Military Review

Modernization of long-range Tu-22М3 bombers will begin in 2018

69
Tupolev in 2018 will begin deep modernization of long-range Tu-22M3 bombers, a source in aviation industry.


The project of deep modernization of the bombers before the modification of the Tu-22М3М is implemented according to the schedule. In 2018, we are starting flight tests.
- Said the source agency.

Modernization of long-range Tu-22М3 bombers will begin in 2018


Then, in the same year, the modernization of aircraft in service will begin
- he stressed.

Earlier, the general director of PJSC "Tupolev" (part of the United Aircraft Building Corporation) Alexander Konyukhov said that the first modernized long-range supersonic bomber-carrier Tu-22М3М will be presented in 2018 year.

According to official figures, Russia has more 100 missile carriers Tu-22М3. Up to 2020, about 30 aircraft will be upgraded to modify the Tu-22М3М, the Russian Defense Ministry said earlier.

The Russian military actively used the Tu-22М3 for strikes against ISIS (banned in the Russian Federation) in Syria - the planes took off from the territory of the Russian Federation, flew over the territory of Iran and Iraq and inflicted a group strike on the terrorists.

Long-range Tu-22М3 bombers showed high efficiency in Syria. These multi-mode rocket carriers work great both alone and as a team.
- said earlier to Interfax the ex-commander-in-chief of the All-Union Military Space Forces of the Russian Federation, the head of the Committee on Defense and Security of the Federation Council, Viktor Bondarev.
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
69 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. hrych
    hrych 5 January 2018 13: 12
    +7
    This pleases to the impossibility. Another unification of the new engines with the Tu-160, just a balm for the soul. The glider is long-lasting, and the engines are limited in life, the serial production of the engine will extend the life of these unique machines to aircraft on new physical principles
    1. siberalt
      siberalt 5 January 2018 13: 18
      +3
      In the first six months, nothing will start. Continuous holidays, yes elections. And then we'll see. lol
      1. lis-ik
        lis-ik 5 January 2018 13: 46
        14
        Quote: siberalt
        In the first six months, nothing will start. Continuous holidays, yes elections. And then we'll see. lol

        Plus, the World Cup 2018, which nobody needs, has gobbled up a lot of money for which more than one AUG could be put into operation.
      2. dvvv
        dvvv 6 January 2018 23: 10
        0
        I don’t know the holidays, but the elections will greatly eclipse the Moscow authorities .. (Although everything is known in advance, the show must be organized and held
    2. poquello
      poquello 5 January 2018 13: 23
      +3
      Quote: hrych
      This pleases to the impossibility. Another unification of the new engines with the Tu-160, just a balm for the soul. The glider is long-lasting, and the engines are limited in life, the serial production of the engine will extend the life of these unique machines to aircraft on new physical principles

      experience dashed + progress on filling and rushing
      1. figwam
        figwam 5 January 2018 13: 28
        +2
        The project of deep modernization of the bombers before the modification of the Tu-22М3М is implemented according to the schedule. In 2018, we are starting flight tests.
        - Said the source agency.

        I hope to install a refueling system in the air.
        1. Rushnairfors
          Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 13: 32
          +5
          They will not install
        2. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
          Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 5 January 2018 13: 47
          +1
          It’s good that we still have something to upgrade. Thanks to the USSR Air Force. But the neighbors 6 dozens TU22 cut crying
          1. zivXP
            zivXP 5 January 2018 22: 21
            +2
            TU22 is a very old side, there is nothing to upgrade.
        3. sanja.grw
          sanja.grw 5 January 2018 17: 40
          +3
          I hope to install a refueling system in the air.

