Created full-size mockup PAK DA

As the TASS, the company "Tupolev" created the first full-size model of a promising aviation complex of the Far aviation (PAK YES).

Created several layouts of PAK DA from composite materials, as well as a full-size model of wood. Layouts are made according to the "flying wing" scheme.

- explained the source agency.

In his words, the new bomber will maximize the use of technology to reduce radar visibility ("stealth"). Among other things, radio-absorbing materials will be used, weapon will be located inside the aircraft.

Also PAK DA is planned to equip with the latest domestic EW (electronic warfare), which have no world analogues in efficiency.

According to unofficial TASS information, it is assumed that the first prototype of a subsonic bomber will rise into the air at the turn of 2025.

Earlier, Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov said that PAK DA can be demonstrated to the public in 2018 year. Initially it was expected that the aircraft would begin to arrive in the troops in 2023-2025, the first test flights were scheduled for 2019-2020 years. Subsequently due to the resumption of mass production Tu-160 the dates were shifted to the right.

Comments

[NEXUS]

The question on TU-160M2 is not clear ... if you believe the military’s statements, the first Tu-160M2 will fly into the air in the 20th year and the number in the series is announced to be 50. Question: Will the PAK DA program interfere with the implementation of what was planned for Swans?

[Thrall]

Better a tit in hand than a crane in perspective.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Thrall

Better a tit in hand than a crane in perspective.

The TU-160 itself was ahead of time, and in the modernized modernized version, it’s ridiculous to call it a “tit”. The adversary and close nothing like that in the coming years and will not. For me, the TU-160M2 and PAK DA programs are equivalent programs. But at the same time we get 2 "range" with completely different characteristics. And there is still a big question, which bomber will be better in the end.

[bouncyhunter]

Quote: NEXUS

The TU-160 itself was ahead of time, and in the modernized modernized version, it’s ridiculous to call it a “tit”. The adversary and close nothing like that in the coming years and will not. For me, the TU-160M2 and PAK DA programs are equivalent programs. But at the same time we get 2 "range" with completely different characteristics. And there is still a big question, which bomber will be better in the end.

Judging by the fact that the terms for PAK YES are shifted to the right - the TU-160M2 program is a priority. It is understandable - the machine is reliable, proven and promising in terms of modernization. And PAK YES is still only in the layout and it is not known how long it will actually take to treat "childhood diseases" when it is embodied "in metal" ...

[Iline]

Quote: bouncyhunter

It’s understandable - the machine is reliable, proven and promising in terms of modernization

Do not tell my slippers .. Do not tell me how many planes are currently in good condition? Of course you will not prompt - information for official use.
So, having served for a long time on these aircraft, I can declare with all responsibility to you: the reliability of this machine, well, really wants to be better. And whoever says the opposite, he only watches peppy reports on TV. Not so simple with this plane.
And I was initially unaware of plans to resume production of these aircraft to the detriment of the PAK-DA program.

[bouncyhunter]

You as a specialist know better.

[Arh]

So we will fly !!!

[fa2998]

Well, we can shout “Hurray!” You carefully read, this year we built a wooden model (glory to the carpenters and joiners). That year they promised to be finished in metal, and the tests will be done after 2 years. And at 23, already in the troops! You are in do you believe it?
Work on the PAK FA (fighter!) Began in 2002. The mock-up was ready in 2004. The first flight in 2010, and is still being tested! So far, 15 years, and has not been built in series, has not been supplied to the troops.

[midivan]

Quote: Iline

Do not tell my slippers .. Do not tell me how many planes are currently in good condition?

Quote: Iline

So, having served for a long time on these aircraft, I can tell you with all responsibility: the reliability of this machine, well, really wants to be better

Of course, I am very far from the sky and such beauty as the Swan, but still in good condition and reliability seem to be two completely different things, I won’t be interested in what the malfunction is insecure so as not to be sent further (a secret probably) but you do not allow such thoughts that over time, technology, materials (well, there is composite, carbon-marbon), as well as machines (I hope) have become more accurate and all the flaws can be fixed?

[Iline]

Quote: midivan

over time, technology and materials have changed (well, there is composite, carbon-marbon), as well as machines (I hope) have become more accurate and can all the shortcomings be corrected?

I admit such a thought. With this approach, one can make a super fighter from An-2. Or maybe still create a new plane? Well, how would be more suitable for real needs? I admit the modernization of strategists, but I don’t see the need for production of airplanes based on them, even if they are deeply modernized. Times are flowing, needs are changing, approaches to warfare also, and combining the new with the old is not a good idea.

[Reviews]

Quote: Iline

I admit the modernization of strategists, but I don’t see the need for production of airplanes based on them, even if they are deeply modernized. Times are flowing, needs are changing, approaches to warfare also, and combining the new with the old is not a good idea.

Well, why is it so right ... For example, subject to the availability of new engines, you can implement cruising supersonic so that the attacks are faster than now on airplanes that have supersonic speed only to break through air defense. The glider is "able" now, it is up to the engine. Only for the sake of this it is possible to start modernization.

[Rushnairfors]

Of course, there are a lot of disputes about PAK and about Tu160 about which I honestly agree with Iline, in general, normal long-range pilots have long offered an excellent option - the creation of a PAK based on the usual tu214, roughly speaking, instead of installing a cabin, drums should be modified a little for equipment and alga !!! After all, the PAK is primarily a missile carrier and I never heard of a bomber variant, which means that roughly the platform is the same as 160 or 95, and why do expensive R&D and create it is not clear what? But our opinion, of course, few people care about.

[midivan]

Quote: Iline

Times are flowing, needs are changing, approaches to warfare also, and combining the new with the old is not a good idea.

And here's the thing, now I understand your idea

[9lvariag]

line, so you please reposted reasonably for what kind of aviators like you are in the DBA, well, are STELS wives anti-Papuan bomber? I did not read your answer in the last topic. Exactly not any.
1. The fact that it will be a cheap bobmer, as a carrier platform, is far from a fact. If you were chasing cheapness, then in Enegels should have been 4M and Tu-16A3 in conservation. The avionics could have been changed now and the RD-3M-500 dvigla was thrown into a landfill, replacing it with more economical and powerful ones. And even though such aircraft would fly abroad, fearing every sneeze in Turkey or Greece, Iran - but it would be much cheaper than a new wunderwaffle. What we have - we do not store, having lost weeping!
2. Yes, there may be a restoration in the production of NK-12, NK-32 and NK-56, will fly into a pretty penny. There are no remnants, no capacities, personnel have long been retired or in a cemetery. But you know, such R&D on the NAA B-2 "Spirit" and copying of Amer’s aircraft in the Tu-202/404 have already taken place! In short, the recipe for the magic of luck: we take out the old drawings of the T-4 / T-60PS or Tu-202/404 from the shelves of the archives, we remove the forgotten and dusty Tu-144LL from the hangar in Monino and begin work. But the trouble is, Naum Chernyakhovsky died and what Tupolei thought there, in connection with the deceased Tu-202, also an HZ. What we shall do? Will we fight in forums like "airbase" and "paralal" or will we think with our heads?
2. The carriers of the WTO, which was originally B-1A / B-1B and B-2, were not cheap when they were. Neither in the shaggy 1970s, nor even more so now. Moreover, to call cheap ammunition GBU-15 / GBU-21 / GBU-47 / GBU-3x - even my tongue will not turn. And even more so, to call cheap CALSM, AGM-105ASM, AGM-158 ER rackets. Sights, GPS, laser stations, bulky electronic warfare systems cost a lot of money (I read somewhere that an electronic warhead kit eats 25kW and weighs 2,5 tons!).
So our sample with our backlog in the electric iron will be all the more cheap. And is it worth firing his glider resource and moto watch - to disperse a gang of stoned losers somewhere over 3000km. from our borders.
3. I think you are cunning in the fact that you yourself know for a long time that all games in conventional warhead warheads and flights to Afghanistan, Syria, etc., are only for peacetime. The main purpose of the DBA: suspension of carriers of nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons, powerful ODAB, Betab. And everything else is for the evil one (there is work in progress, there is a raid, there is study too).
But is it cheap to drive an aircraft designed to destroy with the help of nuclear weapons, especially important goals and prom. enterprises, only the Supreme knowledge. But IMHO, I would not drive, even to save the Su-34 resource.
Can you answer me with drugs or here questions? Or will you voice the hotels of the colonels from the DBA?

[9lvariag]

Iine - At least clearly explain to people what you need?

