Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Tu-22M3: News

    Share

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9451
    Points : 9943
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  George1 on Sun Jan 08, 2012 12:36 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    The third role is as a level bomber with a large conventional payload of dumb bombs.

    Tu-22 can carry other standoff missiles like Kh-59 for example?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:06 pm

    The standard Tu22M3 can only carry a very limited range of missiles, some of which are likely no longer in service.

    AFAIK they could carry the Kh-22M, the upgraded replacement of the Kh-22M(Kh-32), and the Kh-15 as guided weapons.

    Note the photo at the top of this page showing 6 x Kh-15s on the internal rotary launcher, and two large Kh-22M missiles under the wing hard points.

    Western experts like Carlos Kopp suggest the aircraft can carry other weapons like Oniks and long range cruise missiles, and it probably can operate Kh-55SM, and Kh-555, and likely now Kh-101 all externally, but I have only ever seen photos of the aircraft carrying Kh-15s and Kh-22Ms. (Kh-32s are externally identical to the Kh-22Ms so I am assuming that any recent shots of Kh-22Ms are actually Kh-32s.)

    The talk about weapons upgrades has not led to any photos of Kh-59s or Kh-31s or other guided missile types being seen on any of the three aircraft, so for the moment I suspect the upgrade will include a CCIP system for bombing in free flight... which increases bombing accuracy from near zero for point targets to over 80%, and will also add laser, TV, and satellite guided bombs to their inventories.

    This is incredibly useful for the Tu-22M3 as it can carry more 250kg (500lb) bombs than a B-52 in its short range loadout. (according to Kopp)

    If they were satellite guided then that means a huge number of point targets hit per mission at low cost... it would have been invaluable to Soviet forces in Afghanistan as an all weather day and night strike and support capability.

    The Tu-160s were upgraded as they were built so each aircraft is slightly different to the next so an upgrade to get them all the same is important, but it will also add conventional all weather strike, so the question is... do they need Tu-22M3s and Tu-160s?

    (When Tu-160s and Tu-95s were strategic only then a threatre bomber was needed).

    I would think having both is best... especially if you could modify them to carry the same engine and systems, because the numbers will reduce costs, but at the end of the day I am sure their preferred option would be to produce another two dozen Tu-160s and have a fleet of about 45 of them and get rid of the Tu-22M3s.

    The problem there is that the factory that made the huge aluminium castings for the centre box beam structure for the swing wing design is in the Ukraine... and in ruins.

    So with no more Tu-160s that means Tu-22M3s are worth keeping, but a unification of systems and parts and engines in my opinion will cost money now but save money in the future and offer the best capability.

    All reports talking about the upgrades for the aircraft mention new weapons, but are never specific.

    All three aircraft have the payload capacity to carry the father of all bombs, and guided and unguided versions of all the bombs in the Russian arsenal, which would make them quite formidable in service.


    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9451
    Points : 9943
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  George1 on Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:24 pm

    Well 6 Kh-59 standoff missiles on the MKU-6-1 rotary launcher in its bomb bay, plus 4 missiles on two underwing pylons would be a sufficient payload.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jan 08, 2012 9:59 pm

    I don't know if the Kh-59 (AS-13) is in production.

    It has largely been replaced in service by the Kh-59M (AS-18) though the numbers have not been large till recently when they started spending money on guided missiles and bombs.

    AFAIK the small jet engine under the Kh-59 in fixed which would make it incompatible with the internal rotary launcher of the Tu-22M3.

    The Tu-22M3 is a large target so I personally would want a weapon of greater standoff range... I would think Kh-555s would make more sense, with its 3,500km range it would make the Backfire semi-strategic in performance.

    The Su-34 can reportedly carry three Kh-59Ms with the two inner wing pylons carrying one missile each, while the other missile is carried on the front centreline pylon and the rear centreline pylon is fitted with the datalink pod needed to use the Kh-59M.

    3,500km is a long range for the Kh-555, so their might be shorter models that could fit in the Tu-22M3s weapon bay (as well as the Tu=95s internal weapon bay) that would be better options than the Kh-59M.

    The Kh-38 will likely be compatible with the Backfire, and their might be a few other weapon types that will also fit because they have been designed for newer stealthier platforms for internal carriage (ie like several versions of the Kh-31 and Kh-58 (AS-17 and AS-11) shown with the SKATE and PAK FA stealth aircraft.)

