Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Tu-22M3: News

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24501
    Points : 25043
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun May 17, 2020 12:07 am

    I think increasing the size of the weapon bays of the Tu-160M2 to make them a couple of metres longer... say 13-14 metres would allow existing 6m long weapons to be carried in tandem, which would greatly improve capability with only a minor modification.

    More importantly instead of making an 11m large missile to better use the available space in the weapon bays, they could make it a 12m or 13m long missile and get even better performance potential.

    Whether they choose to do that or not, they should develop full sized missiles and half sized missiles and perhaps even 1/3rd sized missiles to allow flexibility in arming them.

    Wasn't one of the changes to the Tu-22M3M design an extension of the internal weapon bay?
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24501
    Points : 25043
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Mon May 18, 2020 5:58 am

    Actually looking at this graphic:

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 09763610

    ... Is that talking about a 4.78 metre long cruise missile with a high subsonic flight speed and a launch range between 4,500 and 9,000km... Product 715?

    The length of 4.78m is the same as the Kh-15 so it will fit inside the Tu-22M3 and also inside the Bear and the Blackjack... 6 inside the Bear and 24 inside the Blackjack...

    The thing I am wondering is why they would have a Kh-50 when they are working on the Product 715 because the Product 715 would be ideal for the Tu-160 and the Tu-22M3 and the Bear... in fact at 4.78m they might even be able to fit two in tandem on a Bear weapon pylon so even if they kept the four external pylons per wing instead of five external pylons, with the shorter missile they could carry 16 missiles on the 8 external weapon pylons and a further 6 missiles internally.

    Experience has shown that targets require a lot of missiles to assure penetrating air defences and short small missiles would make sense as a numbers missile...

    You could start an attack with a mixed flight of Bears and Backfires with Zircon or other hypersonic missiles launched with much larger numbers of subsonic missiles... the hypersonic missiles can target radar and SAM sites and main targets and then hours later the subsonic missiles will arrive and hammer everything else...
    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1223
    Points : 1264
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 32
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 on Mon May 18, 2020 7:59 am

    GarryB wrote:Actually looking at this graphic:

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 09763610

    ... Is that talking about a 4.78 metre long cruise missile with a high subsonic flight speed and a launch range between 4,500 and 9,000km... Product 715?

    The length of 4.78m is the same as the Kh-15 so it will fit inside the Tu-22M3 and also inside the Bear and the Blackjack... 6 inside the Bear and 24 inside the Blackjack...

    The thing I am wondering is why they would have a Kh-50 when they are working on the Product 715 because the Product 715 would be ideal for the Tu-160 and the Tu-22M3 and the Bear... in fact at 4.78m they might even be able to fit two in tandem on a Bear weapon pylon so even if they kept the four external pylons per wing instead of five external pylons, with the shorter missile they could carry 16 missiles on the 8 external weapon pylons and a further 6 missiles internally.

    Experience has shown that targets require a lot of missiles to assure penetrating air defences and short small missiles would make sense as a numbers missile...

    You could start an attack with a mixed flight of Bears and Backfires with Zircon or other hypersonic missiles launched with much larger numbers of subsonic missiles... the hypersonic missiles can target radar and SAM sites and main targets and then hours later the subsonic missiles will arrive and hammer everything else...

    Product 715 is the KH-50 missile. That graphic is wrong, they put the size of kh-15 on kh-50, I think this was discussed earlier, the launch range of 4500km /9000km is also a mistake.
    What I find strange is kh-50 with only less 1.4 my and slightly thinner would loose 3000km in range compared with kh-101 Suspect  and kh-50 will have an improved engine...
    See this link
    https://iz.ru/663570/aleksei-ramm/ubiitcam-avianostcev-popolniat-arsenal
    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1223
    Points : 1264
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 32
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 on Tue May 19, 2020 7:04 pm

    Just to point a thing I forget, to not be considered a heavy bomber in Start treaty, TU-22M3M has to have less than 8000km range and nuclear cruise missiles with range below 600km.
    The Russians said the TU-22M3M won't be a heavy bomber...so kh-50, Kh-MT and GZUR won't be nuclear.

    Edit: and there's a source that says the Kh-MT is the GZUR...
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 5295
    Points : 5287
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Isos on Tue May 19, 2020 7:32 pm

    Treaties work only in peace time. They can easily switch for a nuclear armed missiles if the same missile is used with conventionnal warhead and if that same missile is used on tu-160/pak da as a nuclear weapon.

