Military Review

"Passenger" Tu-160 does not hold water

170
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s proposal to create a civilian version of a Tu-160 bomber caused a stir in the media and on thematic resources. Is there really the possibility of creating a passenger Tu-160?


In November last year, the media spread information about the possible plans for Tupolev to create a supersonic business jet with a capacity of 25 people. According to their data, rich foreigners, primarily Arab sheikhs, have repeatedly appealed to Russian aircraft designers to build a personal supersonic aircraft based on the Tu-160 and Tu-22М3 bombers. But the company refused to develop such an aircraft, since the technologies for creating such machines are secret.

At the same time, Tupolevs are ready to create a supersonic business jet, but on the basis of a completely new project. Moreover, the aircraft must operate on liquid hydrogen.

Vladimir Putin went even further and announced the need for a civilian version of the Tu-160.

170 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. victorsh
    victorsh 31 January 2018 09: 09
    17
    And also to sell “Pinocchio” to farmers. He floundered around the field, there will be no pests and will not.
    1. Artek
      Artek 31 January 2018 12: 22
      13
      Then Putin said in the case, he is thinking about the question, what will happen to military enterprises after orders for military products? Need civilian aircraft or close. Therefore, it is appropriate to recall the Tu244



      http://avia.pro/blog/tu-244-vozvrashchenie-sverhz
      vukovyh-avialaynerov-v-nebo
      1. victorsh
        victorsh 31 January 2018 12: 45
        +3
        Do you believe in bullshit after orders for military products?
        Aliens will fly tomorrow and EVERYTHING WILL BE WELL?
        1. Artek
          Artek 31 January 2018 16: 37
          +2
          Quote: victorsh
          Do you believe in bullshit after orders for military products?
          Aliens will fly tomorrow and EVERYTHING WILL BE WELL?

          Communism will come after orders for military products.
        2. Felixsoft
          Felixsoft 4 February 2018 15: 59
          0
          And now everything is fine, but with aliens it will be even better!
        3. ALEXANDER ABDRAKHMANOV_2
          ALEXANDER ABDRAKHMANOV_2 10 February 2018 15: 27
          +2
          You can’t convince liberals when you’ve got your horns, and you don’t like what is being done in Russia. The plane has already flown, technologists are changing, everything will fly. If there are people like Yavlinsky, there will be nothing to fly, just crawl and then not surely .. Sit in silence and don’t rattle your baby rattle.
      2. Nick
        Nick 4 February 2018 22: 55
        +5
        Quote: Artek
        Then Putin said in the case, he is thinking about the question, what will happen to military enterprises after orders for military products?

        You're right. The author said many words, trying to prove that Putin froze stupidity. The stretch, in my opinion, the author made too much. The video is essentially about nothing. As they say, he hears a bell but does not know where he is. In fact, Putin suggested thinking about civilian versions of supersonic aircraft, based on the technologies used to produce the Tu-160.
      3. leppo
        leppo 5 February 2018 22: 20
        +1
        We know how to work and earn money in the state only by military orders. They rivet submarines and then they are disposed of, riveted ships are then disposed of, there are thousands of military aircraft that later stand in rows and are not needed. But there are no ocean or sea cruise ships, as well as normal passenger aircraft .
        1. Evgeny Strygin
          Evgeny Strygin 7 February 2018 21: 32
          +2
          what?
          my dear friend, you may not be aware, but as if the whole production chain of ALL that was possible, a place with the preparation of scientific and technical personnel was taken a knife.
          The survival of a part of the defense industry is almost a miracle, questions "where are the cruise ships and airliners ?!" almost a diagnosis.
          Do you have a birthday, I apologize not for yesterday?
        2. ALEXANDER ABDRAKHMANOV_2
          ALEXANDER ABDRAKHMANOV_2 10 February 2018 15: 42
          +1
          Take the balls from Navalny and fly as much as you like, that great designer. Here you Liberals destroyed everything, under the pressure of America. Now you want to blame all the blame on Putin.
      4. Angina
        Angina 6 February 2018 16: 50
        0
        From the Novosibirsk Aircraft Plant named after Chkalov already began to leave specialists. 7 people recently arrived at the airport for C7 service staff. They explain that for the 18th year there is no state order for the Su-34 at all, and so many people don’t need so many people for the spare parts for the passenger “hundred parts”.
      5. Guillon
        Guillon 6 September 2018 10: 13
        0
        VV campaign lives in a fairy tale and does not know the real state of affairs! request Hence the bazaar about increasing average life expectancy, with all that it implies ... negative
      6. asr55
        asr55 8 September 2018 23: 17
        0
        What does it mean "... after orders for military products ...". Do you mean that they will not be? Military enterprises are flourishing and expanding. And judging by the situation in the world, this will last for many years.
    2. yehat
      yehat 8 February 2018 15: 11
      0
      or the stealth complex "Cheburashka", which cleans the Donbass from Svidomo ...
  2. Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 31 January 2018 09: 09
    16
    Russian President Vladimir Putin’s proposal to create a civilian version of a Tu-160 bomber caused a stir in the media and on thematic resources. Is there really the possibility of creating a passenger Tu-160?
    in my opinion, the President frankly "blurted out" ...
    1. Vard
      Vard 31 January 2018 09: 15
      10
      It is unlikely that this is so .... On the basis of military aircraft, we did passenger ... Supersonic passenger aircraft are in demand, there is demand ... There will be funding ... There will be an airplane ...
      1. Gardamir
        Gardamir 31 January 2018 09: 29
        25
        we
        in general, lately, I am more and more convinced that the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation are not just different countries, they are different planets.
        1. taisant
          taisant 2 February 2018 20: 23
          +7
          The goals of these states are different. Therefore, the orbits are different. They used to educate people to be educated, strong, friendly, and now, just to be !!! How without serfs.
      2. FID
        FID 31 January 2018 09: 52
        11
        Quote: Vard
        Supersonic passenger aircraft are in demand, there is demand.

        Excuse me, who is in demand? Are you a representative of the airline, or just to party?
        1. Vard
          Vard 31 January 2018 10: 14
          +4
          You read the article or so ... on the bay ...
          1. FID
            FID 31 January 2018 13: 21
            +8
            Quote: Vard
            You read the article or so ... on the bay ...

            I sometimes read on the fence ... Therefore, I repeat the question: demand from whom ??? If you are not a representative of a / c, or not a marketer with a name, then where is “Supersonic passenger aircraft in demand, there is demand ..”
      3. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 31 January 2018 10: 09
        +7
        Quote: Vard
        Based on military aircraft, we made passenger

        Transport military., But not military. The Tu 160 is too noisy and unimportant for the passenger. Making it quiet is too fundamental a task. Not to mention the fact that the cost of a flight hour on it is several times (!) Higher than on existing passenger ones. hi
        1. antivirus
          antivirus 31 January 2018 11: 05
          0
          most likely the whole plant + allies - MUST follow the return schedules of the invested and they were given the option.
          these are proposals to cooperate with the state, and not to obey.
          DR FACTORIES SO DO NOT UPGRADE
          and demand only with TU
        2. JIaIIoTb
          JIaIIoTb 1 February 2018 11: 59
          0
          TU-104 is made on the basis of the Tu-16. Or do you think the Tu-16 is not combat?
          1. Ingvar 72
            Ingvar 72 1 February 2018 14: 39
            +2
            Quote: JIaIIoTb
            Or do you think the Tu-16 is not combat?

            You compare gliders. wink Now (!) Almost all military aircraft cannot (or does not make sense) be converted into civilian ones. For a variety of reasons. hi
            P.S. But in general, there is lower Avia1991 answered better.
      4. Yuyuka
        Yuyuka 1 February 2018 00: 54
        +2
        Quote: Vard
        It is unlikely that this is so .... On the basis of military aircraft, we did passenger ... Supersonic passenger aircraft are in demand, there is demand ... There will be funding ... There will be an airplane ...


        you need to immediately make a dual-use aircraft ... quick-release seats, and even better a module with seats - replaced with a module with missiles and an additional squadron wassat
      5. avia1991
        avia1991 1 February 2018 01: 07
        12
        Quote: Vard
        Based on military aircraft, we made passenger ...