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9451
    Points : 9943
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  George1 on Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:20 am

    Air launched P-800 Oniks, could be a replacement for Kh-22 missiles?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:46 am

    Could be, but has not been seen on Backfires.

    The Kh-22M uses Inhibited Red Fuming Nitric Acid (IRFNA) to be mixed with hydrazine fuel which are nasty liquid chemicals that were awful to work with.

    If the Kh-32 has solid fuel or long term storable liquid propellents that don't need to be loaded into the missile before loading it onto the aircraft it will be a great step forward.

    An air launched Oniks would be interesting too, but as far as I know the Kh-32 doubled the range of the Kh-22M and increased the speed to mach 4.5.

    If this is true then the Oniks will be hard pressed to match that.

    When Oniks II comes out with its ramjet engine replaced with a scramjet engine then it would certainly make sense to adopt those over the Kh-32.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9451
    Points : 9943
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  George1 on Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:55 am

    Nice but i have a wonder. Kh-32 actually exists?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:18 pm

    It exists, but it is externally identical to the Kh-22M.

    I think I remember reading the Kh-22M has been withdrawn from service because of the dangerous fuelling process before takeoff, so any modern photos of Backfires carrying what appear to be Kh-22Ms should be Kh-32s.

    But obviously considering this situation it is hard to say.

    One could say that there is a new Tu22M5 that looks exactly the same as the Tu-22M3 but has all new internal equipment but double the range and speed and is much better. How could you prove it one way or the other?

    Equally how could you disprove it?

    The Kh-32 is not brand new, but the fact that it is not mentioned much could mean it is dead, but why would Tu-22M3s still carry Kh-22M missiles?

    If it met the requirements what killed the Kh-32? Or is it the case that it has entered service and is not proving a problem so they don't have anything to talk about.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9451
    Points : 9943
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  George1 on Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:27 pm

    GarryB wrote:It exists, but it is externally identical to the Kh-22M.

    I think I remember reading the Kh-22M has been withdrawn from service because of the dangerous fuelling process before takeoff, so any modern photos of Backfires carrying what appear to be Kh-22Ms should be Kh-32s.

    But obviously considering this situation it is hard to say.

    One could say that there is a new Tu22M5 that looks exactly the same as the Tu-22M3 but has all new internal equipment but double the range and speed and is much better. How could you prove it one way or the other?

    Equally how could you disprove it?

    The Kh-32 is not brand new, but the fact that it is not mentioned much could mean it is dead, but why would Tu-22M3s still carry Kh-22M missiles?

    If it met the requirements what killed the Kh-32? Or is it the case that it has entered service and is not proving a problem so they don't have anything to talk about.

    Kh-32 has also anti-radiation variant?

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  TR1 on Mon Jan 23, 2012 7:12 pm

    Kh-32 certainly exists, as does Vulkan, both of them have been constantly questioned by the non-believers though because of external similarities.

    While an anti-radiation variant would be very likely, the relevant question is do RuAF units actually operate it. All recent pics I have seen (rusplanes.net) do not seem to show it.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9451
    Points : 9943
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  George1 on Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:14 pm

    Then we must wait until the next war, to be assured for the existence of some weapons. Smile

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:12 am

    They will have developed the Kh-32 for the same roles as the Kh-22M so an anti radiation model is certain.

    I would expect there will be a nuke armed model that flys to a coordinate and detonates a large nuke warhead to hit targets operating in an area that are hard to pin down.

    This missile is also used against entire carrier groups.

    There will be an anti radiation model for use against large SAMs like Patriot, Nike, and now THAAD, these were also anticipated to be used passively against enemy ships with their radars operating and would be fired in a second wave of missiles against a carrier group that was now alerted and with radars operating.

    And the other model of the Kh-22M that will likely have a Kh-32 model is the active radar homing type that was used against ships or large targets like buildings or dams or bridges etc.

    The missile designed to fly to a specific coordinate and then explode was nuke only as the inaccuracy meant a conventional warhead was pointless.

    The other missiles came with nuke or conventional warheads.