    That should be the case for any new missile. Cold war era bombers were designed to use few type of missiles each. New bombers thanks to modern computers can use any new missile.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5795
    Points : 5946
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Tue May 19, 2020 8:08 pm

    dino00 wrote:Just to point a thing I forget, to not be considered a heavy bomber in Start treaty, TU-22M3M has to have less than 8000km range and nuclear cruise missiles with range below 600km.
    The Russians said the TU-22M3M won't be a heavy bomber...so kh-50, Kh-MT and GZUR won't be nuclear.

    Edit: and there's a source that says the Kh-MT is the GZUR...

    That's assuming there will be a new Start Treaty, but the Pentagram is now making impossible demands. They've demanded China join, Russia stop all development of strategic prospective programs (Storm Petrel, Avantegard, Poseidon, etc.) The only reason why the last Start treaty got passed was because it was under the guise of a fake 'reset', which imploded within a year. The treaty before collapsed because of the U.S. side's insistence to pursue cruise missile capable Aegis Ashore, on land, a clear cut violation of the INF Treaty. The Pentagram has even hinted at restarting nuclear testing, and using thermonuclear bombs in theaters like a potential war with Iran. The US side is already negotiating in bad faith, so it's extremely naive to assume the treaty is continuing under this terrible climate.
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 327
    Points : 349
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  mnztr on Tue May 19, 2020 9:41 pm

    Russia needs to be more dickish about these treaties, it should threathen to leave the NPT. I hope they start arming Iran big time
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 6196
    Points : 6331
    Join date : 2014-09-10
    Location : Canuckistan

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  kvs on Tue May 19, 2020 10:23 pm

    mnztr wrote:Russia needs to be more dickish about these treaties, it should threathen to leave the NPT. I hope they start arming Iran big time

    I agree. The NATzO west has blown its wad with anti-Russian hate propaganda. There is nothing restraining Russia since whatever it does
    it will be blood libeled.

    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 4421
    Points : 4399
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  miketheterrible on Wed May 20, 2020 3:00 am

    kvs wrote:
    mnztr wrote:Russia needs to be more dickish about these treaties, it should threathen to leave the NPT. I hope they start arming Iran big time

    I agree.   The NATzO west has blown its wad with anti-Russian hate propaganda.   There is nothing restraining Russia since whatever it does
    it will be blood libeled.


    Agreed. There needs to be a more tougher approach from Russia.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24501
    Points : 25043
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Wed May 20, 2020 9:02 am

    Product 715 is the KH-50 missile. That graphic is wrong, they put the size of kh-15 on kh-50, I think this was discussed earlier, the launch range of 4500km /9000km is also a mistake.

    Yes, of course the flight range is wrong, but to fit inside the Tu-22M3 it would need to be a similar size to the Kh-15 and such a physical size would also be useful for other aircraft to carry the weapon in numbers.... this is supposed to be the high numbers low cost cruise missile that is basically carried by everything... a JDDAM or whatever equivalent...

    What I find strange is kh-50 with only less 1.4 my and slightly thinner would loose 3000km in range compared with kh-101 Suspect and kh-50 will have an improved engine...

    If it is 6m long... if it is 4.78m long then it loses 2.6m... it is only supposed to reach 1,500-2,500km or so anyway...

    Just to point a thing I forget, to not be considered a heavy bomber in Start treaty, TU-22M3M has to have less than 8000km range and nuclear cruise missiles with range below 600km.

    The only START treaty that currently means anything is the new START and it expires in about 7-8 months time (Feb 2021).

    The Russians said the TU-22M3M won't be a heavy bomber...so kh-50, Kh-MT and GZUR won't be nuclear.
    Edit: and there's a source that says the Kh-MT is the GZUR...

    You mean like the US said AEGIS ashore uses the standard Mk41 launcher that can be fitted with Tomahawk cruise missiles.... they said it just wouldn't load them...

    Russia needs to be more dickish about these treaties, it should threathen to leave the NPT. I hope they start arming Iran big time

    Well the thing is that right now outside the west Russia actually has a big of respect and can be seen to do the right thing when others around them are revealing their weaknesses.

