Military Review

TU-160. Should I resume production? Answer to critics

228
23.03.2018 was on the "Military Review" article was posted “Tu-160. Should I resume production? ” The article was followed by a lot of criticism. We answer the most important of them.




1. Comment: "The author does not understand the essence of the subject under discussion."

Answer: It can be argued that the author, since 1985, working as the head of the research institute sector aviation systems, for 20 years collaborated with the OKB im. Tupolev and dealt with issues of scientific support of the onboard defense complex. Therefore, the material presented in the article should be taken as first-hand.

2. “It’s not true that the B-160a bomber was used as a prototype for the Tu-1.”

The author even had to expand the section “History creation, to avoid such comments. In the USSR, never hesitated to borrow anything from the enemy. As an example, the following pairs can be cited: F-111 - Su-24, F-15 - Su-27, B-1a - Tu-160. In this case, of course, no one meant that someone received a complete set of documents. For example, for the Su-27, the general F-15 scheme was used with its own processing - the air intakes were moved from under the wings under the bottom and the wing was located below. When developing the Tu-160 to the scheme of a similar B-1a, they came only in the third version of the layout. The only case of a full copy - (B-29 - Tu-4) was made on the direct instructions of Stalin. KB Mikoyan, Ilyushin, Yakovlev, Myasishchev, Beriev used their own development.

3. “The Tu-160 could well strike one of the North Canadian Dew line radars and go deep into Canada.”

The Dew line consists of unattended radars and serves as a burglar alarm, that is, it should only report the fact of the start of the attack and the indicative location of the breakthrough. The destruction of one of the radar is such a fact. Further, fighters and AWACS AWACS aircraft are being raised from internal airfields of Canada. A pair of F-15C fighters with PTB can meet the Tu-160 and detect them using their own radar. The detection range of a “heavy bomber” target for the F-15 is 400 km. The width of the strip viewed during the flight of a pair of fighters reaches 600-700 km. That is, to cover the entire northern border of Canada will require only five pairs of F-15C. The detection range of heavy bombers with an AWACS aircraft is 700-800 km. According to his target designation, fighters can take targets for tracking at a distance of 500 km. The AMRAAM rocket launch range is 150 km, so one fighter can hit several targets, even when they are flying in heavily dispersed formations. Therefore, the penetration of the T-160 into the depths of the territory of Canada will not solve any strategic tasks, but will only lead to the senseless death of our pilots.

4. "It is possible to increase the power of the EW complex and use the disposable ransferable interference transmitters."

The Tu-160 is equipped with the EIB complex “Baikal”, which was developed in the 80-ies. At that time, omnidirectional antennas were used, radiating interference in all directions. The power of such interference was barely enough to cover the aircraft even then. In modern conditions, this complex has become completely ineffective. Given the increased EPR of the Tu-160, to hide it in modern conditions, the energy potential of the new complex will be ten times greater than that of Baikal. This will require the use of large size antennas based on the HEADLIGHTS. Such a complex of increased power will require a completely new and expensive development, and it will be very difficult to place it on an airplane due to the large dimensions of the antennas.

One-time interference transmitters have too little power to cover a target with such a large ESR. In addition, due to the flow of incoming air, they very quickly lag behind the aircraft. In order to derail the ZUR targeting, the transmitter must act on its hc for at least 3 seconds, that is, for Tu-160, the use of one-time interference transmitters is not effective.

5. "It is necessary to resume production in order to replace the outgoing old aircraft."

In the US, no one is going to resume production of B-52 or B-1b, they must reach its natural wear and tear and be written off. It is also necessary to do with the Tu-160. If, in accordance with the plans of the Ministry of Defense, the release of the Tu-160 will last until 2035 of the year, then they will be operated up to the 2070 of the year, and maybe even later. At this time, air defense equipment will develop so much that the Tu-160 will not have the slightest chance of survival. Therefore, it is necessary to completely abandon the CA or start the production of the PAK DA on the model of the American B-2.

TU-160. Should I resume production? Answer to critics


6. “After the first nuclear strike, the enemy’s air defense system will be in such a destroyed state that our planes will be able to deliver any kind of strikes.”

If the retaliatory strike on the territory of the United States is so strong that even the DEW line located at 70 ° N is broken, then no further use of TU-160 will be required, since the United States will suffer the required unacceptable damage. To inflict such damage, it is sufficient to use less than 10% of the XBUM ICBMs that we have. Americans are so urbanized that any destruction of the infrastructure will lead the country to chaos. For example, if you do not even hit the cities, and destroy the transformer fields of several distribution centers of electricity, then life in the country will stop. Rats and epidemics will complete the job.

However, one should not expect that if such damage is caused to the United States, our territory will remain intact. It is enough to strike at Moscow, as life in the country will also be paralyzed, since we have all the transport communications, communications, management systems tied to Moscow. Moscow’s missile defense system can intercept enemy ICBM units. It will not be effective against a massive strike, since the very first high-altitude nuclear explosion paralyzes the radar. The explosion forms an ionized cloud of such size that other targets behind it are not visible. It should also be borne in mind that too much impact on the US will cause the effect of a global nuclear winter. For our northern country, the consequences will be much worse than for the USA. As a result, it is better to agree that the CA will be used for non-nuclear conflicts.

It should also be borne in mind that the United States developed the concept of "limited nuclear war", according to which the retaliatory strike is dealt with the same number of ICBMs as they were attacked.

I have to recall a quote from Einstein’s letter to President Truman: “I don’t know how weapons there will be a third world war, but the fourth - with sticks and stones. ”

7. "Due to the coatings, it is possible to repeatedly reduce the EPR of the aircraft."

Coatings are of two types: thin and thick. Thin coatings are rarely used, as they are designed to suppress reflections of one narrow wavelength range of an irradiating radar. Thick coatings are designed to absorb a wide range of waves. Such coatings should provide a smooth change in the properties of the medium. We must not allow drastic changes in the dielectric and magnetic properties at the interface between the coating and the surrounding air. Therefore, coatings are made multi-layered: the inner layer is made highly absorbent, and the closer to the outer layer, the weaker the absorption. As a result, the coating becomes thick and, accordingly, heavy. Most often, such coatings are used on ships.

On airplanes, most of the inconspicuousness is ensured by the correct choice of form, that is, the aircraft must be in shape as close as possible to a flat surface. In order for the junction points of different flat surfaces not to reflect radio waves, absorbing coatings are applied to the junction points. Coating is a complex technological task, since they must withstand both high vibration levels and high velocities of air flow in a wide range of temperatures. On airplanes of old structures, it is extremely difficult to reduce the EPR in this way. For example, to reduce reflections from engine compressors, they should be covered with a sufficiently thick layer of absorbing material. In the case of chipping off at least one piece of this material, vibrations occur that can lead to an engine accident. To carry out such work and test the aircraft in all operating conditions will be very expensive, and the weight of the aircraft will increase markedly, which will reduce the maximum combat load. The E-B-1B was able to be reduced to values ​​less than 10 м2 due to the fact that the reduction of the EPR air intakes and other bright points was carried out in the design process. To achieve the same results for the Tu-160 will be extremely difficult.

8. "The task of the Tu-160 is to reach the launch lines of cruise missiles and intercept it in this case is impossible."

It is too dangerous to reach the US coast across the Atlantic because of the presence of a radar station in Greenland, Scotland, Norway, and so on. Sea areas cover shipborne radar, while AWACS aircraft are added during the period of danger.

It is even more difficult to reach the launch lines across the Pacific Ocean, since we do not have the corresponding home-based airfields in the Far East and Kamchatka. Preparation of the Tu-160 for flight requires a large number of qualified personnel. Before starting, use up to 15 service vehicles. The runway must be thoroughly swept and the airfield must be at least first class. Flying towards Korea, Japan, Indonesia will naturally be impossible due to the presence of air defense in these areas. The airfield will have to be located, for example, in Kamchatka, although even in this case the distance to the US borders will be more than 5 thousand km. Kamchatka and Sakhalin are not the best place for an airfield, as they can be hit by enemy ships and submarines. Another disadvantage of such airfields is difficult weather conditions - typhoons and heavy snowfall. Even if it is possible to approach the US coast at a distance of 1000 km and launch X-101 missiles, the flight conditions of these missiles will be unfavorable. Above the sea, there are no hills and terrain behind which the X-101 hides from detection by ground-based radar. Therefore, balloon radars from 3 km can detect X-101 at a distance of 200 km. It follows that the safest route is the route through the Arctic Ocean, where the Tu-160 can fly 73 ° N. Consequently, the areas of application of TU-160 are limited to the desert waters of the world ocean.

9. "It is possible to develop new equipment, in particular, to use the integral lining of the aircraft."

The integral casing in 90-s was understood to be some military fantasies that the aircraft casing could turn into a solid antenna that receives both radio waves of all bands and IR radiation. There were no such radio receivers either then or now. It is impossible to alter the aircraft's casing so that a lot of holes are made in it because the plane will collapse.

10. "Demonstrating our military power is cheaper with the help of planes, not ships."

A few years ago we made a demonstration of our military power. For example, a pair of Tu-160 flew to our friend Hugo Chavez. Of course, the flight itself is interesting, but the report did not indicate that all instances of our CA’s penetration into the North Atlantic took place when accompanied by NATO fighters. Accordingly, such a demonstration of the flag is possible only in peacetime. There were cases when the Tu-95 flew near US destroyers, but some of our generals advertise the most impressive case. They stated that when our Su-24 flew over the destroyer Donald Cook in the Black Sea, the destroyer left for Turkey, where with fear the team and quit. Destroyer radars could not detect the Su-24 due to the fact that they were suppressed by the Khibiny electronic warfare complex.

Nothing but the ignorance of the speakers, it does not indicate. Any radar specialist knows that the EW complex is the better to suppress the radar, the longer the distance from the radar to the aircraft. That is, there is a certain minimum distance R min, as it is approached to which the quality of suppression of the radar by the EW complex becomes worse and worse and at distances less than R min, the radar freely detects the target. For the case of suppression with the help of electronic warfare "Khibiny" radar "Donald Cook" R min is clearly not less than 100 km. This is explained not only by the high power of the radar, but also by the fact that the Su-24 was developed more than 40 years ago and has a high ESR. Therefore, statements that the aircraft could not be found on the destroyer are simply ridiculous for specialists. In addition, on the destroyers set ZAK "Vulcan Falans", the rate of which 100 rds / sec. Such complexes are called cutters (like our AK-630). When the aircraft approaches a distance of less than one kilometer, the line cuts the plane into parts. Therefore, we should be glad that the Americans have not lost their nerves and the command to open fire has not been received.

The only harm that the Su-24 could have done to the destroyer is that when flying at a very low altitude (about 10 m) above the destroyer superstructure, you can turn on the Su-24 radar and direct the beam to the superstructure. In this case, it is possible that high-sensitivity radio intelligence receivers will burn out.

Therefore, it is much cheaper to display a flag with the help of ships, since the ship’s flag is visible even when it is anchored and does not consume fuel, and the aircraft’s flag is only in flight.

11. Findings.

The Ministry of Defense claims that the upgraded Tu-160М2 will have a 60% efficiency greater than the Tu-160. No justification for this statement is not given. It is interesting to learn how improving the cockpit cockpit interfaces, replacing the navigation complex and other auxiliary equipment will increase the effectiveness of attacking enemy aircraft carrier groups ... The enormous cost of the Tu-160М2 program will ultimately lead to the disruption of the surface ship construction program. The HPV 2011-2020's. ship building will be performed on 50% only. Thus, airplanes that are able to participate only in the third world war will be built instead of the ships we need both in peacetime and in local wars.
Author:
Articles from this series:
TU-160. Should I resume production??
228 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 April 21 2018 06: 04
    +11
    TU-160. Should I resume production?

    At least from us, members of the forum, here certainly nothing depends ... request
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich April 21 2018 06: 18
      +7
      TU-160. Should I resume production?
      and sow the garden, is it worth it?
      1. Separ DNR
        Separ DNR April 21 2018 06: 37
        +4
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        and sow the garden, is it worth it?

        What the hell with him. Let it be, in the elderberry garden and in Kiev an uncle ...

        Uncle Sam ...
      2. Safevi
        Safevi April 21 2018 11: 49
        +23
        Many thanks to the author! The easiest way to shout is "Urya, Urya", than to sit and turn on the imagination - "is it really so?" If there were any drawbacks, the author would have been banned a long time ago - "how come! I dare to doubt that we will tear everyone and that everyone around us is afraid." A very good article!
        1. NIKNN
          NIKNN April 22 2018 15: 26
          +12
          Quote: sefevi
          Many thanks to the author!

