Military Review

The prototype Tu-160М2 will make the first flight in February 2018

57
The prototype of a strategic missile-carrier Tu-160М2, made from the Soviet past, took off for the first time from the airfield of the Kazan aircraft plant in February 2018. This was reported by a source in the Russian military-industrial complex.


The aircraft with the production number 804, made from the Soviet backlog, will be rolled out of the final assembly shop of the Kazan Aviation Plant and transferred to the flight test station in November of this year. It is planned that in February next year he will make the first flight from the airfield of this enterprise.
- Said the source agency.

The prototype Tu-160М2 will make the first flight in February 2018


He clarified that this "will be a combat vehicle capable of performing the same tasks that the Tu-16 160 are in the ranks".

The 804 machine will be later upgraded to the Tu-160М2 version.
- added a source.

In 2015, it became known about the decision to resume the production of Tu-160 bombers in the upgraded version of Tu-160M2 and postpone the completion of the development of the new generation PAK DA bomber (promising aviation long-range aviation complex) at a later date. The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation reported that the serial production of the Tu-160M2 should begin in 2023. At the same time, the Russian Aerospace Forces plan to purchase at least 50 of these machines. Viktor Bondarev, who previously held the post of commander of the VKS, said that the Tu-160M2 could take off for the first time at the end of 2018.

The Tu-160 is a strategic bomber carrying a cruise missile that can be equipped with nuclear warheads. Together with the missile carrier Tu-95MS is part of the country's strategic nuclear forces, along with ground-based missile systems and submarines. Earlier, Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov said that all 16 Tu-160, which are in service of the VKS, will be completely modernized, reports TASS.
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
57 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. 210ox
    210ox 9 November 2017 11: 41 New
    +1
    You need to increase the number of carriers. 16 aircraft is nothing ..
    1. svp67
      svp67 9 November 2017 11: 56 New
      10
      Quote: 210ox
      You need to increase the number of carriers. 16 aircraft is nothing ..

      But why? On some ONE TVD it is even SOMETHING. Since the capabilities of this airplane are great. It’s just now to spend HUGE money on the resumption of production, albeit a modernized one, but the plane in which the ideas of the 70s of the last century are embodied. Honestly, I don’t know if it’s right.
      1. Piramidon
        Piramidon 9 November 2017 12: 10 New
        13
        Quote: svp67
        It’s just now to spend HUGE money on the resumption of production, albeit a modernized one, but the plane in which the ideas of the 70s of the last century are embodied. Honestly, I don’t know if it’s right.

        In the version of "M2" from the 70s, there is essentially only a glider. And why is he bad? The main thing is that the "filling" will be modern.
        1. Krabik
          Krabik 9 November 2017 22: 52 New
          0
          The bad thing is that the tactics of its use are outdated and now such a monster will not be able to break through at the supersonic sound through enemy air defense, as was conceived by engineers in the 70s.

          Now we need an analogue of TU-95.

          It is simpler, more reliable and cheaper, and is in no way inferior to the TU-160 in combat character sets.
          1. Golovan Jack
            Golovan Jack 9 November 2017 23: 15 New
            10
            Quote: Krabik
            Now we need an analogue of TU-95.
            It is simpler, more reliable and cheaper and in no way inferior to the TU-160 in combat character

            I’m looking at your, ahem, scribble, and I see only two options:
            1. People are sitting in Moscow region (and the customer is Moscow region), they are at least an order of magnitude more stupid than you ... or, in general, pests and enemies of the people.
            2. You are ... not in the subject, to put it mildly (roughly speaking - I dare not say it, but to put it mildly - there are no words (c) Arkady Raikin).
            Here I sit and think - and which of the options to choose? I bow nevertheless to the second for some reason recourse
            1. Krabik
              Krabik 9 November 2017 23: 23 New
              0
              I wrote here more than once, "Better a tit in a hand than a crane in the sky."

              Here is our MO and chose a tit because the crane does not shine for us in the face of PAK DA.

              TU-95 will also be upgraded, and maybe they will start to make new ones.