          The bar would be returned which, under an agreement with the Americans, was removed, it would be
          1. Kurare
            Kurare 5 January 2018 20: 35
            +3
            Quote: sanja.grw
            The bar would be returned which, under an agreement with the Americans, was removed, it would be

            So they promised that they would return. It will be possible to fly to Syria with full combat load, and this is almost 3 times more than they are delivering now.
            1. abc_alex
              abc_alex 6 January 2018 00: 43
              +5
              Already how many times explained. In the Tu-22M3 there is not only a “rod”, there is no highway providing refueling in the air. In addition, if returned, these aircraft will be counted as strategic missile carriers in the START treaty, that is, it will have to reduce the number of other carriers. WHAT FOR?
              1. Days
                Days 6 January 2018 01: 40
                +2
                START-3 ends in the year 2021. Nothing prevents you from starting to upgrade with the installation of the highway. And then either add the bar, or immediately exit START-3, if the United States leaves the RSDM (which is where everything is heading now).
                1. abc_alex
                  abc_alex 8 January 2018 16: 55
                  0
                  immediately withdraw from START-3 if the US withdraws from RSDM


                  What's the point? We still won’t be able to make carriers at the same pace as the United States, so START is objectively beneficial to us.
              2. Kurare
                Kurare 6 January 2018 21: 38
                +2
                Quote: abc_alex
                ... these planes will be counted as strategic missile carriers in the START treaty

                In this way, each aircraft capable of refueling in the air and carrying special charges can be attributed to strategic ones. This is not true.
                At one time, the Americans really "did not like" the data (which by the way were incorrect) about the flight range of the Tu-22M and they insisted on including them in the START-3 list, although they did not have a place there.
                1. abc_alex
                  abc_alex 8 January 2018 17: 00
                  +1
                  Tu-22M and they insisted on their inclusion in the START-3 list, although they have no place there.


                  Nevertheless, these planes are there, the treaty takes them into account, and if you install a refueling system, you must either reduce the availability of other carriers or withdraw from strategic offensive arms, which is objectively beneficial to us. In my opinion, it is better to make one strategic missile submarine than to convert the Tu-22M3. No?
                  1. Kurare
                    Kurare 8 January 2018 17: 25
                    +2
                    Quote: abc_alex
                    Nevertheless, these planes are there, the treaty takes them into account, and if you install a refueling system, you must either reduce the availability of other carriers or withdraw from strategic offensive arms, which is objectively beneficial to us.

                    It’s not necessary to withdraw completely from the START treaty, simply “delete” the item on the Tu-22 “in view of the changed situation in the world” (as the Americans once said about the missile defense system)
                    Quote: abc_alex
                    In my opinion, it is better to make one strategic missile submarine than to convert the Tu-22M3. No?

                    The 22nd showed quite high efficiency when using non-nuclear ammunition, but could carry about 3 times more bombs if there was the possibility of refueling. The SSBN for this, as you understand, is completely unsuitable.
                    1. Town Hall
                      Town Hall 8 January 2018 17: 29
                      +1
                      Quote: Kurare
                      The 22nd showed quite high efficiency when using non-nuclear ammunition,




                      And where and when did they show it?
                      1. Kurare
                        Kurare 8 January 2018 17: 53
                        +2
                        Quote: Town Hall
                        And where and when did they show it?

                        Stop trolling. negative
  2. Vadivak
    Vadivak 5 January 2018 13: 13
    +4
    Quote: ..........
    Until 2020, about 30 aircraft will be upgraded to the modification of the Tu-22M3M

    Along the way, the M5 topic is also closed, but it is a pity that it was planned to use it to break through air defense at extremely low altitudes, such as the Su-24, with a relief envelope.
    And in M3M there will be the use of a 715 product that flies at extremely low altitudes, in the mode of enveloping the terrain, although flight at high altitudes is also possible - up to 5 kilometers.
    As well as X-32 missiles with a flight speed of 5M, equipped with a modern GOS, which has high noise immunity.
    1. svp67
      svp67 5 January 2018 13: 23
      +4
      Quote: Vadivak
      Along the way, the M5 topic is also closed

      And if it is necessary? In light of budget constraints. Maybe it should be directed to the creation of something more perfect? Moreover, the upgraded Tu22M3M will clearly carry the X-50 and have more powerful engines and modern equipment.
      1. Vadivak
        Vadivak 5 January 2018 13: 41
        +4
        Quote: svp67
        And if it is necessary? In light of budget constraints.