        This is where you dug up?
        The Tu-114, the prototype of which was the Tu-95 - yes, but this is ANOTHER aircraft, the similarities are only in the layout, and the MRL .. suffice it to say that the fuselage is OTHER - and these are already two different devices.
        Tu-104, the prototype of which was Tu-16 - yes, here it is, perhaps, the only one that can be pulled under universality. But it was designed immediately with the prospect of dual use. And then: both of these options are Subsonic. Supersound is characterized by a bunch of features, both structural and technological, aerodynamic, etc. Stupidly throw the stuffing out of the Tu-160, stick the seats, and the "business jet" is ready - it won’t work! And not a single serious designer will promise you such a thing. And the "opinion of iksperds", which is given by the joyful media - so now the iksperds are 5 pieces for a penny, that they draw the hosh without frowning - they cannot answer for the result!
        The main thing is to loudly and joyfully admire the "wonderful Sunshine Idea"!
        1. timofeev_tema
          timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 01: 39
          0
          And then the Tu-114 and Tu-104?
          You read about the Tu-116
          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ту-116
          1. avia1991
            avia1991 1 February 2018 02: 07
            +9
            Quote: timofeev_tema
            You read about the Tu-116
            https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ту-116

            Stop poking - this time. And - Vicki shove her best in ... one place, she’s the best fit for this.
            I was taught by real people, according to real textbooks, and on real airplanes.
            My comment is below. I do not see the need to repeat 100 times.
            1. timofeev_tema
              timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 02: 15
              +3
              If I put Vicki "in ... one place", then you won’t know that in the mid-50s of the last century a passenger VIP version of the aircraft was created in just a year (Tu-116 - do not confuse with Tu-114) based on the Tu-95 bomber by placing a sealed capsule for passengers in the leaking fuselage ..
              Would you change your nickname (avia) to Russian Railways wink since you don’t know the history of the Soviet aircraft industry: such a thing would be excusable to the railroad. wink
        2. Senior manager
          Senior manager 6 February 2018 10: 13
          0
          Avia1991. You would open Tu-95, Tu-142, Tu-114 in a row for your own interest and there are no comments - the 142nd and 114th siblings.
      6. Anatoly R
        Anatoly R 2 February 2018 23: 02
        +1
        Andrei Yurievich - I flew on Tu104. This is a converted bomber. And what's wrong with that?
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 31 January 2018 11: 57
      10
      Quote: Andrey Yurievich
      in my opinion, the President frankly "blurted out" ...

      I got the same opinion. Thinking about all this, I came to about the same conclusion as the author of the video. In order for the TU-160 to become civilian, it is not enough to put more economical engines on it, you need to completely redesign the project, and this will be a completely different plane. That is, to make it smaller overall, since no airline will drive this expensive stuff empty, and moreover, no passenger will pay such a lot of money for a ticket. Oligarchs also know how to count their money.
      And here, I think all the same, the president spoke so clumsily about creating a supersonic super jet with a capacity of exactly 25-30 people. And about the Tu-60 ... I think he had in mind the use in the project of a supersonic super-jet of developments and some technological solutions that were used on the TU-160.
      1. Sergey39
        Sergey39 31 January 2018 18: 03
        0
        The TU 160 has a cruising speed of 850 km / h. What is super sound here?
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 31 January 2018 20: 57
          +7
          Quote: Sergey39
          The TU 160 has a cruising speed of 850 km / h. What is super sound here?

          Cruising 850-900 km / h, and afterburner 2 mach.
          1. In100gram
            In100gram 2 February 2018 17: 36
            0
            Quote: NEXUS
            afterburner 2 mach.

            You can’t fly for a long time in afterburner, the engine resource will be killed immediately
          2. Anatoly R
            Anatoly R 2 February 2018 23: 49
            +2
            NEXUS - Maximum cruising more than 1 mach. And with the new NK-65 engine, something serious may come of it.
        2. Proclus Proclusus
          Proclus Proclusus 9 February 2018 11: 17
          0
          It is necessary to stick the TU-160 engines on the Super Jet, which has no analogues in the world! So much for the modern super sound "Super Jet 160" !!!!!!!!!
      2. Vadim.A
        Vadim.A 1 February 2018 07: 58
        +9
        The civilian version of the Tu-160, while maintaining its appearance (a structural-power scheme with a variable sweep wing) is the height of technical idiocy, the standard of illiteracy and the Everest of stupidity. Vladimir Vladimirovich, my congratulations - this is a jackpot! "- wrote Russian aviation expert Vadim Lukashevich Ph.D., lead designer of the Sukhoi Design Bureau.
        The expert noted that in addition to "worthless economic efficiency", the Tu-160 has a large number of technical characteristics that are not suitable for commercial use of the aircraft.
        "The Tu-160 is not a supersonic, but a dual-mode aircraft that can fly on supersonic only small sections of the route (for a short time, burning a lot of fuel on the afterburner), its main cruising mode is subsonic," Lukashevich said.
        According to him, the power structure of the Tu-160 aircraft is based on the most powerful center-beam beam at its center, which must withstand 3000-ton loads.
        “In principle, it is impossible to make a normal passenger cabin on the Tu-160, because the center section divides the internal space into two parts. Unless you place cargo and people in two large bomb-bombs isolated from each other before and after the center section. I’m silent about the resource and security,” He summed up.
        1. timofeev_tema
          timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 08: 42
          +1
          Indeed, in an airplane weighing only 200 tons, the beam must withstand a load of as much as 3.000 tons. Well, "Tipo", nada ... Iksperd said so. wink
          1. avia1991
            avia1991 1 February 2018 23: 23
            +7
            Quote: timofeev_tema
            in an airplane weighing only 200 tons, the beam must withstand a load of as much as 3.000 tons

            Stop already showing your stupidity. If you do not have an idea about the structural mechanics of aircraft structures - there is nothing to be disturbed at all. Wikipedia expert, Mlyn. One of the same on TV constantly lights up - Boris Borisych is called. Not a relative, an hour? wassat
            1. timofeev_tema
              timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 00: 04
              +4
              Yesterday you made a very stupid statement proving the impossibility of creating a passenger aircraft based on the Tu-160. Well, you just knew nothing about the successful project of Soviet aircraft designers, which is already 60 years old.
              I reasonably proved the possibility thereof: I gave an example of the Tu-116 aircraft.
              Today you accuse me of not knowing the "structural mechanics of aircraft structures" ... (by the way, WHAT is it?)
              Okay ... The burden of proof is on you.
              Please lay out the diagrams and prove that the beam must withstand a load of 3.000 tons.
              I look forward to your ... competent answer wink
              1. Senior manager
                Senior manager 6 February 2018 10: 25
                0
                I think GDP is simply unsuccessfully put it. Technologies and technical solutions were tested on the 144th and 160th, the second aspect is the bomb load, I think the civilian aircraft will have less, again, the composites are in operation. The solution to the problem is real, but it will naturally be a different plane. And as psychologists say, if you don’t set a task, you won’t fulfill it.
    3. timofeev_tema
      timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 01: 16
      +4
      Putin did not blur, but expressed a feasible idea. Moreover, it can be completed in six months or a year, spending very modest means. Examples are already available. Moreover, in the Soviet aircraft industry.
      1. avia1991
        avia1991 1 February 2018 01: 19
        +5
        Quote: timofeev_tema
        He expressed a perfectly feasible idea. Moreover, you can complete it in six months or a year, spending very modest means