    The Backfire is a theatre weapon... whether it can reach strategic targets or not is not the point... the M3M seems to have inflight refuelling reinstalled... but not to make it a strategic bomber, but to give it better performance in the theatre mission it is being used for... so it wont need to stop off in Iran for refuelling for instance when dropping bombs on terrorists in Syria.
    avatar
    Arrow

    Posts : 586
    Points : 586
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Arrow on Wed May 20, 2020 11:32 am

    oth long range bombers that tactical aircraft that already enjoy a combat range advantage against western counterparts wrote:

    Mindstorm, what advantage does Russian tactical aviation have over Western aviation?
    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1223
    Points : 1264
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 32
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 on Wed May 20, 2020 3:50 pm

    GarryB:

    If it has 4.78 mt why bother? They have the Kh-59Mk2 with 4.2 mt... Can be launched from inside the weapons bay of SU-57, and maybe all others bombers,.

    Kh-50 is a missile build from scratch, they want the missile to have the biggest range possible.
    I think they give up on the opportunity of launch 24 missiles from inside the TU-160, I think they have the idea that having more combat radius is more important than launching 24 missiles.

    Mindstorm:


    "The unique segment of lag is in the sub-strategic range, particularly the niche occupied by JASSM/JASSM-ER".  

    Isn't this the same niche of KH-59MK2?
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 945
    Points : 1112
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Wed May 20, 2020 4:19 pm

    Arrow wrote:
    oth long range bombers that tactical aircraft that already enjoy a combat range advantage against western counterparts wrote:

    Mindstorm, what advantage does Russian tactical aviation have over Western aviation?  

    In the statement you have reported it clearly specified the parameter to which i refere.

    Precisely i was attempting to highlight how combat range of tactical aircraft force of the Federation surpass sensibly those of western counterparts and how this parameter would be used (togheter with the higher engagement range of the air to ground theatre to strategic missiles) to attack the enemy air bases , to progressively degrade its air forces potential, starting from froendly air bases effectively unreachable for enemy aviation.


    Су-30CМ, Су-34, Су-35C and Су-57 all outrange ,often significantly, theirs western counterparts.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 945
    Points : 1112
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Wed May 20, 2020 4:32 pm

    dino00 wrote:GarryB:

    If it has 4.78 mt why bother? They have the Kh-59Mk2 with 4.2 mt... Can be launched from inside the weapons bay of SU-57, and maybe all others bombers,.

    Kh-50 is a missile build from scratch, they want the missile to have the biggest range possible.
    I think they give up on the opportunity of launch 24 missiles from inside the TU-160, I think they have the idea that having more combat radius is more important than launching 24 missiles.

    Mindstorm:


    "The unique segment of lag is in the sub-strategic range, particularly the niche occupied by JASSM/JASSM-ER".  

    Isn't this the same niche of KH-59MK2?

    Only Partially.

    KH-59MK2 has been purposely conceived to be contained in the internal weapon bays of Су-57 and therefore has some obvious unavoidable limitations for what attain the range requirements that the MoD put for new substrategic weapons.

    KH-59MK2 will surely, and significantly, outrange anything an F-35 can carry in its internal weapon bays for theatre operations, but at the substrategic level it will concede to the externally mounted JASSM-ER.
    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1223
    Points : 1264
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 32
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 on Wed May 20, 2020 4:52 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    dino00 wrote:GarryB:

    If it has 4.78 mt why bother? They have the Kh-59Mk2 with 4.2 mt... Can be launched from inside the weapons bay of SU-57, and maybe all others bombers,.

    Kh-50 is a missile build from scratch, they want the missile to have the biggest range possible.
    I think they give up on the opportunity of launch 24 missiles from inside the TU-160, I think they have the idea that having more combat radius is more important than launching 24 missiles.

    Mindstorm:


    "The unique segment of lag is in the sub-strategic range, particularly the niche occupied by JASSM/JASSM-ER".  

    Isn't this the same niche of KH-59MK2?

    Only Partially.

    KH-59MK2 has been purposely conceived to be contained in the internal weapon bays of Су-57 and therefore has some obvious unavoidable limitations for what attain the range requirements that the MoD put for new substrategic weapons.

    KH-59MK2 will surely, and significantly, outrange anything an F-35 can carry in its internal weapon bays for theatre operations, but at the substrategic level it will concede to the externally mounted JASSM-ER.

    Surprised by the bold part of your answer, Jassm-er has more diameter so more fuel...makes sense.
    avatar
    Arrow

    Posts : 586
    Points : 586
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Arrow on Wed May 20, 2020 5:02 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Arrow wrote:
    oth long range bombers that tactical aircraft that already enjoy a combat range advantage against western counterparts wrote:

    Mindstorm, what advantage does Russian tactical aviation have over Western aviation?  