          For what? For the fact that the amateur to the bone marrow with pathos writes about what is lower than the baseboard? Even GOOGLE can’t help him ...
          For example, for the Su-27, the F-15 general scheme was used with its own processing - the air intakes were moved from under the wings to the bottom and the wing is located below
          Let it be known to the author that the F-15 is designed according to the classical aerodynamic scheme, and the Su-27 is integrated ... Based on the knowledge of the author, all twin-engine planes are analogous to the F-15, only the air intakes are located differently ... request
        2. SETTGF
          SETTGF April 22 2018 17: 57
          +2
          Sefevi and author Andrei Gorbachevsky! Before approving and writing an article, you need to study the theory of electromagnetic wave propagation and the basics of radar ... it's about your optimal distance of 100 km ... it's pure fiction! With a radial-circular scan, part of a small sector can be illuminated and with the help of other radar devices, the interference can be easily cut off ... And the interference intensity - its amplitude will be greater, the closer the plane is to the radar, which is denied by you ... Of course, if your the plane will not fall into the funnel of the AFU radar! Do not write and do not approve of "fairy tales" ... and not only. And in other matters, if the article is corrected and finalized, that is, something to think about ... One opinion is good, more opinions are better!
          1. aagor
            April 22 2018 21: 42
            +1
            In the case of opposition radar Aegis - Su-24 100 km is not the optimal, but the minimum distance, closer to which the C-24 is clearly visible. You do not take into account that the radar receives a signal whose power grows as 1 / R to the 4 degree, and the power of the EW interference as 1 / R to the 2 degree. Author.
            1. SETTGF
              SETTGF April 23 2018 01: 37
              0
              aagor! Try to interfere with a radar with a pseudo-random change in the carrier frequency from a distance of 100 km or more ?! The result may surprise you, and if you apply the differentiation of interference signals, IAM, MARU, BALL, your target will also be visible very well and at a distance of 100 km or more ... Moreover, the interference intensity at the input of the radar of the receiver will be lower, the signal ratio the noise will be higher will be higher and Pc prm in the denominator of the range equation, which is under the root in the 4th degree, will be less, which also plays to some extent on the radar ... I agree with you in view of the fact that the interference level will be determined square root, but the greater the distance - e - m, the wave attenuates at the beginning in the cube, then in the square, and then linearly ... Everywhere there is a "fight" of the radar with the jammer, and given the range of the S-400, the director there is almost no chance of interference ... there is only a tactic for applying interference, which still somehow occasionally can help the interference maker in some way ...
              1. SETTGF
                SETTGF April 23 2018 02: 35
                0
                Dear author! When the Su-24 flew over Donald Cook and when the Su-24 radar was turned on, nothing happened, since the highly sensitive Donald Cook receivers are very well protected, including from the electromagnetic pulse of a nuclear explosion - with filters and high-speed protection elements ...
              2. aagor
                April 24 2018 08: 44
                0
                The method of tuning the frequency from pulse to pulse is not new and the best. Better than him - the use of broadband signals. But the marginal width of the band is determined, in this case, by the capabilities of the receiver hardware. The figure of 100 km versus Aegis radar is taken very roughly, it can actually be more. In general, a single jammer does not solve any problems, since the missile system can only be started by bearing the target that a single stage director cannot hide in any way. Moreover, missile assault when aiming at a source of interference is less than when aiming at the target itself, since the target signal when the target approaches a distance close to it starts to fluctuate strongly. Interference producers can only survive if they act in groups and very accurately conduct the systems at the same range from the radar station. Author.
                1. Ali
                  Ali 9 October 2020 17: 14
                  -2
                  Quote: aagor
                  Better is the use of broadband signals. But the near-limit bandwidth is determined, in this case, by the capabilities of the receiver equipment.

                  You are wrong. When using wideband signals, it is much easier to put interference than with pseudo-random tuning of the operating frequency of a narrower-band radar receiver, while we do not take processing of radio signals in noise - with a high level of interference, this does not help.
      3. lis-ik
        lis-ik April 22 2018 16: 13
        +1
        Quote: Andrew Y.
        TU-160. Should I resume production?
        and sow the garden, is it worth it?

        And I’m still building a house, and in general I’m building plans! All sadly need to be seen in the cemetery.
    2. Bar1
      Bar1 April 21 2018 09: 25
      +8
      I consider the refusal to produce strategic bombers because of the ineffective use of such weapons not justified.
      Now there are new aircraft protection systems, for example, the creation of false targets, when next to a real aircraft, air defense will see a few more.
      Aircraft protection systems are being developed by surrounding the aircraft body with plasma-ionized gas, which will reduce the EPR, this can be done by installing special containers with radioactive material on the aircraft, just in the area of, say, turbines.
      The plane is good, engine power will increase, new electronics, new weapons. so there will still be a demand for the aircraft.
      1. Yura
        Yura April 21 2018 21: 13
        +4
        Quote: Bar1
        The plane is good, engine power will increase, new electronics, new weapons. so there will still be a demand for the aircraft.

        And I’ll add that we do not have medium-range missiles, and therefore, among other things, the TU 160 will perfectly cope with this task, whether it be the whole of Europe or other theaters of possible conflicts.
        1. Alexey Lantukh
          Alexey Lantukh April 23 2018 21: 33
          +1
          Or maybe it’s easier to place cruise missiles on IL 76? A plane is cheaper, but you still don’t have to enter the air defense zone.
          1. Yura
            Yura April 23 2018 22: 16
            0
            Quote: Alexey Lantukh
            Or it may be easier to place cruise missiles on IL 76

            Why not, of course it is possible, the only speeds are different, respectively, the flight time to the launch site is also different.
          2. aagor
            April 24 2018 08: 47
            0
            Such variants were previously studied and as a palliative means are quite suitable. The speeds of the Tu-160 and IL-76 are almost identical - subsonic. Author.
      2. EnGenius
        EnGenius April 22 2018 17: 09
        +5
        By analogy with the United States, where the B-52 has been operated for half a century and still want to continue to operate for twenty years, the updated Tu-160 can very well be used as a weapon carrier, from free possession of bombs to strategic cruise missiles.

        Is it not to say that the USA has so many bases near our borders that it doesn’t have to fly to the USA - we can work from our territory on NATO and US bases and from the east and the west. And for an attack on the United States there are ICBMs in various designs.

        Russia also does not need to build a cheap analogue of the B-2, probably the Tu-160 will never be used for independent operations in the enemy’s air defense zone. Therefore, the project B-2 is closed. Now their priority is smaller and cheaper, because it’s easier to invade a massive raid of enemy fighter-bombers because of the flight range, and Russia is very large.
    3. iouris
      iouris April 21 2018 11: 53
      +1
      The most interesting question: who depends on whom? It is necessary to understand the purpose, when it is necessary to destroy with the help of Tu-160M2 - the USA or the Russian Federation?
    4. Rus2012
      Rus2012 April 22 2018 14: 51
      +3
      Quote: Author: Andrey Gorbachevsky
      Therefore, balloon radars from 3 km can detect X-101 at a distance of 200 km.

      ... what?
      The author can tell in more detail: how and with what radar data should be located so that 100% detects X-102 "from the crest of the wave" at a distance of 200km.

      And yet - how and what can counteract YES when hit by the "second wave" after an ICBM? When you need only a point cleaning of unfinished objects after additional exploration.
      1. aagor
        April 22 2018 21: 47
        0
        The detection range of low-altitude targets is determined by the radio horizon, which for 3 km altitude is 230 km. The second feature is that the target angle should be slightly above the horizon so that the signal re-reflected from the sea would not suppress the direct signal from the target. The specific angle depends on the working wavelength. Author.
    5. Buffet
      Buffet April 22 2018 21: 12
      +4
      The Tu-160 is equipped with the EIB complex “Baikal”, which was developed in the 80-ies. At that time, omnidirectional antennas were used, radiating interference in all directions. The power of such interference was barely enough to cover the aircraft even then. In modern conditions, this complex has become completely ineffective. Given the increased EPR of the Tu-160, to hide it in modern conditions, the energy potential of the new complex will be ten times greater than that of Baikal. This will require the use of large size antennas based on the HEADLIGHTS. Such a complex of increased power will require a completely new and expensive development, and it will be very difficult to place it on an airplane due to the large dimensions of the antennas.
      And what have you heard about the R&D "Messenger" and the EW "Logger"? They say that in the tests, the "Chipper" burned out everything that is possible with the air defense forces. And next to the working device, dead birds fell ... The bike is not a bike, but this system is there. And the "Messenger" is being developed for the Tu-160.
      [quote.] Integral cladding in the 90 years meant the fantasies of some military that the cladding of an aircraft could turn into a continuous antenna that receives both radio waves of all ranges and infrared radiation. Such radios were neither then nor exist now. It is impossible to remake the skin of the aircraft so that many holes have been made in it because the aircraft will collapse. [/ quote] Who told you that? But engineers are such fools that they cannot redesign a plane for these systems? And then, technology stepped forward. And the mass-dimensional characteristics decreased, with a multiple increase in the product characteristics.
      ... but some of our generals advertise the most impressive case. They stated that when our Su-24 flew over the Donald Cook destroyer in the Black Sea, then the destroyer left for Turkey, where the crew left with fear. The destroyer radars could not detect the Su-24 due to the fact that they were suppressed by the Khibiny electronic warfare system.
      The flight was around and the Americans' hysteria was a fact. And here’s what worked on “Cook”, so our developers with whom I communicate at work say that the complex was more likely to work more powerful. It is likely that the same "chopper". "Khibiny" complex is more self-defense, missile suppress or weak guidance systems. But nobody canceled the likelihood that the Aegis is highly praised and even the Khibiny can handle it ...
      1. aagor
        April 24 2018 09: 01
        0
        1. The problem of EW complexes is not that it is impossible to create a huge energy potential, but that such potential can be created only through highly directional antennas. The growth of the size of the antennas is limited by the availability of free space, on the Tu-160 it is only the wing of the wing, moreover, the high energy potential suppresses its own radio intelligence. Modern radars with AFAR were able to much better resolve different jammers in the angle, as they are not afraid of the effects of interference on the side lobes of the antenna. Therefore, even group use of EW often does not give the desired result.

        2. It is impossible to redesign the plane, since the entire budget of the Defense Ministry will be spent on it, the glider what it was, will remain so. No need to engage in baseless dreams.

        3. In itself, the increase in interference power cannot protect the aircraft from being hit by ZUR. Therefore, Donald Cook, even an order of magnitude more powerful interference, revealed at a distance of a clearly greater 30 km. The panic that has arisen among the Americans is apparently related to the fact that they decided the question - what to do during the next such flight - to open fire or not? Author.
        1. Buffet
          Buffet April 24 2018 19: 25
          0
          1. It seems that you are contradicting yourself. RER / EW operate in their frequencies. "Group EW often does not give the desired result," where when did not? Cases possible? And that is, our KRET, which develops these complexes, are there fools in the research institute?
          2. Have you heard about CAD? And the fact that the entire Tu-160 aircraft was digitized and made electronic drawings, how is it? They made the whole plane in half a year, approximately if memory serves ... it seems like the budget is alive. Yes, and GK also do not think so and design a plane to the design bureau for the future.
          3. Can not? And how do they hover on this plane if their guidance system does not work? "Opened a more powerful obstacle" is how? The crew could only see that its systems would fail if there were no suppression systems.
  2. Separ DNR
    Separ DNR April 21 2018 06: 06
    +12
    5. “It is necessary to resume production in order to replace retired old aircraft”. In the USA, no one is going to resume production of the B-52 or B-1b, they must reach their natural depreciation and be decommissioned. It is also necessary to do with the Tu-160. If, in accordance with the plans of the Ministry of Defense, the Tu-160 production will last until 2035, then they will be operated until 2070, and maybe even further. At this time, air defense equipment will develop so much that the Tu-160 will not have the slightest chance of survival. Therefore, it is necessary to abandon the CA altogether or to begin production of PAK DA according to the model of the American B-2.

    1. Comment: "The author does not understand the essence of the subject under discussion."
    Answer: It can be objected that the author, with 1985, working as a sector head at the Research Institute of Aviation Systems, has worked with the OKB Yakovlev Design Bureau for 20 for years. Tupolev and dealt with the issues of scientific support of the onboard defense complex. Therefore, the material presented in the article should be perceived as first-hand.


    Yes-ah ... That's a "specialist" ... Confirmed the "qualification", so confirmed ...

    Everything is gone. "Carcass" is so outdated that EVERYTHING is just EVERYTHING.
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I April 21 2018 06: 52
      +12
      Quote: Separ DNR
      Everything is gone. "Carcass" is so outdated that EVERYTHING is just EVERYTHING.