        And from this place - in more detail. With examples! And get ready right away wassat
        1. timofeev_tema
          timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 01: 22
          +2
          I'm not going to get ready for a brainwash.
          Read about the Tu-116 on Wikipedia (do not confuse it with the Tu-114). You will be surprised to learn that it was created from the Tu-95 in just a year.
          At the same time you will find out HOW they managed to create it so quickly
          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ту-116
          1. avia1991
            avia1991 1 February 2018 02: 01
            12
            Quote: timofeev_tema
            Read about the Tu-116 on Wikipedia

            I do not need Vicki for this - I managed to study, in due time, from the textbooks of the USSR. And what are YOU (since you love to poke, get a grenade in return) you are going to trump, tell? The fact that two aircraft were prepared in two years for a specific task? Did they go to the series? And after all, it was redesigned from ready-made planes! And there were a lot of complaints about them. And Nikita flew, in the end, on a full-fledged Tu-114 passenger! And this is a makeshift .. do not forget that at the time there were all the power of the restored USSR at the services of aircraft designers, full-fledged design bureaus, factories, allies, etc. And by the way: are you going to offer ready-made Tu-160s to be converted to jets ?! Yes, you have to shoot, dear! No kidding - to the wall! For the proposal to break up for the sake of the dough defense of the homeland!
            In addition, supersonic, a young man - this is not an easy walk for you. And besides creating a new, in fact, airplane (which will take no year or two), you need new low-noise engines - otherwise you only fly in your own sky! - and new flight routes, because one of the main obstacles in the operation of the Tu-144 was the sound impact that accompanied it, from which the glass in the houses at the heading rate shattered, and the cows smoked before the deadline!
            Learn, my dear, study! And it’s better to use decent sources - what Wikipedia cannot be, by virtue of the nature of its irresponsible ..
            1. timofeev_tema
              timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 02: 11
              +2
              Yes, I'm not going to trump anything. I just say that there is already an example of placing an airtight capsule for passengers in an unpressurized compartment for bomb loading.
              If the Tu-116 was created in a year, the civilian version of the Tu-160 will be created in six months.
              The capsule is made from composite materials of the methods of winding prepregs on a bobbin. The mass of the capsule will not exceed 5 tons, which will allow you to take on board an additional 35 tons of fuel.
              What is the difference with a capsule placed INSIDE the fuselage, with what speed that fuselage flies: these are problems not of the capsule, but of the fuselage.
              In short, I showed you through an example that IT is possible. You, in spite of your nickname (avia), only now with surprise have learned that the Tu-116 existed. But, not being able to admit your mistakes, you suffered some kind of snowstorm.
              I'm not interested in discussing with you.
              Fortunately, Putin knows better than you the history of Soviet aircraft manufacturing.
              1. avia1991
                avia1991 1 February 2018 02: 22
                +6
                Quote: timofeev_tema
                You, in spite of your nickname (avia), only now with surprise found out

                God, what a stupid thing .. You joyfully trump just read info - But I thought to argue with the specialist!
                What does history have to do with it, if I safely studied the Tu-95 almost 30 years ago - and at the same time I found out everything about your "discovery" .. I don’t respect myself, I’m talking to such "years". Ugh ..
                1. timofeev_tema
                  timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 02: 26
                  +1
                  I am glad that today you learned about a project that is already 60 years old.
                  You turn to me: I will tell you a lot of things "for aviation" wink
                2. Seryoga Gord
                  Seryoga Gord 1 February 2018 16: 09
                  +6
                  in vain, you, sir, got into a skirmish with this fat, illiterate troll, he is flattered by your attention, as a competent specialist, with a personal opinion that is different from the opinion of a “sun-wired judoka”, because, in the opinion of the Kremlin dreamer, you can even fly to Mars airship with a rocket engine ...))
                  1. timofeev_tema
                    timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 16: 43
                    +3
                    Yes, avia1991 is the same troll: not having basic knowledge from the history of aircraft construction, it is trying to pose as a specialist.
                    It was no accident that he was immediately blown away by the wind when I brought him the facts of a successful FAST and relatively cheap way to create a passenger aircraft based on a bomber, which was successfully worked out 60 years ago by Soviet aircraft manufacturers. He did not even suspect that in the mid-50s of the last century the Tu-116 was created and operated, which was built on the basis of the Tu-95 in just a year. wink
                    And it’s not a shame for him - a complete ignoramus in aviation - to appropriate such a Nick wink
                    A passenger aircraft based on the Tu-160 can really be built in just a year. There is nothing complicated and unknown in this for our aircraft designers.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                    2. Senior manager
                      Senior manager 6 February 2018 10: 37
                      +1
                      Timofeev_theme. A passenger may be built in a year, but it will not be a very attractive business device. Hemp marked - engines (economics and noise), well, the main thing in the project - bringing to * shine *.
              2. Conserp
                Conserp 1 February 2018 14: 02
                +6
                Quote: timofeev_tema
                can be completed in six months or a year, spending very modest means. Examples are already available. Moreover, in the Soviet aircraft industry.

                You still tell about the "Ilya of Muromets", a dreamer.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                2. The comment was deleted.
                3. timofeev_tema
                  timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 14: 19
                  +6
                  I’m talking about "Ilya of Muromets." I will be brief wink
                  1. timofeev_tema
                    timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 14: 25
                    +4
                    And here's another view wink
                4. timofeev_tema
                  timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 14: 38
                  +2
                  I understand that you refer to the times of the First World War, but there is an argument in my favor: the heavy bomber I. Sikorsky “Ilya Muromets” became the first passenger aircraft in the world wink
                  For the first time in aviation history, it was equipped with a comfortable cabin separate from the cabin, bedrooms and even a bathroom with a toilet. The Muromets had heating (engine exhaust) and electric lighting. On the sides were the exits on the lower wing console. The outbreak of World War I and the Civil War in Russia prevented the further development of domestic civil aviation.
                  1. Proclus Proclusus
                    Proclus Proclusus 9 February 2018 11: 32
                    0
                    Well, you directly described one to one that has no analogues in the World of MS-21 !!!!!!!
            2. Vladimir Anatolyevich_2
              Vladimir Anatolyevich_2 2 February 2018 09: 55
              +2
              Do not carry nonsense.
            3. Proclus Proclusus
              Proclus Proclusus 9 February 2018 11: 26
              0
              What does it mean to shoot? If anything, then does the Guarantor also need to go to the wall? Here the guy no longer smells of extremism, but terrorism! Who are you swinging at?
          2. Bratkov Oleg
            Bratkov Oleg 2 February 2018 12: 57
            +5
            Variable sweep, perhaps a fifth of the mass of the aircraft eats. Tu-144 was made commercially, not spent on changing sweeps, and it turned out very expensive.
            1. timofeev_tema
              timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 13: 24
              +2
              So what? .. But this plane ALREADY IS!
              Today, no one will spend billions of dollars on the development of a new purely passenger supersonic aircraft when they need 20-30 units for the whole world: with such a need, either they will not be able to "recapture" the costs of developing, launching a new production and the production itself, or the price a ticket will be 5-10 times higher than usual.
              And here there is already (almost restored) serial production. It is enough only at the stage of final assembly instead of weapons systems to introduce sealed passenger capsules into the fuselage. Well, and make minor changes to the design of the bombers. And to reduce the volume of the fuel tank in the center section by a couple of cubes (minus 1,5 tons of fuel) due to the cutting of the passages connecting the capsules.
              By the way, this method will not only allow us to create such an aircraft as soon as possible within a year), but it will also reduce the cost of production of the Tu-160M ​​bomber / missile carrier for the needs of our airborne forces by increasing the series.
              The variable sweep of the wing allows the aircraft to be used at conventional airfields without restrictions: the take-off / run length of the Tu-160 is 900 / 2.000 meters.
              Using a variable sweep, this aircraft can safely fly in the lower and middle airspace with the same instrument speed as all ordinary passenger airplanes - 450-470 km / h, which will not only allow it to withstand standard speed limits for passenger airplanes , but also to fly at lower engine operating modes and thus easier to fit into noise restrictions.
              Well, since it is considered not just as a passenger plane, but as a VIP-board, the ticket price will not play any role whatsoever.
    4. Seryoga Gord
      Seryoga Gord 1 February 2018 15: 54
      +6
      in my opinion, the President frankly "blurted out" ... but he was not the first time, he was also a populist, he could not cope with Wada and the IOC, but he could also put together an airplane from Buran ...))
  3. ImPerts
    ImPerts 31 January 2018 09: 17
    11
    Everything is possible, but it makes no sense.
    First of all, technologies are secret.
    Secondly, the design of the aircraft is designed for huge loads, which is not at all practical for business jets, where convenience and not the performance of a combat mission are paramount.
    Thirdly, why such a huge aircraft in 245 tons, for a company in 25 people?
    It is necessary to design a new one. Or not taken at all.
    1. HEATHER
      HEATHER 31 January 2018 09: 48
      +7
      ImPerts And you just can’t say that nothing will come of it. I don’t give a damn to the user. And you missed the center section of the car a little. It's a dumb idea. I agree with you. And it's impossible. Who will run into the debate? on a penny.
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 31 January 2018 10: 10
        0
        Quote: VERESK
        Who will be in a dispute?

