will pull the trigger. A mesosphere Bomber is one of the ultimate deterrence that Russia can build , that will force Americans to a new treaty ,that will force americans to remove all their military bases and cruise missiles anywhere near RUssian borders.

    The next super weapon to make peace the only option... except that the most likely US response apart from developing their own hypersonic bomber that could be based in Eastern Europe, would be a first strike before the Russian system is operational... There is no way the US will remove any of their military bases... they don't do that.

    Again don't say an ICBM and a cruise missile fired from 10,000 km away is the same thing.
    is total idiocy. If you have intentions to do a first strike ,it will have to do it as close as possible
    to the target ,to keep the surprise.. so the enemies not alerted.

    Why the fuck would Russia want a first strike capability against the US?

    It was you Garry who was saying "Nobody" can't attack Russia because have nukes..
    and Turkey did it.. Neutral You simply are really awfully bad in strategy and tactics..and don't
    understand how Rules of Engagement ,Politics and public opinion, have a major role in how people do wars. In wars speed and taking by surprise your enemies can be the difference
    between a quick victory or a major defeat.

    Are you 12 years old?

    Nobody has invaded or attacked Russia. Turkey shot down one Russian aircraft and has since apologised and now cooperates with Russia in the conflict in Syria. I am sure your response of an attack on the Turkish air Force to get immediate revenge against a member of NATO would have gone much better...

    My point can be illustrated with a simple question..
    if Russia have ICBMs in moscow that can reach any part of US.. then why Russia bother
    flying with Old soviet bombers near US coast?. why Russia bother sending submarines near US Coast then? since they can reach US anyway from moscow no?

    There are no fucking ICBMs near Moscow. They send bombers and SSBNs to the US coast because bomber crews and SSBN crews need training to make sure they know what they are doing and to look for places to hide to attack from. A missile does not need any training and can sit in a silo until it is needed. A hypersonic bomber would need billions of dollars in fuel for training per year.

    one of them is Retaliation weapon.. and the other are for practice of first nuclear strike.. but they can't launch

    Russia does not need a first strike weapon. They only need a weapon of retaliation. A subsonic flying wing PAK DA does the job without costing too much.

    By the time Russian bombers get to the continental US there will be no F-22s.


    with a high altitude near space bomber ,Russia will the opportunity a big chance to fly over the airspace of 98% of the countries in the world. and even in case of a war fly deep inside US territory unharmed , if combined with courter electronics. It will allow Russia a Big opportunity
    to penetrate any part of US with a bomber.. because traditional combat planes can't intercept it..and only very expensive missiles ,like Thaad or S-500 could do it.. but US don't have many of them. Patriot missiles top altitude is about 30 km to 35km.. so anything higher will be safe from them..

    The ABM system they are building has missiles with a range of over 1,500 miles that can intercept targets flying twice as fast as these mythical bombers you keep bleating about... Russia building hypersonic bombers will simply boost funding to the ABM system in the US potentially making it more effective and more of an issue for Russia.

    BTW Russia already has things that fly over the airspace of every country on the planet.... they are called satellites... why not fit a bomb and a guidance system to a satellite used for weather mapping or something and park it over the US... when needed... oh no one of our satellites is falling and deorbit it over the US and boom... much cheaper, much easier.

    You call me ignorant and wrong Vann but what you need to do is a little more reading... look up the history of the XB-70 Valkyrie bomber. It never went into production because in 1961 they knew SAMs would shoot it down. They knew if it could be seen it would be shot down... the solution was to fly low... and flying low means flying at maybe mach 1.2 at the very best... more likely subsonic for any realistic distance.

    Why else do you think the subsonic cruise missile was invented... long range difficult to spot... accurate... deadly... subsonic.

    Now look up the history of Tupolev... the Tu-22M was supposed to be a Mach 3 bomber, but Tupolev is no fool... he knew making it mach 3 would make it super expensive and unaffordable. After making the Tu-22 he knew he could not get funding and support for another bomber design so he called it Tu-22M... if you didn't know any better you might think it was like Sukhoi with their Su-7 and Su-17 with applying swing wings to improve performance, except that the Tu-22M is a totally different aircraft to the Tu-22.

    At some stage I would love to see an experimental aircraft able to fly mach 8 or mach 10... that would be cool, but first missiles and then probably interceptors... and later heavier aircraft... simply because of the cost.