[9lvariag]

lineYou tell me how much MiG-31, Su -27, MiG-29 is in good condition. How many really flying Su-24 and Sha-Su-25 bombers that you can fly in the frontline without fear? How many even in museums are the Tu-22M2 left with no destroyed PPCh and no failures of the remote control? What were the total losses of the Tu-16 and Tu-95/142 for the entire time of the raid on them.
You are trying to pull an owl on a globe, let's say so in my humble IMHO, almost all the planes of this design bureau ("Tupol") were not sinless and without glitch. Take at least the Tu-16 and Tu-104? And the bouquet of Tu-22 "Eater" diseases will simply surprise those who are not in the subject. And what we have next: we will directly say that the incomprehensible Emka simply rubbed the talented though raw T-4 (Su-100). And your titanium composite "Black Swan", in the T-4MS beat on the move. Although the Tu-22Mx itself was brought up only in the 90s! And the Tu-160 was so cumbersome, expensive and unfinished that they did not have time to arm several regiments.

[Ktor]

In the existing appearance, the Tu-160 is not particularly good - old planes, some elements of on-board equipment had to be removed from other planes - there was nothing to replace them with. The 1st step was the reproduction of this equipment, using which it would be possible to replace a failed one. Also engine reproduction. In the 2nd step, bringing the Tu-160 (those available in the VKS) to the level of Tu-160M ​​(new equipment, cable lines, etc.). Tu-160M2 close to Tu-160m only with new glider. Partially the glider will be finalized (slightly)

[Caa]

Quote: NEXUS

The TU-160 itself was ahead of time, and in the modernized modernized version, it’s ridiculous to call it a “tit”. The adversary and close nothing like that in the coming years and will not. For me, the TU-160M2 and PAK DA programs are equivalent programs.

I will support. As for me, the TU-160M2 will fulfill all the tasks assigned to it and will fully correspond to the time, even taking into account the time that will pass before the series. Now everything looks like we don’t know something for which we needed PAK YES, which will be slow but “wing” and “invisible”. In general, maybe this is a big disinformation and they want to send “partners” along the wrong path? And this wing will not go further than plywood?

[Very old]

YOU are right, NECKUS.
In 160, the possibilities of modernization are hidden, the glider is simply a miracle.
95th can still be pumped with modern filling
Amers 52nd does not write off, they know how to count money

[cap]

I agree completely. I, too, are plagued by doubts whether it is worth chasing two hares instead of refreshing the park. What will be the matter with money is a big question. Not the best times in the world, to drive the new while there is a handicap, why. Tomorrow, God forbid, the dollar will collapse, it is better to have planes ready for battle than mock-ups.

[9lvariag]

How would you like to?
Everything universal in purpose is cut off in other functions. A little - a little bomber, a little - a little missile carrier (two rackets - four X-101 formats), a little - a little supersonic and stuff like that. Nothing but the aglitsky “Victor” and the truncated B-1B, it does not remind me.

[shooter18]

PAK YES - touched for the future.

[A1845]

Quote: NEXUS

The adversary and close nothing like that in the coming years and will not.

and why would they need him?
the concept of combat use of the same B-1B has always been extremely muddy
enlighten plz?

[NEXUS]

Quote: A1845

the concept of combat use of the same B-1B has always been extremely muddy
enlighten plz?

V-1 is close in concept to our Swan, as it was also created to break through the enemy’s air defense, but at low altitudes, let’s say, hiding behind the terrain. But the carrying capacity is less, the speed is only 1,5 mach, and as far as I remember, it is now used as a bomber, in the arsenal of which there are only bombs ... according to the last point I can make a mistake, let me correct if it is not so.

[A1845]

supersonic air defense breakthrough was not considered real even then
Now, we must understand, is this all the more true?

[NEXUS]

Quote: A1845

supersonic air defense breakthrough was not considered real even then

From what? It must be understood that the strategic bomber is a very large platform that can not only launch missiles, but also defend itself very effectively. These are electronic warfare systems, and the ceiling and supersonic (and for a much longer time than those of the same fighters), again, cover by fighters ... so even now it is quite possible.
But why the navel then tear, if there is a "long arm" in the arsenal? As one Mattress general said after the X-101 demonstration, we now have to shoot down not the "archer" but his arrows.

[Blackmokona]

Under the idea of ​​a breakthrough, they created the Valkyrie. And realizing that it was futile at first B1A began to do, and then even slower B1B, and in the end everything turned into B2 sound

[A1845]

Quote: BlackMokona

and in the end everything turned into a B2 sound

which somehow did not manifest itself at all with astronomical high cost

[Blackmokona]

Participation in many conflicts without losses. Excellent indicator.

[A1845]

yes, no loss, yes - flew to the goal halfway around the world, it's cool
but in general acted against an already unarmed enemy?
the same B-1B proved to be no worse ..
and if the B-52 participated - could it be even more effective?

[9lvariag]

Blackmokona, what are you all like parrots? It would be so if something like this would bomb targets in Africa or Latin America. And the Soviet fleet would have nipped at this time the P-500/700, KSR-5 and X-24, on these objects. If the USSR were grinning around Europe for the UR-100, “Relief” and “Pioneer -2UTTX”, “Liner” with conventional warheads, then it would be possible to fly over its beloved one painlessly even on Tu-16A1 and Tu-4! :)

[9lvariag]

Valkyrie It turned out to be unpromising (for many factors) and only because it, unlike Lockheed, had more expensive R&D (well, it wasn’t in the NAA Scank Works). I would even say that with a higher probability I would go from the start Lokhidovsky RB-12than she is. The point is not even the futility of such a breakthrough (we had a place through the Far Eastern Federal District and the Pole was a shaft)! NAC already in this regard already B-58 was not ideal. And in fact (IMHO) that the A-12 is a more capricious, but more traditional version of aerobatics. The materials used in the XB-70 made the price of at least the drill regiment of these hypersonic (welding of special steel was at a price similar to that of titanium) - well, it was absolutely prohibitive, including the price of one flight of two from these aircraft. And also needed tankers that could refuel such a quantity of aggressive fuel in the air. And in general, do you think ice should sit for four or five hours in a bulky spacesuit. And ambiguities with the aerodrome infrastructure. And she completed the moronic accident arranged by the pilot - the astronaut, at a foolish pontificate show for the Pentagon. Everyone already understood that such a highly specialized (no missiles), raw and wayward aircraft, it was impossible to adopt the NAC. And if with the CIA, a rival Lockheed "caught God by the beard" literally having thrown something too innovative for the Air Force, then the NAA had no options. Too Li May, had great plans for this aircraft.

[A1845]

[

Quote: NEXUS

But why the navel then tear, if there is a "long arm" in the arsenal

Golden words!
they once even planned to make an economical CD carrier based on the B-747 and not to bathe
jokes as jokes, but you will involuntarily think about it - what will be the real exhaust from such golden birds?

[Pete mitchell]

By and large, the B-1b is not a supersonic aircraft, with a load at low altitude it does not pull "by the sound." It boasts a fairly advanced system of reb. But even in the distant '89 it seems, when the Americans watched the Tu-160, they recognized that even without possessing a reb like B-1b, Blackjack would enter North American air defense like a knife in oil, it was almost impossible to intercept on time. Then they really liked the plane.
I think that PAK DA and the new Tu-160 m2 will live and work together: one subtle and not so hot; another very fast and not so hot that inconspicuous. I suppose that by combat systems they will be almost ghosts. Beautiful both ..

[Ilya_Nsk]

Hmm, the B-1B is a little inferior to the Tu-160, but this model is somehow very much reminiscent of the B-2 .. with a lag of a dozen years .. If the engines are on a different physical principle, then maybe it will be good ..

[fa2998]

Quote: NEXUS

For me, the TU-160M2 and PAK DA programs are equivalent programs. But at the same time we get 2 "range" with completely different characteristics.

Will there be enough grandmas IMMEDIATELY for 2 PROGRAMS?
Or tomorrow oil will promise to be $ 140 per barrel, or all Armata, the fleet, other aviation, air defense, etc., and so will smash !?

[Nikolaevich I]

No, but what? It is logical! Don’t figure it out, but a “tit in a hand” is really better than a “woodpecker in a ... little box”!

[iConst]

Quote: Thrall

Better a tit in hand than a crane in perspective.

My grandfather used to say to me: a titmouse in the sky is better than a duck under the bed ...

I apologize for offtop ... inspired ...

[Zaurbek]

At the factory, a couple of buildings are from old backlogs. Apparently they will begin to be collected in the near future. The most difficult serial release.

[Ktor]

They wrote from one already assembled a plane and he replaced the bomber after the disaster

[Zaurbek]

New versions of avionics, radars, engines will break in during the modernization of old boards. So there is enough work for everyone.

[Reviews]

Quote: NEXUS

The question on TU-160M2 is not clear ... if you believe the military’s statements, the first Tu-160M2 will fly into the air in the 20th year and the number in the series is announced to be 50. Question: Will the PAK DA program interfere with the implementation of what was planned for Swans?