        Krasava! good
        1. HEATHER
          HEATHER 2 February 2018 09: 32
          +2
          Ingvar 72I hate people who do not rummage in Aviation.
          1. timofeev_tema
            timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 14: 50
            0
            Did you mean this yourself? - Yeah, your knowledge of aviation, except scarce and miserable, can no longer be called. wink
      2. timofeev_tema
        timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 01: 14
        +1
        Well ... I got into an argument ... Butt ...
        What is wrong?
        To create a civilian version of the Tu-160 is a matter of six months.
        You would not be a bull, but you would study the history of aircraft manufacturing, for example, the USSR ... and you would understand everything ... why and how so quickly you can create such an airplane?
        1. avia1991
          avia1991 1 February 2018 01: 26
          +8
          Quote: timofeev_tema
          You would not be a bull

          Would you not poke at a stranger? And dear, by the way, unlike Vasss, with your populist mistakes about the "history of aviation"! People themselves were creating this story, and among those present here there are such. How are you connected with this? At the guard guard at the factory entrance?
          1. timofeev_tema
            timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 01: 32
            +2
            And what about the topic? ..
            Man, not having the slightest idea about the history of Soviet aircraft construction, threw himself up, promising to be grave. And I, related to aviation, and KNOWING the history of the development of Soviet aircraft industry, put it in its place. That's all.
            We already have a successful example of creating a civilian version based on a long-range bomber.
            1. avia1991
              avia1991 1 February 2018 02: 15
              +8
              Quote: timofeev_tema
              We already have a good example.

              Yes, here, by the way: "with us" - who does this? The USSR had a lot of developments, experimental machines, and piece combat units, adapted for narrow tasks. But no one thought of any mass production of such alterations - this is the first, and THIS WAS the USSR - this is the second. What is now - it does not reach the outsole of the Union! Especially considering that in the KLA, such domestic "luminaries" as Mr. Taburetkin (or Serdyukov is memorable), and the young management genius, the son of Dima Rogozin, are working at senior executive positions, this general head of the transport aviation department.
              1. timofeev_tema
                timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 02: 21
                +1
                Again the blizzard in the spirit of "all-companions" suffered. On the topic, what do you say?
                Studied the experience of the Soviet aircraft industry?
                You had some wrong USSR textbooks: in those textbooks I studied, already in the early 80s of the last century we examined the successful experience of creating a passenger version of a bomber by placing a sealed capsule for passengers in the bomb loading compartment.
                Change your nickname, otherwise it’s somehow uncomfortable: you call yourself an aviator, but you don’t know the history of aircraft building wink
                1. JIaIIoTb
                  JIaIIoTb 1 February 2018 15: 58
                  +2
                  Timofeev, you will remember the nicknames of all all-propellers, and when the civilian version of the Tu -160 flies, remind them of their own words. I often do this, after they either moo something unintelligible, or stupidly ignore)))
            2. HEATHER
              HEATHER 3 February 2018 14: 16
              +3
              We already have a successful example of creating a civilian version based on a long-range bomber.Put me in my place! Knock on the drum. And you are not trying to prolong the Tu-16th. Tell me, Aviation connoisseur, how can a passenger be cooked from a Swan? Preferably with evidence.
        2. HEATHER
          HEATHER 2 February 2018 05: 37
          +5
          Your thoughts? Open, at least in the u-tube, the power structure. There are two sections for armaments separated by a titanium center wing. There is no passage. The width of the bomb bay is 1,9 meters. The height is 1,7 meters. Where do you stick passengers? Complete disregard for Aviation. Do not understand, do not give out stupidity.
          1. timofeev_tema
            timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 09: 37
            +1
            Quote: VERESK
            Heather Today, 05: 37
            Your thoughts? Open, at least in the u-tube, the power structure. There are two compartments for armament separated by a titanium center section.

            What do you think of a "titanium centrifuge"? In your opinion this is a channel with a shelf thickness of a meter and a half? wink
            Let it be known to you that the center section is the BOX, which, for example, in the Tu-160 (and other types of aircraft) is used, among other things, as a fuel tank!
            So you can place fuel, but you can’t make a passage? ..
            Learn the design of the Tu-160 you mentioned yourself.
            Well, as for the internal dimensions ... remember one wonderful movie ... wink
            The Tu-160 internal dimensions (height-width) are approximately similar to the Tu-22M3.
            To place two chairs in each row with a passage between them is not difficult.
            1. Lozovik
              Lozovik 2 February 2018 10: 33
              +5
              Quote: timofeev_tema
              The Tu-160 internal dimensions (height-width) are approximately similar to the Tu-22M3.


              Of course not, they were created for completely different weapons. Of course, it is possible to fit, but only lying and not for long, because the compartment is leaky. wink
              1. timofeev_tema
                timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 10: 43
                +1
                Of course not, they were created for completely different weapons. Of course, it is possible to fit, but only lying and not for long, because the compartment is leaky.

                Yes, yes! The internal dimensions are almost the same. The Tu-160 even has a "slightly" inner fuselage height. So, not only lying can be accommodated, but sitting and standing.
                Regarding tightness: read all my posts in this thread. And read about the Tu-116 (do not confuse it with the Tu-114).
                https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ту-116
                1. Lozovik
                  Lozovik 2 February 2018 11: 28
                  +7
                  Quote: timofeev_tema
                  The internal dimensions are almost the same


                  The Tu-22M3 it is much narrower and shorter - 30-35 percent. The Tu-160, too, can’t be said to be big, you won’t even spread your arms freely.

                  Quote: timofeev_tema
                  Regarding tightness: read all my posts in this thread. And read about the Tu-116 (do not confuse it with the Tu-114).


                  Why so disgraceful? You can simply study the fuselage scheme and understand why a passenger plane cannot be made on the basis of the Tu-160, but from the Tu-95, Tu-16, B-50, B-36, Avro Lancaster, etc. can.
                  1. timofeev_tema
                    timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 11: 36
                    +1
                    ..and and? .. Why did you post this uninformative picture?
                    What do you see on it that will not allow you to create a passenger version?
                    Do not just throw information. If you think that it is important, then with the help of it I argue my position.
                    Come on, go ahead. I'll wait.
                    1. Lozovik
                      Lozovik 2 February 2018 13: 19
                      +8
                      Most of the internal volume of the fuselage is occupied by tank compartments, unlike the Tu-95, in which there is a lot of free volume, including due to the placement of cannon turrets and the weapons compartment for almost the entire diameter of the fuselage. The fuselage tanks themselves are small and soft.

