Tu-95MS "Bear"

Ok guys, i have been wondering if it's true that the Tu-95MSM can only launch 8 missiles, since the MSM is an upgrade from the MS-16 there would be no reason to remove the rotary launcher, yet i haven't found a source that could confirm this, they all mention the the 8 under-wing pylons, but no mention of whether the rotary launcher are still there, so can anyone clarify this issue?

AlfaT8 wrote:Ok guys, i have been wondering if it's true that the Tu-95MSM can only launch 8 missiles, since the MSM is an upgrade from the MS-16 there would be no reason to remove the rotary launcher, yet i haven't found a source that could confirm this, they all mention the the 8 under-wing pylons, but no mention of whether the rotary launcher are still there, so can anyone clarify this issue?

Rotary launcher is still there.

franco wrote:

Militarov wrote:

AlfaT8 wrote:Ok guys, i have been wondering if it's true that the Tu-95MSM can only launch 8 missiles, since the MSM is an upgrade from the MS-16 there would be no reason to remove the rotary launcher, yet i haven't found a source that could confirm this, they all mention the the 8 under-wing pylons, but no mention of whether the rotary launcher are still there, so can anyone clarify this issue?

Rotary launcher is still there.

Have been wondering the same thing, the rotary launcher is still there but can it mount the new Kh101/102 as they are 1.4 meters longer then the Kh-55.

Well, it is still there, but it might be kept to use KH-55 rather than KH-101. But that is just my personal belief.

So they use KH-101/2 on external rackets and rotary launcher for KH-55.

By shear coincidence we have this video and writeup

https://southfront.org/russias-tu-95ms-bear-strategic-bomber-and-missile-carrier/

JohninMK wrote:By shear coincidence we have this video and writeup

https://southfront.org/russias-tu-95ms-bear-strategic-bomber-and-missile-carrier/

Not a coincidence, i brought up this question up after noticing this issue in there report, i have yet to find a source that can clarify.

franco wrote:

AlfaT8 wrote:

JohninMK wrote:By shear coincidence we have this video and writeup

https://southfront.org/russias-tu-95ms-bear-strategic-bomber-and-missile-carrier/

Not a coincidence, i brought up this question up after noticing this issue in there report, i have yet to find a source that can clarify.

Did you read my link.

Woow, totally missed it, my bad.

A bear with a 'friend'

JohninMK wrote:A bear with a 'friend'

Yes, come closer, let me scan every detail, muhahaha.

JohninMK wrote:A bear with a 'friend'

With those drop tanks..no need to scan much

Won't be long before we see a bulge on the F-22 intakes ala F-18/15/16 mods.

New capabilities of Tu-95MS with control systems from "Gefest"



In another article by Alexei Ramm and Dmitry Litovkin, from today's issue of Izvestia you can find interesting material about the modernization of the Tu-95MS - the Bears will see the targets behind the enemy's rear. Russian strategic missile carriers are connected to a unique network-centric control system. "

Russian strategic missile carriers Tu-95MS will be able to receive real-time coordinates of targets and immediately destroy them with a missile attack. Such an opportunity will be provided by the installation of a special computing subsystem of the SVP, developed and manufactured by Hephaestus and T. At present, the coordinates of the targets are laid in the memory of missiles at the airfield before the missile carrier ascends into the air. According to experts, the new system seriously increases the capabilities of Russian combat aviation to find and destroy targets in real time.

The principle of the new system is quite simple. Servicemen on the ground with the help of a special terminal transmit the coordinates of the target to the aircraft. The onboard system of the SVP calculates all the parameters and puts the flight task into the head of the missile guidance. And the crew of the "Bear" can only run it.

As "Izvestia" was told to the Defense Ministry, until recently the project of equipping the fleet of Tu-95MS with the SVP system was implemented by initiative of the company "Gefest and T". But now these works are included in the long-term plan for the development of Russian long-range aviation.

In the company "Gefest and T" Izvestia confirmed that the work on equipping the Tu-95MS with the SVP system is underway. But they refrained from further comment.

At present, the Russian SV-24M front-line bombers, Su-33 deck fighters, and the Tu-22M3 long-range bombers are equipped with a special computing subsystem of the SVP. In the troops, the updated planes are called "ogefeshennye". They showed a unique efficiency during the operation of the Russian Air and Space Forces in Syria.

Thanks to the SVP, planes hit terrorist targets with conventional unguided bombs with precision not inferior to controlled airborne weapons. On the ground targets for bombers and fighters are found in the Special Operations Forces. On the electronic map, the soldiers indicate the point to be hit, as well as the target parameters. Then the information is transferred to the aircraft.

According to independent military expert Anton Lavrov, SVP is often considered an ordinary sight. But in fact it is network-centric (when all participants are integrated into a single information system) an automated control system. In the SVP in real time, there is a continuous exchange of information between ground forces and aviation.

"Currently, Russian military aerial reconnaissance vehicles use cruise missiles only on previously detected targets," said Anton Lavrov. - The SVP seriously increases the capabilities of Russian combat aviation to find and destroy targets in real time. Tu-95MS with SVP can be in the air for up to 30 hours and conduct combat patrols. At any time, his crew, at the request of ground troops, will strike high-precision strikes at a distance of up to 1,500 km.