        Well, you yourself answered. Tu-22M3M is a truncated modernization of the Tu-22M4, again for the money. It was planned to install engines from the Tu-4 on the M160, as Rashnairfors rightly pointed out whether such an upgrade on the M3M would be known only at the plant
        1. svp67
          svp67 5 January 2018 13: 45
          +3
          Quote: Vadivak
          will such an upgrade at M3M be known only at the factory

          KB and Zavod have already announced that they WILL. For the purpose of UNIFICATION and the same money savings
          1. Vadivak
            Vadivak 5 January 2018 13: 50
            +1
            Quote: svp67
            KB and Zavod have already announced that WILL

            God grant. From the Tu-160, with the goal of the same unification, much than M3M stuffed
            1. svp67
              svp67 5 January 2018 13: 55
              +2
              Quote: Vadivak
              From the Tu-160, with the goal of the same unification, much than M3M stuffed

              That's for sure GIVE GOD. For me it wouldn’t be so bad to prepare everything for installing a refueling bar, without installing a retractable device, until .... so that later, in cases of which it would take a lot of time for pilots to bother, train refueling on simulators. Yes, and the T-134ubp, it could be adapted to this, it seems like no where in the Agreements was not mentioned ...
      2. Rushnairfors
        Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 13: 42
        +8
        What do you offer from the more perfect? PACK YES? How long will we wait for him? Airplanes are needed today, if the NK32 is pushed into the top three it will already be a breakthrough, the range and duration will increase, the serviceability of equipment will increase by 2-3 times, because there are a lot of boards on the engines, new equipment (Hephaestus 2 in particular) and new weapons x32 (if will be brought to mind) and x50 (a miracle about which the army has not even heard of) will increase shock capabilities than a warrior who has not risen from the ashes? Believe me, if we fully raise 60-70 aircraft with updated weapons and equipment to the wing, the potential friends of the hemorrhagic will definitely increase because so many planes are already strength, but what is now is not serious.
        1. Vadivak
          Vadivak 5 January 2018 14: 06
          +2
          Quote: Rushnairfors
          What do you offer from the more perfect? PACK YES?


          A perfectly fair statement in real time. Of course, I would like instead of the Su-24 to be the T-60S, which was buried by the EBN peace initiative and as for PAK YES, it is clear PAK FA first flight 2010 - it was planned to be put into operation in 2016, it was not so easy to transfer immediately to 2018
        2. sivuch
          sivuch 5 January 2018 16: 42
          +2
          A normal electronic warfare system (and built-in and with containers and towed traps) is not needed? In my sofa opinion I need to read from her
    2. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 13: 28
      +8
      This year, 2 sides were driven off according to the test program: one in Novosib in Yeltsovka to a factory where they rivet - they will perform a strength test there, break in short and determine how many more the glider will last, but we donated the 34nd side just for this deep modernization, this miracle plane will be made of it. For compatibility nk2 and tu32m22 if I knew how to pray to God, honestly. And by the way about a fly in the ointment - at the moment there are a little more than 3 flying boards, without restrictions even less. And of course, there are 30 garrisons, plus Ryazan, and there seems to be a couple of sides in Mongoht that can be reanimated and surpassed, maybe a hundred on paper.
      1. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
        Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 5 January 2018 13: 39
        0
        Dmitriy hi Not in the know, the TU-22, which recently rolled out of the runway, has already flown off or can it still be used?
        At the aerodrome Shaykovka (Kaluga region) when performing taxiing, the Tu-22М3 plane for technical reasons rolled out of the runway. Aircraft after maintenance work will continue to perform tasks as intended.
        - reports the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.
        https://topwar.ru/125038-tu-22m3-vks-rf-vykatilsy
        a-za-predely-vpp.html
        1. Rushnairfors
          Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 13: 58
          +5
          Flew away - SAIP has already been re-qualified in an accident. I feel sorry for Valera, a very good man and a Zdorsky pilot, a sniper, one of my 22m3 teachers.
      2. Vadivak
        Vadivak 5 January 2018 13: 47
        +1
        Quote: Rushnairfors
        at the moment there are a little more than 30 flying boards, even less without restrictions