              But this is not from a good life, but from a backward industry, the absence of engineers and total theft.
              1. JD1979
                JD1979 10 November 2017 16: 13 New
                +1
                Krabik, follow the advertisement - chew, your nagging on every occasion is already tired. The industry is backward, there are no engineers, they are stealing ... In the most "modern army" the 52nd and B-1B are still flying and no one is whining, since the plane is the carrier and only half of the complex. The second half is a weapon. And the Kyrgyz Republic, even old, even new X-101/102, allows you to slaughter the enemy long before the borders of its air defense, in the case of Europe, without even getting close to its borders. And you still have some breakthroughs in your head, these are amers with their beavers carrying "ultra-modern" free-falling bombs, you need to think about a breakthrough, and the 160s and 95s are primarily missile carriers. The difference is visible to everyone except you.
          2. Nikolai Grek
            Nikolai Grek 10 November 2017 16: 08 New
            +1
            Quote: Krabik
            such a monster will not be able to break through in supersonic sound through enemy air defense,

            what what he doesn’t have to break through !!! tongue tongue laughing laughing laughing
      2. Nasrat
        Nasrat 9 November 2017 12: 19 New
        14
        Quote: svp67
        ... which embodies the ideas of the 70s of the last century. Honestly, I don’t know if it’s right.

        When there are no fresh ideas, and the ideas of the 70s for joy! (thanks to the USSR for our peaceful real!)
      3. SpaceCom
        SpaceCom 9 November 2017 13: 38 New
        +5
        In my opinion, jet aircraft are now in the same position as propeller aircraft in the 50s. That is, in deep stagnation! On existing technologies, it is impossible to significantly improve flight performance. And therefore it remains to produce the best samples, improving what is possible (namely, electronic filling, materials to reduce weight and durability ...). At the same time, do not forget to invest in the development of new technologies and concepts.
        1. Nikolai Grek
          Nikolai Grek 10 November 2017 16: 10 New
          +1
          Quote: SpaceCom
          In my opinion, jet aircraft are now in the same position as propeller aircraft in the 50s. That is, in deep stagnation! On existing technologies, it is impossible to significantly improve flight performance. And therefore it remains to produce the best samples, improving what is possible (namely, electronic filling, materials to reduce weight and durability ...). At the same time, do not forget to invest in the development of new technologies and concepts.

          until there is a qualitative leap in physics, there will be no leap in anything already !!! wassat wassat yes request request
      4. NEXUS
        NEXUS 9 November 2017 13: 56 New
        +6
        Quote: svp67
        It’s just now to spend HUGE money on the resumption of production, albeit a modernized one, but the plane in which the ideas of the 70s of the last century are embodied. Honestly, I don’t know if it’s right.

        And what is left of the aircraft manufactured in the 70s? Glider? I think it will be used in addition to aluminum and other materials. Tu-160M2 is not a modernized Swan of the times of the USSR, but a completely new machine that meets the requirements of today.
        1. svp67
          svp67 9 November 2017 17: 01 New
          0
          Quote: NEXUS
          And what remains of the aircraft release 70s? Glider

          The concept of its application. His concept was created under Soviet realities, I do not know whether that concept will be effective now. One variable wing geometry is worth ...
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 9 November 2017 18: 21 New
            +4
            Quote: svp67
            His concept was created under Soviet realities, I do not know whether that concept will be effective now.

            When the Union was not in the arsenal of Cygnus, neither the X-101 nor the X-102 ... and now they are inventing extended-range KRs on its basis. So with such an arsenal, these strategists are very relevant in our time.
            1. svp67
              svp67 9 November 2017 20: 56 New
              +1
              Quote: NEXUS
              When the Union was not in the arsenal of Cygnus, neither the X-101 nor the X-102 ... and now they are inventing extended-range KRs on its basis. So with such an arsenal, these strategists are very relevant in our time.

              For their transportation it would be cheaper to temporarily use the Tu-95 and send the money not for the revival of the Tu-160, but for the development of PAK-DA
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 9 November 2017 21: 02 New
                +6
                Quote: svp67
                For their transportation it would be cheaper to temporarily use the Tu-95 and send the money not for the revival of the Tu-160, but for the development of PAK-DA

                Despite the fact that the fleet of strategists is aging shamelessly, as long as we plan the PAK YES, we would be left without strategic aviation at all. Or do you think that the development of a new strategist, for a new concept, is a matter of two or three years? Take a look at how many developed the Raptor, F-35, our SU-57. And this is a fighter, this is not a strategist.
              2. Piramidon
                Piramidon 10 November 2017 10: 45 New
                +2
                Quote: svp67
                For their transportation it would be cheaper to temporarily use the Tu-95

                You yourself contradict yourself. You don’t like the ideas of the 70s (Tu-160), like they’re out of date. But here the ideas of the 50s (Tu-95) are acceptable to you for some reason.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 10 November 2017 16: 26 New
                  0
                  Quote: Piramidon
                  You yourself contradict yourself. You don’t like the ideas of the 70s (Tu-160), like they’re out of date. But here the ideas of the 50s (Tu-95) are acceptable to you for some reason.