Why should this interfere? Today, flying Tu-160s by 2025 will prettyly age, and we see with what "speed" breakthrough weapons are being brought now. And by 2030-2035 even those Tu-160s that will be released in 2020 will age.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Avis

Why should this interfere?

And you take a look at the cost of these aircraft and maybe my question will become clear to you. Under the USSR, one TU-160 cost 250 rubles ... and could produce no more than 000 pieces. And there will be PAK YES, which will also cost a penny.

[iConst]

Quote: NEXUS

And there will be PAK YES, which will also cost a penny.

The problem (this can be seen in the case of SGA) is a drastic reduction in cost.
Proprietary technologies are highly efficient, but ... very expensive in all respects. Including and for CER / E (total cost of ownership / operation).
Especially the advanced military.

And we see that the SGA is searching for a solution - the customer is pushing cooperation to reduce production costs.

Those. that which was successfully ruined with the collapse of the USSR is now being taken up by our ... - yes, there - enemies.

[Reviews]

Quote: NEXUS

Quote: Avis

Why should this interfere?

And you take a look at the cost of these aircraft and maybe my question will become clear to you. Under the USSR, one TU-160 cost 250 rubles ... and could produce no more than 000 pieces. And there will be PAK YES, which will also cost a penny.

Until PAK YES gets into service, something must fly to the Air Force. A supersonic plane wears out faster than a subsonic one. This is me about the Tu-160 glider. What will you fly after 2020? Only on aircraft built around this year.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Avis

Until PAK YES gets into service, something must fly to the Air Force. A supersonic plane wears out faster than a subsonic one.

TU-160M2 is exactly what it should be. Glider wear, which is the largest over supersonic, which is currently not an option for the long-range fan.

Quote: Avis

Only on aircraft built around this year.

The resource of old swans is extended and the bombers are upgraded to version M1.

[Reviews]

Quote: NEXUS

TU-160M2 is exactly what it should be.

Well, Duc, who is going to produce in Kazan then? Your question was Tu-160M2.

at this point in time, the option for the range is optional.

I can not agree. From cruising supersonic only bad will refuse. But, of course, other engines are needed for this.

The resource of old swans is extended

This cannot be done ad infinitum. And the finished aircraft is more difficult to modify than to build a refreshed from scratch.

[Very old]

NESKUS, once again I agree with you.
"Where is the money, Zin?" @ V. Vysotsky

[viktor.]

250 lyamov in the USSR crazy money! and for the USSR a golden plane! and why swans now? who knows?

[NEXUS]

Quote: viktor.

250 lyamov in the USSR crazy money! and for the USSR a golden plane! and why swans now? who knows?

About the same, not in rubles, but in dollars ... + -...

[NEXUS]

Quote: summer

27 units on the wiki.

Of these, if sclerosis does not fail me, then 6 or 8 prototypes rather than serial cars.

[summer]

35 with prototypes.

[summer]

27 on the wiki. The cost is 3-4 F35, according to Internet numbers.

[Bursa]

In addition to cost, it seems to me that the issue of separation by function is important:
- TU-160 - a breakthrough in supersonic sound with jamming of electronic warfare and striking. In case stealth is impossible to provide. for example, layered defense at the launch point (taking into account the range of missiles). As well as the ability to quickly (taking into account supersonic speed) deliver missiles to their launch zone.
- PAK YES - it will probably be able to quietly barrage in the launch area for a long time (stealth + flying wing scheme), but in the absence of serious countermeasures / detection. He will also be assigned the functions of duty patrols of borders, as Tu-shku drive expensive and it makes no sense.
ps amateur opinion in aviation

[NEXUS]

Quote: Bursan

- PAK YES - it will probably be able to quietly barrage in the launch area for a long time (stealth + flying wing scheme), but in the absence of serious countermeasures / detection. He will also be assigned the functions of duty patrols of borders, as Tu-shku drive expensive and it makes no sense.

I think here the influence of the mattress B-2 and in the future B-3 is more ... about baraging ... you know, Lebed, if sclerosis doesn’t fail me, I have a record of being in the air ..

- The flight was a record for the Tu-160, as its duration exceeded the previous figure by two hours and amounted to about 23 hours to a range of about 18 thousand kilometers, ”said Lieutenant Colonel Vladimir Drik, an official representative of the Press Service and Information Department of the Russian Ministry of Defense for the Air Force.

And given the arsenal and promising developments, then breaking through the adversary’s missile defense system is no longer necessary in essence.

[Woldemar]

V-2 in one of the operations in the air spent 50 hours with a hook, when they flew to Afghanistan, if I don’t confuse

[Ktor]

I think you as an amateur hit the nail on the head. Both planes will be in service after 2030-2035. Tu-160M2 (or M **) will play the role of a high-speed strike complex. And PAK YES is an aircraft that will carry out long-term duty in the airspace of our country (with lower costs and more load than the Tu-box)))) and have the ability to strike a long-range Raman strike. Perhaps, the deterioration of the foreign policy situation is predicted for that period, because at present air watch has not been carried out for more than 30 years

[Vadim237]

Now the new Tu 160 billion 18 will cost.

[siberalt]

And why TU -160 hypersound, if he gets the core to any point on the ball? He is not a fighter!

[Nikolaevich I]

Well, the "hypersound" is necessary for the armament of the Tu-160, and not to the strategist himself.

[fa2998]

Quote: Avis

. And by 2030-2035 even those Tu-160s that will be released in 2020 will age.

Opachki! Today's Tu-160s fly 35-40 years old (began to be used in 1987) and after repair and modernization they fly 10-15-10 years later. And new planes that are thinking of producing again, after XNUMX years, are already old. Probably instead of titanium there will be used tin, wood and fabric!

[Andrey Yuryevich]

Quote: NEXUS

The question on TU-160M2 is not clear ... if you believe the military’s statements, the first Tu-160M2 will fly into the air in the 20th year and the number in the series is announced to be 50. Question: Will the PAK DA program interfere with the implementation of what was planned for Swans?

Andryukha ... I beg, I beg! do you know the corporate joke about the "postponement"? voooot! while 160m2-will be filled with "portable dates" .... just five to seven years ...

[NEXUS]

Quote: Andrey Yurievich

Andryukha ... I beg, I beg! do you know the corporate joke about the "postponement"? voooot! while 160m2-will be filled with "portable dates" .... just five to seven years ...

Namesake, do you really believe that in 5-7 years we will create a series of 50 TU-160? In the USSR, 4 cars a year! did barely barely ...

[Andrey Yuryevich]

Quote: NEXUS

Namesake, do you really believe that in 5-7 years we will create a series of 50 TU-160? In the USSR, 4 cars a year! did barely barely ...

What am I talking about? magic word: "postponement"! and no need to explain!

[iConst]

Quote: NEXUS

Namesake, do you really believe that in 5-7 years we will create a series of 50 TU-160? In the USSR, 4 cars a year! did barely barely ...

In fact, during the years of industrialization of the USSR, the people who did the work, committed the unthinkable.
While the liberals reasoned "this is impossible," they simply did.
Cadres decide everything. If the head cares about relatives and villas - there will be no sense.

A huge number of enterprises rests on the "cutting state goszabla". On personal connections. Lime contests, kickbacks ... Hence, the cost of production is sky-high - kickbacks along the chain for raw materials, components.

Sometimes a sinful thought comes - for a year or two, the 37th to return ... Ugh! There is simply no strength to look at it.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: Andrey Yurievich

do you know the corporate joke about the "postponement"?

Exactly ! After all, only "yesterday" promised us PACK YES in 2018, but did not manage to get sober after the "February holiday weekend", as they already "promise" in 2025 ...

[okko077]

Nexus, good afternoon! The resumption of production of the Tu-160 is a necessary measure and is caused by 2 main reasons. Firstly, to maintain and maintain the combat readiness of existing aircraft, and at least some economic sense of their existence at the expense of a larger number. Secondly, this is a necessary step to prepare for the production of PAK DA. Without debugging the production of the TU-160M, there is nothing to think about the release of PAK DA. And about someone who is ahead of time is not necessary ...

[iConst]

Quote: okko077

Firstly, to maintain and maintain the combat readiness of existing aircraft, and at least some economic sense of their existence at the expense of a larger number. Secondly, this is a necessary step to prepare for the production of PAK DA.

- Perhaps one of the most important summary posts.

[NEXUS]

Quote: okko077

Nexus, good afternoon!

Good afternoon!

Quote: okko077

The resumption of production of the Tu-160 is a necessary measure

She is not forced, but necessary.

Quote: okko077

Secondly, this is a necessary step to prepare for the production of PAK DA.