        The last production M3 seems to have been released in 1993?
        1. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
          Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 5 January 2018 13: 57
          +4
          That's right.

          In the photo the youngest Tu-22M3. The OTK brand on the factory tag is dated July 1993 of the year. By that time, the Ministry of Defense owed KAPO a huge amount of money for previously delivered cars, and the plant ran up: we will transfer new planes only after paying off the debt. Then 90, the crisis, nobody cared about the new Tu-22. In Ukraine alone, over the course of several years, more than fifty 22's have been sawn. And the factory was waiting and waiting for money from the Moscow Region. There were so many different options: convert it into a Tu-22МР for free, put it on a Tu-22М4 program, give it to the Tupolevs as a flying laboratory - as if the Tupolevs had that kind of money, how much a new carcass costs ... The plane was canned for a long time. At the beginning of the 2000's, all possible giblets were pulled out of it for spare parts. And in 2007, the newest, zero strategic missile carrier Tu-22М3 was erected as a monument at KAPO. It is not clear just what a monument.

        2. Rushnairfors
          Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 14: 02
          +4
          At 96, as far as I know, onboard 58, and in the same year that 22mr onboard 02 (the only one alive), I could be mistaken in combat. The fact is that KAPO has 4 more sides, but as far as I know they were built, and the RF Ministry of Defense already had denyuzhki and the cars rot in the far parking lot and were not accepted for service.
    3. NEXUS
      NEXUS 5 January 2018 14: 43
      +2
      Quote: Vadivak
      Along the way, the M5 topic is also closed, but it is a pity that it was planned to use it to break through air defense at extremely low altitudes, such as the Su-24, with a relief envelope.

      But why break through the enemy’s air defense at very low altitudes, if there are new missile defense systems being developed and developed, both for Swan and for the 22nd?
      1. Vadivak
        Vadivak 5 January 2018 21: 01
        +2
        Quote: NEXUS
        But why break through the enemy’s air defense at very low altitudes, if there are new missile defense systems being developed and developed, both for Swan and for the 22nd?

        The name bomber implies the presence of bombs. The wing carrier can travel on the ground
  3. m.cempbell
    m.cempbell 5 January 2018 13: 25
    +2
    Good news. It will help new Swans.
  4. Operator
    Operator 5 January 2018 13: 27
    +1
    Tu-22M3M - one hundred nails in the casket AUG.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 5 January 2018 14: 44
      +2
      Quote: Operator
      Tu-22M3M - one hundred nails in the casket AUG.

      No ... one hundred nails in the coffin of the concept of aircraft carrier strike groups is RCC Zircon.
  5. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 5 January 2018 13: 32
    0
    Fine. The more such news, the higher the anxiety of the "partners"!
  6. pvv113
    pvv113 5 January 2018 13: 36
    0
    Tupolev in 2018 will begin the deep modernization of long-range Tu-22M3 bombers

    Very gratifying. Amazing plane! If I understand correctly, the replacement of NK-25 engines with NK-32 will be decided
    1. Town Hall
      Town Hall 5 January 2018 13: 43
      +1
      Quote: pvv113
      Tupolev in 2018 will begin the deep modernization of long-range Tu-22M3 bombers

      Very gratifying. Amazing plane! If I understand correctly, the replacement of NK-25 engines with NK-32 will be decided