      What does Katz offer? Katz offers to give up!
      1. isker
        isker April 21 2018 11: 03
        +5
        and not only - give up, but - give out all the accomplices and indicate all the places where the money is buried ...
        Liberasty, such n * st ...
        1. spirit
          spirit April 22 2018 16: 09
          0
          Are you talking about any kind of ... do you speak? About Chubais or about Putin?) The head is also from liberals, so you are careful, otherwise you can go through the stages hi
    2. basmach
      basmach April 21 2018 08: 53
      +18
      So he worked in a serious office, and where did you work or serve, such a big "special". Or all the knowledge from the articles "we will tear all" and from the pictures.
      1. YELLOWSTONE
        YELLOWSTONE April 21 2018 09: 09
        +5
        maybe so, especially then point 2 and 3 is nonsense
        especially in terms of the Su-27 and the presence of Canada F-15C lol
        I didn’t have enough to read further laughing
        1. YELLOWSTONE
          YELLOWSTONE April 21 2018 09: 27
          +5
          in short, the Su-27 looks more like the F-14, which also has a decent range, and the Tu-160 was developed by Mikoyan so the specialist has been working with the wrong design bureau all these years lol
          1. axxmanm
            axxmanm April 21 2018 09: 44
            +5
            Quote: YELLOWSTONE
            Tu-160 was developed by Mikoyan

            did you mean Myasishchev?
            1. YELLOWSTONE
              YELLOWSTONE April 21 2018 11: 21
              +1
              yes beguiled with the plant
          2. bnm.99
            bnm.99 April 21 2018 12: 25
            +9
            Are you out of your mind ??? How can a highly maneuverable fighter for gaining air supremacy (Su-27) look like a heavy F-14 interceptor that is also equipped with a variable sweep wing? Conceptually, the Su-27 is just like the F-15, but with the F-14 you need to equal the MiG-31: AN / AWG-9 = "Barrier", AIM-54 = R-33, etc.
            1. YELLOWSTONE
              YELLOWSTONE April 21 2018 12: 29
              +1
              it was written "outwardly", conceptually, the Su-27 is not like any aircraft, the MiG-31, too, the F-14 on the MiG-23 and the heavy F-14 are less manoeuvrable than the F-15
          3. The comment was deleted.
        2. basmach
          basmach April 21 2018 21: 32
          +5
          Well, read the story of the creation of Su-27 .. And about the F-15 in Canada. So there is such a thing in aviation, a jump airfield. And at Canadian airfields Amer's duty units may well be located. So I advise you to read, there are a lot of smart thoughts.
          1. YELLOWSTONE
            YELLOWSTONE April 21 2018 22: 47
            +1
            in which edition? there are no F-15s to jump from
            leafed through to comment while flying, Cook, for example, came to Romania and there really were 30 of the crew decommissioned, because of the stress because they did not sign the contract so take risks
            1. basmach
              basmach April 22 2018 01: 14
              +4
              That is, the airfields from which the F-18 can fly are, but they are not suitable for the 15. You are as close to aviation as I am to ballet.
              Yes, one hundred could write off, the whole question is why. And how do you know about the reasons, they personally told them to you.
              In my time, in a neighboring regiment (Tu-22М3), the main task of which was to destroy an aircraft carrier in the Sea of ​​Japan, there was a bike that, during a sortie’s sortie, the regiment was decommissioned and those transferred to the infantry. And in every joke there is a fraction of a joke.
              1. YELLOWSTONE
                YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 03: 39
                +1
                yes they are too short lol
                in jest but not in a bike
    3. okko077
      okko077 April 21 2018 15: 27
      +7
      All work with the TU-160 related to the modernization and restoration of production is carried out only for 2 reasons: maintaining the combat effectiveness of existing aircraft and preparing for the production of PAK YES ... There will be no 50 aircraft, they are not relevant, unless what like political symbols. Moreover, in light of the need to produce new promising weapons of destruction, this program will be minimized ...
      1. Vladimir 5
        Vladimir 5 April 21 2018 15: 59
        +4
        The third reason, the collapse of the military-industrial complex and embezzlement makes it impossible for the PAK DA, even the PAK FA to emerge soon and not degenerate in any way. We need a screen and a kind of rapid progress, that’s some kind of collection from the backlog of several “Swans”, where the main achievement Beam welding became !!! So they make a good face with other bad things - a developing emptiness. 5th generation aircraft ...
        1. okko077
          okko077 April 21 2018 17: 46
          +2
          PAK FA, as a 5th generation aircraft, is the main element of the Combat Information Systems ... But we don’t have them, therefore, and only because of this it is not a 5th generation aircraft, although it has all the secondary signs. ... Therefore, it is not much needed, it will not be able to realize all its unique capabilities without LSI ... Here its expensive production and do not deploy ....
      2. aagor
        April 21 2018 21: 09
        +4
        There can be no continuity between the Tu-160 and the PAK YES, since these are different planes. Author.
        1. okko077
          okko077 April 22 2018 02: 16
          +4
          To begin with, there is no PAK YES ....
          Non-author.
    4. EnGenius
      EnGenius April 22 2018 18: 52
      0
      Obviously, the answer was qualified only for the integrated electronic warfare system.
  3. Yak28
    Yak28 April 21 2018 07: 07
    +7
    And will strategic aviation be able to take off at the right time? I doubt it very much.
    1. EnGenius
      EnGenius April 22 2018 18: 53
      +1
      It should be on patrol, and ground airfields are reliably covered by air defense.
  4. pravednik
    pravednik April 21 2018 07: 09
    +9
    An article about the arrival of the Khan of Russia. Like, they only know how to copy, and not create new ones. The author, if you had worked with the Tupolev Design Bureau for so many years, you would not have carried such nonsense.
    1. YELLOWSTONE
      YELLOWSTONE April 21 2018 09: 29
      0
      it looks like he collaborated with him, which copied the Mikoyanovsky plane (Tu-160) wassat
    2. isker
      isker April 21 2018 11: 06
      +2
      "bullshit" is not tolerant!
      must be expressed courtesy: a person with iodine deficiency syndrome ...
    3. AUL
      AUL April 21 2018 13: 47
      +9
      Quote: pravednik
      An article about the arrival of the Khan of Russia. Like, they only know how to copy, and not create new ones. The author, if you had worked with the Tupolev Design Bureau for so many years, you would not have carried such nonsense.

      Yes, good comment. Illustration to the proverb - Looks into a book, sees a fig! laughing
      The author is 100% right. The SA has now become atavism, like cavalry during the Great Patriotic War. She is too vulnerable to use (at aerodromes), and during the flight to fulfill the BZ (air defense systems do not leave her a chance), and there will be nowhere to return to her from the BZ (if she is lucky). Expensive and, in general, useless component of strategic nuclear forces.
      Separately for the Righteous - I do not offer to give up, I am writing about something else! tongue
      1. Corporal Pupkin
        Corporal Pupkin April 21 2018 14: 39
        +4
        You "distort the cards" ...
        The author DOES NOT APPROVE that "SA-atavism"!
        The author poses the QUESTION of the REASONABILITY of resuming the production of an OUTDATED MODEL.
        The author convincingly argues with the PURPOSES and TASKS for which the Tu-160 was created, as well as measures to counter the probable enemy performing these tasks.
        1. YELLOWSTONE
          YELLOWSTONE April 21 2018 22: 55
          +1
          enough that the commentator claims, the author leads to this
          both from the same Khrushchev and forgot, for example, about the anti-aircraft designation
          1. aagor
            April 22 2018 11: 05
            +1
            Did the commentator read the original article, where the main tasks of the CA are described in detail? Author
            1. YELLOWSTONE
              YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 12: 10
              0
              in the original, in general, only item 1, a comment on it at the bottom
              commented here are n 2 and 3
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 April 21 2018 20: 34
        +6
        in modern combat, the most effective means are hidden, missiles, underwater and land-based. Therefore, aviation is no longer as effective, and the author is trying to replace it with ships and ships, and they are even less effective than aviation, he simply does not know, because they also slow and much more noticeable aircraft. In general, the enemy can always have some means of destruction and this is not a reason to abandon aircraft or other weapons. So far, the time of the aircraft has not gone, unlike surface ships. A certain amount of DA is needed, by the way, the author revels in the moral obsolescence of that 160, forgetting about the physical aging of DA, and the need to replace it with at least something. Moreover, they will not be built on such a massive scale, well, a dozen then Russia needs the same. Despite its experience, Avtotr does not and cannot know what new technologies are in the new version of TU 160, but judges by TU 160 of its time ..... therefore its analysis is not competent.
        1. YELLOWSTONE
          YELLOWSTONE April 21 2018 23: 01
          +1
          revels in something completely wrong
          the most modern aircraft after the Su-35 and Su-57, and unique in its class in the world
          B-2 is a subsonic cuttlefish that can still be seen behind the horizon
  5. Salomet
    Salomet April 21 2018 07: 12
    +17
    As far as I remember, the modernization program provides for replacing engines with more economical ones, which means that the possibility of using it in low-intensity conflicts will also grow. Don’t say that, but the 160th gold is simply a resource, first of all, engines.
    I will consider the question, when will the engines be? For the Su-57, the OCD has already been completed, I think, soon and for the 160s it will be completed.
    The second author somehow interestingly discusses the use of the SA and Tu-95 and Tu-22, and the Tu-160 should be cut into metal. Excuse me, but USA, basically their GS, disagree with you, give them reasons to cut their B-52, B-1B. But no, they are sawing the B-21.
    CA has its purpose, it is a lever of power, and it is very long. The deterrence factor has not been canceled. And when a gap appears in it, evil spirits will immediately climb. To begin with, try to sit in the same Su-30 for 10 hours and understand that it is limitedly capable of striking away from the base, and this is only thanks to the endurance of the pilots.
    A small example. I talked with a friend on the subject of “clash on equal terms with the Russian Federation”, explained to him that “on equal terms” would not work. VKS can strike the entire depth of the territory of Ukraine, and the APU is not from the word at all.
    The author strongly underestimates the possibility of launching bombing missiles outside the zone of destruction of enemy equipment. As a means of aggressive attack, the Tu-160 may have lost points, but as part of the country's defense system, it does not. It’s worth considering, to the author, what will the VKS do to strike at the enemy troops landed?
    The moment with the escort of our bombers through the radar in Western Europe. I do not think that in the General Staff all are stupid. If a meat grinder goes then they will “cut through” the passage to the strategists literally 15 minutes before their passage. Countries with fighter jets will either be a party to the conflict, respectively, they will decide how to save their own skin, or they will not touch our Tu-160, Tu-95. hi
    1. aagor
      April 21 2018 09: 27
      +14
      The author did not propose cutting any planes, but, on the contrary, declared that they should reach their natural end. The main thesis is that you can not start the production of new Tu-160m2 because they can not penetrate into any air defense. By landing the enemy troops much better hit Su. There is no need to cut through the corridors in Europe for the Tu-160 due to the fact that we have plenty of Su-27, 30, 34, 35. Not enough of this - will help MIGs. To train the NATO air defense on such a training goal as the Tu-160 - I do not agree. Author.
      1. Salomet
        Salomet April 21 2018 10: 11
        +3
        No one says that the new Tu-160m2 will be able to break through air defense. But this is the longest lever of power that is in the VKS.
        Quote: aagor
        Su will hit the landing enemy troops much better. <...> because we have enough Su-27, 30, 34, 35. If this is not enough, MIGs will help. I do not agree to train NATO air defense for such a training target as the Tu-160. Author.

        In general, they don’t really help, the airfields will be in the same area of ​​the tomahawks. From distant airfields to act, the same thing that I described, sit for 10 hours in the cockpit of a Su or MiG and evaluate what kind of blow they can deliver, plus the load is incommensurable. hi
      2. NEXUS
        NEXUS April 21 2018 12: 27
        +9
        Quote: aagor
        The main thesis is that it is impossible to start production of new Tu-160m2 because it is impossible to penetrate into any air defense

        The production of the TU-160M2 is certainly controversial, but ... everything rests on this figure - in a series of at least 50 cars, only in this case, as stated, it will make sense.
        I will say right away that I did not initially believe that such a series would be. There are two reasons for this ... the first, even during the USSR, in the most bready times, 4 boards a year were produced !. Our economy, however, simply cannot stand such a pace, and therefore, perhaps, the pace of construction will be 2 cars a year. That is, to reach the number of 50 boards, it will take 25 years. The question is, what means of intercepting targets such as Swan will not even be in a quarter century, but in 10 years?
        The second series of 50 boards TU-160 completely bury the PAK DA program and the trailer and PAK TA. Stupidly, the economy will not cram three programs that are excessively expensive and alone.
        Conclusion: Perhaps there is some sense to produce TU-160M2 in the amount of 10-20 cars in order to replace the Swans existing in the ranks and stop production on this.
        The author is right that the very controversial program for resuming production of the TU-160M2 (I think this is a necessary measure) greatly negatively affects the renewal of our fleets, which in itself is not a cheap pleasure.
        1. aagor
          April 21 2018 21: 17
          +5
          You can build a maximum of the 4 side, because there is so much groundwork for KAPO. Author.
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS April 21 2018 21: 25
            +3
            Quote: aagor
            You can build a maximum of the 4 side, because there is so much groundwork for KAPO. Author.

            Those 16 boards that are available have been serving for too long, and I think after 10 years they will not look so menacing. Perhaps you are right in the fact that to build 4 sides and collapse it will be all right ... but ... what kind of replacement do we have for Swans in the near future? It is not ... The PAK DA program is about 15 years before the prototype and the pre-production car. For us, our stagnation for a quarter of a century in the margins of history is now very shaky. The USSR was good because its designers, gunsmiths looked far into the future, creating such masterpieces as the TU-160, but not so far away that we would not do anything right now. And as I was still arguing with a smart person here in 13, I said, IF YOU DO NOT CARE FOR YOURSELF, THIS WILL MAKE US DO IT FOR YOU, he won’t wait.
      3. Conserp
        Conserp April 24 2018 18: 59
        0
        Quote: aagor
        The main thesis is that it is impossible to start production of new Tu-160m2 because it is impossible to penetrate into any air defense.