                      Plus wild fuel consumption, meager range, low engine life, especially in afterburner operation modes, low reliability.
                      1. timofeev_tema
                        timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 14: 47
                        +1
                        Schyas will show you how to build a reasoned answer. Listen.
                        Here is the CORRECT picture (it should be clickable).
                        Indeed, fuel tanks are also located in the fuselage (but why are soft fuel tanks needed? - they probably haven’t been using them for 40 years already: hunting had to carry rubber!). and they do not occupy most, but only SOME of the fuselage.
                        But we are not interested in the tail (5) fuel tank: let it be - it does not interfere. The one that is in the center section (3) can be slightly reduced (2 cubic meters is approximately minus one and a half tons of fuel) due to the creation of a passage between the capsules in it.
                        Well, the front (1), middle (2) and rear (3) arms bays are large enough to accommodate 2-3 capsules for 20-25 people with maintenance personnel.
                        All your other arguments about misery - nothing.
            2. HEATHER
              HEATHER 3 February 2018 14: 20
              +5
              You will poke your grandmother. Expert. Study the design of the 160th. Or just look at the placement of power beams. And did your children draw drawings? Clarify point 4.
        3. HEATHER
          HEATHER 2 February 2018 09: 35
          +4
          Examine the glider of Swan. Then we will argue. Although there will be no doubt. It is impossible to create a civilian from Swan. Do not be stupid.
          1. Bratkov Oleg
            Bratkov Oleg 2 February 2018 13: 03
            +7
            Passages in the center section are made by the same people who knock down the load-bearing walls in high-rise buildings.
            1. timofeev_tema
              timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 14: 53
              +1
              And you also think that the center section consists of a solid titanium plate 2 meters thick? Do not listen to this heather: it carries complete nonsense. wink
          2. timofeev_tema
            timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 15: 10
            0
            It’s worth you to study the "Swan glider" wink
            I’m sure that for the FIRST TIME you’ve learned that he has so much free space inside the fuselage! wink
        4. HEATHER
          HEATHER 2 February 2018 13: 07
          +2
          Build. Where do you plug in the salon? Do you even understand the construction of the 160th? If you don't know, don't get into the pros. You'll look smarter.Bratkov Oleg To treat you too.
          1. timofeev_tema
            timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 14: 56
            0
            Are you shouting unproven slogans again?
            Look at the picture I posted above: the whole fuselage is painted there wink
            Although, to you with your inflated conceit except how to shout "impossible" nothing more ... impossible wink
            Well, you already showed your knowledge in the design of the aircraft wink
            You know, it would be much better for you to be silent. Why are you disgracing yourself? wink
      3. The comment was deleted.
    2. Ber
      Ber 31 January 2018 10: 02
      +2
      Everything is possible, but it makes no sense.


      Most likely this is primarily a matter of prestige of the country, such as the No. 1 aircraft of the president’s plane, no one has such an effect on an audience like the American confused on the transformer and pacimonos without fail, plus the plane is really for the rich people of the planet,
      the fact that he will not take root in civil aviation is understandable,
      but for businessmen and military it is a fact.

      For example, the transfer of several hundred commandos on super sound anywhere in the world,
      and landing them in special masks from 10 meters and above, in the era of hybrid wars is expensive
      and for this we need a military-cargo-passenger version of the Tu-160.
      In the meantime, this function is performed by the old transport workers IL-76, who are too vulnerable.

      Something they darken there, ........ the civilian version can only be an analogue of a military cargo and passenger aircraft, and not an analogue of a bomber.
      1. avia1991
        avia1991 1 February 2018 01: 13
        +6
        Quote: Ber
        disembarking them in special masks from 10 meters and above

        A mask is, of course, good. But with the speed of ejection - a problem .. but it will not work more slowly, like a transporter, supersonic.
        In addition, to maintain the health of a fighter, he needs a compensating suit at such a height - and this is already an order of magnitude more expensive than conventional equipment .. it won’t wink
        1. Ber
          Ber 2 February 2018 07: 26
          0
          This is to say that the amers at every point on the planet have almost an aircraft carrier, therefore, they can discard the required number of specialists on ordinary transport vehicles from high altitudes, so the thought flashed, since we do not have such a presence in the world's oceans, maybe create something like that. On supersonic to the target then on normal
          sound speed landing. Otherwise, there is no sense in this whole undertaking, the civilian sector is a priori unprofitable, only officials and military men in the country can carry such an over-the-air liner, well, about a dozen will be sold to billionaires over a hill, in general this is an assumption.
          Otherwise, the president really sweeps the blizzard, a pensioner already.
    3. Vard
      Vard 31 January 2018 10: 17
      0
      Why build yachts the length of a cruiser ...
  4. HEATHER
    HEATHER 31 January 2018 09: 44
    +2
    On liquid hydrogen? Brains left this "designer."
    1. FID
      FID 31 January 2018 09: 56
      +8
      Quote: VERESK
      On liquid hydrogen?

      Tu-156 ... Did not hear? When in ZhLiIDB this car was refueled, around, at a distance of about 1km there was no one ....
      1. HEATHER
        HEATHER 31 January 2018 10: 12
        +2
        SSI is my submission! hi Not only I heard, but I know. But at present, I don’t see the reality of such engines. As in the real future. With respect, to you!
        1. FID
          FID 31 January 2018 15: 45
          +3
          Hello and respect to you! I currently do not see anything at all ...
          1. avia1991
            avia1991 1 February 2018 01: 17
            +1
            Quote: SSI
            I currently do not see anything at all ...

            belay That you sho-oh ?! A "Superjet", with imported filling ?! What about MS-21? ..
            Although what ..in general, Yakovlev and Ilyushin have some kind of stirring, and even a few inspire hope ..
          2. HEATHER
            HEATHER 2 February 2018 05: 42
            +1
            I'm talking about the Tu-155 and not the Tu-156, I not only heard, but I know a little. And the car did not go into production because of some very big problems. It is with hydrogen.
  5. shura7782
    shura7782 31 January 2018 10: 33
    +3
    The proposal of the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin to create
    Uncle Vova suggested, then ordered. If ordered, then there has already been a discussion of this proposal with the designers. Mala capacity, noisy, voracious - what nonsense. But the first person on this SAPSAN will quickly get where it is needed.
    Another variant. This is an informational stuffing at the level - One woman said. We grind this ringing and forget. I especially liked hydrogen.
    1. timofeev_tema
      timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 01: 55
      0
      This is not a "stuffing at the level", but quite an easily implemented idea. By the way, Putin did not say a WORD about hydrogen.
      <<< President Vladimir Putin, having watched the flight of the new supersonic strategic missile carrier Tu-160 "Pyotr Deinekin", suggested making a civilian version of the supersonic aircraft based on the Tu-160.

      “We need to make a civilian version. Why did the Tu-144 go out of production - the ticket had to correspond to some average salary in the country. But now the situation is different. Now large companies have appeared that could use this aircraft, "RIA Novosti reports Putin's words. >>>
      1. HEATHER
        HEATHER 2 February 2018 13: 21
        +6
        GDP doesn’t understand in Aviation. They talked about it and it went. But it didn’t go. There are sensible people who perfectly understand the impossibility of fulfilling this order. Now, the main thing is to bring it to the commander in chief. Otherwise there will be too much resonance. Putin is not an aviator. He is not understands the specifics of supersonic. And he has no one to explain what it is. They dispersed the specialists to retire. And now who is left? Rogozin? Who sees the planes only on the computer display.
        1. timofeev_tema
          timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 14: 59
          +1
          Heather Today, 13: 21
          GDP in Aviation does not understand.

          Your father doesn’t understand this at your father! wink
          And Putin has very sensible consultants. And he himself, unlike you, is not deprived of intelligence wink
        2. aleks26
          aleks26 4 February 2018 05: 21
          +1
          Quote: VERESK
          GDP in Aviation does not understand.