    Missiles and perhaps interceptors will boost development and knowledge in the technology to the point where larger aircraft become viable.

    Remember a hypersonic cruise missile does not need to be hypersonic all the way... look at the supersonic club... a hypersonic model could be a small subsonic turbojet engine with a straight wing and external fuel tanks for the first 4,000km at a steady climb to altitude and then drop the tanks and wings and convert to scramjet mode and climb and accelerate for the next 2-3 thousand kms... getting faster as it gets higher and lighter...


    _________________
    “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

    Vann7

    Posts : 3471
    Points : 3583
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vann7 on Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:18 am

    Garryb you never like to lose...even if dead wrong in your arguments..  Laughing
    but you are WRONG dude. Stop pretending you know anything about military tactics,
    you don't know anything. the only thing you can do is provide stats of , memorize
    features of military hardware and thats it..  so i value your information only there.
    but in military tactics you suck.  And writing a wall of text will not make you right at all.

    It was GArryb who was saying Russia don't need military bases near US..
    that their ICBM can reach any place.  Laughing   what a foolish comments.
    It was GArryb who was arguing with me that Russia nukes guarantee
    no one will attack Russia.  again -->   Laughing     Laughing     Laughing
    Oh no nobody will dare to attack Russia because have nukes..  Rolling Eyes
    And Turkey proved you are dead wrong..

    and now it was Garryb.. that claims that a mesosphere bomber "is not needed"
    because a hypersonic ICBM or fast Cruise missile can achieve the same.   -->  Rolling Eyes

    Listen amateur , No mater how much range and ICBM have,no matter how fast..
    it will NEVER REPLACE , in any way,shape ,or form the importance of having a long range Bomber , that can take by surprise an enemy .. switching from peaceful patrol mode ,to a first tactical strike to decapitate a nation leadership. or just take an aircraft carrier.
    IF Russia launch an ICBM across the artic towards United States , that will be an act of war
    will fly over territory of other nations.. a will be a very hostile action..

    While patroling with a Bomber peacefully near US coast in international airspace is not an act
    of war is just "Training". Still it will have a HUGE deterrence potential..will force the leader of any country to run and hide ,if see such high altitude bombers near their nation.  It was Russian missiles in Cuba ,what Forced Americans to remove theirs from Turkey.. So Russia
    needs missiles close to United States. but nothing can't be more closer than a nuclear capable bomber flying close to US capital that they can't intercept ,escort or block from launching a missile.

    Launching an ICBM and not hitting US is like firing a bullet
    towards someone and missing. even if miss (or in case of ICBM if Russia auto destroy it)
    it will be a very hostile aggression and Americans will retaliate in the same way.. So is NOT
    a first strike. sorry dude . you are dead wrong.

    But if Russia have a Long Range bomber near US coast.. with very fast missiles..
    it will cut the distance of the missile by 90 to 98%.. depending how close he goes.
    and it can be done by Surprise.. So instead of the hypersonic ICBM hitting US in ~30 minutes..
    as an ICBM will do , a missile launched from US Coast could do it in 2-3 minutes..!!!! means
    not enough time for anyone to be saved. it will be unlucky any leader if happens to be in a
    conference and Russia knows it.. or in the bathroom.  lol1

    And for the other Idiot..Doesn't matter if the plane is detected by American radars or not.
    if the bomber can't be intercepted or shot it down ,whether because Russia is legally flying
    in International airspace. or whether because they simply don't have missiles to intercept at 50km altitude ready.. then thats a huge problem.  A subsonic stealth bomber could do it..
    but if it is intercepted as it will be ,and always Russian bombers are ,then they will be unable to launch anything ,not even a curse..without their planes being shot down. While having a Mesosphere bomber allows the bombers to hit and run and escape easily..without no NATO planes intercepting it. THiS is a HUGE  HUGE Difference.  And not even armed with nukes
    need.. conventional weapons will also be scary if they used to decapitate a nation leaders.
    and provoke a major coup.