                  You either misunderstood or simply do not want to understand. Use the ideas of the 50s that have already passed the stage of modernization and spend money on a completely new plane or spend them on the modernization of ideas of the 70s. Which way do you like more?
                  1. Piramidon
                    Piramidon 10 November 2017 17: 23 New
                    +1
                    Quote: svp67
                    Quote: Piramidon
                    You yourself contradict yourself. You don’t like the ideas of the 70s (Tu-160), like they’re out of date. But here the ideas of the 50s (Tu-95) are acceptable to you for some reason.

                    You either misunderstood or simply do not want to understand. Use the ideas of the 50s that have already passed the stage of modernization and spend money on a completely new plane or spend them on the modernization of ideas of the 70s. Which way do you like more?

                    There are three questions for you:
                    1. How many years are those "ideas of the 50s" left to serve? (however, as well as the "ideas of the 70s")
                    2. How many years does it take to develop, test, and launch a series of completely new "ideas"?
                    3. What will be in service with the DA in this period, if you do not set up production of the TU-160 variant?
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 10 November 2017 17: 28 New
                      0
                      Quote: Piramidon
                      There are three questions for you:

                      I will answer immediately to the last
                      Quote: Piramidon
                      3. What will be in service with the DA in this period, if you do not set up production of the TU-160 variant?

                      If indeed all possible means are thrown into development, then the motor resources of the existing Tu-22M, Tu-95, Tu-160 and Su-34 are enough. The time has come for the DRONS and if you do not understand this, then it’s just your grief, but do not do it with the grief of Russia
                      1. Piramidon
                        Piramidon 10 November 2017 17: 38 New
                        +1
                        Quote: svp67
                        If indeed all possible means are thrown into development, then the motor resources of the existing Tu-22M, Tu-95, Tu-160 and Su-34 are enough. The time has come for the DRONS and if you do not understand this, then it’s just your grief, but do not do it with the grief of Russia

                        How everything turns out smartly for you. Track the development, testing and introduction of even the Su-57 into the series. Will the existing Tu-95 / 160s survive until the appearance of the PAK DA?
                        And you do not need to bring Tu-160 and Su-34 into one pile.
              3. Nikolai Grek
                Nikolai Grek 10 November 2017 16: 12 New
                +1
                Quote: svp67
                Quote: NEXUS
                When the Union was not in the arsenal of Cygnus, neither the X-101 nor the X-102 ... and now they are inventing extended-range KRs on its basis. So with such an arsenal, these strategists are very relevant in our time.

                For their transportation it would be cheaper to temporarily use the Tu-95 and send the money not for the revival of the Tu-160, but for the development of PAK-DA

                but somewhere you can see the prices for TU95 and TU 160 ??? what what what
                1. svp67
                  svp67 10 November 2017 17: 34 New
                  0
                  Quote: Nikolai Grek
                  but somewhere you can see the prices for TU95 and TU 160 ???

                  Rates for what? At the ALREADY modernization of carriers of the 50s and at the SUGGESTED modernization of carriers in the forehead, one does not need to understand what would be cheaper.
                  1. Nikolai Grek
                    Nikolai Grek 10 November 2017 18: 50 New
                    +1
                    Quote: svp67
                    Quote: Nikolai Grek
                    but somewhere you can see the prices for TU95 and TU 160 ???

                    Rates for what? At the ALREADY modernization of carriers of the 50s and at the SUGGESTED modernization of carriers in the forehead, one does not need to understand what would be cheaper.

                    what what Why do I need your assumptions ??? wassat wassat judging by your confident tone, you have a piece of paper with budget expenses on the topic under discussion on your computer !!! lol lol lol come on, let’s discuss it with us too !!! laughing laughing laughing
      5. Nikolai Grek
        Nikolai Grek 10 November 2017 16: 07 New
        +1
        Quote: svp67
        but the plane which embodied the ideas of the 70s of the last century. Honestly, I don’t know if it’s right.

        nothing has changed radically in aerodynamics since then !!! wink yes yes
        1. svp67
          svp67 10 November 2017 17: 37 New
          0
          Quote: Nikolai Grek
          nothing has changed radically in aerodynamics since then !!!