    It all depends on when the Kh-22Ms were withdrawn... if they were withdrawn in the 1990s then any recent photo of a Tu-22M3 carrying what appears to be a Kh-22M will actually be a Kh-32.

    I rather suspect they got rid of the Kh-22M rapidly with the low flying hours of the aircraft and availability of a replacement that presumably uses storable liquid propellents that can be kept in the missile for its operational life will be much safer in terms of handling and operation.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  TR1 on Thu Jan 26, 2012 6:59 pm

    http://russianplanes.net/images/to65000/064335.jpg

    2012, Tu-22M fueled up and armed Smile.

    I suspect those are Kh-22s though. For some nagging reason.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:04 am

    That is a pretty clear picture, and if you are sure of the date then all we need to find out is if the Kh-22Ms have been officially withdrawn from service... which I thought they were because of the problems with fuel handling as they need to be fueled up before takeoff.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Austin on Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:37 pm

    Could be the newer Kh-32 they look identical to the Kh-22 but with much greater capability.

    I had updated wiki on Kh-32 based on information available from the new book Russian Strategic Aviation from Yefim Gordon , check the Kh-32 link and the details

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-22

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9451
    Points : 9943
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Russia to Modernize 30 Tu-22M3 Bombers by 2020

    Post  George1 on Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:02 pm

    http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120131/171049406.html

    About 30 Tu-22M3 strategic bombers from Russia's Long Range Aviation fleet will be modernized by 2020, Russian Air Force spokesman Col. Vladimir Drik said on Tuesday.
    "We plan to upgrade about 30 strategic bombers to the M3M standard,” Drik said.

    Tu-22M3 (NATO reporting name Backfire-C) is a supersonic, swing-wing, long-range strategic bomber that Russia uses mainly to patrol the skies over its southern borders, Central Asia and the Black Sea region.

    The Tu-22M3 has a flight range of 6,800 km (4,300 miles) and can carry a 24,000 kg (52,910 lb) payload, including nuclear bombs and cruise missiles fitted with nuclear or conventional warheads. Aircraft of the M3M standard can be equipped with a wider range of weapons.

    As of 2008, the Russian Air Force had at least 141 Tu-22M3 bombers in service.

    Maj. Gen. Anatoly Zhikharev, commander of Long Range Aviation, earlier said that Russia's strategic aviation fleet will undergo extensive modernization while Russia’s next generation strategic bomber, the PAK DA, is being developed by the Tupolev Design Bureau.

    He said the modernized aircraft will be equipped with new equipment, communications systems, cockpits and avionics.


    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  TR1 on Tue Jan 31, 2012 7:21 pm

    Hmmm. I wonder if this is a Tupolev upgrade, or the Gefest&T one (essentially a sized up modernization from their Su-24M2.)

    Vladimir79
    Grand Marshal
    Grand Marshal

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 3099
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Only 30 Tu-22M3 bombers to be upgraded

    Post  Vladimir79 on Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:40 am

    Long-range aviation of the Russian Federation until 2020, about thirty upgrade the Tu-22M3

    MOSCOW, January 31 - RIA Novosti. About 30 long-range bombers Tu-22M3 long-range aviation will be upgraded to 2020, told reporters Tuesday the official representative of the Russian Defense Ministry on Air Force Col. Vladimir Drik.
    "By 2020, plans for long-range aircraft to modernize the order of 30 long-range bombers to modify M3M" - he said.

    Earlier, the commander-range aviation Maj. Gen. Anatoly Zhikharev said that range aircraft will be held in-depth modernization, while developing a new aircraft PAK DA (prospective aviation complex long-distance). In the process of modernization of the aircraft will receive new equipment, communications equipment, new cockpit and avionics.

    According to the drk, now in the middle of combat employment and retraining of flight personnel long-range aviation in Ryazan young pilots are preparing to take the theory they have to go through training on simulators and perform flights on Tu-22M3 and Tu-95MS. Pilots are also trained to manage the upgraded aircraft - the Tu-22M3M. Version of the Tu-22M3 it distinguishes extension of the means of destruction.

    Long-range aircraft is operational-strategic union of the Armed Forces, strategic reserve of the Supreme Command, and a component of the strategic nuclear forces. One of its main tasks is to defeat the enemy military targets at a distance of several thousand kilometers from home, as well as keeping operational and strategic aerial reconnaissance. Currently, the new organizational structure of long-range aviation is composed of two air bases for the first category, consisting of air and of the direct subordination, aviation commandant's office and other parts of the software.