    If an ICBM missile is all that Russia needs then why bother building Long RAnge
    bombers at all..  Rolling Eyes   .  Bombers are needed too.. and the faster they fly than the adversary planes the better ,more chances to survive ,after hit and run.. and if fly in the mesosphere ,
    can penetrate NATO warships formations ,will be totally defenseless. and even a big chance to get very close or even penetrate the airspace of any nation including US. Making it more difficult to intercept Russian bombers is not a bad idea. Is not cheap such planes ,. but again Losing a war is way more expensive. Russia needs to be prepared for a major confrontation with US.. and waiting NATO to hit Russia first is retarded. I don't think Russia will obey their own policy of not being the first... because those bomber patrols across US coast is precisely done to practice a first strike. but they will naturally will have to claim that they will not do it
    officially to confuse Russia enemies.


    If the Russian bomber is faster than NATO planes and fly in a zone their missiles not designed to operate then it can avoid them day and night , and laugh about it. This also can allow Putin
    to travel safely anywhere around the world to avoid hostile NATO interception on their plane.
    and if the mesosphere bomber can be detected by radars or not is IRRELEVANT..
    if US navy have no way to shot down those bombers ,positioning near their aircraft carriers
    formations ,then is a huge security problem for NATO and not for Russia. A mesosphere
    Bomber is the ultimate deterrence.  because it can do a first strike anywhere and bypass
    more easily NATO air defenses ,when combined with powerful counter electronics. and other
    evasion technology. It can be used to take down Ukraine poroshenko , avoid their S-300s easily or any patriots there. and then followed with an organized coup. it can be used to take down
    Erdogan is betray Russia again... and it could be coordinated with an internal coup. So is a real
    game changing weapon ,to build a bomber that can fly very high to stay away of enemy air defenses.


    Last edited by Vann7 on Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:31 am; edited 3 times in total
    avatar
    DasVivo

    Posts : 13
    Points : 15
    Join date : 2015-12-12
    Location : Computer

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  DasVivo on Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:04 am

    I do believe a big advantage of having bombers as part of your Triad is that in situations of 'heightened alert' you can theoretically arm them, place them in around the clock patrols supported if necessary via refueling and thus retain another leg of your triad that just like the SSBN fleet be potentially able to deliver a strike regardless what happens to the home land. Speed in this case likely isn't going to be of any advantage except to burn fuel.

    In this case I'd imagine Range, Payload, Loiter Time and indeed the parameters of the payload itself are probably far more useful than the ability to try and pierce enemy defences with the airframe itself whether thats by speed or stealth.
    All of this ends in the exact same result though, both sides however good their systems will likely be turn into shell of what they once were.

    Ignoring all the above, its obvious that the Russian Government doesn't have the benefit of endless funds to throw around (even if they did decide to ramp up the debt allowed), thus they need to take priorities.
    I'm sure they'd love some magically perfect combination of hypersonic speed, stealth, heavy payload, dog fighting/self defence and transport all built into one but guess what?
    They have to prioritize, and considering the scale of tasks that still lay before them that means compromising which sadly means such wunderwaffe will have to wait as many of the benefits being touted are obviously for one (or more likely many) reason or another not worth the energy expended as decided by those actual experts whom make the requirements (It isn't Putin who is ticking every box on the design briefs)

    YMMV
    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 528
    Points : 532
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Benya on Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:30 am

    Vann7 wrote: Stop pretending you know anything about military tactics,
    you don't know anything.

    Ok Mr. God of War, please tell us mortals how tactics work. Personally I'm all eyes

    It was GArryb who was saying Russia don't need military bases near US..
    that their ICBM can reach any place.  Laughing   what a foolish comments.
    It was GArryb who was arguing with me that Russia nukes guarantee
    no one will attack Russia.  again -->   Laughing     Laughing     Laughing
    Oh no nobody will dare to attack Russia because have nukes..  Rolling Eyes
    And Turkey proved you are dead wrong..

    and now it was Garryb.. that claims that a mesosphere bomber "is not needed"
    because a hypersonic ICBM or fast Cruise missile can achieve the same.   -->  Rolling Eyes


    Horseshit. ICBM warheads (both MIRVs and MaRVs) ARE BETTER than cruise missiles and free falling nukes in EVERY ASPECT.

    Listen amateur...

    Is Garry really an amateur? Then why the hell is he a mod here?

    While patroling with a Bomber peacefully near US coast is not an act of war
    is just "Training". Launching an ICBM and not hitting US is like firing a bullet
    towards someone and missing. even if miss (or in case of ICBM if Russia auto destroy it)
    it will be a very hostile aggression and Americans will retaliate in the same way.. So is NOT
    a first strike. sorry dude . you are dead wrong.

