Home
Register
Log in
Cyberspec wrote:KiloGolf wrote:Well that took about 1/4 of a century....
CongratulationsThis one takes the prize for the most idiotic recent post...and it was a tight contest
i's weekend and I wanna smoke same thing as KiloGolf
Tu-160 "White Swan"
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 4988
Points : 5016
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
i's weekend and I wanna smoke same thing as KiloGolf
Guest- Guest
GarryB wrote:We have already been over this.
They had four aircraft in different states of completion.
They finished the two they could finish but because the remaining two didn't have the expensive and complicated titanium box structure the remaining two could not be completed outside of the Ukrainian factory that made them in the first place.
The fact that they have finished the remaining two means they now have a forge able to work with very large titanium structures in a vacuum.... which is pretty much all they needed to make new Blackjacks.
Mil and Kilo.. hope you are happy with your snide cheap shots...
Troll all you want, you just sound like asses.
These planes are going to be built and these engines are going to be upgraded and it might not actually run to schedule, because this is the real world and not fairy fanboi land like the EU you two live in.
Oops, did I say fairy.... sorry, I realise in the western democratic republic of EU that you two live in that might be deemed offensive to faggots and I would be strung up under the nearest lamp post for uttering such an offensive slur on the good name of homos everywhere.
I do not live in the EU, that to start with
Second, i just commented on their cute schedules. How comes they always bring silly schedules and then prolong them for decade on average, whats the point. Stfu and just say, we are working on it, it will be done, report if you are pleased on completion phases during the work and thats it. But no... IN 2019. IT WILL... no it wont, over and over, it wont.
"PAK-FA enters service in 2015."... yea..cute... "Admiral Nakhimov overhaul ends in 2018..."...right... "Ivan Gren...." you got me i hope.
Who is coming up with these dates, someone with Down syndrome? Engine production restart will take long, then they will have issues with modernisations, then they will produce same NK-32 variant for start... same as it was with Izd-30.
I am not "troll", i am just saying what everyone thinks, thats the difference.
Guest- Guest
KiloGolf wrote:Cyberspec wrote:KiloGolf wrote:Well that took about 1/4 of a century....
Congratulations
Try the Ivan Gren thread, you'll find epic stuff there.
Although wait one sec, I can hear a phone ringing. Oh it's 1992, they want their incomplete bombers back
PS. you too, learn to take a joke.
To be honest, many other countries did scrap production of certain equipment, stored the semi complete examples and restarted production decade or two later, either as maintenance or replacement of lost equipment feat. Its not only Russian thing, tho that is far more common in naval production than aviation.
Singular_Transform- Posts : 817
Points : 807
Join date : 2016-11-13
Militarov wrote:
I do not live in the EU, that to start with
Second, i just commented on their cute schedules. How comes they always bring silly schedules and then prolong them for decade on average, whats the point. Stfu and just say, we are working on it, it will be done, report if you are pleased on completion phases during the work and thats it. But no... IN 2019. IT WILL... no it wont, over and over, it wont.
"PAK-FA enters service in 2015."... yea..cute... "Admiral Nakhimov overhaul ends in 2018..."...right... "Ivan Gren...." you got me i hope.
Who is coming up with these dates, someone with Down syndrome? Engine production restart will take long, then they will have issues with modernisations, then they will produce same NK-32 variant for start... same as it was with Izd-30.
I am not "troll", i am just saying what everyone thinks, thats the difference.
It is completely normal, just see what happened with the US nuclear manufacturing lines after two decade of shutdown.
They wanted to make just same fogbank ,and it is only a small part of a nuke, and faced with extreme expense and years later delivery than it was expected.
wilhelm- Posts : 254
Points : 258
Join date : 2014-12-09
Too much idle chit chat here.
The roll out of the Tu-160M, or partial M i guess, in Kazan, prototype for the new production, apparently from one of the last unfinished airframes previously built 25 years ago. Slated to fly in February of 2018.
Article below.
https://kazanfirst.ru/articles/452526
The roll out of the Tu-160M, or partial M i guess, in Kazan, prototype for the new production, apparently from one of the last unfinished airframes previously built 25 years ago. Slated to fly in February of 2018.
Article below.
https://kazanfirst.ru/articles/452526
Last edited by wilhelm on Thu Nov 16, 2017 1:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
TheArmenian- Posts : 1882
Points : 2033
Join date : 2011-09-14
A truly UUUURRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA moment
They tried to kill the white swan
Now the Phoenix has risen from the ashes.
A better resolution video:
They tried to kill the white swan
Now the Phoenix has risen from the ashes.
A better resolution video:
PapaDragon- Posts : 9230
Points : 9312
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
I know they started with partially built airframe but this is still not a bad time at all. They said that one of the objectives was for new guy to learn how to build these planes becasue old ones are mostly retired by now. Not bad.