        The main thesis that the Tu-160 generally needs to penetrate through any air defense is enchanting nonsense.

        I have seen more competent shkolota at children's forums than Mr. Author.
    2. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I April 21 2018 10: 01
      +6
      They say that B-52, B-1 were created for nuclear war ... Thank God, there was no nuclear war, but the American bombers had to fight ... And in these "non-nuclear" wars, the bombers proved their effectiveness. those objections that may be answered: the insufficient effectiveness of the bombers was manifested only in those cases when: a) the bombers were used “stupidly” (old tactical methods when changing the nature of hostilities; b) used outdated weapons with old tactical methods ...
      1. Salomet
        Salomet April 21 2018 21: 07
        +1
        [quote = NEXUS] [quote = aagor]
        The author is right that a very controversial program to resume production of the TU-160M2 (I think this is a necessary measure) greatly negatively affects the renewal of our fleets, which in itself is not a cheap pleasure. [/ Quote]
        PAK YES I think the Tu-160 will prompt, the experience in assembling strategists for factories, running in equipment and engines. It’s difficult for the economy, yes, but the fleet is still frozen because of turbines. why not seize the opportunity? hi
  6. Oleg Jacket
    Oleg Jacket April 21 2018 07: 54
    +5
    I agree with the author wink
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 April 21 2018 21: 31
      +2
      Quote: Oleg Vatnik
      I have to remind a quote from Einstein’s letter to President Truman: “I don’t know what weapons the third world war will be in, but the fourth - with sticks and stones.”

      In what?
      Quote: Author
      I have to remind a quote from Einstein’s letter to President Truman: “I don’t know what weapons the third world war will be in, but the fourth - with sticks and stones.”

      I’m wondering (it’s clear that 3MV will be nuclear), and where are the warehouses with a small arrow, the same AK (PPSh, PPS, SVT and AVS, SKS, SVD, not counting Naganov, TT, PM, APS, etc.). and this is not counting the BP to them which in warehouses just before the HORRY), of which it was made for two or three world wars ...
  7. avt
    avt April 21 2018 08: 02
    +13
    the author, since 1985, working as head of the sector of the Research Institute of Aviation Systems, for 20 years he collaborated with OKB im. Tupolev and was engaged in scientific support of the airborne defense complex.
    Oh - oooh! To the captain, mana! Real! Well then, let's go straight to
    11. Findings.
    With respect and reverence we listen!
    The enormous cost of the Tu-160M2 program will ultimately lead to the disruption of the surface ship construction program. In the GPV 2011-2020. ship construction will be only 50% complete.
    Will be! Oh will be! We are poor wretched current, mana will not explain to the captain - What side is the construction of Tu -160 already hindering the adoption of Ivan Gren ",,, Gorshkov" and the three frigates, "amber" without standing engines, despite the fact that money was poured into ,, Saturn " and did they build a stand? This is Az, in fact, about the fact that the author needs to more carefully (according to Zhvanetsky) build a causal relationship based on facts, and not to keep site visitors for peddlers, spitting on such conclusions as he thinks .
    Thus, aircraft that can only participate in the third world war will be built instead of the ships we need in peacetime and in local wars.
    Oh how! And the guys did not even know that in Vietnam, USA led the Third World War, well, when the B-52 was used! wassat And now in Suria? Well, besides us, strategists are driving someone? This is the sinful Az about B-52. Or were these mirages of desert? wassat Maybe the author is better for
    questions of scientific support of the airborne defense complex.
    in terms of what is permitted in comparison with probable friends to tell? Well, at least about the past, Soviet? bully
  8. The comment was deleted.
  9. RomanS
    RomanS April 21 2018 08: 14
    +3
    Freedom of speech in action! When everyone can publicly express their opinion. Even illiterate. But the bourgeoisie believe that we do not have democracy!
  10. air wolf
    air wolf April 21 2018 08: 47
    +4
    I think that it is economically feasible to promote the Tu-22M3M with further deep modernization, the return of the refueling bar and new economical engines and avionics:
    https://topwar.ru/21963-tu-22m3m-vtoraya-molodost
    -izvestnogo-bombardirovschika.html
    1. aagor
      April 21 2018 09: 19
      +12
      Tu - 22М3 is still much older than Tu-160 and no less noticeable. To the SA does not apply. These planes are so old that there is no point in upgrading them. Their fuselage strength is worse than that of the Tu-160. Author.
    2. YELLOWSTONE
      YELLOWSTONE April 21 2018 09: 45
      0
      with the rod belong, Tu-160 were supposed to fly only after them, and usually fly to the Indian Ocean and others south of the equator
  11. tank66
    tank66 April 21 2018 09: 19
    +2
    Why is it still not open near the Dew line, with maintenance-free radars, to buy up color?
  12. vlad007
    vlad007 April 21 2018 09: 43
    +2
    An example of the passage of Su -24 over the destroyer D. Cook is dragged by the ears. The pilot of the Su-24 played too much and nothing more, and the author is trying to draw a theoretical basis for this.
  13. Skifotavr
    Skifotavr April 21 2018 10: 00
    +14
    For example, for the Su-27, the F-15 general scheme was used with its own processing - the air intakes were moved from under the wings to the bottom and the wing is located below.
    Nonsense. This is the F-15 used MiG-25 scheme.
    When developing the Tu-160, a scheme similar to the B-1a came only in the third version of the layout.
    The fact that the Tu-160 scheme was borrowed from the American B-1 is a lie and a common misconception, because the B-1 itself was copied from the unrealized Meshchishchev M-20. http://forum.topwar.ru/topic/450-т-4мс-и-м-18-кон
    kumers-tu-160 /
    1. Lozovik
      Lozovik April 21 2018 11: 47
      +2
      In the same way, we can say that:

      MiG-31 copied from XF-108



      M-54 and M-56 with B-58



      Tu-135 and M-30 with XB-70





      Tu-144 with Super-Caravelle

      1. Skifotavr
        Skifotavr April 21 2018 15: 37
        +1
        I had in mind the scheme and you, I think, understood me perfectly.
      2. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm April 21 2018 18: 43
        +1
        Quote: Lozovik
        In the same way, we can say that:
        MiG-31 copied from XF-108

        Actually, the Mig-31 is the development of the Mig-25. One could assume that the MiG-25 was copied from the XF-108 if it were not for the fact that the XF-108 did not work, the project was closed during development in 1959 (the plane did not even take off) and the MiG-25 in 1964 made its first flight. The development was essentially conducted in parallel, if the Mikoyanites could drop in to the Americans, then maybe they copied it, if it is for the good of the cause then why not copy it, everyone sins.
        1. Lozovik
          Lozovik April 22 2018 21: 57
          0
          The composition of the crew, the capabilities of the SUV, Rapier’s armament is nevertheless closer to the MiG-31.
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm April 24 2018 18: 42
            0
            Quote: Lozovik
            the capabilities of the SUV, Rapier’s armament is nevertheless closer to the MiG-31.

            And what are the capabilities of SUV and weapons?
      3. Conserp
        Conserp April 23 2018 23: 30
        0
        Quote: Lozovik
        In the same way, we can say that:
        MiG-31 copied from XF-108 ...

        Not "in the same way", but if you distort. The XF-108 and MiG-25 only have a similar type of air intake with a horizontal ramp - and borrowing is known only from dubious rumors.

        A direct borrowing of the layout, shapes and dimensions of the MiG-25 when creating the F-15 is obvious when comparing them and studying the history of creation.
        1. Lozovik
          Lozovik April 24 2018 11: 38
          0
          Yes, the Americans purged the models with the MiG-25 layout, but they did not find it optimal.



          Please indicate where in the F-15 you can see the "shapes" and, most importantly, the "dimensions" of the MiG-25?
          1. Conserp
            Conserp April 24 2018 13: 35
            +1


            No layout differences.

            Technical differences: the dimension of the engine and, accordingly, the air intake, the area of ​​the keels and GO, the shape of the wingtips, the dimensions of the nose compartment of the avionics and fairing, a cabin with improved visibility and the absence of a garrotta.

            The aircraft is clearly designed on the basis of the MiG-25 model, recreated from photographs, based on the belief (including a very erroneous one) in its very high performance - with subsequent dopilivanie under its engines and TTT.

            As a result, from the atavisms there remained a “sharp” three-swing VZ (which otherwise simply cannot be explained by anything - the angle, by the way, is almost identical) and the wing is not enough for a maneuverable fighter.

            And then Belenko suddenly flew in and told me that the MiG-25 was not a maneuver, an interceptor. But the train has already left.
            1. YELLOWSTONE
              YELLOWSTONE April 24 2018 14: 14
              +1
              with an F-15 ceiling of 20,000, he above 11,000 cannot engage in combat with the MiG-25
              1. Skifotavr
                Skifotavr April 24 2018 23: 16
                0
                Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                with an F-15 ceiling of 20,000, he above 11,000 cannot engage in combat with the MiG-25

                The F-15 has a practical ceiling of 18,000 m, and Wikipedia, if anything, has long turned into a solid diso and a field of information warfare.
                1. YELLOWSTONE
                  YELLOWSTONE April 24 2018 23: 38
                  0
                  even if so then on an extra 7000, out of 18000, this fighter of conquest cannot conquer anything, nor can it be quickly transferred from region to region if the MiG-25 is at the top
            2. Lozovik
              Lozovik April 24 2018 18: 43
              0
              Quote: Conserp
              No layout differences.


              I agree.

              Quote: Conserp
              The aircraft is clearly designed on the basis of the MiG-25 model, recreated from photographs, based on the belief (including a very erroneous one) in its very high performance - with subsequent dopilivanie under its engines and TTT.


              Certainly.

              Quote: Conserp
              Technical differences: the dimension of the engine and, accordingly, the air intake, the area of ​​the keels and GO, the shape of the wingtips, the dimensions of the nose compartment of the avionics and fairing, a cabin with improved visibility and the absence of a garrotta.


              Transverse V wing, camber of keels, the presence of sagging, ridges, brake flap, etc. A long list is obtained.

              Quote: Conserp
              As a result, the “sharp” three-swing VZ remained from the atavisms


              Initially, he was supposed to be three-swing.

              Quote: Conserp
              the angle, by the way, is almost identical


              In flight even more. By the way, this is reflected in the diagram.

              Quote: Conserp
              wing insufficient for maneuverable fighter area.


              The case is bearing. GO, one must think, also creates a positive lift.
              1. Conserp
                Conserp April 24 2018 23: 30
                +1
                The F-15 has no sag, and its body is bearing about the same as that of the MiG-25.
    2. YELLOWSTONE
      YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 03: 33
      0
      from the sold-out, after the death of Myasishchev, the plane was handed over to the Tupolevites and they simply received bonuses, for the kind of slightly changing the tail.
      But where is the Super-Caravelle itself and why not with the chord that flew later? laughing
      1. Lozovik
        Lozovik April 22 2018 22: 06
        0
        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
        and where is Super-Caravelle itself


        Became a concord winked

        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
        which chord flew later? laughing


        But he could fly across the Atlantic wassat
        1. YELLOWSTONE
          YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 23: 09
          0
          British Aerospace just cling to it?
          Why not across the Pacific?
          Tu-144D could also be operated at the same time from smaller aerodromes.
          But the USSR had the Atlantic, and would Tu-144 have three well-known countries to buy on that line?
          1. Lozovik
            Lozovik April 22 2018 23: 34
            0
            Tu-144D flew 5 years after the F-WTSS, and could not overcome the prototype and 3000 km.

            Quote: YELLOWSTONE
            Tu-144D could also be operated at the same time from smaller aerodromes.


            The plans are huge, and at the exit Moscow - Alma-Ata with additional tanks and 60 passengers.
            1. YELLOWSTONE
              YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 23: 44
              +1
              stop pulling your owl on the Israeli globe, the prototype had engines from another plane, you can test the plane itself with such
              so did the British Aerospace or where?
              Why was Concord sponsored by the wealthy under capitalism and flew on only two lines? lol
              1. Lozovik
                Lozovik April 23 2018 00: 00
                0
                Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                in the prototype there were engines from another plane


                Is it NK-144 from another plane?

                Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                so did the British Aerospace or where?


                She was not there then.

                Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                Why was Concord sponsored by the wealthy under capitalism and flew on only two lines? lol


                Because the idea of ​​a supersonic passenger plane is not viable.
                1. YELLOWSTONE
                  YELLOWSTONE April 23 2018 00: 17
                  0
                  that is, British Aerospace didn’t bring anything to the French project of the Super Caravel?
                  why did he fly then, but why only two? there were many rich people still in South Africa, in the Persian Gulf, do American tourists fly to South America for a long time?
                  a shah, or a Saudi prince, could sponsor, and any sheikh would make a business super-budget for the entire harem without it
                  Tu-144, by the way, was still in the bomber version, but it wasn’t sold as a Concord even for 1 Ruble laughing
                  1. Lozovik
                    Lozovik April 23 2018 06: 34
                    0
                    Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                    that is, British Aerospace didn’t bring anything to the French project of the Super Caravel?


                    British Aerospace was founded in 1977.

                    Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                    why did he fly then


                    Under pressure from the government.

                    Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                    but why only two?


                    Because they are the most sought after. You won’t be able to run into such a small park.