As noted by the expert, "Bears" are needed for operations, when the targets are very far from the airfields of Russian combat aircraft. Tu-95MS with SVPs will be especially useful for Russian military communications in local wars and armed conflicts of low intensity. Also, these machines will be able to effectively support the raids of special operations forces.

Tu-95MS is an updated version of the Soviet strategic bomber Tu-95, adopted in service in the late 1950s. The car received a new wing, as well as more economical turboprop engines NK-12MP. The first flight of the MC was in 1979. And two years later their serial production began.

Until 1992, about a hundred upgraded strategic missile carriers were launched. At present, the Armed Forces of Russia has 60 Tu-95MS. The range of the "Bear" flight without refueling in the air is more than 10 thousand km. Ammunition of the machine - eight cruise missiles Kh-555 or Kh-101.

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2693072.html

New Tu-95MS strike by Κh-101 cruise missiles against targets in Syria

I'd love to see at least a few Tu-95s are active to achieve 100 years of operational service!!!!!

T-47 wrote:I'd love to see at least a few Tu-95s are active to achieve 100 years of operational service!!!!!

Possible if you start counting by first flight of the design, back in the 50's. But it is still very far away if you start counting when the frames were produced, Tu-95MS are much newer than most people think, it is a deep modernization (including structural) of the original Tu-95, developed in the 70's and produced till the early 90's, so the oldest Tu-95 in service nowadays must be 40 years old (if there is any frame produced in the late 70's still flying), and the newest 25 years old.

Svyatoslavich wrote:
Possible if you start counting by first flight of the design, back in the 50's. But it is still very far away if you start counting when the frames were produced, Tu-95MS are much newer than most people think, it is a deep modernization (including structural) of the original Tu-95, developed in the 70's and produced till the early 90's, so the oldest Tu-95 in service nowadays must be 40 years old (if there is any frame produced in the late 70's still flying), and the newest 25 years old.

Yes I am aware of the that time frame. And I am counting it from first flight. Still it'll be an impressive achievement for aviation history.

I just wanted to ask people's opinion on the rear mounted gun on the Tu-95 is worth having it now? Only use I can see is if it came across another enemy bomber which is highly unlikely.  I thought maybe best just to remove it to save weight and it removes 23mm ammo sitting at rear of aircraft.

I just wanted to ask people's opinion on the rear mounted gun on the Tu-95 is worth having it now? Only use I can see is if it came across another enemy bomber which is highly unlikely.  I thought maybe best just to remove it to save weight and it removes 23mm ammo sitting at rear of aircraft.

Already replied on the Tu-22M3 thread, but would add here that these guns are not for use against enemy bombers... the Bear and Backfire would never come close to western bombers.

Chaff and flare and jammer rounds makes them interesting options and their high rate of fire would give them a small chance against incoming missiles, but not enough to make them worth putting on brand new aircraft.

I doubt they would remove them from existing types... the guns themselves are compact and light and what would you replace that weight with anyway?

On new aircraft they will likely be replaced with small interceptor missiles for self defence from missiles and aircraft.

GarryB wrote:

I just wanted to ask people's opinion on the rear mounted gun on the Tu-95 is worth having it now? Only use I can see is if it came across another enemy bomber which is highly unlikely.  I thought maybe best just to remove it to save weight and it removes 23mm ammo sitting at rear of aircraft.

Already replied on the Tu-22M3 thread, but would add here that these guns are not for use against enemy bombers... the Bear and Backfire would never come close to western bombers.

Chaff and flare and jammer rounds makes them interesting options and their high rate of fire would give them a small chance against incoming missiles, but not enough to make them worth putting on brand new aircraft.

I doubt they would remove them from existing types... the guns themselves are compact and light and what would you replace that weight with anyway?

On new aircraft they will likely be replaced with small interceptor missiles for self defence from missiles and aircraft.

I wouldn't replace the weight with anything it would just be so some weight even though it's small. I agree they would never be removed on Tu-95 now. Also because both aircraft are in separate threads I had to post it like this.

Nuclear-capable Russian Tu-95 bombers in 1st-ever Pacific patrol from Indonesia

https://www.rt.com/news/412367-russian-strategic-bombers-indonesia/

Red paintjob just in case someone doesn't get the hint

The contract for the creation of a deeply modernized strategic bomber Tu-95MSM

As reported on August 13, 2018 by the agency Interfax, PJSC Tupolev concluded a contract with the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation to create a deeply modernized strategic missile carrier Tu-95MSM. This was reported by Interfax General Director of PJSC Tupolev Alexander Konyukhov.

"The contract for deep modernization - Tu-95MSM - was signed a month and a half ago, and the work was deployed at the Taganrog Aviation Plant (Beriev-IFTTC)," said Konyukhov.

"The first Tu-95MSM departure is planned for the end of 2019," said the head of Tupolev.

He also noted that the decision to upgrade the fleet of Tu-95MS military aircraft will be made by the Ministry of Defense following the results of state tests.

In addition, the state tests of the strategic missile carrier Tu-95MS with the upgraded engine NK-12MPM are currently underway - they will be completed by the end of 2018. "The tests are proceeding successfully, the ICG (state joint tests - IF) we will complete by the end of this year," said Konyukhov. He noted that during the tests the strategic missile carrier Tu-95MS with the modernized engine confirms the declared characteristics.

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3303872.html

Any detail on what is upgraded in engines?
Presumably better efficiency/durability rather than more power.