    Would you please tell me how can you fly a strategic aircraft "peacefully" in a heated political situation? If your wonderweapon would somehow manage to get within striking distance to attack Washington DC, US would automatically take it as a first strike, and would start to retaliate

    But if Russia have a Long Range bomber near US coast.. with very fast missiles..
    it will cut the distance of the missile by 90 to 98%.. depending how close he goes.
    and it can be done by Surprise..

    You moron. The shit you are talking about is like aircraft carriers in the high atmosphere.

    Doesn't matter if the plane is detected by American radars or not. if it can't shot it down.
    then thats a huge problem.  A subsonic stealth bomber could do it.. but if it is intercepted as it will be ,and always Russian bombers are ,then they will be unable to launch anything without their planes being shot down. While having a Mesosphere bomber allows the bombers to hit and run easily..without no NATO planes intercepting it. THis is a HUGE Difference.

    Would you please take a look back at previous posts? Garry, Azi, Big_Gazza and I have proved you wrong.

    If an ICBM missile is all that Russia needs then why bother building Long RAnge
    bombers at all..

    Dude, you are mental. Long range bombers like the Tu-95, Tu-160 and the future PAK-DA will have to fulfill conventional pinpoint strike duties too, NONE of them is a dedicated nuclear-capable bomber

    If the bomber is faster than NATO planes and fly in a zone their missiles not designed to
    operate then it can avoid them. whether the radars can see it or not is IRRELEVANT..
    if US navy have no way to shot down those bombers ,positioning near their aircraft carriers
    formations ,then is a huge security problem for NATO and not for Russia.


    A mesosphere Bomber is the ultimate deterrence.

    In your (wet) dreams, maybe.

    So Vann, I hope you are starting to realize that you are alone against four, if not five of us. You should better stop spewing this hypersonic BS all around.

    Vann7

    Posts : 3471
    Points : 3583
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vann7 on Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:33 am

    Benya wrote:
    So Vann, I hope you are starting to realize that you are alone against four, if not five of us. You should better stop spewing this hypersonic BS all around.

    Will not waste my time replying to an ignorant like you.. but you are 100% wrong . in everything  Wink
    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 528
    Points : 532
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Benya on Tue Aug 08, 2017 12:18 pm

    Vann7 wrote:
    Benya wrote:
    So Vann, I hope you are starting to realize that you are alone against four, if not five of us. You should better stop spewing this hypersonic BS all around.

    Will not waste my time replying to an ignorant like you.. but you are 100% wrong . in everything   Wink

    You should, if you think that I'm wrong, please prove it.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1468
    Points : 1493
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  eehnie on Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:29 pm

    Benya wrote:
    Vann7 wrote:
    Benya wrote:
    So Vann, I hope you are starting to realize that you are alone against four, if not five of us. You should better stop spewing this hypersonic BS all around.

    Will not waste my time replying to an ignorant like you.. but you are 100% wrong . in everything   Wink

    You should, if you think that I'm wrong, please prove it.

    This is not how this works. Alone or not you have to prove your own statements. You also have to prove, to justify you are right. The number in every side matters not, gives not the reason. Your comment about the number is totally silly, and is a little bully.


    Last edited by eehnie on Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:57 pm; edited 2 times in total
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1468
    Points : 1493
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  eehnie on Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:35 pm

    There is some link where the Russian Ministery of Defense said that the Tu-PAK-DA will not be supersonic?

    No.
    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 528
    Points : 532
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Benya on Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:06 pm

    eehnie wrote:This is not how this works. Alone or not you have to prove your own statements. You also have to prove, to justify you are right. The number in every side matters not, gives not the reason. Your comment about the number is totally silly, and is a little bully.

    Ok eehnie...

    The thing is that Vann started this whole argument about this mesospheric-hypersonic BS, and Garry have proved him wrong, then came Azi, then Gazza and I. All of us have made statements, and we have backed them up with facts. But so far, Vann still failed to acknowledge our statements, he just went on, and kept pushing his bollocks all along, showing complete ignorance towards us, and started to call us names like "we collectively fail to understand military tactics and strategy", while he wasn't even talking about them, but he was rather started to ramble about some failed Cold War era stuff.

    This wasn't the first case when Vann was like this. In the [b]Strategic Air Defenses S-300/S-400/S-500 thread, he said that: "Why does Russia invests this much into AD missiles, and why doesn't invests more to directed energy weapons, lasers and stuff..."