                    Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                    there were many rich people still in South Africa, in the Persian Gulf, do American tourists fly to South America for a long time?
                    a shah, or a Saudi prince, could sponsor, and any sheikh would make a business super-budget for the entire harem without it


                    It was necessary to take while offered, and not to cancel orders. request

                    Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                    Tu-144 by the way was still in the bomber version


                    Where are you there? Even the passenger could not finish.
                    1. YELLOWSTONE
                      YELLOWSTONE April 23 2018 08: 48
                      0
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      British Aerospace was founded in 1977.

                      but they write on the concords.
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      Under pressure from the government.

                      with their subsidies, with capitalism lol
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      Because they are the most sought after. You won’t be able to run into such a small park.

                      The park is now idle. Because it was designed only for these two.
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      It was necessary to take while offered, and not to cancel orders.

                      and whether offered? Why do sheiks and Yasir Arafat need a bomber?
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      Where are you there? Even the passenger could not finish.

                      where did you get that? it’s just that there are few sheikhs in the USSR, more than 60 were not recruited for each flight.
                      additional tanks put directly into the cabin? lol
                      1. Lozovik
                        Lozovik April 23 2018 10: 31
                        0
                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        but they write on the concords.


                        They also wrote Pepsi lol

                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        with their subsidies, with capitalism lol


                        This is now practiced.

                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        The park is now idle.


                        In museums wink

                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        Because it was designed only for these two.


                        Not really. There were such regular flights as Paris - Dakar - Rio de Janeiro, London - Manama - Singapore and even Washington - Miami.

                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        Why do sheiks and Yasir Arafat need a bomber?


                        Probably not really needed without an airfield request

                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        and whether offered?


                        There were a lot of orders and options, but in 1973 everybody got over it.

                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        where did you get that? it’s just that there are few sheikhs in the USSR, more than 60 were not recruited for each flight.


                        I am more inclined to technical problems.

                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        additional tanks put directly into the cabin? lol


                        It seems to be in the luggage compartment.
                    2. YELLOWSTONE
                      YELLOWSTONE April 23 2018 12: 14
                      0
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      They also wrote Pepsi lol

                      But the "Super Caravel" did not write.
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      In museums wink

                      in order to start generating income?
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      Not quite.

                      it was about the range to which everything else was adjusted, by the way they didn’t fly it all at supersonic
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      Request is not really needed without an airfield

                      they have beautiful airfields, is Manama not an airfield?
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      There were a lot of orders and options, but in 1973 everybody got over it.

                      and in 1973 there was something else in those parts?

                      NASA for some reason rented it along with SR-71 and not a concord from the museum
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      It seems to be in the luggage compartment.

                      definitely not bomb bombs?
                      1. Lozovik
                        Lozovik April 23 2018 13: 14
                        0
                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        By the way, they didn’t fly it all at supersonic


                        belay More?

                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        they have beautiful airfields


                        In Palestine?

                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        NASA for some reason rented it along with SR-71


                        Tupolevites themselves offered their plane. Type peace, friendship, chewing gum drinks

                        Quote: YELLOWSTONE
                        not a concord from the museum


                        90s, most concordas still fly.
                    3. YELLOWSTONE
                      YELLOWSTONE April 23 2018 13: 54
                      0
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      In Palestine?

                      in Palestine, Israeli air defense that would tire of intercepting them
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      Tupolevites themselves offered their plane.

                      if so, how did they know that NASA was needed? bully
                      and the Concordists did not know anything? winked
                      Quote: Lozovik
                      90s, most concordas still fly.

                      but not all, and with such a loss-making situation, is wholesale money from such a large state customer not needed?
    3. mmaxx
      mmaxx April 22 2018 04: 00
      0
      Here we can also say that the F-15 was created clearly according to the aerodynamic configuration of the Mig-25. And somehow suspiciously fast. It was after the flight of the MiG-25 to Japan.
      And the Su-27 and MiG-29 are their own developments. Some, now unknown, specialist from TsAGI. Since miracles do not happen, I venture to assume that the aerodynamics of the MIG-25 are growing from there.
      1. YELLOWSTONE
        YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 05: 15
        +1
        They began to do F-15 before the transfer, they could see the appearance, for example, from a satellite
        Su-27 is Simonov, not from TsAGI, on the contrary, it was his enemy
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx April 22 2018 06: 40
          +1
          No, TsAGI. At one time, the name of this man sounded. Maybe it’s in the patent that he stands next to Simonov. Type, Simonov co-author.
          And it turns out that Simonov, not having time to create a Su-27, passed on his thoughts to the Mikoyanites. So they made MIG-29.
          No matter how romantic everything is, but TsAGI and the like move the aviation forward.
          1. YELLOWSTONE
            YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 07: 03
            +2
            well well well laughing "co-author", it’s TsAGI, on the contrary, until the last I didn’t want to let this aircraft, like the Air Force, then take it into service lol and the Su-27 is very different from the MiG-29
      2. aagor
        April 22 2018 11: 12
        +1
        Belenko flew to Japan in the 1976 year, and the first flight of the F-15 in the 1972 year. Author.
        1. Conserp
          Conserp April 24 2018 10: 08
          +2
          The F-15 was created from photographs of the MiG-25, by directly copying the layout, solutions, sizes and shapes when they considered it a highly maneuverable fighter.

          At the F-15, atavisms remained from the MiG-25 - such as angles designed for Mach 3.
          1. The comment was deleted.
  14. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I April 21 2018 10: 30
    +5
    .... or start production of PAK YES on the model of the American B-2 ....And if "... the air defense equipment develops so much that the B-2 will not have the slightest chance of surviving ..."?
    At this time, the air defense system will develop so much that the Tu-160 will not have the slightest chance of survival. Therefore, you must completely abandon the CA ... Air defense technology will develop, but aviation technology, according to the author, is not?
    1. aagor
      April 21 2018 21: 24
      +3
      Aviation technology will develop, but not in the project Tu-160. Author.
      1. YELLOWSTONE
        YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 03: 37
        0
        Of course, the necessary signature will not be for any money
        now not 1937 lol
      2. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I April 22 2018 06: 37
        +4
        Quote: aagor
        Aviation technology will develop, but not in the project Tu-160. Author.

        Where does such "impudent" self-confidence in foreseeing the future come from? Are you AviaVanga? Air Defense-Nostradamus? Initially, I "didn’t have words, only emotions" But gradually the ability to "speak" returned to me and the words appeared:
        1. Reject Stealth Covers: Coatings are "thin" ... "thick" ... "Thin" is how much? A "thick"? Chinese stealth coatings with a thickness of 7,8 mm will suit?
        ((The new material, called Active Frequency Selecting Surface (AFSS), which was developed by researchers from Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Huazhong University of Science and Technology), using active electronic components can dynamically change its absorption coefficient in different ranges of radio frequencies. This will allow the aircraft, while still far beyond the radius of the radar, to catch its radiation and configure its stealth system to the maximum degree of counteraction to this radar in advance.))
        2. It is impossible to install large-sized AFARs on a bomber glider ... There will be many “holes”! Integrated antenna antennas! I agree, we do not need holes ... in a large number. But AFAR .... they are so different AFAR wink And "planar" (that is, "thin" ...) .... How do you like the "super.planar" AFAR in the form of a single external "coating"? Yes, most likely the first Tu-160М2, which were released, will not receive such high-tech "gadgets" ... But the Tu-160М2 program is designed for decades! And electronics is developing "super. Stormy" .. (. How often new models of computers and smartphones appeared 10,5 years ago ... and the last 1-2 years.?) It is unfair .... unfairly little attention is paid in our country to carbon fiber reinforced plastics. But this is not "fantasy" - in the near future to make an airplane glider from carbon fiber! Then, the installation of radio-emitting devices under glider trim there will be no problem ... as well as the installation of stealth cover ... (if necessary ...)
        3. POI radio transmitters - low-power and "gone with the wind"!
        Radio interference jammers, false targets, traps can also be different, like the AFAR, different ... and not only "carried away by the wind", but also towed, integrated into unmanned aerial vehicles, carrier rockets. The power of the developed interference transmitters is constantly growing ... the insufficient power of one transmitter is “compensated” by the total power of many ...
        It is necessary to pay more attention to the development of active self-defense means-to aircraft missiles-interceptors of SAM and RVV ... (it is possible that this will produce a “revolution” in the methods of breaking through enemy air defense)
        The development and adoption of the Tu-160M2 "special" (hypersonic and long-range ...) aeroballistic missiles, missiles with a nuclear installation, hypersonic missiles will change the nature of the combat use of bombers.
        Therefore, maybe now it’s not worthwhile to approach the future bomb (Tu-160М2) with the old arshin of “combat use”?
        1. aagor
          April 22 2018 11: 34
          +3
          1. A thin coating is called a quarter-wavelength coating of an irradiating radar. Since the wavelength is determined by the speed of propagation inside the coating, it can be several times less than in air. Since the most dangerous radars operate in the 3 range of cm, a thin coating is a few mm. Thick coating reaches centimeters. I don’t know anything about modern Chinese coverage and they hardly announce its characteristics. If the specific weight of the coating is of the order of 2, then the weight of the coating exceeds the weight of the fuselage skin. Much more interesting were the work carried out in our research institutes, on the destruction of the structure of the irradiating radar signal due to electronic components, but the matter did not come to implementation.

          2. Rubber coatings will change the mass of the aircraft, resonant frequencies, will require constant monitoring and so on. The carbon fiber case strongly absorbs radio waves and will not allow placing antennas under it. Any design change requires a full cycle of all flight tests, that is, the hope that in the process of building the first aircraft the following will be radically improved, must be supported by huge investments.

          3. The towed interference perdators must have a cable of at least 100-150 m. Therefore, the transmitter power must be very large so that missiles flying from the front can be aimed at them. And even in this case, if the missile defense system flies past the plane and flies into a trap, then the radio detonator will force it to blow up at the moment of flight past the plane. UAVs with traps on all fired rockets will not save enough, since their speed must be equal to the speed of the aircraft. If you follow this path, then you will not take the combat load on the aircraft.

          There can be only one conclusion here - instead of spending tremendous efforts on correcting previous mistakes, it is better to make a new aircraft of low-reflecting shape.
          Author.
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I April 22 2018 19: 07
            +2
            Quote: aagor
            There can be only one conclusion here - instead of spending tremendous efforts on correcting previous mistakes, it is better to make a new aircraft of low-reflecting shape.

            In the first lines: I want to correct right away about carbon fiber: “I got excited”! In the "polemic fever" he blurted out without thinking about the "radio transparency" of carbon fiber, "confused" with fiberglass ... But you yourself said about the radio-absorbing properties of carbon fiber, because in the development of modern aircraft (including the 5 generation fighters, new bombers ...) all over the world are trying to maximize the use of carbon (of course, not only for the sake of their radar absorbing properties) Whatever it was, my mention of carbon fiber "remains valid" ... It can be assumed that new materials will be developed in the near future . which allow premium To reduce the "drawbacks" of the aircraft of the present time, because such developments are being carried out now, albeit on an experimental and theoretical level. (The same carbon plastics are trying to be used not only in a "pure" form, but also "hybrid" ones: for example, basalt carbon, glass carbon, aramid carbon ....) A new direction is now “open”: the development of composites with “adaptive” or, as they sometimes say, intellectual “properties; that is, with self-regulation or controlled regulation of material properties depending on operating conditions. Therefore, it is possible that in the near future, they will learn to manage the "radio transparency" of the glider skin.
            . I want to note that I’m not, I insist on not one “point” from my “plan”! It is the lot of scientists and engineers to decide what to pay more attention to. I mentioned those "proposals" that are coughing up in the "scientific and technical" world. To "resist" your pessimism, to give an idea that the perspective of Tu is not so gloomy -160М2 ... This is with regards to "stealth coatings"; and "super.planar" outdoor AFAR, etc.
            PS your item 3 : Again .... the towed PP is just one of the names on the “general list”! And no need to stock up on drones for all missiles, and no need to think. That every bomber will wait for 100 interceptor missiles! After all, each "event" of bomber aircraft should be planned on the basis of specific assumed (intelligence!) Conditions! And also, in a particular case, the defense of bombers can focus on either individual self-defense of each or group defense. With the release of one bomb, as a carrier of electronic warfare (including long-range interceptor missiles ...) And the speed of missile-false targets does not always have to equal the speed of a bomber! why, under certain conditions, the bomber is not guided by a missile-false target, a missile trap.?
            As for the "low-reflecting aircraft", there is no "guarantee". That after 5, let the 10 method not appear, the system reliably and "just" detects, accompanying all these "stealth"! And PAK YES is designed for several decades ...
            And then “the main ability” will be the “active ability” to resist shooting down, and not “invisibility”!
            1. aagor
              April 22 2018 21: 04
              +2
              I already wrote that in 90-s we had carried out work on controlled change of the properties of the coating, which allowed us to destroy the phase structure of the irradiated signal, which sharply reduced the detection range. However, the confirmed idea required technological support, but there was not enough money for that. Therefore, we always have enough ideas, the Russian engineer is more majestic than others, and we are not able to embody. With the arrival of Shoigu, funding for NIIR has decreased by several times (according to my feelings, 3 times). So let's hope, what if your wonderful suggestions will be realized.

