Blackjacks Showcase Surprising Stamina

The Strategy Page ^ | 6/23/2010 | James Dunnigan

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

Two Russian Tu-160 heavy bombers recently completed a record 23 hour long, 18,000 kilometer flight around the periphery of Russia. This required two in-flight refuelings from Il-78 tankers. This feat was nothing new. Last year, a Tu-160 completed a 21 hour flight. Although designed as a heavy bomber, the Tu-160 has largely been used, in the last few years, as a long range reconnaissance aircraft. But even in that role, the Tu-160 can carry cruise missiles and other air-to-ground weapons. Two years ago, Russia received its first new Tu-160 heavy bomber since the early 1990s. Production had been revived four years ago. The plan is to produce one new Tu-160 every 18 months, until another 14 are built. But this plan appears to have been put aside in favor of upgrading the equipment on current aircraft. Currently, there are 16 Tu-160s in service.

Production of the Tu-160 had ceased in 1994, with several of them partially completed. Apparently, this new aircraft is one of those left uncompleted in the 1990s. Lots of Russian weapons factories were shut down after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. That occurred, in part, because the Soviet Union was, literally, bankrupt. The defense budget was cut by more than two-thirds, and weapons production got hurt the most. The only plants that kept operating were those producing items for export. But many of the shuttered factories were preserved, and now many of them are in operation again, picking up where they left off.

[Only1choice____Freedom]

Weakness invites enemies.

When the light gets dim, the roaches start to come out.

[Yo-Yo]

In before the B-1ski comment.

[MGMSwordsman]

Americans will probably be learning more about the combat capabilities of the Tu-160 than they ever wanted to know in the not so distant future....

[valkyry1]

It looks to be extremely fast on the deck with long range also.

[bandleader]

This is more reason why we need to keep upgrading the GREATEST HEAVY BOMBER of ALL TIME,The B-52 Strato-Fortress!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[valkyry1]

There is probably a lot of re-engineering they could do with it if they wanted, agree?

[spetznaz]

How would upgrading the 'greatest heavy bomber of all time' help against the Blackjack? Moreover, the B-52 is absolutely useless against a real adversary. Sure, it serves as a great bomb-truck against camel humping Allah worshippers, but against anything even remotely close to a near peer (e.g. Russia/China) or against more evolved baser enemies (e.g. say at the start of the Yugoslav crisis) the B-52 is worse than useless. The best bomber in the US service is the B-1B (which sadly will be getting cancelled to save on costs), which can carry more, and carry more much much much faster. The B-1 is what BlackJack would like to be but cannot. The B-2 Stealth bomber has its tricks, and is a technological marvel, but bang for buck nothing approaches the B-1B.

As for the B-52 ....it is the 'greatest heavy bomber of all time' for using against peasants and zealots armed with either Viet ideology or Allah's idiocies, but against someone who has access to cogent technology and does not rely on jungle tunnels in S.E.Asia, or caves in Afgahnistan, the B-52 is woefully inadequate.

[MaxMax]

I hope the Russians know that killing innocents is illegal in America.
So, no hitting in the face.

[TXnMA]

Similar, but the B-1 is much smaller. (It is the dark silhouette on the model plans below:

There seem to be relatively few in-flight photos of the TU-160 in fully-swept-back wing configuration

[Yo-Yo]

There seem to be relatively few in-flight photos of the TU-160 in fully-swept-back wing configuration

Sure there are. They just don't look like they're fully swept back, but if you look at your silhouette, the leading edge is cranked slightly at full sweep. Also, note the "shark fin" that pops up during full sweep. It is a gap filler piece that folds down during full forward sweep.

Nice line drawing here.

[Nabber]

“B-52 is absolutely useless against a real adversary”.

Who are you kidding? That statement is crap.

The B-52 armed with cruise missiles (a lot of them) does not have to penetrate Russia or China or Iran any more. As a stand-off weapons platform, with enough Electronic Warfare power to render most fighters ineffective, the B-52 can wreak havoc against any enemy. There are really no plans, in a major war, to have it act as a “gravity bomb” bomber.....

[spetznaz]

I still maintain what I said, and yes, I am fully aware that the 52 can carry cruise missiles, their number and capability (and the missiles are effective), and that in a war against a near peer gravity bombs (be they dumb or JDAM) would not be at the fore. I still stand by my statement though. The BUFF is not a bad airframe, but even with ECM it cannot survive against a modern IADS. It ...simply ...cannot. There is a reason, even with cruise missiles, that the B1 came into existence. There is also a reason why, even with cruise missiles that could go a long way, the stealthy B2 bomber came into service. The only reason the B52 remains relevant is that virtually all the wars the US has found itself in in the last several decades are against foes that did not have real IADS. For instance, the Iraqi KARI IADS was broken more or less on the first day (and moreover, Kari had been created to fend off a limited attack from Iran and/or Israel, both of which had tried to destroy the Osirak reactor, Israel doing successfully what the Iranians were unable). The last time the USAF faced a real air defense system was in Viet Nam, and that was neither integrated nor sophisticated in comparison to the S300/HQ9 types now in existence. You could load the BUFF with ecm and cruise missiles, and it would never penetrate the Chinese IADS for example.

However, for dropping JDAMs on towelheads .......perfect, since it is a cheap bomb truck.

[Nabber]

“The BUFF is not a bad airframe, but even with ECM it cannot survive against a modern IADS. It ...simply ...cannot. “

Poppycock.

Since I am very familiar with the most recently modified B-52s with completely updated ECM, and apparently you are not, let me assure you and other readers of this thread, that the B-52 is a very viable threat against any IADS when used as a stand-off platform carrying cruise missiles.

[TXnMA]

Thanks! that is most helpful!