Cyberspec
Cyberspec- Posts : 2868
Points : 3023
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis
the plane isn't even painted yet....way too slow 
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 4149
Points : 4145
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
Perhaps once the M2s start getting inducted, some of the older Tu-160s will be transferred to the Naval Aviation to replace/augment Tu-95s/142s.
Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Sun Nov 19, 2017 11:26 pm; edited 3 times in total
Arctic_Fox- Posts : 156
Points : 159
Join date : 2015-05-02
Age : 27
Location : Brazil
This means that they gave up on PAK DA?
PapaDragon- Posts : 9230
Points : 9312
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
Arctic_Fox wrote:This means that they gave up on PAK DA?
No just pushed back for later
They still need replacement for Tu-22 that won't cost as much as Tu-160
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 4149
Points : 4145
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
More details:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/16175/russia-rolls-out-new-tu-160m2-but-are-moscows-bomber-ambitions-realistic
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/16175/russia-rolls-out-new-tu-160m2-but-are-moscows-bomber-ambitions-realistic
"..Tupolev, in addressing two main tasks – the deep modernization of the Tu-160, and the development of the PAK-DA, may have focused on the [Tu-160] bird in hand, while the [PAK-DA] pot of gold at the end of the rainbow can wait," Tuchkov explained. ..
Ultimately, the military analyst noted that the fact that the Tu-160M2 is being created in parallel with the PAK-DA is to the advantage of both aircraft, allowing the modernized plane to receive advanced technologies, while giving the next generation bomber a head start on development.
https://sputniknews.com/military/201706221054888100-tu160m2-prospects-analysis/
Azi- Posts : 419
Points : 415
Join date : 2016-04-05
The work on Tu-160M2 doesn't mean that PAK-DA is dead. The contrary! If you hear nothing the project livesArctic_Fox wrote:This means that they gave up on PAK DA?
They said they will reveal the design in 2018.
miketheterrible- Posts : 4551
Points : 4529
Join date : 2016-11-06
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/4730201
Source: PAK DA will be cheaper than the Tu-160, but you can replace all long range aircraft
Source: PAK DA will be cheaper than the Tu-160, but you can replace all long range aircraft
GarryB- Posts : 25258
Points : 25804
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
This means that they gave up on PAK DA?
No.
The PAK DA needs to be developed from scratch, which will take some time. In the mean time they have upgraded their production facilities to handle construction of very large titanium structures needed for aircraft like the Tu-160 and the new PAK DA.
The new tooling and facilities to be used to build new Tu-160M2s will then be used to build PAK DAs to replace the Tu-95s left in service in the strategic role and the Tu-22m3s used in the theatre role.
This is clearly one of the four airframes left from the cold war period.... one of the second pair they could not make because the factory that could handly such large titanium structures was in the Ukraine.
Now this aircraft is near completion but presumably with new internals like fibre optics instead of copper wires etc etc.
I am looking forward to seeing the third Tu-160M2 to see if it has the optics under the nose for bombing...
It goes without saying that a subsonic flying wing design should have lower operating costs than a supersonic large jet like the blackjack.... it is like comparing a jumbo jet with Concord.
George1- Posts : 14755
Points : 15254
Join date : 2011-12-22
Location : Greece
This unit is a new built one or old Tu-160 modernized to M2 level?
franco- Posts : 3355
Points : 3387
Join date : 2010-08-18
George1 wrote:This unit is a new built one or old Tu-160 modernized to M2 level?
My understanding is it was built using an unfinished frame from the Tu-160 production. Don't believe it has the new engines yet but will be used as a test platform for the new technology.
Isos- Posts : 5736
Points : 5728
Join date : 2015-11-06
franco wrote:George1 wrote:This unit is a new built one or old Tu-160 modernized to M2 level?
My understanding is it was built using an unfinished frame from the Tu-160 production. Don't believe it has the new engines yet but will be used as a test platform for the new technology.
Is it more stealthy ? Do they us RAM on it or they use the same materials than before ?
franco- Posts : 3355
Points : 3387
Join date : 2010-08-18
Not sure however one of our techies may know.
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 4988
Points : 5016
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
franco wrote:Not sure however one of our techies may know.
First of all avionics, both for bombing, navigation, signalling and net-centric warfare, EW. I would also add anti missile systems (lasers for blinding optical sensors or microwaves to burning missile electronics) . Engines and hudrulics too. In short air frame looka remains as air flow didn't change. T?he rest can be the subject of change/upgrade
eehnie- Posts : 2461
Points : 2470
Join date : 2015-05-13
Isos wrote:franco wrote:George1 wrote:This unit is a new built one or old Tu-160 modernized to M2 level?