Two strategists in the future, this is a very big crap for techies, this is first. Secondly, this is a dispersion of efforts - we are trying to do with two hands what we need to do with four. The same applies to the cost of the bombers themselves and the further financing of their maintenance.
I do not agree that the Swan in the M2 variation will be worse than PAK YES. The only thing the TU-160 will concede to PAK YES, as far as I understand, is stealth. But now there is X-101/102 with a range of more than 5000 km in the arsenal of the Swans. And work is already underway on extended range missiles. I mean, to the bomber, if the range is, say, 6-8 thousand for the new missile defense system, it will not be necessary to enter the coverage area of ​​the adversary’s air defense. Then the question is, why would he need excessive stealth, if he would be able to launch missiles, not even crossing the border of Russia?

Quote: okko077

And about someone who is ahead of time is not necessary ...

Do you disagree with this? Even when I started talking about resuscitation of the TU-160 production, I said that the T-4 (SOTKA) was much more promising ... and it’s very unclear to me why the work on the T-4 is not used in the updated TU-160M2 .

[okko077]

Andrew! You did not carefully read my comment about the reasons why, in my opinion, the production of the TU-160 will be restored ...
The scheme with variable wing geometry on modern aircraft has not been used for a long time. Providing a certain advantage in the aerodynamic plan, aircraft are significantly inferior in terms of load capacity, resource and cost. The rotary assembly makes the structure heavier, requires additional costs, does not allow rational use of the internal compartments of the crane and reduces the resource due to increased load, and permissible overloads ... Especially for heavy aircraft .. your arguments ?.

[NEXUS]

Quote: okko077

What are your arguments?

Quote: okko077

aircraft are significantly inferior in terms of cargo capacity

Nothing that Swan is the most heavy-lifting in its class?
At the same time, I believe in the new-old glider, composites and lightweight will probably be used, which will facilitate a few construction. I said a long time ago, or rather did not understand the moment - in fact, the TU-160M2 is a new aircraft and is created almost from scratch. From here I had a question that to this day I can’t find an answer- Why, when the conversation about the PAK DA and TU-160M2 only started, the question of work on the T-4 was not considered in the long-range version, which exceeded almost all of Cygnus ? The whole start is still one. But in the end, they got a bomber, which is still, in my opinion, the best.

[the most important]

Quote: NEXUS

I do not agree that the Swan in the M2 variation will be worse than PAK YES.

Or maybe the question should be posed not by anyone better, but what tasks will be set for each? There is no information on the tasks assigned to the new aircraft. Invisibility, a new wing and other things - these are not tasks, but simply "bells and whistles". When designing the Tu-160, the task was to break through the air defense of aircraft carrier formations, but when the aircraft was ready it became clear that the task at that time was impossible. But in the presence of long-range missile systems, it suddenly turned out that the missiles were breaking through air defense warrants and that "the old man will still serve!" But what are the tasks of PAK YES? With the declared low-speed, it is a “second-tier” aircraft ... when the air defense is destroyed or absent, when the enemy does not have the strength and means to counteract even such a slow-moving target or on condition of striking practically from its territory. It is possible that PAK YES it will be more bomber, and Tu -160 occupies a niche rocket carrier. And then it becomes clear why two different aircraft are needed by the aerospace forces.

[NEXUS]

Quote: the most important

It is possible that PAK YES it will be more bomber, and Tu -160 occupies a niche rocket carrier. And then it becomes clear why two different aircraft are needed by the aerospace forces.

Therefore, from this I ask the question: Are we able to pull two bomb programs financially? We have been giving birth to PAK FA since the time of the first prototype, the 8th year, and at the same time, we conspired with the Indians to finance ... and there is no serial car yet.
And then there are two strategists who themselves are not worth a penny, and even the program itself will suck how much ... therefore I say, but we are not trying to eat more than we can swallow?

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: NEXUS

why the developments on T-4 are not applied in the updated TU-160M2.

T-4 ("weaving"; sometimes, Su-100) turned out super. Wonderful, but also super. Dear! “Golden”, if not “platinum” ... After the T-4 project was closed, all the developments were transferred to the Tupolev Design Bureau. They say that Tupolev used these “developments” to create the Tu-160, but to what extent, I do not know.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: NEXUS

there is X-101 / 102 with a range of more than 5000 km. And work is already underway on extended range missiles. I mean, to the bomber, if the range is, say, 6-8 thousand for the new KR,

For the X-101 / 102, the turboprop engine was originally created. It was planned that the "range" of the X-101 / 102 would reach up to 8.000 km (one "uncle" voiced even numbers "up to 8.000-10.000 km, but here you can doubt). Unfortunately , the development of the turboprop engine dragged on and then put what was already ready.

[avt]

Quote: NEXUS

Will the PAK YES program interfere with the implementation of Swans?

What a fright! ??? The distance from the layout, to the flight prototype, and even more so to the series, is enormous, especially since it is no longer an airplane of the times of B-29 and not of the USSR of the times of Stalin. They won’t do it for a year, but strategists are needed

Quote: Thrall

Better a tit in hand than a crane in perspective.

Otherwise, in the absence of a tit in the hands of a woodpecker in the ass, it is guaranteed.

[NEXUS]

Quote: avt

What a fright! ??? From the layout, to the flight model, and especially the series, the distance is huge

Shark, welcome! So with such a fright ... how many TU-160M2 can we afford to produce per year, taking into account the price of this aircraft, labor costs, focusing on indicators of at least the same Union? I think from the strength of no more than 2 pieces. And so that the series was cost-effective, voiced a series of 50 cars. And this is subject to normal funding. Simple arithmetic - to make 50 machines, it will take about 25 years. And this is if production starts from the 20th year to the 45th year. And here a reasonable question arises - do we have a printing press, like the United States, to pull out and implement these two nifig not cheap projects, taking into account the purchase and serial machines? The navel will not untie?

Quote: avt

and strategists are needed

I am not saying that they are not needed.

[avt]

Quote: NEXUS

Shark, welcome!

Quote: NEXUS

So with such a fright ... how many TU-160M2 can we afford to produce per year, taking into account the price of this aircraft, labor costs, focusing on indicators of at least the same Union? I think from the strength of no more than 2 pieces.

But we can have a production base with equipment for it. And according to PAK YES, only a wooden horse is available in the form of a model, and in general the perspective in metal is not known. So everything is fine. Everything should ripen, and picking the green fruit can be poisoned. Moreover, the 95th in production nailed the EBN again and in fact we only have the ability to maintain the available 22M3-x, 95-x and 160s with the possibility of releasing ONLY 160s in the short term from the Soviet backlog and new ones.

[NEXUS]

Quote: avt

But we can have a production base with equipment for it

You see, the concept-we can and we can buy, slightly different concepts. Remember the Caucasian captive?

Quote: avt

Everything must ripen

In fact, we have new Swans not yet mature.

Quote: avt

in fact, we only have the ability to maintain the 22M3s, 95s and 160s that are available in flight condition with the possibility of releasing ONLY 160s in the short term from the Soviet backlog and new ones.

There is also a double edged sword. The TU-160 was generally created as a bomber, which should break through the enemy’s air defense, and that’s why it’s supersonic, so the variable geometry of the wing, and so on ... now that long-range missiles have appeared in the arsenal, in excess of sound, wing and even stealth technology are turning into rudiments ...

[okko077]

Andrew! They will not even be more than 50 with the old together, do not hesitate. The release of new TU-160s is the restoration and modernization of old ones and the deployment of preparations for production, if you want the bases for PAK FA.Together they will not be produced ... Now the real health of the Tu-160 is very low, the units and systems are manufactured, or rather, repaired by piece and it will soon be put on the conveyor, some systems for PAK DA will be able to be tested on new and modernized Tu-160s ....

[NEXUS]

Quote: okko077

There will not even be more than 50 with the old ones together, do not hesitate

The truth of life is that in order for this part of the nuclear triad to be effective and reckoned with, we just need about 40-50 of these machines. Otherwise, it makes no sense to fence the garden.

Quote: okko077

Now the real serviceability of the Tu-160 is very low, the blocks and systems are manufactured, or rather, repaired by piece, and this will soon be put on the conveyor

But in the Union it was not put on the conveyor? And did it somehow speed up or reduce the cost of production?

[okko077]

On the Su-25 is the IKV-1 system, and on the Su-17M3 it was also included in the PNK complex. One of the units of this BUG-14 system had low reliability, for 50 cars a month I needed 2-3 spare units - about 30 units a year ..... Where are now the plants that produced systems, units and assemblies for TU- 160? ... Whoever was not connected with the operation, it is very difficult for him to understand what it means to maintain the aircraft in good condition, and what is needed for this. On small planes, hundreds of blocks and assemblies, sensors, and on large ones it’s scary to think ....