      NK-32 are those engines which they want to replace with the Tu-160 as obsolete? .... then yes, an amazing solution ...
      1. pvv113
        pvv113 5 January 2018 14: 56
        0
        In my opinion, there was a conversation about the engines of the second series. At one time, the NK-25 was replaced by the NK-25 of the second series. Perhaps there will be more advanced motors.
        1. Town Hall
          Town Hall 5 January 2018 15: 04
          +1
          That is, a conversation about non-existent engines? ... started a modernization with the aim of changing current engines to nonexistent yet? ...
          1. pvv113
            pvv113 5 January 2018 15: 24
            0
            Project news on the resumption of production of engines NK-32

            https://topwar.ru/99329-.html
    2. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 14: 06
      +3
      Pvv did you serve on triples? What was the problem originally did not know? Why didn't hk32 go? We were told that NK32 is the same as NK25, only his ECM is different and she did not want to "work" with Tu22m3 fuel automation, I don’t remember why, maybe you know or heard? One side in Ryazan in the museum stands, with 12 cusp refueling flaps.
      1. pvv113
        pvv113 5 January 2018 15: 05
        +3
        Fuel automation of the aircraft was designed for the NK-25. ESUD-25 was eventually replaced by ESUD-25M - the number of electronic units was reduced from 8 to 2. I have not encountered the NK-32, but I know that the turbogenerator is the same as the NK-25, but the fuel automation of the engine itself is absolutely another, i.e. ADT and RSF are not suitable for NK-25. Naturally, the electronics are different - ESUD-32. And again, it is designed for fuel automation Tu-160.
        A plane with 12 refill flaps was seen only in the photo. Honestly, I didn’t even know that this was a revision under the NK-32. I have never come across this topic. Yes, and the last time in Ryazan was in 1994
        1. Rushnairfors
          Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 17: 50
          +3
          Thank you and still do not understand. They are the same in mass and overall dimensions, that is, you can shove it into tu22m3, and they did it, roughly speaking, half the work has been done. Changing something in the aircraft’s fuel system makes no sense and is impossible in principle (you can’t replace the caisson tanks in principle, and you don’t need the order of fuel production, pumps, all this does not affect the engine, from production, from the tank to the pumping part ND25, as I understand it, everything is unchanged, then through the filter to the ND25 pumping unit and from there to the ADT (and it is different from NK32, as I understand it) - did the differences come from here right? And what couldn’t "teach" the electronics to work on the new regulation program? even the notorious "house" are similar, remember? In short, I think that the M4 began to be created when nobody needed it, neither the leadership of the country, nor the army, didn’t they bring it to mind, as you think? And now it’s needed and God forbid that this the stone flower came out, I really hope
  7. bald
    bald 5 January 2018 13: 38
    0
    Of course, it was not without losses, we will never forget them (we honor the story), but the experience gained in pilots and in cars is priceless.
  8. Herculesic
    Herculesic 5 January 2018 13: 40
    +1
    All of them should be modernized, and not 30 boards!
  9. viktorch
    viktorch 5 January 2018 13: 55
    +3
    Wow, let’s il2 sample 1945 deeply modernize, and we will have a killer of aircraft carriers at an affordable price
    1. dali
      dali 5 January 2018 14: 22
      +2
      Quote: viktorch
      Wow, let’s il2 sample 1945 deeply modernize, and we will have a killer of aircraft carriers at an affordable price