My understanding is it was built using an unfinished frame from the Tu-160 production. Don't believe it has the new engines yet but will be used as a test platform for the new technology.
Is it more stealthy ? Do they us RAM on it or they use the same materials than before ?
Some small external dimmensional change is possible, also it is possible some surface treatment, but change in external materials is more difficult and is unlikely in my opinion.
Isos- Posts : 5736
Points : 5728
Join date : 2015-11-06
eehnie wrote:Isos wrote:franco wrote:George1 wrote:This unit is a new built one or old Tu-160 modernized to M2 level?
My understanding is it was built using an unfinished frame from the Tu-160 production. Don't believe it has the new engines yet but will be used as a test platform for the new technology.
Is it more stealthy ? Do they us RAM on it or they use the same materials than before ?
Some small external dimmensional change is possible, also it is possible some surface treatment, but change in external materials is more difficult and is unlikely in my opinion.
Why unlikly ? Material science has evolved a lot since its design. I'm pretty sure they have some composite materials stronger, lighter and more stealthy to use today.
If they plan to build new ones, better make them with better technology in every field.
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 4149
Points : 4145
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
They may not even need so many expensive TU-160M2s (each can carry just "12× Raduga Kh-55SM/101/102/555 cruise missiles (primary armament) or 24× AS-16 Kickback short-range nuclear CMs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-160#Specifications_.28Tu-160.29"): a few modified IL-76s/96 or AN-22s/124s each could also carry 3-4 dozen ALCMs & be refueled by IL-78s while escorted by MiG-31s/SU-30s/35s.
OTH, I'm surprised that China didn't buy the 1 TU-160 that is now in a Ukrainian museum for their own strategic bomber program!
OTH, I'm surprised that China didn't buy the 1 TU-160 that is now in a Ukrainian museum for their own strategic bomber program!
GarryB- Posts : 25258
Points : 25804
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Yeah, people talk about using transports or civilian types for the job but it never actually happens...
Who wants to make all their civil aircraft targets for the enemy?
They hadn't completed two of the old aircraft... they did not have their main centre box sections made of titanium that held the mechanism for the swing wings... and who knows what other components they didn't have.
they have described this as being the first of the new Tu-160M2 designs so we can assume it has all new avionics and systems, but it uses an old shell.
For instance under the nose you can clearly see the old optical port... if it is going to be a cruise missile carrier only then it wont need such a feature.
It probably wasn't worth removing from the two old airframes but may not appear on the new build models, and I would suspect there is plenty of scope for rather more changes including materials and shape.... technology has moved on since the 1970s and new things are possible.
Who wants to make all their civil aircraft targets for the enemy?
They hadn't completed two of the old aircraft... they did not have their main centre box sections made of titanium that held the mechanism for the swing wings... and who knows what other components they didn't have.
they have described this as being the first of the new Tu-160M2 designs so we can assume it has all new avionics and systems, but it uses an old shell.
For instance under the nose you can clearly see the old optical port... if it is going to be a cruise missile carrier only then it wont need such a feature.
It probably wasn't worth removing from the two old airframes but may not appear on the new build models, and I would suspect there is plenty of scope for rather more changes including materials and shape.... technology has moved on since the 1970s and new things are possible.
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 4149
Points : 4145
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
"Who wants to make all their civil aircraft targets for the enemy?"
Only the AF transports marked as such could be modified for CMs to avoid civilian 1s being targeted. In any case, there r 100s marked as AEROFLOT or VOLGA -DNEPR,etc. worldwide at any given time- nobody'll risk shooting them down unless it's an all out war that may quickly turn nuclear. A Russian BM ship, train or truck disguised as freight is a case in point: will the other side bomb every freight ship/train/truck?
If it wasn't completely finished & never flew, it's still a new airframe, with some old holes in it! The basic geometry of the M2 = the Tu-160M, with minimal changes, if any.
Just in time to eventually replace the 2 crashed Tu-95 & 1 Tu-160! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-95#Incidents
https://web.archive.org/web/20030920062314/http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_820476.html
Only the AF transports marked as such could be modified for CMs to avoid civilian 1s being targeted. In any case, there r 100s marked as AEROFLOT or VOLGA -DNEPR,etc. worldwide at any given time- nobody'll risk shooting them down unless it's an all out war that may quickly turn nuclear. A Russian BM ship, train or truck disguised as freight is a case in point: will the other side bomb every freight ship/train/truck?
If it wasn't completely finished & never flew, it's still a new airframe, with some old holes in it! The basic geometry of the M2 = the Tu-160M, with minimal changes, if any.
Just in time to eventually replace the 2 crashed Tu-95 & 1 Tu-160! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-95#Incidents
https://web.archive.org/web/20030920062314/http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_820476.html
|
|
|