              In the development of the Tu-160 as a jammer, I took part in the 90-e, but the development cost was such that it was abandoned, despite the fact that all the calculations were performed.

              False goals Tupolevskoe KB made itself, but it turned out that more than a couple of such goals can not be taken. Regards, Author.
        2. SETTGF
          SETTGF April 22 2018 16: 34
          0
          No need to write about those studies that belong to the field of "science fiction" ... I'm about the Chinese coverage! To make such a coating with active absorption along the entire length of the aircraft - what kind of energy consumption will be ... The plane will be completely without metal ?! You just do not understand many of the principles of reflection of radio waves! Therefore, do not write fiction - the laws of physics have not yet been canceled ... By the way of jamming transmitters - learn radar ...
          1. SETTGF
            SETTGF April 22 2018 16: 57
            0
            With interference transmitters - get an anti-radar missile with a radiation source (such as Harm) stored right in the “nose” and nothing will save! You all started playing electronic warfare, not realizing that this is not a panacea ... The Internet is firing tales about the possibilities of electronic warfare!
            1. SETTGF
              SETTGF April 22 2018 17: 20
              0
              1.aagor! But is it only dangerous radiation with a wavelength of 3cm ?! You didn’t get away with the problem - the coating used to reduce the EPR should be broadband! And about the towed jammers - you will hook them with their cables to the AN-2; because in another case, you can forget about flight speed and aerodynamics! And it still won’t give you anything!
              2. To other couch strategists- Regarding the use of radioactive substances - do not irradiate your crew in view of the radiation that is needed to form a plasma cloud around the aircraft so that it cannot be seen - then you should sheathe it with sheets of lead! Do not write fairy tales!
              Very funny - but sometimes you like the eccentricity of your thinking, so I put ++++ and not only ...
              1. aagor
                April 22 2018 21: 13
                +2
                The 3 wavelength, cm, is not the only dangerous one, but the most dangerous one, since all of the enemy fighter radars and the Aegis radar are working on it. In the other ranges, survey radars are working, the accuracy of which is much lower than the guidance radar.
                Broadband coatings are many times heavier than thin ones.
                Towed traps for front-line aviation are made a long time ago, 5 kg weigh and have very good aerodynamics, so there are no difficulties in using them. But for the Tu-160 trap power will have to increase by an order. Author.
                1. SETTGF
                  SETTGF April 23 2018 02: 07
                  0
                  aagor! For strategic bombers and stealth fighters, broadband coatings are mainly used, since detection is basically a loss in the confrontation ... Of course, the shape of the aircraft plays a role, but there are big contradictions between the invisibility and aerodynamics of the aircraft ... And of course, the more radar detection range, the earlier detection of the aircraft and its firing by rockets is possible! And as for the traps, the GOS missiles are being developed, in the memory of which the images of aircraft, missiles, then the traps become ineffective ...
            2. Nikolaevich I
              Nikolaevich I April 22 2018 17: 32
              +3
              Quote: SETTGF
              With interference transmitters - get an anti-radar missile with a radiation source (such as Harm) stored right in the “nose” and nothing will save!

              Enough of "getting in" you with your nonsense! Firstly, I did not “swear” that jamming radio transmitters are a panacea! Secondly, what kind of “harm” is when I “mentioned” interference transmitters “working” outside the plane ... Thirdly, the electronic warfare is “multifaceted”, so the electronic warfare capabilities should not be overestimated or underestimated. In any case , without electronic warfare for a long time already: both there, and not here. And again, electronic warfare is part (!) Of the comprehensive organization of measures, methods of protection (self-defense), in this case, aviation means. As I understand it, you yourself are a “crap” in such matters, so do not bother! I'm not interested in “talking” with you!
              1. SETTGF
                SETTGF April 22 2018 18: 21
                0
                Nikolaevich I! If you are not talking nonsense, then justify the use of electronic warfare on air defense systems ... the physics of the process in the radar?
                1. SETTGF
                  SETTGF April 22 2018 18: 21
                  0
                  Oppiska - justify!
                  1. SETTGF
                    SETTGF April 22 2018 19: 02
                    0
                    Nikolaevich I! Apparently weak !!!
          2. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I April 22 2018 17: 37
            +2
            Quote: SETTGF
            I'm about the Chinese coverage!

            Once again I say. Do not meddle with your nonsense! You are misinterpreting the meaning of what I said, and you have not made the impression of a "connoisseur"
            1. SETTGF
              SETTGF April 22 2018 18: 09
              0
              Nikolaevich I! It is you who are carrying pure water nonsense, not understanding the meaning! The GOS of the rocket head will easily determine the target, unlike the generators of interference with “cables” ... let me not be an expert on yours, but I don’t write such nonsense and I don’t repeat after others like you ...
    2. mmaxx
      mmaxx April 22 2018 03: 54
      +1
      How is the Tu-160 aviation technology developing? It will only feed the Kazan Aviation Plant. At present, this is good.
      1. aagor
        April 22 2018 11: 36
        +1
        Maybe it is worth taking care of shipbuilding yards? Author.
  15. sevtrash
    sevtrash April 21 2018 11: 05
    +8
    Have there been any cases in the history of aviation of the resumption of production of a bomber developed 50 years ago? From the point of view of stealth technologies, as one of the fundamental qualities of a modern bomber (and in general), it makes no sense to make an obsolete machine and restore obsolete technology. On the other hand, there is nothing new and is not expected in the near / distant future. If Tu160 is needed as a component of nuclear forces, and even more so for use as a carrier for advanced weapons (which were designated not so long ago) - then why not, it drags a lot and quickly. The same in52 another 20 years will be in service. Although, of course, a forced step.
    1. APASUS
      APASUS April 21 2018 12: 20
      +5
      Quote: sevtrash
      Have there been any cases in the history of aviation of the resumption of production of a bomber developed 50 years ago? From the point of view of stealth technologies, as one of the fundamental qualities of a modern bomber (and in general), it makes no sense to make an obsolete machine and restore obsolete technology.

      And you try to consider this situation from the perspective of the complete restoration of lost technologies, the closure of the production cycle. Despite the fact that the machine is not designed for fighting in the air, it is a stupid carrier and therefore the importance of technology in this case is not critical.
      But in essence, the main goal is still the transition from an obsolete model of the model by modernization to a more advanced one with a smooth transition to a completely new model of a modern medium.
      1. polikarpich
        polikarpich April 23 2018 04: 57
        +2
        Not so much the restoration of lost technology as the restoration of a workable team. Anyone who has ever created a machining workshop from scratch knows that this takes three to four years. Creating an assembly shop takes even more time. And besides the workshops it is necessary to recreate the production. An engineer needs five years to get a diploma. If an engineer after a university did not work in his specialty, then his retraining is a couple of years at least. Interestingly, the current Ministry of Finance will allocate money to create a team capable of building large civilian aircraft? And for the construction of combat aircraft I have to give money. In six years, the future leadership will have a choice of what to build, a combat or civilian aircraft. For the sake of this, all this was started, and a dozen strategists is only a pleasant bonus.
        1. APASUS
          APASUS April 23 2018 18: 17
          +1
          Quote: polycarpych
          Not so much the restoration of lost technology as the restoration of a workable team

          Welding titanium in a gas environment - the technology is not new enough but is critical for the construction of the fuselage of the aircraft. The technology has been lost and at the moment the restoration of skills, the preparation process, the welding process, flaw detection for such a complex element, all this needs to be restored on a professional level. And such technologies were lost in the region of 2 dozen.
  16. Sergey824
    Sergey824 April 21 2018 13: 04
    +4
    I always liked dialogues like "doctor-patient" or "teacher-student". Here, it’s not difficult among us to show off talents, I don’t think that there are many highly qualified specialists in this field who can oppose the author. Go to the level of MO or industry level - argue, prove. There prove-you level!
    1. sevtrash
      sevtrash April 21 2018 18: 27
      +3
      Well, why is this site not to show - both I and I are smart and know a lot of things! laughing And without irony - this is necessary and for therapeutic purposes, because in offline environments this is far from happening for everyone. Sublimation, however. The site also needs visitors. Again - and talk? On exactly an interesting topic for yourself? It is clear that there will be no professionals here, not their level. Well, maybe there will be a little bit and will come. If, of course, they were not very appreciated at work. lol
      1. Stanislas
        Stanislas April 21 2018 19: 57
        0
        Quote: sevtrash
        Sublimation, however.
        Substitution, of course.
    2. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm April 21 2018 18: 51
      0
      Quote: Sergey824
      I always liked dialogues like "doctor-patient" or "teacher-student".

      A person developing an airborne defense system is much better versed than the entire GS in the application of SA.
      1. YELLOWSTONE
        YELLOWSTONE April 24 2018 01: 35
        0
        did he use it?
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm April 24 2018 19: 42
          +1
          Quote: YELLOWSTONE
          did he use it?

          Ч
          the man who develops an airborne defense system is much better versed than the entire GS in the application of SA.

          This is sarcasm, the author screwed the device to the plane and is already starting to talk about the tactics of using SA. The author does not attach the Tu-160 flight across the Pacific Ocean to the article.
  17. krops777
    krops777 April 21 2018 13: 10
    +3
    "The task of the Tu-160 to reach the launch line of cruise missiles and intercept it in this case is impossible."


    The correct task has been set, the main thing is looking at what the TU-160 will achieve on the target, it might also be missiles and missiles with nuclear weapons, etc., the author says the opposite, I’m generally more inclined to believe the conclusions of the Moscow Defense Ministry.

    It is enough to strike Moscow, as life in the country will also be paralyzed, since we have all transport communications, communications, control systems tied to Moscow. Moscow missile defense system can intercept enemy ICBMs


    Well this is a lie, I don’t even want to comment too long. sad
    1. mmaxx
      mmaxx April 22 2018 03: 51
      +1
      Half of the country would have been happy if Moscow had been torn apart. I love Moscow as a city. But the capital does not belong there.
  18. glenffidik
    glenffidik April 21 2018 13: 51
    +8
    the author is right, there is no sense in these airplanes, just as there is no sense in the existence of the “aircraft carrier” Kuznetsov, for example, but the local urya are deeply burnt by such ideas, unfortunately they, like our generals, always live in the last war, tank battles, attacking regiments shouting "Hurray," carpet bombardments, and for some reason they firmly believe that our weapons are the best, but why is it better if the USSR kept up with the West all the time in technology, and all high-tech weapons are practically copies of Western models?
  19. akudr48
    akudr48 April 21 2018 14: 17
    +2
    When two journalists (the Rogozin company and a son, and just Manturov) command the military industry in aviation, one should not expect good results and progress from such a public-private partnership.

    The article more than convincingly shows that in a normally developing country such retro-cars would not be possible.