          And he does not need to understand this matter, he has an army of consultants, but the fact that he does not throw words into the wind is for sure. If I said so, it means that it pursues certain goals, which for us are apparently not obvious, to put it mildly.
  6. cedar
    cedar 31 January 2018 11: 51
    +3
    This version of the Tu-160 is necessary for the President’s air squad. And what, even very ponto will rush to a meeting at the top with some Trump or Netanyahu with a rear bomb-bomb hammered to the eyeballs of X-101. Then the negotiations will be held in the spirit of mutual understanding and even good neighborliness ...
    Convert the front bomb bay to a salvage cabin with all amenities. How long can I fly on a Su-25? Russia is the largest country, from the end to the end to saw and to saw, and time is money, especially in wartime to the Commander-in-Chief of the RF Armed Forces, the Minister of Defense, the Chief of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces, such a version is very suitable. The rest suffered and will still suffer ...
    See the root. Our President is not so simple, as many two-leggeds were thirsty and trying to imagine it ...
    1. Bastinda
      Bastinda 31 January 2018 12: 37
      +2
      Alternative offer, life-saving capsules - individual! And by our officials and oligarchs, inflict a hard blow on the United States! But they are for some 18 years, undressed to cowards!
    2. HEATHER
      HEATHER 2 February 2018 13: 27
      +1
      Hmm. And the idea makes sense. Thanks to you, I will again limit the use of kerosene! GDP will gnaw me tomorrow. Not your fault. And your idea. Well, Cedar-I warned you.
      1. timofeev_tema
        timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 15: 00
        0
        Did you try to joke? Well then - ah ha ha ha ha ha ... wink
  7. cedar
    cedar 31 January 2018 12: 40
    +1
    Quote: Bastinda
    Alternative offer, life-saving capsules - individual! And by our officials and oligarchs, inflict a hard blow on the United States! But they are for some 18 years, undressed to cowards!


    And what is this super weapon called?
    1. Yuyuka
      Yuyuka 1 February 2018 00: 48
      0
      Quote: cedar
      Quote: Bastinda
      Alternative offer, life-saving capsules - individual! And by our officials and oligarchs, inflict a hard blow on the United States! But they are for some 18 years, undressed to cowards!


      And what is this super weapon called?


      Olga Fuck ...
  8. DiKoff
    DiKoff 31 January 2018 19: 48
    0
    What's new ?? Mikoyan at one time, in order to knock money out of the Political Bureau of the CPSU, proposed option 9 of a local passenger jet based on MIG 25, the so-called administrative plane to Africa to hunt for flying (for example) in the Kremlin they replied that it was difficult to represent the old ones .. new ones coming out of it somewhere in the Congo after flying at a speed of 3 M)))
  9. The poor man
    The poor man 31 January 2018 20: 28
    +4
    Again, they simply accept Putin’s proposal as a directive. So a person’s head doesn’t have to wear a hat, think and suggest a real and inexpensive project of a supersonic passenger plane. The president, delighted at the elegance of the TU160M, voiced in this way Russia's need for a supersonic aircraft, and not the way of its creation. So prove what and how not to do, but how to. He is an intelligent man, he will understand, do not doubt it. Well, if you fail to prove, then it’s better and don’t do anything, it will be cheaper. Say: eh, they couldn’t. The people will understand and forgive, because the Tupolevs are not born every decade (a century, etc.). And we, according to the old and good tradition, do not want to learn from the experience of previous generations, to learn something from them and the further, the less. We sit and poke a finger at a smartphone - that’s all science.
    1. timofeev_tema
      timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 01: 18
      0
      There is a way to create a civilian version of the Tu-160, and it is known to everyone in the slightest degree related to aviation. Work - a maximum of one year. An example is already there. Moreover, very successful.
      1. avia1991
        avia1991 1 February 2018 01: 22
        +4
        Quote: timofeev_tema
        he is known to everyone in the slightest degree related to aviation. Work - a maximum of one year.

        Even that ?! Share it! And communication with aviation at the same time ..
        1. timofeev_tema
          timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 01: 26
          0
          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ту-116
          Read ... Don’t confuse Tu-116 with Tu-114
    2. HEATHER
      HEATHER 2 February 2018 05: 49
      0
      GDP is the smartest person. But in Aviation, there is no one to train. Excuse me, but to create a civilian supersonic from Swan is unrealistic.
      1. timofeev_tema
        timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 09: 03
        0
        HERE Today, 05: 49 ↑
        GDP is the smartest person. But in Aviation, there is no one to train. Excuse me, but to create a civilian supersonic from Swan is unrealistic.

        Colleague, would you be so kind as to argue your vyser wink
        1. HEATHER
          HEATHER 2 February 2018 09: 22
          +3
          Look at the Swan glider. Between the two compartments there is a powerful 2-meter titanium bulkhead. There will be no plane to remove it. If you are such a special explain how to cram passengers into a strategic missile carrier? If there are no thoughts, do not go where you should not. without you enough. Although you are regular. And you are not a colleague to me.
          1. timofeev_tema
            timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 09: 51
            0
            Do not make me laugh! There is no TWO METER bulkhead! There is a hollow box used as a fuel tank.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  10. VladVlad
    VladVlad 1 February 2018 08: 23
    0
    The United States has a top-secret aerospace hypersonic aircraft such as the TR-3B and its many modifications. Already a whole secret army. LA launch speed of 5 km per second, cruising from 20 km per second. It controls the force of inertia, controls the force of gravity, controls the flow around it. Often used as a scout, invisible to radar, works through space. It descends vertically over an object, a city, adjusted its goals and again went into space, for 10000 km. Our planes and hypersonic missiles do not even have time to fly up.
    1. timofeev_tema
      timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 08: 37
      +2
      This American top-secret aircraft is so secret that they have not even heard of it at the Pentagon and the American White House wink
      1. Anatoly R
        Anatoly R 3 February 2018 00: 23
        +2
        timofeev_tema - And they also had plywood Saturn 5, which flew only on ballistics.
    2. aleks26
      aleks26 4 February 2018 05: 29
      +1
      Quote: VladVlad
      The United States has a top-secret aerospace hypersonic aircraft such as the TR-3B and its many modifications.

      Based on Mars. Exactly, our GRU officers spotted on Mars right away as many as 3 runways. There is also a "jump" airfield on the moon. Dadada, this is accurate information.
  11. Bosch
    Bosch 1 February 2018 09: 38
    +6
    Passenger TU-160 is pure populism.
    1. timofeev_tema
      timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 10: 29
      0
      ... and the argument of this thesis will be? .. or is it said in order to shake the air?
  12. Valery Saitov
    Valery Saitov 1 February 2018 14: 23
    0
    The main thing is to determine the goal and outline the task, and then the thought will develop. The Tu-144 was the thought, and let the factory workers think how to move it further.
  13. north_ok
    north_ok 1 February 2018 15: 18
    +2
    Quote: Valery Saitov
    The main thing is to determine the goal and outline the task, and then the thought will develop. The Tu-144 was the thought, and let the factory workers think how to move it further.

    I agree that with the new technologies the TU 144 project can and will turn out as they say “in the metal.” The Tupolevites have 144 earnings, it remains a small task to build an airplane. And yes, I understand that this is not a shed to bungle.
  14. Nikon Chukaly
    Nikon Chukaly 1 February 2018 15: 45
    +2
    There is not even a shadow of doubt about the awareness of the President of the Russian Federation regarding the relevance of aircraft manufacturers' technologies at the moment, and it is clear that Mr. Putin intentionally came up with the idea of ​​implementing a civilian version of a military aircraft in connection with the transition of the military component to a higher level of technology.
  15. BOPOH50
    BOPOH50 1 February 2018 20: 53
    +3
    Civil that 160 ...., well this is our old favorite rake)))). It's like plowing a field on Armata.)))
  16. BOPOH50
    BOPOH50 1 February 2018 20: 56
    +1
    On all military equipment, the level of comfort implies conducting a battle, and not a ride with relish.
  17. vik669
    vik669 1 February 2018 21: 39
    +4
    Quote: Andrey Yurievich
    The president frankly "blurted out" ...