    Then came the artillery thread where we have gotten ourselves into a heated argument when Vann said that Russia needs a 300km surface to surface missile to close the gap between the Iskander and guided Smerch missiles. Russia has zero need to have such rockets.

    Oh, and should I mention that every single time he posts something to the Syrian War threads, he constantly whines about how things would escalate and that WW3 is around the corner.

    And the absolute worst is the Russian-made Crash Notifications thread, in which whenever a Russian plane crashes, he starts "bleating" like a little girl (as Garry would say), and then provides no facts to back up his claims.

    This guy is just absolutely cocky and ignorant, plus he thinks that he knows everything better than everyone, when it comes to military tactics and strategy.

    I personally lost all hopes to have a civilized discussion with him.

    And then you come to his rescue? Good Lord...

    T-47

    Posts : 207
    Points : 211
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  T-47 on Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:09 pm

    Ugh sad to see Vann doesn't want to reply anymore. It was real amusement to read his comments Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy

    But at least see the positive of his arguments. He didn't demand a Star Destroyer where Darth Vann is standing with his lipstick sabre and pink cape! He can always have all the first to last strikes on US like that. lol1 lol1 lol1
    avatar
    Benya

    Posts : 528
    Points : 532
    Join date : 2016-06-05
    Location : Budapest, Hungary

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Benya on Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:31 pm

    T-47 wrote:Ugh sad to see Vann doesn't want to reply anymore. It was real amusement to read his comments Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy

    But at least see the positive of his arguments. He didn't demand a Star Destroyer where Darth Vann is standing with his lipstick sabre and pink cape! He can always have all the first to last strikes on US like that. lol1 lol1 lol1

    Indeed, but I'm sure that he is thinking about equipping Russia with Venator- (oh wait, why not call them Vannator) class star destroyers. Laughing Laughing Laughing
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Militarov on Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:34 pm

    eehnie wrote:There is some link where the Russian Ministery of Defense said that the Tu-PAK-DA will not be supersonic?

    No.

    Suspect

    No? Bondarev himself said it will be flying wing... now.. unless you know something we do not about aerodynamics and physics it will be subsonic.

    "Выбор военных пал на дозвуковой самолет с широким применением технологий малозаметности. Новый стратегический бомбардировщик-ракетоносец будет построен по схеме «летающего крыла» и в силу особенностей данной конструкции не сможет преодолевать звуковой барьер."
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1468
    Points : 1493
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  eehnie on Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:23 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:There is some link where the Russian Ministery of Defense said that the Tu-PAK-DA will not be supersonic?

    No.

    Suspect

    No? Bondarev himself said it will be flying wing... now.. unless you know something we do not about aerodynamics and physics it will be subsonic.

    "Выбор военных пал на дозвуковой самолет с широким применением технологий малозаметности. Новый стратегический бомбардировщик-ракетоносец будет построен по схеме «летающего крыла» и в силу особенностей данной конструкции не сможет преодолевать звуковой барьер."

    Put the link to justify your words. These are your words not the words of Bondarev.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16536
    Points : 17144
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:17 am

    It was GArryb who was saying Russia don't need military bases near US..
    that their ICBM can reach any place. Laughing what a foolish comments.

    If Russia needed military bases near the US it could easily have them right now. I very much doubt Cuba would object to Russia building a port or an airfield or both in their country... but what would be the point of that?

    Such a small force would be of no use in WWIII and during peacetime what good would they do?

    It was GArryb who was arguing with me that Russia nukes guarantee
    no one will attack Russia. again --

    I obviously meant not invade or take territory from.

    Oh no nobody will dare to attack Russia because have nukes.. Rolling Eyes
    And Turkey proved you are dead wrong..

    Don't be such a dick head... more than 12 carrier battle groups doesn't prevent US aircraft from being shot down... WTF difference would a few fast fucking bombers make?

    Turkey in a cowardly attack shot down a Russian light bomber that was on a mission killing terrorists. A bit like going to the scene of a fire to shoot firemen in the back.

    They have since apologised for their actions and are now cooperating in fighting fires with Russia.

    Do you think your plan of immediately shooting down a turkish plane would be a better solution?

    Listen amateur , No mater how much range and ICBM have,no matter how fast..
    it will NEVER REPLACE

    Listen moron there is nothing to replace because hypersonic bombers don't exist.