      For you viktorch, a foreign citizen, everything that is done in Russia, everything is "gamut" ... (((
      They themselves have at least done something useful ... or just know how to "poop" here ?!
    2. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 14: 28
      +7
      Il2 and tu22m3 a very incorrect comparison, do not you? And by the way: the Americans intend to extend the life of their b52 to 70-100 years, they understand that today the strategic aviation aircraft is a platform for the WTO, which will be used for hundreds and thousands of kilometers. from the front line, for this old planes will fit perfectly, appropriately modernized, so that reanimation of the Tu22m3 and equipping it with new types of weapons, coupled with the reproduction of the updated Tu160, I personally consider the right decision.
      1. Town Hall
        Town Hall 5 January 2018 14: 54
        +3
        Quote: Rushnairfors
        Il2 and tu22m3 a very incorrect comparison, do not you? And by the way: the Americans intend to extend the life of their b52 to 70-100 years, they understand that today the strategic aviation aircraft is a platform for the WTO, which will be used for hundreds and thousands of kilometers. from the front line, for this old planes will fit perfectly, appropriately modernized, so that reanimation of the Tu22m3 and equipping it with new types of weapons, coupled with the reproduction of the updated Tu160, I personally consider the right decision.



        And you know a lot of examples of Soviet / Russian weapons, airplanes, ships, submarines, reaching the American for "longevity"? They have battleships and aircraft carriers served for 50 years, they know how to build it ... the average age of the Soviet counterparts, going for cancellation, recall?
        1. Rushnairfors
          Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 16: 29
          +4
          I’ll give you a couple of examples: the Chinese Tu16 - the old plane was "stripped to the goal", shoved new engines, equipment, weapons and voila - it’s quite a modern bomber. True, they are now being produced even from scratch, but there are old men in the ranks as well. Soviet migrants21 and Su17 still fly in a number of countries, they even fight, and after all they are far from 20-30 years old and by the way, with appropriate modernization, they could greatly increase their combat potential. Going further, Our su24 age is approaching 40, put on a hephaestus, upgraded the PrNK, strengthened armaments, please fly, fight and fight well, by the way, I’m sure and will be operational after 2020, f111, by the way, is history. from 27 years fly by, su30- in Afghanistan if memory serves the 10nd, 25 years old already and they fly and fly. About An82 I almost forgot, some of them are more than 35 years old and fly like nice. An12 many over 50, also not an advanced aircraft, BUT RELIABLE and performs tasks. Are you enough? And then I have one more: Il26, Il40 Il18 even exist, a little true.
          1. Rushnairfors
            Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 16: 30
            +3
            About ships and submarines, I'm not a sailor, but I’m sure that our sailors can give you enough examples if they want to.
            1. sivuch
              sivuch 5 January 2018 16: 49
              +4
              well, at least 1135 / 1135M, Gadfly, Petrels
  10. Zomanus
    Zomanus 5 January 2018 14: 01
    +1
    Interestingly, they will restore them a bar for refueling in the air?
    In the current realities, this would not hurt.
    Well, and the offal will be sorted out already.
    1. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 14: 36
      +3
      I don’t think that the partial installation of refueling equipment was carried out only in the first series, the rods were supplied for them, for today these aircraft are the oldest, and it is logical that the aircraft of the last series will be modernized in the first place, i.e. the newest ones, and on them even in the cockpit there is no equipment for refueling and there are no rods in the kit, although the extreme planes came to the unit long before my release, I only write what the old people tell.
      1. HEATHER
        HEATHER 5 January 2018 14: 43
        +2
        GreatRushnairfors hi The rods were removed from the M2. Vodka was drunk a lot, for the stupidity of our then “Leaders”. Even on the simple 22nd rod, and on the 01th. On the 3M there were rods. The technology remained. Stubs are standing. If the Americans are us they’ll bring it up, it’s a matter of technology, to put the barbell in a day. There is everything for this. One is not clear, they are choking on us, and we, like, are observing! We’ll wait for the opercot. Syria, for example. "AWL" was not a good machine. And the bar-with him and went for the rest of the "dull" Muzzle-modern, not really.
  11. HEATHER
    HEATHER 5 January 2018 14: 37
    +2
    Russia has over 100 Tu-22M3 missile carriers. Excessively small. If, including storage. There are 60 cars on the go. I’m judging this from my bell tower. If 30 are modernized, it’s already not bad. Today, we have the whole sky in the tracks. I counted 12 cars. The binoculars confirmed that 22M3 went somewhere. Perhaps with Bela.
    1. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 16: 40
      +3
      Hello, heather, I know what exactly was shot from m2, are we still discussing with pvv113 how the holidays went? Tomorrow we have a ski run, everything is like in the army: "that there is no active rest, no sporting holiday."
      1. Rushnairfors
        Rushnairfors 5 January 2018 16: 41
        +2
        White is engaged in sports
        1. HEATHER
          HEATHER 5 January 2018 16: 52
          +1
          Wow, colleague! On New Year's Eve, I was in a shift. Tomorrow morning, toss her in the stump, there too! The frost hit.-26! lol Young people are puffing. They don’t remember -40 and -50. We, the old people, just smile at them. I’m no longer athletic. On hunting skis only. Sometimes. Cross-country skiing is a completed stage. White, today your west side hasn’t gone ? 12 pieces counted. Over Krasnoyarsk. Namely 22M3.Optics are good.
  12. thinker
    thinker 5 January 2018 15: 10
    0
    Modernization of long-range bombers Tu-22M3 will start in 2018