    As I understand it, the renewal of the Tu-160 with different letters is a forced matter, since there is no money or brains for a truly new one in military aircraft construction. And there will be no such government in the country.
  20. Cannonball
    Cannonball April 21 2018 14: 27
    +6
    Tu-160M2 is at least real for the next 5-7 years. What can not be said about PAK YES, which is not yet. From the word "in general".
    To say that in 30-40 years Tu-160M2 does not survive in any way against the modern air defense for that time. However, created 60 years ago, the B-52 and Tu-95 today are quite relevant and combat-ready, despite the global breakthrough of air defense systems during this time.
    In addition, the author is modestly silent about the fact that the armament is not a strategic bomber or missile carrier, but a combat complex that includes a bomber-missile carrier and its weapons. Already, weapons, read — long-range cruise missiles, allow in many cases to conduct target attacks without entering the air defense zone. Consequently, there is no need for a bomber-missile carrier to break through it - this becomes the task of cruise missiles. Already now they are in service with the Kh-55 with a launch range of 2000-3500 km. In the future, the appearance of the KR even greater launch range. It is quite likely that the launch of the KR DD will be carried out almost immediately after take-off from aerodromes, including those located in the internal regions of the Russian Federation.
    1. aagor
      April 21 2018 21: 33
      +3
      1. B-52 and Tu-95 must either use the same X-101 missiles without entering the air defense zone, or bomb Bantustans.
      2. In the article, after all, it is described that X-101 can be used with a range of 4,5 thousand, but during the flight over the territory of the United States and Canada, most of them will be shot down. Author.
      1. Cannonball
        Cannonball April 21 2018 21: 54
        +2
        Tu-95MS6 is already a carrier 6 KR X-55,
        Tu-95MS16 - carrier 16 KR X-55
        Tu-95MSM - carrier 16 KR X-101/102
  21. Corporal Pupkin
    Corporal Pupkin April 21 2018 14: 48
    +4
    It's not a pity to part with the Tu-160, but I have to agree with the author ...
    It is impossible to disperse the country's forces and means to create the production of outdated types of weapons, if ONLY ...
    they will not be BUY by other countries! wink
  22. The comment was deleted.
  23. Beltasir matyagu
    Beltasir matyagu April 21 2018 16: 43
    +2
    Who is responsible? Who is responsible? Who are we?
    Bomber is a platform for carrying bombs. Tu160 is a good platform with a wide range of weapons. Can launch rockets, drop bombs, whatever. Glider and nodes have a huge flight resource and range. The tactics of application and the filling can vary, and the aircraft is a platform for the use of various air-based weapons. Consequently, the author has claims not just to the presence in Russia of airborne delivery vehicles, but generally to the presence of such in Russia. Hence the conclusion - the author is a typical rat, which hordes now divorced from informational unsanitary conditions.
    Tu160 - an air cruiser. Don't like it - your bald damn problems
  24. alexhol
    alexhol April 21 2018 17: 10
    +5
    I had to read the article twice. Immediately all "did not enter." Thanks to the author and VO for such articles. Such as I am "profane" in the forum, most (but not all are recognized). This "majority" is now in prostration: "How so? After all, this is the" pride of the nation "!!!! What do you mean is not needed? ...
    1. Beltasir matyagu
      Beltasir matyagu April 22 2018 01: 11
      +1
      Two extremes. The author, in a demagogic vein, without giving any real arguments, wrote nonsense using an excess of printed characters. A commentator in the same style waved, but even without pseudo-arguments in the spirit of "the plane will not fly because it is not a balloon." And stupid to the beat obediently nod their heads. The article is written clearly on the "demagogy" training manual. Who does not understand, read the "techniques of literary controversy" Karel Chapek. The brochure is also known under the tacit name - a manual on demagogy. Also called "black rhetoric." If you don’t know how to analyze the text for such manipulations with consciousness, be silent. And most likely you are a member of the State Department of the Russian-speaking factory of trolls
      1. alexhol
        alexhol April 22 2018 13: 08
        +2
        Demagogy is when you blame the author that he is a "typical rat", that is me. that "gosdepovsky Troll." I will try to explain to you then "on the fingers." I still have one of Nokia's push-button phones. This is a wonderful phone that has served me for many years, which makes it convenient for me to communicate in the car. I always blindly dial someone’s number using the tactile sensations of physical keys. BUT ... His time has passed and now I’m waiting for the new Caterpillar to come out with two sims, since I still have to use a second Android phone to communicate via vibe, view mail, etc. . And no one in the world comes to renew the release of push-button phones based on Symbion Mobile. Technological progress, for example, buried sequentially vinyl, magnetic tape, disks, and my watch now carries more of a decorative function of a certain status and nothing more. Once that same aircraft carrier was an undeniable threat to the enemy, but today it is rather just a status of sovereignty.
  25. Aviator_
    Aviator_ April 21 2018 18: 17
    0
    [/ quote] author, since 1985, working as head of the sector of the Research Institute of Aviation Systems, [quote]

    This, of course, pleases. Only very different people worked at NIIAS: for example, from 1978 to 1990, Silaev Jr. worked there for a year (also the head of the sector), the son of Ivan Silaev, deputy aviation minister. He was one of the first in commerce, just like his dad.
    1. aagor
      April 21 2018 21: 37
      +4
      I know that NIIAS cunning people were deciphering - the scientific research institute is an academician and sons. There really were a lot of syncs, but thank God, they didn’t interfere in the technology. Author.
      1. Aviator_
        Aviator_ April 22 2018 20: 13
        0
        As for the "little interference" - I do not know. Probably, the sense of self-preservation worked - for a technical jamb it was possible to decently decouple, despite my father's cover options. Silaev Jr.'s career growth was rapid - he became the head of the sector without even being a candidate of technical sciences.
        1. aagor
          April 22 2018 21: 16
          0
          I worked in the same department with the son of Minister Pleshakov. A very decent employee was. And the head of the sector can be without being a candidate. Author.
          1. Aviator_
            Aviator_ April 22 2018 23: 08
            0
            Auto RU. I studied with Silaev Jr. He did not stand out anything special, except for a squeamish attitude towards fellow students. He became the head of the sector the very first of our entire course, without even defending himself (and we had very strong “nerds”, to which he clearly did not belong). His dissertation later appeared. This is not the case: Academician Fedosiev acted in exactly the same way as Chelomei, whom he strongly criticizes. For reference -
            Chelomei son of Khrushchev organized the State Prize in 28 years. Here, nevertheless, the matter did not reach the State Prize.
  26. borys
    borys April 21 2018 18: 41
    +5
    The author of the article begins with the fact that he worked in a serious organization. In this regard, the following can be noted: a lot of people worked in these organizations, but all were
    sensible. In those days, the sinful Az did not work at the flour-grinding technical school either, and he saw
    different specialists. Specifically, this specialist does not cause much confidence.
    1. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 April 21 2018 20: 46
      +2
      good experts are not writing on the Internet, but are working on the modernization of TU 160, IL 76, and various types of PAK ...
  27. PPD
    PPD April 21 2018 21: 41
    +3
    Quote: "up to 2070, and maybe even further. At this time, air defense equipment will develop so much ....."
    This is exactly known from where. On a time machine drove? Without delving into scientific examples relatively recently, it was possible to say for sure that the USSR would soon develop so much that communism would come no further than in 1980. Artillery was also considered a relic. etc.
    1. Beltasir matyagu
      Beltasir matyagu April 22 2018 01: 23
      +1
      The usual agent of influence that gale into the brains of the target audience. Everything is lost. Yesterday, they still demanded the Tsar’s breastbone so that the farm was everywhere. Strong manager is an effective manager. Ship rust. Planes fly by
      1. aagor
        April 22 2018 11: 40
        +1
        Well, the author is certainly filthy. And say something good and reasoned about the Tu-160. Author
        1. YELLOWSTONE
          YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 12: 16
          0
          and it’s better on LTH yet laughing
          stealth if it does not work out to improve on this, then on the Tu-160-2 in which this will be taken as a basis,
          it’s cheaper and better to develop than from scratch to cut the analogue of the subsonic B-2 (modern combat vehicle taken out of service F / A-117) of which the amerikatos has something very little, probably not so good.
          1. aagor
            April 22 2018 21: 20
            +1
            Nobody will improve LTH. Alteration of the airframe and engines is a huge amount of money for full flight tests. In addition to the fake modifications of the indicators of the pilots, nothing will be done. Author.
            1. YELLOWSTONE
              YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 23: 17
              0
              They are generally difficult to improve. A PACK YES is not that huge? Isn't the B-2 more expensive than the Tu-160?
              1. aagor
                April 24 2018 09: 11
                0
                B-2 is more expensive, but it can overcome air defense. Author.
                1. YELLOWSTONE
                  YELLOWSTONE April 24 2018 13: 08
                  0
                  it is visible behind the horizon, and can’t come off about anyone
    2. MadCat
      MadCat April 22 2018 05: 10
      0
      Quote: PPD
      Quote: "up to 2070, and maybe even further. At this time, air defense equipment will develop so much ....."
      This is exactly known from where. On a time machine drove?

      Why is a time machine then? Tell this fool that you can’t capture and bring down the same C300 / 400?
  28. aagor
    April 21 2018 21: 51
    +7
    Dear commentators! The author would love to receive comments on technical issues of the problem under discussion. During the first day of discussion, only emotions go. Try! Author.
    1. sevtrash
      sevtrash April 21 2018 22: 21
      0
      On technical issues - this is for you to the professionals, who, it seems, are hardly a lot here. The working professional here, it seems, has nothing to do. It is clear that 50 years ago, the development does not meet modern requirements. However, it is also clear that among those who decided on the reproduction of tu160, there were some sane people and, probably, there was a logical justification for the construction.
      Perhaps a bunch of some kind of future weapons, which are the same hypersonic or ultra-long missiles. Perhaps, as at least something, because PAK YES is very far, and maybe not.
    2. Curious
      Curious April 21 2018 22: 59
      +6
      "The author would very much like to receive comments on the technical issues of the problem under discussion. "
      In order to hope for this, the material had to be placed in the "Weapons" section. There are still, if not specialists, then erudite and sane people. And "Opinion", "News" and "Analytics" is the patrimony of hamsters - uryapatriots, couch marshals, they simply are not able to withstand a different opinion that violates their fictional world. All your arguments and arguments will be swallowed and the next salvo of the corresponding content will be the answer.
    3. Beltasir matyagu
      Beltasir matyagu April 22 2018 01: 25
      +2
      Professionals in aircraft and military aviation work and do not comment on any crap from left-wing authors.
      In your wet dreams, everyone around should yell, everything was lost and that patriotism is safe for the scoundrels, plus the billion people personally executed by Stalin. Duck still post
      1. aagor
        April 22 2018 11: 44
        +4
        It’s better to write about a billion personally shot by Stalin on political sites, here I would like to discuss the Tu-160. Author
        1. YELLOWSTONE
          YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 12: 18
          +1
          it looks more like just that what
    4. Yuri Guliy
      Yuri Guliy April 22 2018 08: 46
      +2
      Dear author! You do not much take offense at the rude comments, reaching the primitive rudeness. This is from an unsatisfied desire to be the most “smart” and right (they are not up to the technical subtleties). Or maybe the usual spring exacerbation.
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm April 24 2018 20: 28
        +1
        Quote: Yuri Guliy
        Or maybe the usual spring exacerbation.

        Something from you, too, is not yet visible technical calculations on the penetration or impossibility of penetration of the Tu-160 to enemy shores.
  29. shuravi
    shuravi April 22 2018 00: 27
    +3
    Actually not surprised. Any nonsense is published on this site, if only punctuation and spelling are respected. laughing
    1. Beltasir matyagu
      Beltasir matyagu April 22 2018 01: 25
      +2
      You can’t say more precisely
    2. YELLOWSTONE
      YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 03: 41
      +1
      they have already cut off what article? and where else can it be read?
  30. mmaxx
    mmaxx April 22 2018 03: 47
    +2
    Regrettably, the desire to restart the Tu-160 says that our industry is now simply not capable of creating at least something to replace it in the near future. I do not know how Kazan will do this. Over the years, everything that was at the Tu-160 plant came into a state of trash. That is, in fact, production will launch a new aircraft, only morally obsolete. When did KAZ launch the aircraft for the last time? Well, someday it will launch.
    Maybe the Tu-160 was good when it was made, but now this is just a dinosaur. One wing of variable geometry is worth it. The resource of such a mechanism is usually small. Weights and places eats a lot. All this is morally obsolete 20 years ago.
    Most likely we need a carrier of some more surprises from GDP for our partners.
    If this is not so, then something like the Tu-22M3 would be better. This aircraft is justified in concept.
    1. YELLOWSTONE
      YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 05: 18
      0
      Yes, yes, it only gives more benefits, especially to the bomber, the freak compared to him, the Tu-22M3 is also with variable arrow-shaped, but just the Tu-22 does not.
    2. SETTGF
      SETTGF April 23 2018 12: 08
      0
      mmaxx! You can’t agree with you! The Tu-160 has no analogues in terms of bomb load and flight range ... Tu-22M3 cannot be compared with it! Therefore, updating the Tu-160 to the level of Tu-160M2 is simply necessary, and it is also necessary to carry out R&D on the design and manufacture of PAK YES. One should not interfere with the arc!
      1. aagor
        April 24 2018 09: 14
        0
        The Tu-160 and the Tu-22М3 are just close enough for the bomb load, only the flight range differ significantly. Author.
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm April 24 2018 20: 40
          +2
          Quote: aagor
          Tu-160 and Tu-22M3 are quite close in terms of bomb load,

          Well, yes, at a maximum of 40 and 24 tons, or standard 22,5 and 12 tons, very close by.
  31. mmaxx
    mmaxx April 22 2018 04: 09
    0
    Quote: YELLOWSTONE
    in short, the Su-27 looks more like the F-14, which also has a decent range, and the Tu-160 was developed by Mikoyan so the specialist has been working with the wrong design bureau all these years lol

    Here are them # $ "// ^^ & ra yourself! Have you ever seen the Su-27 alive? Only two Su-27 and MiG-29 aircraft have such aerodynamics. They wanted to do this in part, apparently, they would also use it on the Tu-160, but they need bays for weapons and space for wing folding mechanisms, so he had to make a classic fuselage.
    1. YELLOWSTONE
      YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 05: 05
      0
      aerodynamics of the Su-27 and MiG-29 are fundamentally different, the Tu-160 is also not classic
  32. mmaxx
    mmaxx April 22 2018 06: 54
    0
    Quote: YELLOWSTONE
    aerodynamics of the Su-27 and MiG-29 are fundamentally different, the Tu-160 is also not classic

    "What will be your evidence?"
    Kakbe, I personally don’t see drying every day just because I just walk by without turning my head. If you point with your finger on which airplane the center section is a fuselage, I plead wrong.
    1. YELLOWSTONE
      YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 13: 13
      0
      on YouTube, watch the "wings of the motherland" about the history of the creation of the Su-27 there is explained
  33. Scharnhorst
    Scharnhorst April 22 2018 08: 30
    +2
    The question of resuming production and how much our collective mind will not solve on the forum. I tend to trust the General Staff. The author’s uncompromising arguments, “They will detect radars, intercept fighters, interferences are ineffective, there are no airdromes,” completely ignore the factor of surprise and the real state of this huge countermeasure complex. Admiral Woodward wrote well about this in his memoirs about the Falklands, from the latter - the 71 / 103 ax, and each of his personal experience will recall examples of the "blown power" of his weapon at certain moments.
    Being a supporter of the construction of the fleet, I nevertheless give priority to the need for new 160M2. Quantity is a difficult question.
  34. Cannonball
    Cannonball April 22 2018 09: 37
    0
    Quote: mmaxx
    And it turns out that Simonov, not having time to create a Su-27, passed on his thoughts to the Mikoyanites. So they made MIG-29.
    Both topics were developed in parallel with the PFI program. There were also Yakovlev Yak-45 and Yak-47 projects, but they did not pass through the competition. Then the idea arose to break the topic of PFI into two topics of light (MiG) and heavy (Su) fighter jets.
  35. sabotage
    sabotage April 22 2018 10: 37
    +1
    Author, the site has an SSI user. He claimed that he participated in the development and commissioning of the avionics TU-160, as well as claimed that B1-a was not used as a prototype. Can I expand on the topic of borrowing?
  36. Operator
    Operator April 22 2018 11: 37
    +1
    It is necessary to replace the Tu-160 supersonic missile carrier with a variable sweep wing and an 100 sq. ESR with a flying wing subsonic bomber with an 1 sq. ESR for bombing slippers.