    The basis of long-range aviation are strategic missile carriers Tu-160 Blackjack and Tu-95MS bombers, long-range missile, the Tu-22M3 bombers, refueling tankers and Il-78 reconnaissance aircraft TU-22MR.

    http://news.mail.ru/politics/7963608/

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 01, 2012 2:56 am

    I can understand not wanting to waste a lot of money on upgraded old stuff to save money for buying brand new stuff, but only upgrading 30 Backfires sounds like they don't intend to use it much...

    I was hoping they would do to the existing bombers what they have been doing to the Su-35 in that they are using the older generation as a test platform for the new stuff.

    Obviously he old planes will not equal the new designs, but certainly a new engine in the 30-35 ton thrust class developed for the PAK DA could have its early versions designed to fit the Backfire and the Blackjack, as that will remove two different engines from the inventory while at the same time aide development of the PAK DA and improve the flight performance of the existing jets and help reduce the price of the engines through serial production.

    The Blackjack uses four engines but because there are only about 15 of them that means there are only 60 engines while the 140 odd Tu-22M3s with two engines per aircraft have 280 engines.

    Instead of having to support 60 engines in service and 280 different engines in service and x number of new engines for the PAK DA, they could unify the design and produce 340 engines for existing types.

    Lets face it they will likely build only about 40-60 PAK DA bomber aircraft to replace the Bears and perhaps keep the Blackjacks in service for a while.

    Personally I would like to see the PAK DA being a flying wing design with a tail with no vertical tail structure. This would minimise RCS but allow supersonic flight speeds, and I would design the aircraft to supercuise at mach 1.6 or so for 14-18,000km with a 10 ton strategic payload and perhaps 4-6,000km with a theatre payload of maybe 50-60 tons.

    It wouldn't need to be super stealthy as by the time bombers get to launch positions the ICBMs and SLBMs have already done their jobs.

    Of course 30 is better upgraded than none.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Austin on Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:36 pm

    Russian Strategic Bomber Conducts High-Accuracy Simulated Attack

    http://en.rian.ru/video/20120203/171118298.html

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Austin on Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:44 pm

    From what i read the 30 Tu-22M3M will be deep upgrade which will allow them to carry the newest Stand Off Weapons ( X-555/X-101 )and improve Avionics/EW/ECM and Communication suite besides the cockpit.These will allow them to carry all the latest conventional weapons

    They have some 100-130 Tu-22M3 even though these may not be upgraded fully but basic stuff like GLONASS Navigation will improve their navigation and will allow them to use JDAM type weapons besides the other contentional weapon they currently use ....not to mention their Nuclear role.

    So 120 Su-34 , Upgraded Su-24 and upgraded 30 Tu-22M3 will most likely form the basis of conventional spearhead , the rest non-upgraded Su-24 and Tu-22M3 still retain the Nuclear role and Conventional role but cannot carry all newest conventional weapon.

    Besides that all Tu-160 and Tu-95 will be deeply upgraded to allow them to carry all latest conventional weapon and cruise missile ( X-555/101 ) besides their nuclear role.

    Its probably good enough for the next 15 years for Tactical/Sub-Strategic and Strategic Conventional and Nuclear bombing till such time the PAK-DA enters service.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Feb 04, 2012 3:56 am

    The video you posted shows they have one Tu22M3M bomber with upgrades.

    To put this in perspective previously the role of the Su-24 was to hit point targets in any weather like bridges or arms depots or oil or fuel supplies or power stations etc etc.

    The role of the Tu-22M3 was as a dumb carpet bomber (as used in Afghanistan) in which role it is actually able to carry more 250kg bombs than a USAF B-52, but the accuracy is pathetic and only area targets or targets whose precise location is not known.

    In other words cover the mountains of Afghanistan in lots of bombs because you know there are bandits there but not sure exactly where then call in Tu-22M3. If you know where the base is then Su-24 is used with much more accuracy... Su-24M even more so.

    The primary function of the Tu-22M3 was to carry large and heavy missiles (Kh-22M) for use against strategic radar and major SAM sites on land and at sea similar missiles for an anti ship mission.