    In the statement you have reported it clearly specified the parameter to which i refere.

    Precisely i was attempting to highlight how combat range of tactical aircraft force of the Federation surpass sensibly those of western counterparts and how this parameter would be used (togheter with the higher engagement range of the air to ground theatre to strategic missiles) to attack the enemy air bases , to progressively degrade its air forces potential, starting from froendly air bases effectively unreachable for enemy aviation.


    Су-30CМ, Су-34,  Су-35C and Су-57 all outrange ,often significantly, theirs western counterparts.

    Yes, but VKS does not have weapons that can attack from a safe distance. Western aviation has many cruise missiles with such capabilities. Russia has such capabilities but only through strategic aviation. Tactical aviation can only attack targets from a direct distance.

    Russia still does not have stealth aircraft. Yes, the Su-57, but it will take a long time before they acquire a significant number of these aircraft. Meanwhile, the US has about 180 F-22 and 500 F-35, plus F35 in Europe, many F-16, EF-2000, Gripen. This is still a huge advantage of Western aviation. Of course, Russian machines have better performance when it comes to range maneuverability but will this offset NATO's advantage in tactical aviation?
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 5295
    Points : 5287
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Isos on Wed May 20, 2020 5:09 pm

    There is no real need to carrybthe missile internally if it has enough stand off range to stay outside of the enemy engagement zone.

    Intercepting a su-57 or any fighter jet that can supercruise more than 500km away is very difficult.

    First because of the range (most of jets will cruise at subsonic speed).

    And second because of the detection range which can't be more than 500km anyday soon. Awacs huge ranges are against big rcs targets. Against cruise missiles and new fighter-bombers with coating that absorbs radar waves, even if they use L band, the range will be less than 200km. I even want to say less than 100km... add to that the su-57 pilot will choose the best terrain to hide from any radar by flying low before the launch of the missile.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 945
    Points : 1112
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Wed May 20, 2020 6:58 pm


    Arrow wrote:Western aviation has many cruise missiles with such capabilities. Russia has such capabilities but only through strategic aviation. Tactical aviation can only attack targets from a direct distance.

    Name those western air delivered cruise missiles that allow to attack from "safe distance" ,excluding obviously JASSM and JASSM-ER , that are the weapons in debate. Wink


    Isos wrote:There is no real need to carrybthe missile internally if it has enough stand off range to stay outside of the enemy engagement zone.

    Intercepting a su-57 or any fighter jet that can supercruise more than 500km away is very difficult.

    If the range of the missile is measured in thousands of Km (such as some strategic range cruise missiles) your line of reasoning is perfectly shareable; the problem arise when you must attack enemy REAR (second and third echelon) air bases ,in particular those hosting not only just the carrying platforms of enemy stand off missiles (and obviously theirs weapon depots) but also enemy aircraft used for command and control (in western nations AWACS and J-STAR)and air-refueling aircraft.

    The effects of similar deep attacks, if successful, are obvious : the enemy Air Force lose, almost completely, any capability to endanger own key rear installations and the IAD's nodes at theirs defence -even only of moderate density- but in this instance you must deliver from hundreds of km within the enemy airspace

    An F-35, for example, with externally mounted JASSM/JASSM-ER could at maximum attack enemy's first echelon command and control installations and air bases (moreover defended hundreds of times more than any OTAN counterparts) where no critical assets are ever deployed and evacuation and dispersion measures are much more pressing , an Су-57 could attack, thanks to much greater volume of its internal weapon bays and combat radius, directly the hosting air bases of those same F-35s, the weapon depots of its JASSM/JASSM-ER and all theirs supporting assets such as AWACS and tankers.

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 5295
    Points : 5287
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Isos on Wed May 20, 2020 7:10 pm

    Yes and no. If you want to attack so deep you will need a kalibr with 2500/4000km range. The su-57 with a kh-59mk2 may have the range but it would be suicide mission to send it attack US bases in Germany because even if it is stealth and all that it will be dead alone so deep in enemy territory.