          Ha, ha ... But the views on HOW to manage it have changed. Show me now a modern wing sweep aircraft?
          1. Nikolai Grek
            Nikolai Grek 10 November 2017 18: 53 New
            +1
            Quote: svp67
            Quote: Nikolai Grek
            nothing has changed radically in aerodynamics since then !!!

            Ha, ha ... But the views on HOW to manage it have changed. Show me now a modern wing sweep aircraft?

            what what what ha, ha ... show me the new laws in aerodynamics, which put an end to previous developments !!! laughing laughing laughing
            1. svp67
              svp67 10 November 2017 18: 58 New
              0
              Quote: Nikolai Grek
              ha, ha ... show me the new laws in aerodynamics, which put an end to previous developments !!

              Aerodynamics has not changed, the understanding of HOW it can be controlled has changed. Otherwise, we would not have had the MiG-29 and Su-27, but the Americans F-16 and the “Europeans” had their “fighters”.
  2. Eurodav
    Eurodav 9 November 2017 11: 45 New
    +6
    Quote: 210ox
    You need to increase the number of carriers. 16 aircraft is nothing ..

    "..At the same time, the Russian Aerospace Forces plan to purchase at least 50 of these machines ..."
  3. Egorovich
    Egorovich 9 November 2017 11: 52 New
    +9
    With such news and sleeps more calmly. Soviet groundwork - that says a lot!
    1. nemec55
      nemec55 9 November 2017 12: 42 New
      +2
      With such news and sleeps calmer

      Egorovich, well, you’re a bother, however wassat
      1. Egorovich
        Egorovich 9 November 2017 12: 47 New
        +7
        I am 57 years old. All these years I almost never used it and I don’t advise anyone.
        1. nemec55
          nemec55 9 November 2017 13: 16 New
          +1
          hi Sorry joke failed
          I understood you perfectly from the text
          1. Egorovich
            Egorovich 9 November 2017 13: 29 New
            +6
            Yes, I realized that you're kidding.
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 9 November 2017 13: 57 New
      +4
      Quote: Egorovich
      With such news and sleeps more calmly.

      When he goes into the series, then he will sleep peacefully. In the meantime, we have 16 boards in the TU-160M1 version.
      1. Egorovich
        Egorovich 9 November 2017 15: 52 New
        +5
        The beginning of the restoration is already good.
    3. Nikolai Grek
      Nikolai Grek 10 November 2017 16: 18 New
      +1
      Quote: Egorovich
      With such news and sleeps more calmly. Soviet groundwork - that says a lot!

      Americans are enjoying the American backlog !!! wassat wassat laughing
      1. Egorovich
        Egorovich 10 November 2017 18: 24 New
        +5
        Something I hardly believe in it. Flying supposedly to the moon 50 years ago, now they fly into space on other people's engines. This is a real paradox.
        1. Nikolai Grek
          Nikolai Grek 10 November 2017 18: 55 New
          +2
          Quote: Egorovich
          Something I hardly believe in it. Flying supposedly to the moon 50 years ago, now they fly into space on other people's engines. This is a real paradox.

          Well, this is particular !! I am in terms of the fact that everything modern uses the backlogs of previous times !!! I don’t see anything shameful in the fact that Russia uses Soviet backlogs !! taking into account that the basis of the USSR was Russia !! tongue tongue laughing
          1. Egorovich
            Egorovich 10 November 2017 18: 58 New
            +6
            So I for this with both hands.
            1. Nikolai Grek
              Nikolai Grek 10 November 2017 19: 07 New
              +2
              Quote: Egorovich
              So I for this with both hands.

              ahhhh ... well tada drinks drinks drinks good good good Otherwise, such speeches usually sound like a rebuke from Russia, saying that "vile" Russia uses the backlog of the USSR, which is not related to it, but "brave" Amrikos do not use any backlogs, because they have everything fresh born out of the blue on their desire and right now !!! wassat wassat laughing laughing
              1. Egorovich
                Egorovich 10 November 2017 19: 33 New
                +6
                Since I was born in the USSR, I am proud of what was achieved in the Union.
                1. Nikolai Grek
                  Nikolai Grek 10 November 2017 21: 40 New
                  +2
                  Quote: Egorovich
                  Since I was born in the USSR, I am proud of what was achieved in the Union.