[Tusv]

Quote: NEXUS

Will the PAK YES program interfere with the implementation of Swans?

Well Bears need to be replaced

[NEXUS]

Quote: Tusv

Well Bears need to be replaced

For some reason, no one here takes into account the arsenal for our long-range, which dramatically changes the tactics of using these platforms. We talk about stealth technologies, the concept of a “wing”, etc. ... but what the hell is this for if there is a CR in the arsenal of our strategists, which will be close to ICBMs in range? Already now in service with the X-101, and if sclerosis doesn’t fail me, they continue to improve it.

[Tusv]

Quote: NEXUS

We talk about stealth technologies, the concept of a “wing”, etc. ... but what the hell is this for if there is a CR in the arsenal of our strategists, which will be close to ICBMs in range?

Here the Bears are in flight. Ha 101 is not stuffed into the bomb bay. From here a conclusion. It is necessary to build PACDA and not to forget about the Swans. That is, it is not a whim, but a necessity

[NEXUS]

Quote: Tusv

From here a conclusion. It is necessary to build PACDA and not to forget about the Swans. That is, it is not a whim, but a necessity

That's what I’m talking about ... undertaking two programs that are not cheaper in terms of funding, I think, for example, the Yasen-M nuclear submarine program, is it worth it now if we don’t even have a TU-160M2 in a prototype before .. .
But it should be borne in mind that in addition to the TU-160M2, PAK DA program, there are programs of Sarmat, Ash, Husky, the same Almaty, Pak fa, PAK DP, PAK TA, and so on ... and all this requires a lot of real money. And this is not a complete list of what we have swung at ...

[Vadim237]

And they are included in the rearmament program 2015 - 2025 - 27 trillion rubles, so there will be money, about 900 billion rubles for the purchase of 50 Tu 160, and the production of PAK DA will go to the next program, but we can say with confidence that it will be much cheaper Tu 160th.

[Tusv]

Quote: NEXUS

But we must take into account that in addition to the TU-160M2, PAK DA programs, there are programs of Sarmat, Ash, Husky, the same Almaty, Pak fa, PAK DP, PAK TA, and so on ... and all this requires a lot of real money. And this is far from a complete list of what we are aiming at ..

Speaking of money, Why not contact our partners, they say we will still defeat you, no matter how much you attack. Let's get the contribution and preferences right now. Why play war games

[Ustin]

To build a PAK DA, it is necessary to reanimate a number of enterprises, otherwise there will be nobody to deal with this topic. So the decision to restart the TU-160M2 is this event.
After the layout, it usually takes 5-7 years to the prototype, and even 3-4 years to the experimental series, and from it, plus boldly five years before entering the army. This is an optimistic option. That's all arithmetic.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Ustin

After the layout, it usually takes 5-7 years to the prototype, and even 3-4 years to the experimental series, and from it, plus boldly five years before entering the army. This is an optimistic option. That's all arithmetic.

All right painted ... as they say oil painting. Yes, only good on paper, but forgot about the ravines. I’ll ask you a question. And where will we take the money for all this, taking into account inflation, crises, other projects, priority, and the cost of the products themselves?

[the most important]

Quote: NEXUS

And where will we take the money for all this pleasure, taking into account inflation, crises, other projects, priority, and the cost of the products themselves?

There are prospects in this direction ... After 18 years (immediately after the well-known event), retirement will increase to 65 (63 for women) years. And here the former Minister Kudrin proposes to further increase personal income tax from 13% to 17% (or maybe up to 21%) ... And from here the funds will appear ....

[Cat man null]

Quote: the most important

After the 18 year (immediately after the famous event), retirement will be increased to 65 (63 for women) years

- are you Wang?

Quote: the most important

Kudrin proposes to further increase personal income tax from 13% to 17% (or maybe up to 21%)

- they have been offering this for a long time ... And much more is being offered ...
- there’s only one nasis ... alternatively smart suggested 23 of February be postponed ... Moved, no?

About that

[NEXUS]

Quote: the most important

.Here from here and funds will appear ....

Well, yes ... you tell PAK FA and PAK DP, and in the appendage of the 5th generation LFI, which they said to plan not without the help of third-party "partners" ...

[drunkram]

PACK YES until 2035 for us it will be only a picture and 1-2 prototypes, so everything is fine.
Just in time for this, they will begin to write off the bears.

[PalSanych]

PACK YES subsonic bomber, and Swan try to catch up in the sky! PAK YES rather to replace the Bears.

[opus]

Quote: NEXUS

Will the PAK YES program interfere with the implementation of Swans?

Of course it will hurt. Not one or the other will come out.
Bolivar will not stand two

Quote: NEXUS

TU-160 in itself ahead of time

Hardly. It was created according to the required military technical specifications of the military, formed by technical specifications and based on the technologies that the USSR had as a response to B-1 (a, c).
With the advent of missile defense databases and the saturation of IA with guidance from AWACS, it became unnecessary (supersonic), and very expensive.

Quote: Author

Created full-size mockup PAK DA

HOW DOES THIS PR!

Full-size layout these are products to scale 1:1
from the words "full size" and "layout"
This is the layout of the U-280 installation with the 2A42 gun in the 1 scale: 1 (prm)

This is a full-size model of the CP-10 aircraft developed by Design Bureau Modern Aviation Technologies LLC

in the article 7 water on jelly. Photoshop modelka created in 3AD GARDEN.
Moreover, it is unlikely that PfP itself will be PAK.
I explained in "PAK YES designed to replace all three missile carriers"
https://topwar.ru/109920-pak-da-prizvan-zamenit-v
se-tri-raketonosca.html # comment-id-6674343
But this is my opinion.
you can believe the journalist who confuses Fedosov Evgeny Alexandrovich with the late Fedorov, Evgeny (Konstantinovich), the RAS died in 1981

[210ox]

The aircraft is certainly certainly needed .. Only when it appears with our capabilities? Is this design more serious than the T50 will be-dates with PAK FA are constantly being transferred ..

[summer]

This bomber will mask from satellites and horizontal radars. Hide IR radiation, radio stealth, etc. etc. They said about the United States that they already have a device flying at high altitudes, or even in low orbits. He can descend from orbit, now as a scout. If such a device hangs in orbit, and satellites track the aircraft, the bomber will not fly far.

[mr.redpartizan]

PAK FA is technically much more complicated than PAK YES. You can compare a bomber to a truck, and a fighter to a Formula 1 car.

[pupsik]

On tape.ru another photo is given. If it’s like on tape, then our pack doesn’t need nuclear bombs - it scares all enemies with its appearance))


Lenta.ru: The first model of the new Russian strategic bomber was created
https://lenta.ru/news/2017/03/01/maket/

[midivan]

Are you talking about it? The tape is of course an authoritative murzilka but you do not find some differences? Or I have a squint

[Zaurbek]

I think we’ve purged different models, but built the life-size most successful one. And the picture in the article is nothing more than a fantasy of the artist ....

[WUA 518]

Quote: Zaurbek

And the picture in the article is nothing more than a fantasy of the artist ....

Absolutely true! How much was tankor .... in the Armata. What they expected to see.
And what we have at the moment!

[MoJloT]

Yes, the color is different!

[midivan]

[/ quote] Yes, the color is different! [quote]

there is such a color in the dark

[MoJloT]

No headlamp is another like.

[midivan]

Quote: Zaurbek

And the picture in the article is nothing more than a fantasy of the artist ....

Quote: WUA 518

Absolutely true!

Stop stop stop, how fantasy? That is, even a photo of the layout is such a secret that we can’t see it? Or in the picture in the article the layout is still there, I do not say that it (the final product) will be like that, it’s all just about the layout.

[WUA 518]

Quote: midivan

murzilka but you do not find some differences?

Purge model T-4MS "product 200" 1971.

[Vadim237]

To heat the air intake into the fuselage is not rational, in the amount that it will take you can place fuel and weapons.

[Reviews]

Quote: Vadim237

To heat the air intake into the fuselage is not rational, in the amount that it will take you can place fuel and weapons.

Rationally. Firstly, there are fewer corner reflectors, and secondly, there is less surface to be washed.
In LK, internal volumes are, in general, excessive. Even on heavy aircraft of the classical scheme, the construction height of the caissons is such that there is so much fuel that they can get in there that they simply will not take off with such a reserve. For example, An-124.

[Vadim237]

Just at the flying wing, in the rear of the fuselage there is a disruption of the incoming flow and it is therefore more rational to install air intakes with engines there - like the Tu 404.

[Vadim237]

Rather, it will be similar to Tu 404

[NEXUS]

Quote: Vadim237

Rather, it will be similar to Tu 404

I think it will most likely look like an ECIP ...

