Russia Defence Forum

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

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    PAK-DΑ: News #2

    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 1069
    Points : 1101
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  mnztr Sun Apr 04, 2021 7:03 pm

    So in war you expect no one to seriously fuck up? Ever heard of the "fog of war"? Ever heard "no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy"?
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10494
    Points : 10568
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Sun Apr 04, 2021 8:00 pm

    mnztr wrote:So in war you expect no one to seriously fuck up? Ever heard of the "fog of war"? Ever heard "no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy"?

    Someone always fucks up in war

    However if your long range long endurance bombers armed with extremely long range weapons get into contact with short range enemy platforms then you seriously fucked up

    And those kinds​ of epic fuckups almost always result in losing the war

    So better don't fuck up that bad
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 1069
    Points : 1101
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  mnztr Sun Apr 04, 2021 9:54 pm

    What is the maximum situational awareness you can count on? 3-400 km? you don't think the enemy will be trying to ambush you? They could be lying in wait hidden in some clutter from an island on your route with a tanker, then pounce as soon as your planes are observed by a multittude of ways, satelitte radar, long range radar ground observation etc. At that point speed is your friend. I would prefer to be in a TU-22 or 160 in this situation then any stealth bomber.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10494
    Points : 10568
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Sun Apr 04, 2021 11:17 pm

    mnztr wrote:What is the maximum situational awareness you can count on? 3-400 km? you don't think the enemy will be trying to ambush you? They could be lying in wait hidden in some clutter from an island on your route with a tanker, then pounce as soon as your planes are observed by a multittude of ways, satelitte radar, long range radar ground observation etc. At that point speed is your friend. I would prefer to be in a TU-22 or 160 in this situation then any stealth bomber.

    Ambush? By carrier aircraft?

    Where do carrier aircraft come from? Oh yeah, the carriers

    If carriers can sneak up on you then you have no business trying to fight because you are too stupid to win

    As for Tu-22s there are just 60 of them in total today

    One third will always be in maintenance so you will just have 20 of them for each ocean

    That's nothing, they are too few in numbers to be worth keeping in service especially with superior platform available

    Also there is no overlap between Tu-22M and Tu-160 other than appearance, they do completely different things




    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 1069
    Points : 1101
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  mnztr Sun Apr 04, 2021 11:33 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    mnztr wrote:What is the maximum situational awareness you can count on? 3-400 km? you don't think the enemy will be trying to ambush you? They could be lying in wait hidden in some clutter from an island on your route with a tanker, then pounce as soon as your planes are observed by a multittude of ways, satelitte radar, long range radar ground observation etc. At that point speed is your friend. I would prefer to be in a TU-22 or 160 in this situation then any stealth bomber.

    Ambush? By carrier aircraft?

    Where do carrier aircraft come from? Oh yeah, the carriers

    If carriers can sneak up on you then you have no business trying to fight because you are too stupid to win

    As for Tu-22s there are just 60 of them in total today

    One third will always be in maintenance so you will just have 20 of them for each ocean

    That's nothing, they are too few in numbers to be worth keeping in service especially with superior platform available

    Also there is no overlap between Tu-22M and Tu-160 other than appearance, they do completely different things





    You can ambush from land base planes with tanker support quite easily. USAF has 800 tankers. 60 TUs is a very formidable force. 20 TU launched each with 3 KH-32s..you are gonna tell me that is nothing? 60 KH-32s fired at a CBG from several different directions to arrive at the same time.. yeah. That is a pretty fearsome strike package.
    Yes they have differnt purposes, which is why it makes sense to keep the TU-22. They are not upgrading the planes and airframes to get rid of them in 4-5 years.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10494
    Points : 10568
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Mon Apr 05, 2021 12:10 am


    Okay, I will keep this as simple as possible so you could understand:

    There are only 20 Tu-22s for each ocean and there will never be more ever again

    20 is nothing

    USSR had 400 and still they expected to lose majority of them to enemy fire before they could get into position to launch because they would be spotted immediately and intercepted



    Once PAK-DA starts arriving Tu-22s will be the first to go the way of museum, their time is ending


    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7364
    Points : 7350
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  Isos Mon Apr 05, 2021 1:24 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Okay, I will keep this as simple as possible so you could understand:

    There are only 20 Tu-22s for each ocean and there will never be more ever again

    20 is nothing

    USSR had 400 and still they expected to lose majority of them to enemy fire before they could get into position to launch because they would be spotted immediately and intercepted



    Once PAK-DA starts arriving Tu-22s will be the first to go the way of museum, their time is ending



    You are quite wrong. Tu-22 will cover pacific ocean and norther seas since they can make the journey from east to west in few hours.