                  I also managed to be born in the USSR back in 84 !! but even if it’s already in Russia, then this is not a reason to dismantle its history and achievements of the past ... whoever bald there, but for centuries Russia was the backbone of everything, and not some other formations !!! it was later, due to the shortsightedness or stupidity of some, they crushed it into some "fraternal" republics, created the USSR, and eventually Russia became, and with the loss of vast territories !!! negative negative negative
                  1. Egorovich
                    Egorovich 10 November 2017 21: 57 New
                    +6
                    I am 24 years older than you, but I agree with you almost completely. One of such misunderstandings was Ukraine, which was created from pieces of foreign countries.
                    1. Nikolai Grek
                      Nikolai Grek 10 November 2017 22: 26 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Egorovich
                      I am 24 years older than you, but I agree with you almost completely. One of such misunderstandings was Ukraine, which was created from pieces of foreign countries.

                      in-in..i about the same !!! it was necessary to take away all our lands during the collapse of the USSR !!! repeat repeat am am
  4. Panikovsky
    Panikovsky 9 November 2017 11: 59 New
    +4
    Sunny morning, great news, the day has set! good
  5. pvv113
    pvv113 9 November 2017 12: 01 New
    +6
    Made from Soviet backlog

    Well done Kazan, saved! And today it came in handy. In my opinion, there was another side in the reserve.
  6. rudolff
    rudolff 9 November 2017 12: 10 New
    +3
    Somehow floridly written. It seems to be initially built as a prototype Tu-160M2, but it seems like a regular Tu-160 and the M2 variant will be upgraded later.
    1. Grandfather
      Grandfather 9 November 2017 12: 18 New
      +4
      Quote: rudolff
      Somehow floridly written. It seems to be initially built as a prototype Tu-160M2, but it seems like a regular Tu-160 and the M2 variant will be upgraded later.

      former glider, new avionics, here is M2.
      1. Town Hall
        Town Hall 9 November 2017 12: 29 New
        0
        Quote: Dead Day
        former glider, new avionics, here is M2.



        And when will the new avionics be delivered?
        1. True
          True 9 November 2017 12: 58 New
          +3
          Quote: Town Hall
          And when will the new avionics be delivered?

          It’s first rolled around on Ilya Muromets m2, the glider remained from the Russian backlog.
  7. tomket
    tomket 9 November 2017 12: 10 New
    +3
    Well, how to build a completely new car, not out of touch, then we can talk about the full restoration of the production line.
    1. Nasrat
      Nasrat 9 November 2017 12: 22 New
      +1
      We are waiting for the year 2023 ...
  8. Sergei75
    Sergei75 9 November 2017 14: 38 New
    +1
    Instead of making a new plane from scratch, we restore the production of the old from scratch, of course we ... did all the rigging during our mental insanity (Borka is not the only one to blame, we let him, and now we allow him), but from scratch ....
  9. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 9 November 2017 23: 03 New
    +3
    Quote: Sergei75
    Instead of making a new plane from scratch, we restore the production of the old from scratch, of course we ... did all the rigging during our mental insanity (Borka is not the only one to blame, we let him, and now we allow him), but from scratch ....

    Not quite from scratch, but starting from a low position, the distance from the development of PAK YES to release is great, and during this time all strategic aviation will go into the trash. Therefore, we have to revive the intermediate option, so as not to stay with a bare booty! hi
  10. Dazdranagon
    Dazdranagon 10 November 2017 16: 04 New
    0
    At least half a year late. Remember my words! In the defense industry one chatterbox!
  11. svp67
    svp67 10 November 2017 18: 13 New
    0
    Quote: Piramidon
    How everything turns out smartly for you.

    Yeah, AS IS ...
    Quote: Piramidon
    Track the development, testing and introduction of even the Su-57 into the series. Will the existing Tu-95 / 160s survive until the appearance of the PAK DA?
    It all depends on us. Do we have the RESOURCES necessary for the development of this PAK YES, or is it just FICTION, and do we have the same RESOURCES for maintaining in bg. ADD potential ...
    Quote: Piramidon
    And you do not need to bring Tu-160 and Su-34 into one pile.
    Here it is a shame. I’m definitely not going to “bring them down” in one pile. But now we don’t want to not see that having the possibility of refueling the Su-34, than I just don’t want the “neutered” Tu-22M. And I just DEMAND the withdrawal from the INF Treaty and the return of refueling rods to the Tu-22M, as well as their modernization and modernization of the Su-34.