    The amount of money needed to actually get a bomber sized aircraft to fly at mach 5 or more would bankrupt the US let alone Russia... it just is not going to happen.

    A subsonic bomber that is stealthy and hard to spot except at very close range that could fly at high altitude until it gets to Canada and then can drop down below the radar height and fly a bit further into troll territory before launching a cruise missile attack on the home of apple pie is going to be much cheaper and still get the job done.

    During peace time they will be able to use it to cheaply bomb other countries like the Tu-22M3 has been doing except without having to land anywhere.

    The PAK DA will be a subsonic flying wing. It wont be a B-2.

    A B-2 is a subsonic flying wing designed to deliver bombs on point targets deep in enemy territory, but was never designed for large internal loads of weapons.

    The PAK DA will be a theatre bomber with a heavy bomb load, and a strategic cruise missile carrier with long range and hypersonic cruise missiles...

    in any way,shape ,or form the importance of having a long range Bomber , that can take by surprise an enemy .. switching from peaceful patrol mode ,to a first tactical strike to decapitate a nation leadership. or just take an aircraft carrier.

    No Russian hypersonic bomber flying down the US coastline will be ignored... the US will go on high alert until it is well away from US soil.

    there would be no surprise possible even if it could do what you suggest... and as pointed out by others it will be a 30 minute plane with very short range and no ability to loiter.

    Put the link to justify your words. These are your words not the words of Bondarev.

    Yes Mil... you must post a link because otherwise what you suggest could not possibly be true... I mean we cannot accept that people from a military forum interested in Russian stuff could not possibly be trusted to listen an understand press releases from the Russian military...

    I mean obviously I would prefer something slightly more ambitious like a super cruising tailed flying wing design, just to be a little more different, but we know it wont be a hypersonic messy bomber... the point of the PAK DA is to offer a selection of options... WTF is the point of making a mach 2 bomber in the Tu-160M2 and then a hypersonic bomber out of the PAK DA?

    When you design something for a job it needs to meet certain criteria... in the case of a strategic bomber it was the ability to carry a nuclear weapon strategic distances. The faster you carry it the more fuel you will burn so the faster you want to fly the bigger and heavier your plane becomes... and guess what... bigger heavier planes need more engine power to get them airborne and moving which burns even more fuel.

    What I tried to convey with my examples of cars and car engines that clearly went completely over your head is that if speed is everything then everything has to take second place to the engine... the result will be good for speed records but no good for touring.

    Of course the PAK DA will be a safe effective subsonic flying wing that unlike the B-2 will be economical to operate and might even come with wing surface radar leading to a flying wing based AWACS aircraft... being all wing it could cruise for long periods at subsonic speeds for days on the amount of fuel it could carry...

    Equally an inflight refuelling tanker version would also be handy too... just for strategic aviation.


    _________________
    “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
    GarryB

    Posts : 16536
    Points : 17144
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:25 am

    Actually that discussion made me wonder about the potential armament of the PAK DA and it made me think that perhaps a useful idea would be a row of single tubes for the UKSK vertical launch system from the centre of the fuselage out to the tips of the wings... sure that will make the wings thick but it means that there would probably be about 24-36 launch tubes for missiles ready to use... for theatre missions you might put dumb bombs in them as well as guided missiles, whereas for a strategic mission you could load 16 tubes with fuel to extend flight range and use the remaining 8-20 tubes for long range missiles like Zircon or Calibr etc etc.

    The U in UKSK does stand for universal...

    Of course in addition to 360 degree radar antenna it will likely also have internal missile bays for AAMs for self defence too.


    _________________
    “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
    eehnie

    Posts : 1468
    Points : 1493
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  eehnie on Wed Aug 09, 2017 2:34 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Put the link to justify your words. These are your words not the words of Bondarev.

    Yes Mil... you must post a link because otherwise what you suggest could not possibly be true... I mean we cannot accept that people from a military forum interested in Russian stuff could not possibly be trusted to listen an understand press releases from the Russian military...

    I mean obviously I would prefer something slightly more ambitious like a super cruising tailed flying wing design, just to be a little more different, but we know it wont be a hypersonic messy bomber... the point of the PAK DA is to offer a selection of options... WTF is the point of making a mach 2 bomber in the Tu-160M2 and then a hypersonic bomber out of the PAK DA?