    They are planes not ships.

    USSR was going to use them pretty far away. Russia will use them above its territory wheb the carrier comes close. F-35 in combat mission won't go further than 700-800km. New missiles have more than 1000km range so...

    Close enough they can have the sukvois protecting them since a sukhoi has more range than f-18 or f-35.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28763
    Points : 29293
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  GarryB Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:40 am

    Even if enemy F35s or similar launch a brace of AIM-120Cs in a tail chase the Tu-22M3M with the hammer down in a short sprint will likely outpace them.

    If the PAK DA is carrying a full range of AAMs I would expect that would include the tiny short range 9M100 based self defence anti missile missile.... a sort of CIWS missile for air, ground, and sea platforms.... hell it has lock on after launch capability with a two way datalink you could launch it from a submerged submarine and have it lock on to a MPA or anti sub helicopter just based on the noise those platforms make...

    The PAK DA could launch a few long range R-37Ms and also a few R-77Ms and perhaps even some scramjet powered new R-77s at any fighters present, and while leaving launch short range anti missile weapons against any naval SAM or AAM fired at it...

    The thing is that the Blackjacks can launch conventional cruise missiles but will mostly be for strategic roles, the PAK DA has the capacity to carry very heavy conventional payloads and likely their entire range of conventional and nuclear ordinance internally, but they will want it to remain in Russia in terms of basing, while the Tu-22M3M models are still new and very capable and could be based in Syria or new bases around the world where they could do double duty with serious bomb loads but also anti ship weapons that could make friendly countries safe from aircraft carrier based sabre rattling from the colonial west...

    Equally the Bears could be transferred to the Navy and be fitted with sensors and equipment and communications gear like their open skies aircraft and new anti ship and anti sub gear and also be based around the world just expanding Russian views and reach.

    Seriously I think the Iranian regime is evil, based on how it treats its people, but the saber rattling approach is just pointless.

    I find it hilarious that westerners judge Iran as evil... the number of living people made dead in that region because of the actions of a government would be an interesting list and I suspect Iran would be no where near the top of that list... and more ironically the moral and ethical and judgemental western powers that identify other leaders as killers and this or that regime as being evil are head and shoulders at the top of that list.

    Look at the death penalty in the US, or Guantanimo Bay concentration camp... if you are poor you die...


    Also there is no overlap between Tu-22M and Tu-160 other than appearance, they do completely different things

    The Tu-22M is a heavy strike theatre bomber, and is totally different from the Bear and the Tu-160.

    The job of the PAK DA is to combine the performance of the Bear... long range strategic cruise missile carrier, with the performance of the Tu-22m3.... where a lot of fuel is offloaded to carry a heavy bomb or conventional weapon load.

    You are quite wrong. Tu-22 will cover pacific ocean and norther seas since they can make the journey from east to west in few hours.

    Most of the Tu-22M3 were used by long range aviation and would have been used as a deep strike platform attacking SAM sites and Comms centres and HQs in the European theatre. They would mostly use Kh-22M and later Kh-32 missiles which come in a few different models for the different missions... including the land attack grid square remover with a nuclear warhead, but also versions with passive radar and active radar weapons for large structures like ships, large buildings and bridges.

    More often than not they would have an escort of Su-27s to support their missions.

    I think the long range aviation will use Tu-160s to replace some of the Bears in service, but the rest of the Bears and the Backfires wont retire till replaced by PAK DA.