    F-35 has a not so great range and if they want it to fly above the front line they will use airbases at less than 1000km away from the front. Then it will be in range of mig-31D+Kinzhal and other new iskander disrupting their air operations allowing su-57 to go a little bit in enemy territory and launches its missiles at targets in range. You don't send him to take out targets very far when you have kalibr for them and when you have plenty of targets near the front or as you call them on the first echelon.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24501
    Points : 25043
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB on Thu May 21, 2020 1:27 am

    If it has 4.78 mt why bother? They have the Kh-59Mk2 with 4.2 mt... Can be launched from inside the weapons bay of SU-57, and maybe all others bombers,.

    Well can I turn that around and say if it is 6 metres long then why bother when the Kh-55SM and Kh-555 are 6 metres long and have flight ranges of 3,000km already.

    What they don't have is a smaller shorter ranged weapon that can be carried in larger numbers than existing Kh-55 and Kh-555 missiles.

    The Kh-59MK2 is a 500km range weapon... this weapon is supposed to have at least three or four times that range at about 1,500km or 2,000km...

    Kh-50 is a missile build from scratch, they want the missile to have the biggest range possible.

    Well they are not achieving that goal if it is 6m long and has less range than existing cruise missile types that size.

    By making it 4.78m long they can get them in to the Backfires internal weapon bay, and the Bears internal weapon bay (that can take 6m missiles but not 7.4m missiles) and two in each position on the rotary launcher of a Blackjack (total 24 missiles if necessary).

    If they make it 6m long like the Kh-55SM and Kh-555 then it wont fit internally on the Backfire and will fit in the Bear, but why would you carry it on the Blackjack because you are trading one for one with missiles with much better range in the form of the Kh-101/2. Why swap a single 6m long Kh-50 with 1,500km range with a single 7.4m long conventional Kh-101 that can reach 4,500km or 5,000km in the kh-102 nuke model?

    What they really need to do is make models to fit the launchers or change the launchers... make all the internal launchers slightly longer so the Bear can take 7.4m long missiles internally, and the Backfire can take 6m long missiles internally and the Blackjack so it can take two 6m long missiles internally and make the replacement for the Kh-101/2 into a 12m long missile to fill up the space properly.

    Or they can make the small "tactical" cruise missile a 4.78m long weapon that has a double warhead on the Backfire version with a range of 600km, and a Blackjack version with a range of maybe 2,000km... so it could carry 12 Gzur missiles in one bay and 12 Kh-50 in the other... or 6 of each in one (total 12 missiles) and 6 long range missiles in the other bay for 18 missiles total.

    I think they give up on the opportunity of launch 24 missiles from inside the TU-160, I think they have the idea that having more combat radius is more important than launching 24 missiles.

    The Gzur could be a Kickback replacement... if it is 6m long then if the Kh-50 is 4.8m long then perhaps they could be paired in one bomb bay.... 6 Gzur missiles and 6 Kh-50s with the other weapon bay carrying 6 x 7.4m Kh-102s.

    Yes, but VKS does not have weapons that can attack from a safe distance.Western aviation has many cruise missiles with such capabilities. Russia has such capabilities but only through strategic aviation. Tactical aviation can only attack targets from a direct distance.

    You understand the difference between tactical aviation and theatre strike platforms?

    Kh-555, and the various air launched weapons like Kinzhal and Kh-32 and even Zircon when it is ready... and what you you mean by safe.... how effective are european SAMs?


    Russia still does not have stealth aircraft.

    Neither does the west to be honest... unless you really want to could less than 200 F-22s which will most likely be sent back to the US to defend her airspace... the F-35s seem to be a joke and are easily tracked.

    Israeli F-35s wont even enter Syrian airspace... so how stealthy are they?

    Meanwhile, the US has about 180 F-22 and 500 F-35, plus F35 in Europe, many F-16, EF-2000, Gripen. This is still a huge advantage of Western aviation. Of course, Russian machines have better performance when it comes to range maneuverability but will this offset NATO's advantage in tactical aviation?

    What advantage... the more F-35s the HATO forces have the worse things are for them... even the most basic F-16 can go supersonic when it needs to, and with internal weapons only the F-35s are pathetic.

    And second because of the detection range which can't be more than 500km anyday soon. Awacs huge ranges are against big rcs targets. Against cruise missiles and new fighter-bombers with coating that absorbs radar waves, even if they use L band, the range will be less than 200km. I even want to say less than 100km... add to that the su-57 pilot will choose the best terrain to hide from any radar by flying low before the launch of the missile.