    When you design something for a job it needs to meet certain criteria... in the case of a strategic bomber it was the ability to carry a nuclear weapon strategic distances. The faster you carry it the more fuel you will burn so the faster you want to fly the bigger and heavier your plane becomes... and guess what... bigger heavier planes need more engine power to get them airborne and moving which burns even more fuel.

    What I tried to convey with my examples of cars and car engines that clearly went completely over your head is that if speed is everything then everything has to take second place to the engine... the result will be good for speed records but no good for touring.

    Of course the PAK DA will be a safe effective subsonic flying wing that unlike the B-2 will be economical to operate and might even come with wing surface radar leading to a flying wing based AWACS aircraft... being all wing it could cruise for long periods at subsonic speeds for days on the amount of fuel it could carry...

    Equally an inflight refuelling tanker version would also be handy too... just for strategic aviation.

    Also these are your own words GarryB. It is as difficult to find a link where the Russian Ministery of Defense says the Tu-PAK-DA will not be supersonic? It is as difficult to find a link where the Russian Ministery of Defense says the Tu-PAK-DA will underperform the features of the Tu-160 in something, and more concretely in a key feature like the speed?

    Yes, it is very difficult. In fact there is not link that say it. There is not link official link form the ministery of defense that confirms the opinion of those who deny supersonic speed for the Tu-PAK-DA.

    A recent example of official link:

    http://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/vks/news/more.htm?id=12120918@egNews

    According to Y Borisov, the Tu-PAK-DA will replace the Tu-95. Also from the new. This aircraft [Tu-PAK-DA] is planned in the State Armament Program 2018-2025. This is official.

    The comments about the Tu-PAK-DA being not supersonic instead are your opinions and/or your wishes.

    JohninMK

    Posts : 5069
    Points : 5132
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  JohninMK on Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:16 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    Also these are your own words GarryB. It is as difficult to find a link where the Russian Ministery of Defense says the Tu-PAK-DA will not be supersonic? It is as difficult to find a link where the Russian Ministery of Defense says the Tu-PAK-DA will underperform the features of the Tu-160 in something, and more concretely in a key feature like the speed?

    Yes, it is very difficult. In fact there is not link that say it. There is not link official link form the ministery of defense that confirms the opinion of those who deny supersonic speed for the Tu-PAK-DA.

    A recent example of official link:

    http://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/vks/news/more.htm?id=12120918@egNews

    According to Y Borisov, the Tu-PAK-DA will replace the Tu-95. Also from the new. This aircraft [Tu-PAK-DA] is planned in the State Armament Program 2018-2025. This is official.

    The comments about the Tu-PAK-DA being not supersonic instead are your opinions and/or your wishes.
    I am not sure if it is way that you have explained it but in your quote it says

    "the Tu-PAK-DA will replace the Tu-95"

    since the Tu-95 is subsonic that surely is an official indication that the PAK-DA will be the same as if it was going to be supersonic then he would have quoted the Tu-160?

    T-47

    Posts : 207
    Points : 211
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  T-47 on Wed Aug 09, 2017 6:26 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    Also these are your own words GarryB. It is as difficult to find a link where the Russian Ministery of Defense says the Tu-PAK-DA will not be supersonic? It is as difficult to find a link where the Russian Ministery of Defense says the Tu-PAK-DA will underperform the features of the Tu-160 in something, and more concretely in a key feature like the speed?

    Yes, it is very difficult. In fact there is not link that say it. There is not link official link form the ministery of defense that confirms the opinion of those who deny supersonic speed for the Tu-PAK-DA.

    A recent example of official link:

    http://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/vks/news/more.htm?id=12120918@egNews

    According to Y Borisov, the Tu-PAK-DA will replace the Tu-95. Also from the new. This aircraft [Tu-PAK-DA] is planned in the State Armament Program 2018-2025. This is official.

    The comments about the Tu-PAK-DA being not supersonic instead are your opinions and/or your wishes.

    PAK DA is supersonic which also not official either. Rogozin once said about hypersonic but I've never heard about being just "supersonic". Also I don't think its just GarryBs own words/opinion/wishes. Its been in media since 2013 that PAK DA is going to be flying wing, stealth and subsonic.

    For example:
    https://lenta.ru/news/2013/03/04/fifth/

    The supersonic job is for Tu-160M2.

    Sponsored content

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:05 am