Of course, taking into account new technologies, materials and application concepts. That's why for some reason, I think PAK YES will be exactly like ECIP.

[Vadim237]

EKIP is a thick flying wing, and PAK YES is the usual aerodynamic design - a flying wing.

[Reviews]

Quote: NEXUS

I think it will most likely look like an ECIP ...
That's why for some reason, I think PAK YES will be exactly like ECIP.

This makes no sense.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Avis

This makes no sense.

What is nonsense? I'm not saying that it will be exactly the same as the ECIP, but I think it will be something similar. At the same time, such a lineup allows you to carry more load, he does not need extra sound, well, and I think the range is not inferior to a line-up ala V-2.
Your argument, why this cannot be?

[opus]

Quote: Vadim237

Rather, it will be similar to Tu 404

Quote: NEXUS

I think it will most likely look like an ECIP ...

Wishlist and fantasy guys.
It's pointless.
Will (remember me) look like B-2

maybe taking into account the "experience" of T-50 (this is reasonable)

Of course without PGO and Whitcomb pucks
This is not a trend.
And certainly without a variable sweep of the wing.
Stealth is now in trend.
and it will be terribly expensive (TU-160 "resting") and neither in nor in 2018 nor in 2020 (the meaning of spending grandmas on TU-10М2 is lost)
And then!
If our industry will master.
I’m afraid that PR-manager D. Rogozin’s “one-time spaceport” wouldn’t go out
Roscosmos plans after a test launch of the launch vehicle from the Vostochny Cosmodrome in late April long break in launches, said the executive director of the Department of launch vehicles and ground-based space infrastructure of Roscosmos Andrey Mazurin.

“I hope that in April we will open the spaceport with the first launch. In 2017, we will not have a launch, most likely. In 2018 and on, insignificant quantities (starts) will go, depending on the program", he said at a meeting in Yakutsk.

He’s a stranger’s budget, he drank to hucksters and their entourage

A people-saves
Threat. I just don’t understand what it should be ***** m, to buy a Mercedes with a star, EVEN IF YOU DO NOT PAY MONEY

Is this some kind of phobia of a "little peepie"?

[Vadim237]

I believe that it will be similar to the Tu 404 in the fuselage, since it has a lot of space just for several bomb compartments, it will exceed the Tu 160 in bomb load, the engines will be put into the tail section, with recessed air intakes, the fuselage will be made of composite materials, whether Bo 4 or Bo 6 NK 56 - MO engines decided to reanimate the old jet engine design, which makes the creation of an airplane much cheaper.

[opus]

Quote: Vadim237

I think that it will be similar to the Tu 404 in the fuselage, since it has a lot of space just for several bomb compartments

1.?
Why so scoff at the VKS (RF Air Force)?

What would the barmaley laugh?
2. PACK YES not a passenger airliner.
rockets, bombs NOT NEEDED air conditioners, chairs, stewardesses and living space!
The payload density is completely different than that of humans.
And you still can’t fill up the reserves of the volume with fuel, you won’t fill up with missiles
the chassis will break
-no such runways
3. Why such a midsection? AEPR in the frontal zone?

Quote: Vadim237

the fuselage will be made of composite materials,

the country will go bankrupt

[Vadim237]

Well, it’s directly not in the size of Tu 404 - 20 percent less, composite materials are not as expensive as creating an engine, and the engine has already been created - the most difficult thing is done, it remains to make a glider with avionics and it will carry the same bombs, from small to super heavy 10 tons.

[Vadim237]

And in addition, the Tupolev Design Bureau - Tu 404, is probably the only well-developed project of the flying wing - that you can’t take an already completed project.

[Reviews]

Quote: pupsik

On tape.ru another photo is given. If it’s like on tape, then our pack doesn’t need nuclear bombs - it scares all enemies with its appearance))
Lenta.ru: The first model of the new Russian strategic bomber was created
https://lenta.ru/news/2017/03/01/maket/

There were several options. Apparently, they purged them all.
And what is “awesome” in the version shown on the “tape”? The usual integrated circuit.

[UVB]

Another option

[Zaurbek]

Stealth fails with straight keels

[igor.borov775]

Quote: UVB

Another option

Hi!! This, you don’t find something familiar. The golden times were blown out such models that still surprise. There and Spiral and Myasischevskie projects from Sukhoi. Now only fuss around the stealth. And you missed one important component that was built and implemented together with TU-160. Our probable opponents were never fools. They didn’t really like Swan. All the boron cheese flared up around the brother of the smaller Swan. There is a special article on this aircraft under the US-USSR Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty. That's where it was for they are a terrible threat.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: pupsik

On tape.ru another photo is given

Dyk. It was already said that “right now” nothing should be taken specifically .... except for the fact that “the ice has broken ....”! That's when all the journalists who don’t understand are “unsubscribed.” What is the difference between the capsule and the capsule ... then the situation will settle down and you can see what the interesting people will say.

[corporal]

full-size wood model

At the furniture factory named after Serdyukov.
3d design has apparently not taken root with us. Sadly.

[Thrall]

Quote: Corporal

3d design has apparently not taken root with us. Sadly.

But it took root in the design of the mowing American F-35.

[Reviews]

Quote: Corporal

3d design has apparently not taken root with us. Sadly.

The customer commission is not digitized. They must climb and try on the layout themselves.

[Zaurbek]

First, 3D is modeled and then a layout is built, first on a scale for purging, then 1: 1 to confirm the layout ...

[corporal]

Quote: Zaurbek

first on a scale for blowing, then 1: 1 to confirm the layout ...

Purging is understandable. I just naively believed that the full-sized pieces of wood had long been abandoned

[Zaurbek]

The generals need to show something ...

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: Corporal

3d design has apparently not taken root with us. Sadly.

Well ... that’s the way we have it: 3D-designing is a new thing ... not everyone understands what to eat or how to bite it ... but the furniture factory ... so the furniture ... it is always need ... this is more understandable to the people!

[Ktor]

It’s just that aviation equipment is being developed according to guests, they need to present a mock-up - the prices for the work are so constructed that changing is not particularly profitable. Perhaps this is the right decision - specialists decide

[tol100v]

Projects of "our" menagers are simply surprising! Restore Tu-160 production from the beginning, and then draw “pictures”!

[Vadim237]

This picture, which is for the article, has nothing to do with PAK YES - only the shape of a flying wing.

[okko077]

Looking at this bird, any person with elementary knowledge in aerodynamics and concepts of a jet engine will have a lot of questions about the possibility of flying this miracle, especially in takeoff and landing modes. And if you think about which engine this creation is planned for, it becomes completely sad. Who is this circus for?

[Zaurbek]

this picture is not a PAK YES project

[Andrey Yuryevich]

Quote: okko077

Looking at this bird, any person with elementary knowledge in aerodynamics and concepts of a jet engine will have a lot of questions about the possibility of flying this miracle, especially in takeoff and landing modes. And if you think about which engine this creation is planned for, it becomes completely sad. Who is this circus for?

that is, to the American "flying wing", there were no questions? and the fact that they had a "circus" flew, was that for granted? and to adjust the glider under the engine is also your thought? who you are???

[okko077]

I'm realist. You take a closer look at V-2 and read about it. And your thought after it ... The engine and air intake are inscribed inside the wing-body on this miracle, and are not stuck on top or bottom, now it is clear? ...

[Andrey Yuryevich]

Quote: okko077

I'm realist. You take a closer look at V-2 and read about it. And your thought after it ... The engine and air intake are inscribed inside the wing-body on this miracle, and are not stuck on top or bottom, now it is clear? ...

it’s clear that you take pictures to heart ...

[Reviews]

Quote: Andrey Yurievich

that is, to the American "flying wing", there were no questions?

Now he will say that the Americans were not on the moon, sorry, these are all computer films and there are no B-2s. And B-35 / -49 was not. And K-12 too.

[Reviews]

Quote: okko077

Looking at this bird, any person with elementary knowledge in aerodynamics and concepts of a jet engine will have a lot of questions about the possibility of flying this miracle

Oh, and tell us your questions and their rationale? Well pzhzhaalsta!

[Bursa]

The Americans in their aircraft, built according to the flying wing scheme used a computer system to stabilize the machine in flight. By the way, the MiG-29 and Su-27 developed in the USSR and all subsequent domestic military aircraft, if I am not mistaken, already had a computer system for stabilizing the aircraft in flight. Therefore, currently stabilizing the machine according to the PAK DA scheme (discussed in this article) should not be a big problem.

[midivan]

[/ quote] It is also planned to equip PAK DA with the latest domestic electronic warfare systems (electronic warfare), not having world analogues in efficiency.