    Any AWACS crew scanning for Su-57s will likely expect their first warning to be an R-37M descending on them at mach 6... when the target is cranking out EM emissions in enormous volumes the game of hide and seek becomes much easier for those hiding...

    Name those western air delivered cruise missiles that allow to attack from "safe distance" ,excluding obviously JASSM and JASSM-ER , that are the weapons in debate.

    Even JASSMs range of 370km is not good enough... with S-400 able to reach 400km and the fact that it might be located 200km closer to the launch position than the target is, you really want something with a lot more range. The extended range model looks better but would be externally carried making the super expensive stealthy F-35 not stealthy at all...

    You could argue with the stand off range it doesn't need to be stealthy but then the Kinzhal and Kh-32 and Kh-555 therefore also don't need stealthy platforms to carry them... and soon Gzur with a mach 6 speed and 1,500km range sounds like an ideal solution to their perceived gap.... as would the Kh-50 with 1,500-2,000km range.

    Yes and no. If you want to attack so deep you will need a kalibr with 2500/4000km range. The su-57 with a kh-59mk2 may have the range but it would be suicide mission to send it attack US bases in Germany because even if it is stealth and all that it will be dead alone so deep in enemy territory.

    Extended range Iskander and likely ground launched hypersonic missiles like Zircon snr should be able to deal with such problems... keeping most Russian aircraft nice and local.

    allowing su-57 to go a little bit in enemy territory and launches its missiles at targets in range. You don't send him to take out targets very far when you have kalibr for them and when you have plenty of targets near the front or as you call them on the first echelon.

    Su-57 would be best used picking off AWACS and JSTARS and inflight refuelling aircraft 150km back from the front line... I would use the Su-35s to pick off the F-35s and Rafales... though I might be tempted to leave the F-35s as their use is probably financially crippling the owning country with every flight...

    avatar
    Arrow

    Posts : 586
    Points : 586
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Arrow on Thu May 21, 2020 4:46 am

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Arrow wrote:Western aviation has many cruise missiles with such capabilities. Russia has such capabilities but only through strategic aviation. Tactical aviation can only attack targets from a direct distance.

    Name those western air delivered cruise missiles that allow to attack from "safe distance" ,excluding obviously JASSM and JASSM-ER , that are the weapons in debate. Wink

    KEPD 350 Taurus, Storm Shadow,SCALP, Delilah, SOM cruise missile etc. A lot of precise equipment with a range of several hundred kilometers.
    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1223
    Points : 1264
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 32
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 on Thu May 21, 2020 6:12 am

    Well can I turn that around and say if it is 6 metres long then why bother when the Kh-55SM and Kh-555 are 6 metres long and have flight ranges of 3,000km already. wrote:

    I knew you could do that Very Happy that's why I said built from scratch, KH-50 has a flattened profile, KH-55SM doesn't, I think that even if they are the same length TU-22M3M couldn't launch kh-55SM, obviously KH-50 has a stealth profile that KH -55SM doesn't have, and in subsonic cruise missiles that's important.

    The[b] Kh-59MK2 is a 500km range weapon[/b]... this weapon is supposed to have at least three or four times that range at about 1,500km or 2,000km... wrote:

    I really really doubt that...the export version has a range of 290 km...from Tass: Russia to develop cruise missiles capable of striking targets at 1,000km range
    The missiles will be developed before 2020


    Work is under way on a new family of items with a range of 200km, 400km, 600km and 1,000km. That is why, work in this area is being carried out. I believe that before 2020 we’ll surely roll out this family of items [missiles]," Obnosov said at the MAKS-2017 airshow, responding to a question about whether Russia was developing the analog of the US JASSM high precision long-range cruise missile.

    https://tass.com/defense/957105

    I think KH-59MK2 is the 1000km range, Mindstorm said that the former concedes to JASSM-ER, that's probably, But Jassm-er has a lot more than over 925km.

    Well they are not achieving that goal if it is 6m long and has less range than existing cruise missile types that size. wrote:

    But I don't think it has, the stealth shape will reduce the range, the diameter looks small than KH-101, it all depends on the weight of the warhead, but I won't be surprised if it has more than 3000km range with a conventional warhead.
    A new Russian air-launched cruise missile 6 mt long, a completely new design engine, build with different materials that the Kh-55 family, the best solid fuel available, and it has 1500km range lol1

    If they make it 6m long like the Kh-55SM and Kh-555 then it wont fit internally on the Backfire and will fit in the Bear wrote:

    It will, KH-50 and GZUR were built especially for the Backfire.

    but why would you carry it on the Blackjack because you are trading one for one with missiles with much better range in the form of the Kh-101/2. Why swap a single 6m long Kh-50 with 1,500km range with a single 7.4m long conventional Kh-101 that can reach 4,500km or 5,000km in the kh-102 nuke model? wrote:

    Agree 100% if you remember I made this question with other words.