    Both types are still relatively new and with plenty of hours on the clock so they will be retired from strategic missions but will likely be given other roles in Russian bases perhaps around the world.

    dino00 and Big_Gazza like this post

    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 1069
    Points : 1101
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  mnztr Mon Apr 05, 2021 8:02 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Okay, I will keep this as simple as possible so you could understand:

    There are only 20 Tu-22s for each ocean and there will never be more ever again

    20 is nothing

    USSR had 400 and still they expected to lose majority of them to enemy fire before they could get into position to launch because they would be spotted immediately and intercepted



    Once PAK-DA starts arriving Tu-22s will be the first to go the way of museum, their time is ending



    The weapons have changed quite a bit,  and a fleet of 60 medium and almost strategic bombers is more then almost any country out there except the USA and maybe China. So to say this is nothing is frankly, nonsense. even with dumb bombs, if 40 operational planes we deployed on a carpet bombing mission, that is 1000T of bombs. Do you have any idea of the destruction from one strike like this? You can pretty much obliterate an entire city in a single strike. And once again, how many other nations have this capacity? USA and *maybe* China. If the Russians wanted to stop a CBG or 2 they can send the entire operations fleet of 40 planes, likely can surge to about 55 planes and launch 165 KH-32s ... I am not even sure if there will be any lifeboats floating after such a strike.
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 1069
    Points : 1101
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  mnztr Mon Apr 05, 2021 8:19 pm

    Question is, what is a reasonable fleet of bombers for Russias needs? They have about 60 TU-95, plan to build up to 50 TU-160, 60 TU-22 and how many PAK-DAs? As its stands they have a pretty staggering fleet. If they are gonna build a lot of PAK-DA plus the AAM capability, does this signal a major change in operational docterine for heavy units?
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10494
    Points : 10568
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Mon Apr 05, 2021 10:22 pm

    mnztr wrote:...So to say this is nothing is frankly, nonsense. even with dumb bombs, if 40 operational planes we deployed on a carpet bombing mission, that is 1000T of bombs. Do you have any idea of the destruction from one strike like this?...

    Of those 40 only 20 will be available per one coast

    And of those 20 majority will be immediately spotted, intercepted and shot down by carrier aircraft

    There will be no carpet bombing of enemy fleet



    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 1069
    Points : 1101
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  mnztr Tue Apr 06, 2021 3:07 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Of those 40 only 20 will be available per one coast

    And of those 20 majority will be immediately spotted, intercepted and shot down by carrier aircraft

    There will be no carpet bombing of enemy fleet


    The TU-95 can transit coast to coast in 10 hours. They can be fueled up and ready to go as part of a full 40 unit strike armed with KH-32s. Carpet bombing is not an effective naval strike tactic. The 120 KH-32s will be launch well out of the range of the naval fighters. Approaching an just below hypersonic speed they will be incredibly hard to intercept. The Russians can send a 2nd strike with dumb bombs or themobaric bombs to mop up any ships that may be salvageable.

    If they were sent to carpet bomb a city or base, they would do the first strike with cruise missile to take out any SAMs, and only then rain bombs down to finish the job.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10494
    Points : 10568
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Tue Apr 06, 2021 4:07 am

    mnztr wrote:...The 120 KH-32s will be launch well out of the range of the naval fighters...

    You just said that F-35s would be waiting in ambush but now they are not in range?

    Pick one


    mnztr wrote:The Russians can send a 2nd strike with dumb bombs or themobaric bombs to mop up any ships that may be salvageable....

    There will not be anything left for second strike, there are only 20 of them to begin with

    Also, dumb bombs for ships? What century do you think this is?

    Will they have to worry about searchlights and Flak 88s?


    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 1069
    Points : 1101
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  mnztr Tue Apr 06, 2021 6:39 am

    there will be 40-60 planes you approach from multiple directions with flights of 3 or 4 to mitigate the risk. If the TU-22s are ambushed by F-35 they can out run them because they are considerably faster. So one tactic -  the TU's head out with tankers. Top up. fly to release point, launch missiles and egress at Mach 2 meet tankers if necessary and return to base. or they can dash in at mach 2 and egress at mach 2 depending on range/fuel.

    In case you didn't notice the Russian can use dumb bombs effectively. As I said, for mopping up
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28763
    Points : 29293
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  GarryB Tue Apr 06, 2021 12:46 pm

    Yes I judge them as evil based on how they treat their own people.