Well hold on to the source of the agency

Several PAK DA mock-ups made of composite materials, as well as full-size mock up of wood.. [quote]

Well we all hold on, hoh. We will give us relief!

[Reviews]

Finally, LC. Reason wins.

[media = https: //www.youtube.com/watch? v = G6R9PjhHu4
M]

[Tolstoevsky]

hope of fine wood

[twincam]

in the photo is a full-size layout ???

[Reviews]

Quote: twincam

in the photo is a full-size layout ???

This is a drawing.

[Altona]

What a terrible layout. And where are the tail keels? This is not an airplane for aerobatic monograms, the airplane must be stable in flight.

[Reviews]

Quote: Altona

And where are the tail keels?

What for?

[mr.redpartizan]

The American B-2 does not have keels, but it flies. Keels increase the EPR, so they were abandoned in favor of the advanced mechanization of the wing. Flight stability is provided by a digital emf.

[Andrey Yuryevich]

Quote: mr.redpartizan

The American B-2 does not have keels, but it flies. Keels increase the EPR, so they were abandoned in favor of the advanced mechanization of the wing. Flight stability is provided by a digital emf.

and ... we must pay tribute to the enemies, their electronics are class ... alas.

[fess1303]

How will it fly, how will the engines be placed, why the layout and not 3d modeling? ... blah blah blah. You are not asked. how why and why. They will put the engines and fly. Do not doubt. Financing is another matter. But that is another matter. By the way, 3d modeling is certainly good, and it’s not difficult, and we can do it. But to watch it live is never in vain.

[Altona]

Quote: Corporal

3d design has apparently not taken root with us. Sadly.

------------------------
Take root, why not? Only for 3d-designing is necessary to chain the entire system of machine tools, and not the manual work of a mechanic Uncle Vasya. Otherwise, 3d does not make much sense.

[Vadim237]

And 3D machines and DMG machining centers are used in almost all aircraft plants.

[lukewarm]

(((Follow B-2 ??? Which is also a headache for the states.

[mr.redpartizan]

Why is B-2 a headache for the US? It is a very successful machine with a very low EPR, a long flight range and a serious combat load. PAK YES repeats his concept almost one to one.

[Vadim237]

Only when it was created, it turned out to be very difficult in development and in production - it required the most advanced aircraft manufacturing technologies, some had to be created from scratch.

[Reviews]

Quote: unwillingly

(((We follow the path B-2 ???

The flight path is the only reasonable option for the development of aviation. Both civilian and military. The “pipe with wings” scheme had already exhausted itself by the 1990s.
There are drawbacks to this scheme, but any scheme, including the classical one, has them. It would be a desire, they will be overcome, because there are much more advantages, the rejection of the fuselage is a quantum leap, and not the miserable percent of fuel efficiency that they are fighting for now. Well, and besides fuel, there are other pluses.
B-2 headache, except for the budget. Normal plane. Here is the F-117, yes, it was a smut and F-35, too, no one argues here.

[Altona]

Quote: Avis

What for?

----------------------
What do you mean why? I've told. In the photo I see a kite with wing mechanization.

[Reviews]

Quote: Altona

Quote: Avis

What for?

----------------------
What do you mean why? I've told. In the photo I see a kite with wing mechanization.

You did not say anything.
Familiarize yourself, if only superficially, with the history of aviation. Not all LCs have and have keels. It's a hint.
In the figure, by the way, there are already two keels. Well, or washers, if you wish.

[Observer2014]

Here is convincing. What is so secret that at least you can’t publish this layout !! !! ??? Is there a secret shape? Delirium. Sometimes nonsense rolls over. But we do not want to look at the photo from the cartoons, don’t understand by whom and on what scale. It’s on the real layout where our money goes. In the literal sense of the word. We ask you to publish the drawings! Just a normal photo of an airplane model. Which is worth rolling it out onto the street. And who needs to take a picture of it from space. So who are these secrets from? This is an old Soviet nonsense or habit. To keep a secret from ourselves that which really are not.

[Reviews]

Quote: Observer2014

Here is convincing. What is so secret that at least you can’t publish this layout !! !! ??? Is there a secret shape? Delirium. Sometimes nonsense rolls over. And we would like not to see in the photo from the cartoons, don’t understand by whom and on what scale.

Have you seen a lot of T-50 models? You will see PAK YES when they begin to collect. What hysteria is that?
Maybe they will show the layout. It’s just that at the first inspection no one had time for “little photos” there.
By the way, the shape of the case for the "stealth", indeed, is secret for obvious reasons. When it starts to fly, of course, it is already impossible to hide, but for the time being there is no need to give food to analysts of the most incredible enemy.

[Observer2014]

Reviews They convinced Horsho that, as always since the days of the USSR, we will wait for the first publications of the PAK DA photo in the foreign press.

[Reviews]

Quote: Observer2014

Reviews They convinced Horsho that, as always since the days of the USSR, we will wait for the first publications of the PAK DA photo in the foreign press.

Returning to the T-50 - Where did you see his first photo / video? Personally, I am in the domestic media. Well, maybe simultaneously with foreign ones. All the same, XXI century.

[Zaurbek]

For example: the Americans made the Valkyrie, the layouts were not hidden especially. We thought we could not do high-speed aircraft. And we did the MiG-25 in parallel ... and then the MiG-31.

[Reviews]

Quote: Zaurbek

For example: the Americans made the Valkyrie, the layouts were not hidden especially.

The Yankees even retouched the chassis of the B-52. So that they do not keep the Valkyrie secret? Yes, this can not be. General view is not a layout.

[user1212]

Quote: Observer2014

What is so secret that at least kill you can’t publish this layout !! ???

Eeee ... "reporters" do not show half the work
And then the howl will begin "they will not build, they will not fly up, they swallow stones" ... it was already.
Then there will be "people's representatives" with the formation of the level of three classes and a corridor that, in the wake of "popular" criticism, will advance the liquidation of the project. Who needs this?

[Altona]

Quote: Avis

Familiarize yourself, if only superficially, with the history of aviation. Not all LCs have and have keels. It's a hint.

-------------------------------
I am familiar with the history of aviation; not all crap has taken root in it. Like the same vaunted faceted B-2 Spirit, which flies fearing unforeseen factors. Even a brick can fly with the appropriate thrust, as Tupolev used to say. I immediately understood your opinion and I do not need to give stupid advice, they are not interesting to me. My opinion is that it’s dangerous to put people there, the plane should be statically stable. I explain to you again. Leave your answer to yourself, I do not need it.

[Reviews]

Quote: Altona

I am familiar with the history of aviation; not all crap has taken root in it. Like the same vaunted faceted B-2 Spirit

Clearly, not familiar, all the same.
"Faceted B-2" ...


Yes, my answer will not help you already.

[Skif83]

This one especially smiled: - "... a full-size mock-up made of wood ...". People are modeling a little on 3D printers, and we are all made of wood
Well, what? Also our material, before the Second World War and during the Second World War, so the bulk of the planes were ball plywood., And won the war nothing. It only seems that time is a little wrong ...

[Reviews]

Quote: Skif83

This one especially smiled: - "... a full-size mock-up made of wood ...". People are gradually modeling on 3D printers

But not the whole plane. About two years ago, at one of the Sikorsky air shows (EMNIP), he exhibited a full-size model of the new VIP helicopter. Not of wood, of course, but not the essence of the material. And the bottom line is that the customer always wants to feel, sit inside and so on. You won’t fit inside the 3D model.

[Vadim237]

This wooden scale model is needed for practical work.

[Altona]

Quote: Avis

Clearly, not familiar, all the same.
"Faceted B-2" ...

----------------------------
Listen, I’m not only familiar with the history of aviation, but also wrote a diploma in hydraulics for the flap of an airplane. It’s good that the planes are designed not by “historians from aviation” like you, who can only post stupid “yo-mine” demotivators, but engineers who are familiar with the laws of nature and the mathematical apparatus that describes them. You seem to have never been so competent at the airport, you have not even seen plastic models of passenger airplanes and you don’t know why they are built according to a statically stable fuselage scheme, keel, rather narrow wings in comparison with the flying wing scheme. Look, I sincerely advise you. Apparently, engineers designing civil and transport aircraft do not know the "history of aviation" and your most precious "well, mine, apparently you don’t know, my answer will not help." Write them your “precious answer” with justifications from the “history of aviation”.

[Same lech]

We have on the forum KULIBINY dime a dozen.
Some geniuses like LOMONOSOV.
The land of Russia is rich in talents.

[Vadim237]

Moscow Region needs a simple, lifting, air platform - and the missiles and bombs themselves that it will carry will be clever.