    The Gzur could be a Kickback replacement wrote:

    Now we are talking attack and what a great replacement! They could have 6 GZUR and 6 Kh-101/2.










    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1223
    Points : 1264
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 32
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 on Thu May 21, 2020 6:24 am

    All the quotes above are from GarryB, I can't edit without the quotes disappearing, anyway there's some time I don't speak about KH-MT Very Happy I'm the only one, looks like a monologue lol1 just this though I will shut up with Kh-MT, if it isn't Gzur it could be a longer KH-58UShKE.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 945
    Points : 1112
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu May 21, 2020 6:49 am


    Isos wrote:The su-57 with a kh-59mk2 may have the range but it would be suicide mission to send it attack US bases in Germany because even if it is stealth and all that it will be dead alone so deep in enemy territory.

    Well that is not the informed opinion, as result of extensive simulations, among MoD planners.

    The model take into account 4 main points :

    1) The almost complete absence, in western military architecture, of high-gain, multi-band radar with integrated signal processing (the development of which was an almost two decades long affair....).
    2) The lack of high performance very-long-range air defense systems to the level ,such as C-400 or С-300В4.
    3) The lack of any high mobile modern medium and short range defense, with optronic tracking back-up channels, capable to possibly ambush incoming Cu-57 passing in theirs defended area or to neutralize the delivered missiles at the target's position.
    4) The commitment by part of western Air Forces ,within the next three decades, for interception and air denial missions , on a fleet of almost exclusively subsonic tactical aircraft - F-35 -

    A squadron of 12 Cu-57 with 4 internal Х-59МК2, with probably another one with air superiority weapon configuration, will take-off from air bases placed well beyond range of attack of enemy tactical aviation with JASSM/JASSM-ER proceeding at high altitude and subsonic speed in friendly air space, possibly receiving air refueling in proximity of the limits of the area controled by Federation Ground Forces; those squadron will maintain this flight regime up to 150-200 km from first echelon of ground forces (for the presence of umbrella coverege offered by С-300В4 and C-400 divisions and division level EW that will also hamper the work of enemy radar and surveillance sateliltes) then it will accelerate to supersonic cruise speed to reach the optimal and more safe point of delivery for the 48 Х-59МК2 and at the same supercruising speed it will egress toward protection of friendly IADS.

    The chances that ,even already-in-the-air squadrons of F-35A (having much lower altitude limits that hinder the kinematic performances of theirs air to air missiles and lower theirs authonomy) will be capable to intercept a similar stand-off attack group of Cu-57, maintaining reduced RCS configuration, would be abysmally low., those F-35s would moreover not receive any guidance from any multi-spectral long range radar or space-based surveillance systems.

    The most complex situations and scenario would be the one taking into account the deployment of the entire fleet of F-22s in the European theatre ,that will obviously complicate thosew kind of mission and operations in the South Western European sectors for the effect of French Nostradamus OTH radar.

    avatar
    Arrow

    Posts : 586
    Points : 586
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Arrow on Thu May 21, 2020 3:03 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Isos wrote:The su-57 with a kh-59mk2 may have the range but it would be suicide mission to send it attack US bases in Germany because even if it is stealth and all that it will be dead alone so deep in enemy territory.

    , those F-35s would moreover not receive any guidance from any multi-spectral long range radar or space-based surveillance systems.


    Why ? Since France has OTH radar, they see air traffic in quite a large part of European Russia.



    What about this situation? Attack of strategic maneuvering and hypersonic missiles from the territory of Russia with the participation of strategic aviation? or VKS would try to fight the F-22? The entire F-22 fleet is a powerful force. In addition, the F-22 has better parameters than the F-35 and the has supercruise capabilities. Su-57 has better characteristics? but there will be much less of them all the time. The only hope is to destroy the F-22 at base with a hypersonic missile. Slow subsonic missiles will be quickly detected by the French OTH radar. There will be time to react?

    Sponsored content

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 29 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:43 pm