The Tu-160 Blackjack
Posted on 09/23/2006 5:23:47 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Russia’s Strategic Aviation to Conduct Major Exercises
Strategic bombers of Russian Air Forces are to conduct major exercises with launching cruise missiles and mid-air refueling, RIA News agency says with reference to Alexander Drobyshevsky, spokesman of Russian Air Forces.
Aviation is to try new crews during the exercises. “Over 50 percent of the participants are young pilots,” said Drobyshevsky. Tu-160 and Tu-95 bombers will shoot cruise missiles at northern firing grounds, and Tu-22M3 are to practice bomb-release. Some of the tasks, including mid-air refueling, are to be carried out at night.
Exercises of the 37th air army of Russian Air Forces, which unites all divisions and joints of strategic aviation, are to be held from September 26 to September 30, 2006. Air Force Commander-in-Chief Vladimir Mikhailov is to be in charge. The exercises are rather long and geographically large-scale. Strategic bombers are to fly over the Atlantic, the Pacific, and the Arctic oceans, and the Black and the Caspian seas.
The main weapon of Tu-95 and Tu-160 bombers is the strategic cruise missile X-55. Its range is between 2,500 and 3,000 kilometers (depending of modification), its warhead power is 200 kilotons. Besides, 2 more rockets were created on the base of X-55 -- X-65 rocket with non-nuclear warhead, and X-555 with flight range of up to 5,000 kilometers which allows strategic bombers to attack targets which are much farther than their firing range.
The Tu-160 Blackjack
Is this "exercise" going to include subs and ICBMs too?
Excerise Hell. Kill some Chenchen rebels for Ramadan. Is the TU 95 a bear?
How'd they fit a B1-b into a copier?
Yep,it's the venerable Bear itself.The Russkies are better off using attack helos to kill Chechens than costly cruise missiles.
who knows,but they have fired a few SLBMs & ICBMs in recent months.Their bomber jocks rarely get adequate practice,so this is a Godsend.
The Tu-95MS (current version) is, indeed, a Bear. (Would someone PLEASE put those things out of their misery already, so we don't have to hear those damned things clanking around the skies any more?)
The Tu-22M3 is the Backfire C, and is roughly equivalent to our F-111D/E, though it has no hands-off nap-of-the-earth capability and is inferior in some other ways, and it fills much the same role as the Aardvark.
The Tu-160 Blackjack is also known as the "B-1ski" and is thought to have been constructed with the "assistance" of a great deal of espionage on the B-1 program. However, it appears to be modeled after the B-1A, not the B-1B, which is an important distinction. The Blackjack is larger and faster than the B-1A, but despite Russian claims, is not nearly as stealthy - yet. The Tu-160 fleet is undergoing a rebuild to bring it up to B-1B equivalent capabilities, including the addition of radar absorbent materials and full GLONASS piloting/control plus a digital flight control system and a HUD (they didn't come with the latter two). Probably the best bomber the Russians have - but they only have 35-36 of them, and they're expensive and slow to build. And they make great Raptor bait.
From the looks of things, One plans sheet at a time. But the engine mount plans from the XB-70 got inserted when the filchers had to scram.
B-2 pilots never complain when they get tactical assigments.
B-1A, not XB-70 - something else to thank Carter for screwing up (though it ended up a plus for our side, when Reagan rescued the program - but improved the security so that the Russians had to wait until the Clinton administration to get the plans for the B-1B.)
FYI, despite the looks, the B-1B is a *very* different airplane than its' parent B-1A.
If you tell me anymore, they will have to kill me. TU-95MS? Is that the MSNBC version as contrasted to the TU-97CNN?
I think Russia has reopened the production line for improved Tu-160s after about 15 years.
The Tu-22M fleet is mostly being mothballed & some are being offered for export to India.While they have their defeciencies,modified variants which can launch supersonic cruise missiles the Yakhont/Brahmos can be very potent in the maritime strike & land attack roles.
A Godsend?????
Are you nuts?
I hope NORAD is keeping a close eye on this.
They're supposed to get their first "new" Blackjack this year (after stopping production in 1994, leaving several uncompleted aircraft). They're also modernizing their existing 35 planes at the rate of one per year.
That said, rumor has it that they're not actually making all-new Blackjacks but just putting planes together from the leftovers from the last run - and when they run out of those, the "new" production will end. According to that same rumor, they only have enough to put together two more planes - the one delivered this year, and the one coming next year. Other than that, they only had 14 flyable examples left in service.
A Godsend for their pilots,dude.Keeping the implications aside for a second.
Perhaps the original poster refers to the abysmally high accident rates among the Russian Air Force while on exercise. I'll be very surprised if they don't lose at least one aircraft.
The Tu-95MS (Bear G) is their maritime surveillance variant of the Bear, upgraded with the ability to carry the Kh-55 (NATO name: AS-15 Kent) cruise missile.
It's still a noisy, clanking thing.
Even with modifications, the Tu-22M is cold meat in today's air defense environment. It'd only be useful against an undefended target, or with standoff weapons. I wouldn't want to be the poor SOB that has to attack a defended target with dumb bombs or JDAM equivalents in that plane - with the advent of the Stinger and the SA-18, hypersonic low level dashes over a target = suicide mission.
It's for that reason that the Russians are essentially advertising it for only one role-stand-off maritime strike missions.It's very tempting for the likes of China or India to have a (relatively) long-range aircraft which can carry upto 4 Yakhont missiles,which have a range of around 180 miles at almost Mach-3 speed.It would be useful also for hitting coastal installations.
Maybe... They'd have to be really cheap for that to make sense, since the plane isn't capable of transsonic NOE/TFR flight and unless you want to throw away the plane and crew, you'd almost have to launch from over the horizon. And, well, maritime strike doesn't usually work out that way....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.