[voyaka uh]

Is Boeing able to build passenger aircraft?
Future passenger Boeing 797. Tailless flying wing.
More payload, 10% less fuel consumption, less noise.

[insular]

Quote: Altona

wrote a diploma hydraulics for flap aircraft.

This is a very authoritative opinion, yeah ..
I look, you simply have GIANT experience in designing and implementing EMDS ...

Quote: Altona

don’t know why they are built according to a statically stable fuselage scheme, keel, rather narrow wings in comparison with the scheme of a flying wing

Probably all the same? reliable enough EMDS appeared only recently?
And by the way, most modern airliners have an EMDS (especially Airbus ... But what about our SuperPupJet there too. But there is nothing to say about fighter aircraft) ... Switching to tailless vehicles is a matter of time in this situation. For if you do not use the EMF, then the point is in a normal aerodynamic design? Increase aerodynamic drag with all that it implies?)

Immediately retake the diploma.

[Bronevick]

PAK YES will appear no earlier than 2030, just when the order for TU-160 is completed.

[igor.borov775]

That is the correct answer.

[Vz.58]

Dear! On the wrong side, approach the question. PAK YES moved "to the right" - another propaganda expression for "so far we can’t." And the Tu-160 began to be reanimated due to the fact that this chic project, PAK YES, so far, is too tough. Both electronics and engines, so far, are catching up, and conversations about "having no analogues" are, so far, for ordinary people, you yourself know

[Lester7777]

It will be a beautiful car.

[dvvv]

if you succeed in riveting Tu-160M2 / 3/4, then this is good money and at the same time PAK YES to cut, but there is no sense from them. Can immediately make missiles that they themselves reach the target. they won’t be able to overcome air defense and it’s very expensive to maintain them, as well as larger cruise missiles and let them fly if that.

[Blackmokona]

A1845,

Quote: A1845

yes, no loss, yes - flew to the goal halfway around the world, it's cool
but in general acted against an already unarmed enemy?
the same B-1B proved to be no worse ..
and if the B-52 participated - could it be even more effective?

Iraq, Yugoslavia and Libya had air defense for reference

[A1845]

It is a fact! It was even there that the S-125 missile plant named after the 117th Party Congress blocked the flying furniture F-XNUMX!
Nevertheless, it is difficult to place accents, for example, in Syria and you Tu-95 and Tu-22M3 and Tu-160 all performed equally brilliantly, right?
And if so, then why overpay?

[Blackmokona]

Are you proposing to write off all Tu-95 and Tu-160?
And then when confronted with a stronger enemy, what will you do?

[A1845]

God forbid, such copyists here are already branded with shame and bad words

[Reviews]

Quote: BlackMokona

Iraq, Yugoslavia and Libya had air defense for reference

Outdated air defense. And they knocked out before the raids.

[Blackmokona]

B-2 was beaten from the very beginning to the removal of air defense

[xtur]

Quote: NEXUS

But at the same time we get 2 "range" with completely different characteristics.

Moreover, according to the statements, it is completely not noticeable that the projects are somehow seriously separated in time, there are statements saying that they will be separated in time, but there are also reverse ones, as in this news

And what’s important, there are real actions to promote both projects
All of this is most likely that there are two influential wings that have completely different views, and each realizes its own view. Given the existence of long-range missiles, the differences between the projects are essentially purely economic, not military.

The military doesn’t care if the DA will be supersonic or subsonic if it has a suitable flight range and GP.

And then, the supposed profitability of the PAK DA scheme should be tested by reality - and suddenly the cost of its development and implementation will be so high that the release of the Tu-160 (M2) will be more profitable, or completely comparable. After all, here, as with ships, 2/3 of the price is the cost of systems, not gliders.
And the stealthiness of the "flying wing" can negate all the savings from a large GPU of this scheme. Because no one really knows what will ultimately fire. Nobody can explain what will happen to PAK YES if its stealth is not as good as it is planned now - how will this affect the combat qualities of the aircraft, will they fall to an unacceptable level?

[A1845]

Quote: xtur

All of this is most likely that there are two influential wings that have completely different views, and each realizes its own view.

recalls a story with three types of main battle tank in the USSR

[Incvizitor]

As I said for the strategist, speed is more important to bring gifts to partners at the right time, but if you want to use 22 m 3 like that in local conflicts, low visibility is very useful.

And as for me I need supersonic strategists with high speed and subsonic long-range bombers with low visibility priority for conflicts like the current Syrian, it’s not good to combine them into one.

[A1845]

a third type would also be nice - with the priority of the maximum payload

[Rushnairfors]

В-2 the car is cool, in the VSIG classes we were shown how this guy alone had 8 KABami smashed it, a couple of shots with the results of blows to the runway with blanks — neat and beautiful, hephaestos nervously smoking. Although it may be the Yankees by chance so .... hit. Somehow long ago 11 of 12 fabs applied exactly 6 zeros, even the division navigator drove to the AP, he said the 22nd couldn’t bomb, and by the way worked without hephaestus

[Altona]

Quote: voyaka uh

Future passenger Boeing 797. Tailless flying wing.

--------------------------------
And everything that Boeing or Lockheed Martin is incredibly successful is direct? In theory, everything can be successful, but the "tree of life is green." Operation will show. And in general, you can publish mock-ups, prototypes, simply outline sketches every day, now even schoolchildren are fond of industrial design and win solid prizes at competitions. How much they squeaked about the PAK FA, at the exit they saw a lot like F-22 with a more sleek glider geometry. About the “Buran” there was so much scream, the output was the same “Shuttle” (referring to the “iron” design), but without shunting engines. There are many examples. I repeat, the brick will fly with the appropriate traction and good EMF. There will be a ready working prototype, see. The same Concord and Tu-144 did not justify themselves, although there are a lot of advantages and inherent useful technologies in them.

[Flyer_64]

Something does not fit in the tape another layout. https://lenta.ru/news/2017/03/01/maket/

[Altona]

Quote: Avis

I told you that you are dumb. This applies to the entire piece quoted.

--------------------------------
Well done, googled ... But you still shouldn’t be rude, and all the more so to me ... I understand that you with the CENSOR. NO, take the manner of communication. I ask the moderators to pay attention to the manner of communication between the gentleman and the nickname of the cheap jeans label.

[Altona]

Quote: The same LYOKHA

Some geniuses like LOMONOSOV.
The land of Russia is rich in talents.

----------------------------
I don’t know how about a creative genius, but boorish genius blossoms and turns green. A gentleman came with a CENSOR. NO right before the new year, put on a nickname of Indian jeans (sorry, a bird in translation) and let others teach life. Not lived, not designed.

[Comrade Bolt]

The appearance may also change (this depends on many factors), and moving forward our most important task is not to stop in technology, because this will lead to the collapse of the entire design system.

[Tishka]

With this PAK Yes, one is not understood at all, it is intended to replace 3 types of aircraft, TU-22, TU-95 and TU-160. As far as information could be obtained, the TU-22 was developed for hunting for AUGs, therefore, it needs great speed to get from the base zone to the point where the enemy AUG is located, it’s a sound plane until it reaches, the AUG will have time to leave the given square , and look for his fistulas. TU-95, the only one in the world, a missile carrier bomber, which is difficult to detect even from space, because it has turboprop engines. TU-160 missile carrier, with the possibility of access to supersonic. The new aircraft is made invisible to radars, and subsonic, but all weapons are removed into the vehicle’s body, for less noticeability, and right here, we are told that it will not enter the enemy’s air defense zone, since it will carry missiles with a range of destruction on board at 7000 kilometers. The question is, why then, does he need this stealth? You need speed to take off from the airfield, in the shortest time, to reach the launch point, launch missiles, and escape from the attack, it may take a long time to be in the air to protect the territory, and retaliate, but for this, stealth is also not very need it! So, most likely, stealth is needed only for one thing, so that people don’t see how much money was stolen when creating this masterpiece, and it will work like with Angara, they spent money on development, but it turned out to be a dead end! Another point is interesting, they are also going to use it as the first stage, for the output of satellites into space. Then the question arises, at what altitude can it fly up, and what speed can it give to a satellite being put into orbit? So, designers started something wrong, or again decided to copy from the Americans, maybe it’s worth doing your own thing, and not trying to copy flying irons!

[mbayer1949]

Perhaps the wooden model was made with one ax and without a single nail. We have been able to do this for a long time according to historians. If you believe the TV you look and fly. But what about invisibility ... I see the inversion trace from below and without radar. What a satellite with various equipment from the damned will see from above ... Well, as for subsonic speed, I remember a film that seems to be 65 years LIVE and DEAD the first series where TB-3 bombers shoot in the air. If you believe the TV, then our Bears in flight are accompanied by NATO fighters. Why is PAK YES worse than the Bear ...