    For a short period in the 1980s they deployed Kh-15 high supersonic missiles, of which 10 could be carried (4 externally and 6 in the internal rotary bomb bay) which came in an anti radiation model with a tactical nuclear warhead for DEAD (Destruction of Enemy Air Defences) in a nuclear attack.
    There were suggestions of an anti ship model but no evidence to support its existence.

    With the addition of TV and laser and satellite guided bombs this opens a huge opportunity for the Backfire as it is large enough to carry a wide variety of weapon weights and types.

    A 24 ton payload gives it real combat persistence, while guided munitions along with wing kits to allow for standoff release of gliding bombs makes them even more interesting, and the accuracy would have seriously positive effects on its ability to operate over a mission area and supply direct and powerful and accurate support.

    Part of the new upgrade might include things like a CCIP computer or continuously calculated impact point computer so bombs can be released in free flight with a floating aimpoint in the bomb aimers sight so when the aimpoint covers the target you press the button and release the (dumb) bomb aimed specifically for that particular target with a good chance of getting a hit.

    Personally I would like to see 30 bombers upgraded to Tu-22M3M level plus 40-50 upgraded to a Tu-22MRM, or upgraded recon model, and a further 20-30 upgraded jammer models with larger more powerful equipment of a similar type to that being developed for the Su-34 and Su-35.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9451
    Points : 9943
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  George1 on Sat Feb 04, 2012 10:42 pm

    What about standoff missiles like new Kh-59MK2?

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Sun Feb 05, 2012 1:17 am


    George1 wrote:What about standoff missiles like new Kh-59MK2?

    Question Question George for what reason at world Russian Air Force should procure for itself the downgraded export version of its missile -the Kh-59MK2 with range limited within the limits of MTCR - when it has the domestical ,vastly superior, version of this same missile ?
    George ,if you allow me to provide a little piece of advice, when you see the letter "K" in a russian weapon denomination don't put never this same weapon in any discussions about Russian Armed Forces, Wink


    The primary function of the Tu-22M3 was to carry large and heavy missiles (Kh-22M) for use against strategic radar and major SAM sites on land and at sea similar missiles for an anti ship mission.

    Yes GarryB, but SEAD/DEAD missions ,for the land attack version of Kh-22 (in particular since beginnig of '80 years) was a very secondary role, like you well know the ,by far, most numerous land attack version of Kh-22 was the Kh-22MPSI with a 350 Kt warhead and a purpopsely designed dead reckoning system and preselected range detonator for optimise nuclear airbust detonation at several hundreds meters of altitude; this devastating weaopon with a range in excess of 550 Km when delivered by TU-22M at supersonic speed, was conceived ,clearly, for employment against large area fixed land targets full of "soft" targets (in particular Nato's C4, logistic resupply line and main airfields).
    Soviets had always stimed NATO air defence network very,very,very poor and among the less dangerous menaces for theirs large scale offensive operation in Europe ; on the other hand, them had foreseen (at rerason...) that NATO ,being completely unable to manage the crushing conventional superiority of Soviet Forces in the continental theatre would have resorted to the employment of tactical nuclear weapons , theirs primary objective was therefore to quickly and efficiently neutralize all the "allowing" segments of NATO's strategic asset (like C4 , radar stations and ,above all, airfields ) positioned far from the closing menace of the advancing Soviet ground Forces ,employing extensively both balistic missiles,such as the RSD-10 Pioneer, and air delivered wide stand-off cruise missiles , such as Kh-22MPSI.


    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9451
    Points : 9943
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  George1 on Sun Feb 05, 2012 1:42 am

    Mindstorm wrote:
    George1 wrote:What about standoff missiles like new Kh-59MK2?

    Question Question George for what reason at world Russian Air Force should procure for itself the downgraded export version of its missile -the Kh-59MK2 with range limited within the limits of MTCR - when it has the domestical ,vastly superior, version of this same missile ?
    George ,if you allow me to provide a little piece of advice, when you see the letter "K" in a russian weapon denomination don't put never this same weapon in any discussions about Russian Armed Forces, Wink


    Which is the domestic version of this missile?

    Sponsored content

    Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 4:06 am


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 10, 2016 4:06 am