    In February 2012 years official information appeared that the Russian Ministry of Defense signed a contract to modernize about 30 Tu-22M3 bombers to the Tu-22M3M version.
    Well, harness for a very long time. Clearly, of course, the budget ...
  13. romandostalo
    romandostalo 5 January 2018 15: 30
    +1
    Good news! In the 90s, he was resting near St. Petersburg in Siverskaya, the runway was 200 meters from the window and they passed at an altitude of 10-15 meters, beauty!
  14. abc_alex
    abc_alex 8 January 2018 17: 48
    0
    Quote: Kurare
    It’s not necessary to withdraw completely from the START treaty, simply “delete” the item on the Tu-22 “in view of the changed situation in the world” (as the Americans once said about the missile defense system)


    Do you think the US will allow it? I believe that an attempt to withdraw the Tu-22M3 from the agreement will lead to the fact that the United States will simply stop participating in it. Thus, the United States will be completely free from any restrictions in the development of strategic systems. What missile defense, what offensive weapon. It's worth it?

    Quote: Kurare
    The 22nd showed quite high efficiency when using non-nuclear ammunition, but could carry about 3 times more bombs if there was the possibility of refueling. The SSBN for this, as you understand, is completely unsuitable.


    I do not know how many bombs were taken in the flight of the Tu-22M3 to Syria. Therefore, I can’t agree that there was an opportunity to take threefold more. But in my opinion the typical versions of the bomb load - 69 FAB-250 or eight FAB-1500? The aircraft carries this load (12 tons) in the internal compartment. If you add bombs to the external suspension, you get 24 tons, not 36 in any way. And most importantly, how many "Syrian options" will Russia have in the future? Situations when you can use the Tu-22M3 with a load of their “cast iron” without fear of enemy air defense and air force? Perhaps it is more promising to equip Tu-22M3 with long-range cruise missiles? Then the flight range of the aircraft itself will not be so critical.
    1. Town Hall
      Town Hall 8 January 2018 17: 50
      +1
      Quote: abc_alex
      I do not know how many bombs were taken in the flight of the Tu-22M3 to Syria. Therefore, I cannot agree that there was an opportunity to take three times as much. But in my opinion the typical versions of the bomb load - 69 FAB-250 or eight FAB-1500? The aircraft carries this load (12 tons) in the internal compartment. If you add bombs to the external suspension, you get 24 tons, not 36.



      This is not a secret .... Moscow oblivion overwhelmed the Internet video with the bombing of Tu-22.6-8 500-hundred parts
  15. Town Hall
    Town Hall 8 January 2018 17: 59
    +1
    Kurare,



    Come on ... before writing such odes, it didn’t hurt to think either .... throwing out 3 tons of uncontrollable cast iron almost by a Strategist God knows where as during the 2nd
    Worldwide in the absence of any opposition, this undoubtedly says that the device corresponds to the realities of the 21st century