    But what is the actual treatment you find to be evil... Considering in Canada you can be arrested for child abuse calling your son male terms when she has decided she identifies as female. I don't think many things are evil, but your country supported the US to kill millions of people in the Middle East and elsewhere while calling anyone who died a terrorist or collateral damage... shoot first and fix any problems with cash payments to survivors... being an athiest I don't really think in terms of good and evil... but if I was to start calling governments evil... like I have said western people should not throw stones.

    The USA does do some evil things for sure, as does even Canada and all the western countries and China, but I would live in most of those countries, NO WAY would I live in Iran. Maybe visit but thats it.

    So pillage and murder around the world, along with blackmail and theft, has paid off so much you forgive the west their crimes, yet think of Iran as evil.

    Interesting.

    Question is, what is a reasonable fleet of bombers for Russias needs? They have about 60 TU-95, plan to build up to 50 TU-160, 60 TU-22 and how many PAK-DAs? As its stands they have a pretty staggering fleet. If they are gonna build a lot of PAK-DA plus the AAM capability, does this signal a major change in operational docterine for heavy units?

    The problem is that the 15 Blackjacks they currently have is not really a viable force so when they make another 50 or so they can form operational units from those aircraft. The Tu-22Ms don't come in to it because they are theatre strike only and have no strategic purpose.

    The purpose of the PAK DA is to form a mixed fleet of supersonic very long range cruise missile and missile carriers (Tu-160 only) and subsonic long range fuel efficient and cheaper to operate bomb and missile carriers that can carry large outsized loads internally with lots of fuel and inflight refuelling for strategic missions with long range and hypersonic long range missiles, or shorter ranged missions with much much heavier conventional loads.

    Essentially the Tu-160 is expanded to become the primary anti US strategic cruise missile carrier force, while the PAK DA will replace the Tu-95 in the subsonic strategic role, but extra PAK DAs could be built for other missions like inflight refuelling support of the strategic attack PAK DA... the inflight refuelling versions could carry Zircon missiles and AAMs as well as lots of fuel so as they head over the north pole with the cruise missile armed PAK DAs, they could launch Zircons at AEGIS cruisers in the Arctic Ocean looking for ballistic missile warheads to shoot down, plus long range AAMs to engage any long range cruise missiles or enemy fighter aircraft in the air.

    As I said the Tu-160 and PAKDA will replace the Bears and Backfires in their current roles, but that frees these aircraft that are new and up to date for other missions.

    New missiles are entering service which would be ideal for the Bears and Backfires to keep them potent and useful... the new Grom, a 1,500km range mach 6 defence penetration missile is one example, while the Kh-50 subsonic stealthy 1,500km range missile is interesting too.

    In the short term the Tu-22M3 and Tu-95 that are made redundant as new Blackjacks and PAK DAs are produced could be used as inflight refuelling aircraft, or shorter ranged strike platforms.

    The Tu-22M3 operating from Syrian airfields would be much more effective at dropping very heavy loads on insurgent forces without burning a lot of fuel in the process.

    Bears based in Syria could carry a wide range of anti ship and anti sub weapons... if the US can base B-1Bs in Norway then Russia could base Bears and Backfires in Cuba or Venezuela, while keeping their actual strategic cruise missile carrying force within the boundaries and safety of Russia and the Russian IADS.

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28763
    Points : 29293
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  GarryB Tue Apr 06, 2021 12:47 pm

    Imagine leasing some Tu-22M3Ms to Argentina.... Twisted Evil

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2430
    Points : 2430
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  Big_Gazza Tue Apr 06, 2021 1:36 pm

    GarryB wrote:Imagine leasing some Tu-22M3Ms to Argentina....  Twisted Evil

    ..or Venezuela Twisted Evil

    GarryB likes this post

    avatar
    Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E

    Posts : 59
    Points : 63
    Join date : 2016-01-20

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E Wed Apr 07, 2021 8:47 pm

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 So-koennte-der-naechste-russische-Bomber-aussehen-Entwickelt-wird-der-PAK-DA-von-Tupolew--169FullWidth-9140939e-1782134
    German Portal flugrevue.de
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10494
    Points : 10568
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  PapaDragon Wed Apr 07, 2021 9:00 pm

    Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E wrote:https://imgr1.flugrevue.de/So-koennte-der-naechste-russische-Bomber-aussehen-Entwickelt-wird-der-PAK-DA-von-Tupolew--169FullWidth-9140939e-1782134.jpg
    German Portal flugrevue.de

    Old fanart

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    flamming_python
    flamming_python

    Posts : 4320
    Points : 4402
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  flamming_python Thu Apr 08, 2021 5:59 am

    lyle6 wrote:The Tu-22M3s can still find use in the naval aviation, reprising its long range maritime anti-ship role. They would actually make a far better launcher for the Kinzhal missile than the MiG-31K, for starters carrying 4 missiles instead of the one for the latter. Longer ranged, yet could still do supersonic dashes necessary to outrun interdiction efforts. Really, its a waste if they retire them without at least considering this option.

    The main problem with using Tu-22M3s for the role is that they take far longer than the MiG-31K to get to the necessary altitude. The climb rate of the baseline Tu-22M3 is 15 m/s, while that of the baseline MiG-31 is 208 m/s. It will change with the weight of a Kinzhal of course but we're still looking at a an order of magnitude.

    Otherwise they would have just used them in the first place and skipped the MiG-31 platform.

    As we can see response time is key, when it comes to the Caspian garrison of airborne Kinzhal launchers for instance.
    But for long-range patrol with the missile or some such it shouldn't make much difference.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28763
    Points : 29293
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  GarryB Thu Apr 08, 2021 2:14 pm

    The kinzhal is a solid rocket powered missile with fixed burn rates... being based on the Iskander its first stage of fuel will be high energy high power fuel... which burns rapidly but gets the missile up and moving and climbing and accelerating to top speed... the next layer of fuel is designed to burn slower and much much longer and maintain speed and also allow manouverability because it uses thrust vectoring to manouver so fuel needs to be burning for it to turn... the small external fins are fixed stabilisers.

    The point is that without any changes at all taking it up to altitude and accelerating it to speed improves its performance enormously because it no longer has to accelerate from stationary and it does not have to climb vertically through the thickest part of the atmosphere.

    This means that instead of overcoming inertia and moving several tons of missile off the ground and climbing to altitude the missile is already moving at a good speed and is through the thickest air so it can accelerate to a higher speed and operate at an even higher altitude where the air is even thinner and travel much further.

    For best distance and best performance the fastest highest flying platform is best and that is MiG-31K.

    For the Tu-22M3 it would make rather more sense to develop an air launched scramjet powered missile which can be optimised for the size and weight of the aircraft.

    The new Gzur missile is supposed to replace the Kh-15 short range attack missile... it should be able to be carried internally on the Tu-22M3M in the rotary launcher and it is supposed to have a 1,500km range at mach 6 which is plenty of performance...

    I think putting the Kinzhal on another aircraft... other than the MiG-31K is a waste of time... it already has the 800km range Kh-32 mach 5 missile and the potential for newer missiles with more efficient propulsion.

    The Tu-22M3M is already a potent aircraft, it does not really need or benefit from the Kinzhal which is an emergency stop gap weapon... very clever... but can be greatly improved upon.

    Now the INF treaty is gone new multistage IRBMs will be an interesting development branch that could be used in PAK DA and Tu-22M3M platforms... and naval launched versions would be very interesting too.

    Quite some time ago a member called Ironsightsniper suggested a naval Iskander... I remember dismissing it as a bad idea because it would be limited to 500km range and that if they made it they would be accused of violating the INF treaty because it could be used on a land based trailer.

    Well now it does not matter, so a 3,000km range multistage ballistic missile with perhaps scramjet powered stages that manouvers to impact could be very very useful and could be ship and sub and land based(truck and rail).

    Air launched versions would be interesting too.

    dino00 likes this post


    Sponsored content

    PAK-DΑ: News #2 - Page 12 Empty Re: PAK-DΑ: News #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Apr 23, 2021 6:21 pm