    This is exactly BUT how sharply "especially gifted" in all seriousness began to discuss this "idea".
    That is the question - who is who and why?
    1. timofeev_tema
      timofeev_tema 1 February 2018 22: 10
      0
      Calm down: you don’t understand. You harness a donkey to the arba and - a tsob-tsobe! .. And that’s enough for you.
      And our president didn’t blurt out, but said something that was not only feasible in a short time (within a year), but, I think, was already at some stage of implementation.
      Putin does not grind his tongue, unlike you.
      1. HEATHER
        HEATHER 2 February 2018 05: 54
        +2
        Have you ever understood that you blurted out: the President said, we’ll do it! Urrya! But how about it? How could you? The specialists in Aviation on the site have divorced me a lot. Yes, they haven’t seen any planes.
        1. timofeev_tema
          timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 09: 06
          0
          Quote: VERESK
          Heather Today, 05: 54
          Have you ever understood that you blurted out: the President said, we’ll do it! Urrya! But how about it? How could you? The specialists in Aviation on the site have divorced me a lot. Yes, they haven’t seen any planes.

          Do not consider it work, dear Guru of the aircraft industry, tell us, the poor and the wretched, who are surprised that the plane does not flap its wings, but it flies, what did I blurt out? Explain. What should I have been thinking?
          Or are you special only in terms of unproven vysers?
  18. NN52
    NN52 1 February 2018 22: 09
    10
    I read all the comments ....
    I'm shocked....
    How old are you all? 70-80?
    1. aleks26
      aleks26 4 February 2018 05: 33
      +2
      Quote: NN52
      How old are you all? 70-80?

      Nope, 4 to 7
  19. tsybin denis
    tsybin denis 1 February 2018 22: 21
    0
    what are some secret technologies?
  20. faradien
    faradien 2 February 2018 05: 15
    0
    Here is an article with an analysis of a possible market for such an aircraft:
    tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/201802011116-af07.ht
    m

    But even if they make such an apparatus, say, a man of 100, it is clear that the "office plankton" on it will not fly from Moscow to Vladik. Too expensive! But there are not so many oligarchs who can fork out for it. Moreover, the presidential squadron will purchase several pieces. So the main calculation for the foreign market. Here is the fun part! Based on the current international situation, which will only be heating up, it can be assumed that the States, Europe and several other countries will prohibit flights of this particular aircraft, such as your “grenades of the wrong system” ... stop So directly, I see how some European bureaucrat explains to the Arab sheikh: "you don’t fly here, you fly there, otherwise ..." lol And those in addition to our "Carcasses" are forced to acquire "ideologically correct" pepelats for flights to the "correct" countries. laughing

    In general, Putin may have blurted out, or maybe not. It does not seem to be taken literally. Those. not specifically the existing Tu-160 to remake ... request Well, since Putin said, then funding will be tightened. Only it will not be tightened soon. There are other priorities. However, sooner or later, such a liner will be made. There are several businessjet projects in the world that, however, are far from being embodied in metal. So our already can start fussing. And Putin's "magic pendol" is not at all superfluous. In any case, first there will be analytics and a draft design. Which all "iksperdy" will again be excited to discuss.

    Z.Y. Regarding the economy and the possibility of a long flight at supersonic ... There should also be new dviguns that will do supersonic without afterburner ... Or maybe it is also at the same time a message to the engine drivers to make the necessary modification ... fellow
  21. Lozovik
    Lozovik 2 February 2018 16: 39
    +6
    timofeev_tema,
    Quote: timofeev_tema
    Here is the CORRECT picture (it should be clickable).


    Why throw disu?



    Quote: timofeev_tema
    average


    Where did the middle weapon compartment come from?

    Quote: timofeev_tema
    The one that is in the center section (3) can be slightly reduced (2 cubic meters is approximately minus one and a half tons of fuel) due to the creation of a passage between the capsules in it.


    Only a genius can propose cutting the central beam. By the way, how will we decide the range issue, comrade expert?
    1. timofeev_tema
      timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 20: 19
      0
      What kind of picture did you print? What did you even manage to make out on it on this vague gray-black spot?
      And why did you call my picture desa?
      You do not know how to search for pictures on the Internet, or you banned in Yandex?
      Then look at this picture carefully.
      Congratulations! You FIRST TIME managed to learn at least something about the design of the Tu-160.
      1. Lozovik
        Lozovik 2 February 2018 20: 57
        +5
        Once again for the gifted.

        1. timofeev_tema
          timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 21: 27
          0
          And why are you, UN gifted, showing me the tanks located OUTSIDE the fuselage?
          Or do you think that the tanks that I highlighted in red are inside the fuselage? wink

          Silly ... The tanks highlighted in red are not in the fuselage, but in the wings and in the rhizomes of the wings.
          Most likely, you do not know what the Tu-160 looks like.
          Take a look at the picture. Tu-160 is, in fact, a wing aircraft. And so the thickness of the rhizome of the wing is almost equal to the diameter of the fuselage ..
          And what you took for the continuation of the fuselage in cross section is no longer a fuselage.
          Than to post pictures indistinct and incomprehensible to you, it is better to look again at my clear picture. You will see those fuel tanks that are inside the fuselage. And those that are OUTSIDE the fuselage, I did not highlight.

          Now figured it out? Well, thank God!
          1. Lozovik
            Lozovik 2 February 2018 22: 00
            +6
            Bursts are part of the body. You can clearly see how the frames are located:



            I didn’t explain about the mythical middle compartment, I didn’t figure it out in previous questions. In short, the drain is complete. However, I will not engage in educational program, because it is useless. request
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. timofeev_tema
              timofeev_tema 2 February 2018 22: 20
              +2
              Yes, I’m not really messing with you too: what’s the point of arguing with a person about aviation technology, who has no idea about aviation technology?
              Wow, wing fuel tanks should be considered located in the fuselage! .. This is a masterpiece
            3. goblin xnumx
              goblin xnumx 4 February 2018 12: 16
              +3
              Well, why do you, specialists, argue in a bot troll ?? - ignore it like stupid news :) - old wisdom- prove something to an idiot- how to play chess with a pigeon ....- or else- don’t lower the troll level - he will defeat you at his level:) - my daughter after reading the comments (Grade 7) - asked, why they do not ban the idiot? - even she understood :)
          2. HEATHER
            HEATHER 3 February 2018 14: 30
            +5
            TANKS OUTSIDE THE FUSELAGE? I AM BURNING FROM SUCH SPECIALIST. God forbid, such a worm will appear in aviation.
            1. timofeev_tema
              timofeev_tema 4 February 2018 06: 38
              0
              Did you look at the picture? Got the initial knowledge of the design of the Tu-160? - That's good.
              The next step could be a conversation about the structure of the center section and the possibility of cutting a passage in it.
              Well, there they would have reached the flight range.
              Don’t be shy, ask. Over 37 years, I have answered many questions related to aviation - this is the job.
              1. HEATHER
                HEATHER 4 February 2018 15: 06
                +2
                22 years old. Of these, 7 in the 160s. Not a part. You are not our expert. wassatEspecially about the center section I want to hear. In particular about the 3rd armament compartment. Very interesting.
  22. Bhishma Ivanov
    Bhishma Ivanov 2 February 2018 18: 09
    0
    in its current form for the civilian version is too ugly
  23. Vladimir Moroz
    Vladimir Moroz 2 February 2018 21: 15
    +3
    The offer is absolutely working. I speak as a navigator of long-range aviation and far from the worst engineer.
    1. Anatoly R
      Anatoly R 3 February 2018 00: 38
      0
      Tu 104 flew.
    2. HEATHER
      HEATHER 3 February 2018 14: 32
      +1
      Alas. Not working. Help. All the same, with YES you live. hi
    3. Lucy
      Lucy 3 February 2018 17: 24
      0
      Hooray. They said minus the engineer. Have a semester - CEAT and Aerodynamics?
  24. artwin
    artwin 3 February 2018 00: 43
    0
    This is right Vovchik, and not just a civilian version, but only a presidential one, when Schaub was flying on business and was burnt by the adversary.
  25. Qwazar Qwazar
    Qwazar Qwazar 3 February 2018 15: 41
    +5
    It's not even that he eats 150 tons of fuel, the Arab sheikhs will survive it ...
    The thing is different, namely, the service team, RTB, etc. ... Infrastructure at world airports under TU-160 - zero point, zero tenths, and personnel who can serve - exactly the same ... Our former techies provide high-paying jobs? - They are FOR, but the country of NATO, will it be ready to allow the military, although former (possibly :)))) into their infrastructure? In short - the civilian use of the TU-160 is nonsense ...
  26. abrikotin
    abrikotin 4 February 2018 10: 22
    0
    come on, they’ll redo it so that it’s possible to make combat out of civilian, without any special expenses !!!
  27. Forever so
    Forever so 4 February 2018 12: 00
    0
    Liquid hydrogen ?? nudes, nudes))) TU 154 was already flying in the USSR in hydrogen, but with the destruction of the USSR all work was curtailed and handed over to the Americans with a goodwill gesture, with Russia's ban on hydrogen technologies. So before writing about hydrogen, you need to ask permission from your favorite partners.
    1. HEATHER
      HEATHER 4 February 2018 15: 11
      +2
      TU 154 on hydrogen has already flown in the USSR Tu-155. Right engine. The tail was clogged with hydrogen cylinders. Not good.
  28. pro100y.belarus
    pro100y.belarus 4 February 2018 12: 09
    +3
    Why go into the same river twice?
    There was a Tu-144. Crashed. Stop talk about this.
    There was a Concord. Crashed. Stop talk about this.
    Why do we need a civilian version of the Tu-160? After all, no one rides an armored personnel carrier to a supermarket. There are cars for this.
    And to pay 10 thousand dollars for a ticket for a flight across the Atlantic is unprofitable.
    1. HEATHER
      HEATHER 4 February 2018 15: 12
      +2
      We can’t fly on the soon-to-show pepelats ... recourse
  29. vik669
    vik669 4 February 2018 15: 52
    0
    Quote: JIaIIoTb
    TU-104 is made on the basis of Tu-16

    A TU-16 is made on the basis of Flyer I.
  30. vik669
    vik669 4 February 2018 15: 58
    +2
    Quote: Lozovik
    Once again for the gifted

    So starting with the one who submitted this idea and ending with those who chew this chewing gum all are “especially” gifted. Dear Editor,
    Maybe better about the reactor,
    About favorite moon tractor
  31. lance
    lance 4 February 2018 20: 26
    0
    ha ha ha ...... Orem and argue engineers, and the president said the plane will be!
  32. 1536
    1536 5 February 2018 15: 11
    0
    So will there be a plane or not? Or with some secrets we’ll stay as usual.
  33. ppgt90
    ppgt90 5 February 2018 16: 30
    +2
    So I read komenty and wonder. After all, it seems that people are adults and some even know something, but they are utter nonsense. Gentlemen, well, you can’t take what is said so literally. Yes, the president said about the civilian aircraft as a prototype of the TU-160, but this does not mean that two passenger salons will be taken and bombed at the plant. Well, only a completely stupid person can think so straightforwardly. Speaking of railway workers, they responded explicitly. For the gifted. Railway workers, and especially locomotive drivers, are the most technically competent people. Dear literate gentlemen! Putin never said to make the TU-160 passenger. A proposal was voiced to use existing developments and industrial potential to create a supersonic passenger aircraft. And such developments are taking into account the creation of two unique aircraft TU-144 and TU-160. So this is a very meaningful proposal. Who says cross these two cars? Yes, no one, but to use the experience of their creation is quite reasonable.
    1. Pavel_n
      Pavel_n 6 February 2018 06: 48
      +1
      Quote: ppgt90
      A proposal was voiced to use existing developments and industrial potential to create a supersonic passenger aircraft. And such developments are taking into account the creation of two unique aircraft TU-144 and TU-160. So this is a very meaningful proposal. Who says cross these two cars? Yes, no one, but to use the experience of their creation is quite reasonable.


      Yes, most likely it was meant. But why? Question: why, why make an uneconomical CIVIL supersonic plane? Indeed, if it is not economical, (let's say that there will be new engines there, nevertheless, they will be much more voracious than subsonic ones. By the way, developing and bringing a new engine is costly and very long. That’s another plus to the cost aircraft and of course to a rise in price for a passenger), then who will buy it? A pair of sheikhs, for a pontus?
      Those. you can do something, just for what? Can you imagine the ratio of costs to practical benefits? Serially, such machines will not be made, because nobody needs them, because expensive to fly and service. Those. at best, a few cars. In this case, they will be very (VERY) expensive. And this is the production of a single equipment - the irregularity of production, hence all the other problems - staff turnover (which is already absent), low qualification of personnel, competitive technical solutions, etc. Some problems. As a civilian version, this is a stillborn project. No matter how beautiful the idea.
      If you organize a series (or even mass) then yes, it makes sense. But this is taking into account that you will solve problems with the efficiency of dvigla and noise. But how to organize a large series ??? Who will buy a plane with a notoriously low profitability?

      In general, first you need to determine the potential market capacity of such an aircraft. And from there already to dance.

      If you fantasize like that to the fullest! There was such a project, and maybe now it’s warming somewhere, of a stratospheric passenger plane, in my opinion, it’s much more real and elegant - not to burst in supersonic sound through a dense atmosphere, burning a lot of fuel, but to fly around it from above ... But this is different the level of industry is needed ... the USSR would have pulled ...
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Serg nik
      Serg nik 6 February 2018 16: 22
      +2
      Mr. President for some reason "took away" from Medvedev "the honorable duty of" voicing "muddy projects." Even in the USSR, where they stole several orders of magnitude less, the EXPLOITATION of the supersonic Tu-144 caused so many problems (from the re-equipment of airports to the use of new fuels and lubricants) that Aeroflot refused it. At the current level of technology, "super-sonics" can only successfully fly across the ocean - otherwise they will have to lay tracks taking into account the impact of the shock wave on ground objects. And, finally, both the Tu-144 and Tu-160 are ideas of almost half a century ago. And it is not the aircraft designers who are to blame for this. But you cannot go far in the carriage of the past.
  34. iouris
    iouris 6 February 2018 01: 44
    0
    Rogozin said that he would return to Romania on the Tu-160, the son of Rogozin must do. Fast and mobile.
  35. The comment was deleted.
  36. Yarik
    Yarik 6 February 2018 19: 24
    +2
    SU-34, the ideal option. For one client who does not like the neighbors in flight to pester. laughing
  37. Sergei 777
    Sergei 777 10 February 2018 19: 57
    0
    It is necessary to recoup the production of these aircraft. The state defense order apparently will not do this. So we get similar "super projects".
  38. kunstkammer
    kunstkammer 24 February 2018 13: 14
    -1
    wealthy foreigners, primarily Arab sheikhs

    Arab sheikhs? ABOUT! They are! They love home delivery and straight to bed ...
    Our VKS have already worked out this comfortable service in Syria: flying over the Sheikh’s palace ... we’ll clarify the moment, the wind there and so on ... gently open the bomb gate cover. Believe, an important guest falls out of the hatch. Then he gets his own way. Sheikhmetry accuracy is a maximum of 5 meters from his sofa.