    The Burevestnik missile launcher, launched from mobile soil launchers and attacking from the Arctic after the disruption of the Dew line and other radars of the North American continent by high-altitude thermonuclear explosions of ballistic missiles, will completely cope with the United States.
  37. Eduard petrov
    Eduard petrov April 22 2018 14: 16
    +1
    Thus, aircraft that can only participate in the third world war will be built instead of the ships we need in peacetime and in local wars.

    Apparently getting ready for the world?
  38. tazilion
    tazilion April 22 2018 14: 52
    0
    Perfect knowledge, the logic of choice AST do not agree:

    1. It is impossible to resume the production of Tu

    In ... P..T.NeNu or V..NeNu..FT, where the choice is "Well" from the pairs of NNu ... Fri. Necessary
    11.12.2..6..5 or 2..56..1112, where the choice is "5". Necessary

    2. The production of tudwas requires the Illusion of Truth
    P..T..N..Il..Is, where the choice of "H" from the triple PTN and the choice of "Is" from a pair of IlIs (matching directions of choice)
    12.610..7 ..... 6, where the choice is "10" from the pair 10.12 and the choice is "6" from the pair 67 and pair 66.
    Truth is needed - in letters and numbers.

    3. The author of the article is wrong
    ASNP, where the choice of "NP" from the SPS or from the four ASNP
    5524, where the choice without a choice is "24"

    Etc.
  39. kan123
    kan123 April 22 2018 15: 03
    0
    The subject of copying is not disclosed. The United States never had its own aviation, in the full sense of the word. The British handed them all the patents in 1941 — it was the US condition to “help” against Hitler — there was a nuclear bomb and planes there. There is no aviation in the USA - everything they do, they take from somewhere. All of their helicopters were invented by a man who lived under the Russian tsar. Therefore, when they believed, and consider Lisa Migovskaya something divine, they were an airplane of the 70s, if they had come up with it, they would not have been copyrights. Most likely - they are copying, and not us, dear. Therefore, all of their aircraft are so similar to ours, and f16 is a degraded copy of Soviet engineers. In this sense, we can also say that the cap system lost to the Soviet design bureau, laid down by Stalin, Beria - and this system defeated the American system (I don’t see any system there, to be honest) - we’re inventing today "the achievements of the 80s, in the Russian Federation, and the United States did not even start - because they probably forgot to sell it. They all buy and steal. Is this a consumer country - where do they get such planes like f16 from? Where do Gopniks from the village get starships from? They destroyed the USSR, because they completely lost the entire war, which the USSR did not even start. Therefore, they replaced the "destruction of the USSR" with "perestroika." How much can you bow to these flawed types, just a dumb nation - the United States? 90 is long over. If you bow before the United States - disarm - stupid people buried all of their military-industrial complex and aircraft, and all that they could have worsened and led to a dead end.
    1. mmaxx
      mmaxx April 22 2018 16: 45
      +3
      Well, so to speak ....
      Most of the progress in aviation is from the Americans. And in production technologies, in general, almost everything.
      USA is a very developed industrial country. That they gave the Chinese all nonsense.
      1. Curious
        Curious April 22 2018 18: 52
        +1
        Never mind. These are the costs of civilization. On the one hand, seasonal phenomena, on the other, the availability of the Internet, even in Kanatchikovo.
        1. YELLOWSTONE
          YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 23: 20
          0
          in kanatchikovo they don’t know that they are already tired of stealing and what are the Americans flying on to the ISS and on whose engines to Pluto?
      2. SETTGF
        SETTGF April 23 2018 12: 21
        +1
        mmaxx! Do not write nonsense about the USA! They borrowed a lot from other countries, including the USSR and Russia - for example, the welding technology of the Paton Institute ... It is ugly to grovel in front of the United States ... The United States has not been able to create many types of weapons, for example, trains with strategic missiles, missile defense systems and Air defense superior to Russian systems ... they do not have a MiG-31 aircraft so far, including in speed ... they lag behind in the field of hypersonic weapons and a lot of things, although they consider themselves superior to others and rattle with weapons - this can bring the world to World War 3 and more!
      3. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm April 24 2018 20: 55
        0
        Quote: mmaxx
        Most of the progress in aviation is from the Americans. And in production technologies, in general, almost everything.

        They couldn’t make a hat for the plane, first turned to the Britons and then to the Israelis, and with God's and Jewish help, something happened.
        Quote: mmaxx
        That they gave the Chinese all nonsense.

        Probably soon they will buy this nonsense from the Chinese.
        Who in our world today is the leader in shipbuilding?


        All technologies were invented by the Germans.
  40. mmaxx
    mmaxx April 22 2018 16: 22
    +1
    Quote: aagor
    Belenko flew to Japan in the 1976 year, and the first flight of the F-15 in the 1972 year. Author.

    So something was mixed up in the head. But the MiG-25 flew all the time before
  41. mmaxx
    mmaxx April 22 2018 16: 30
    0
    Quote: Cannonball
    Quote: mmaxx
    And it turns out that Simonov, not having time to create a Su-27, passed on his thoughts to the Mikoyanites. So they made MIG-29.
    Both topics were developed in parallel with the PFI program. There were also Yakovlev Yak-45 and Yak-47 projects, but they did not pass through the competition. Then the idea arose to break the topic of PFI into two topics of light (MiG) and heavy (Su) fighter jets.

    About that and speech. The GC of one company cannot, having muddied the new in aerodynamics, immediately give it to a competing office. This is ridiculous. There was an order. Or an indication. Or something else. 100% . Make it in such a pattern. Since it is promising. This is always done. Designers have no freedom and never have. And the rest, too.
    1. YELLOWSTONE
      YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 23: 28
      0
      Well, why didn’t Jacob have such a scheme? Because unpromising?
    2. Conserp
      Conserp April 24 2018 09: 58
      0
      Quote: mmaxx
      The GC of one company cannot, having muddied the new in aerodynamics, immediately give it to a competing office. This is ridiculous. There was an order. Or an indication. Or something else.

      Before writing nonsense, it was possible to google and find out that the scheme was developed by aerodynamics from TsAGI.
      1. YELLOWSTONE
        YELLOWSTONE April 24 2018 13: 11
        0
        no, the schemes of the first prototype Su-27 (T-10-1) were very different in appearance from the MiG-29, the scheme of the second real Su-27 is similar but different in essence
        1. Conserp
          Conserp April 24 2018 18: 15
          0
          The first T-10 was a vortex-free integral.

          Su-27 and MiG-29 are vortex integrals, the aerodynamic scheme is the same (but the Su-27 is statically unstable).

          F-15 - there is no integrated or vortex aerodynamics, even developed wing mechanization. There is no EDSU, no datalinks, no OLS. Only engines and radars are normal, 4th generation. The rest hardly pulls on the 3rd generation.
          1. YELLOWSTONE
            YELLOWSTONE April 24 2018 18: 45
            0
            Tsags were not involved in layouts at all, they had nothing to do with static instability, and they tried to ban the integral
  42. mmaxx
    mmaxx April 22 2018 16: 42
    0
    Quote: aagor
    Dear commentators! The author would love to receive comments on technical issues of the problem under discussion. During the first day of discussion, only emotions go. Try! Author.

    What is there to advise? I’m a specialist in the construction of iplanes. It is clear that only in one narrow area. I think that restarting the Tu-160 is from complete hopelessness. That there was at least something better than nothing. Therefore, I completely agree with the author.
    It is not very rational to threaten money and time to launch junk. If the plane was made all this time at 0.5 sets per year, that would be right. But then there was also cooperation. Kazan was not the only one doing it. Now you have to do everything yourself. And technology over the years has taken the lead.
    The confusion and vacillations at KAPO are familiar to me and do not add optimism. For a long time the plant did nothing. This does not work for nothing. Let it rise even on this money. The plane will do something. Nevertheless, it will be better to throw bombs and missiles from afar than to storm under fire. The plant will work, experts will gain experience. One launch costs 20 years of serial work. This is an upbeat side of things.
    1. SETTGF
      SETTGF April 22 2018 19: 34
      0
      mmaxx! It is always necessary to develop new promising aircraft taking into account the latest technologies — to carry out R&D and create at least experimental models so as not to lag behind scientific and technological progress (and scientific and technological progress) and, if there are funds or threats, to create aircraft for defense capability ... however, quantitative respect to follow the samples in service and modify - but do not oppose the "obsolete" to the new! So it makes sense to produce the Tu-160M2, but in reasonable quantities, as well as put all the effort into the development of PAK YES ...
    2. aagor
      April 22 2018 21: 33
      +3
      Why rebuild the plant if you do not restore the Tupoevskoe KB itself? Who needs experience in manufacturing aircraft of the last century? Airplanes "stealth" require a completely different production culture. We are sorely lacking drones. Attack drone buy from Israel. Wouldn't it be better to do something like the Global Hawk? Author.
      1. Golovan Jack
        Golovan Jack April 22 2018 21: 39
        +2
        Quote: aagor
        Who needs experience in manufacturing aircraft of the last century?

        Ek, you are neglecting ... the same equipment for welding a center section titanium beam - the farm will probably come in handy ... and in general, do you really think that this work was started simply because the left hind leg so wanted? wink
        Quote: aagor
        Stealth aircraft require a completely different production culture

        And detail? So far, nothing ...
        Quote: aagor
        We are sorely short of drones

        We have a lot that is missing ... what side is all this to the TU-160?
        Quote: aagor
        Isn't it better to do something like the Global Hawk

        Mdja ... recourse
        1. YELLOWSTONE
          YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 23: 35
          0
          for Americans and their friends - certainly better
        2. aagor
          April 24 2018 09: 19
          0
          Production culture consists in the art of applying absorbing coatings, adherence to low-reflective forms, the correct location of air intakes, the art of placing multiple antennas and reducing the infrared visibility of engine nozzles. Author
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm April 24 2018 21: 38
            +1
            Quote: aagor
            and reduced IR visibility of engine nozzles.

            That's what Americans have reduced IR visibility at their most modern.
    3. Conserp
      Conserp April 24 2018 09: 59
      0
      Quote: mmaxx
      What is there to advise? I’m a specialist in the construction of iplanes.

      Oh well. But I think that you are just a liar.
  43. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet April 22 2018 18: 33
    0
    Quote: aagor
    The author did not propose cutting any planes, but, on the contrary, declared that they should reach their natural end. The main thesis is that you can not start the production of new Tu-160m2 because they can not penetrate into any air defense. By landing the enemy troops much better hit Su. There is no need to cut through the corridors in Europe for the Tu-160 due to the fact that we have plenty of Su-27, 30, 34, 35. Not enough of this - will help MIGs. To train the NATO air defense on such a training goal as the Tu-160 - I do not agree. Author.

    The author fulfills the order of sailors. And that’s it. With a launch range of the Kyrgyz Republic of 5,5 thousand km, no missile defense needs to be breached. But there is also a petrel and a dagger. I read about the air intakes. laughed, the problem was solved for the SU-35S and SU-57. And in the same way they will decide for TU-160M2. And the problem of welding the main beam is really an achievement in our time. The problem is different - there are no escort fighters that could cover the carcass during an air defense breakthrough ... In particular, mattresses are preparing a strike from Poland and the Baltic states. TU-160 could solve the problem of the destruction of groups with the support of fighters. laughing tongue wassat
    1. aagor
      April 22 2018 22: 10
      +2
      For those who believe that the Tu-160 is more important than ships, let them look fresh: https://topwar.ru/139928-kitay-pokazal-vtoroy-flo
      tv-mire.html Author.
      1. YELLOWSTONE
        YELLOWSTONE April 22 2018 23: 47
        0
        But did China show something better than copies of the Tu-16?
  44. The comment was deleted.
  45. ToS
    ToS April 23 2018 11: 09
    +1
    I think our designers are not fools and they know some of their business. And the military too.
    And the priority is not profit from exports, as is customary for "partners", but a more pragmatic need. There are export tasks, but they are secondary. And much that has already been done and is being done by the rest is not given to know.
    Ours are often guided by the goal - efficiency at the lowest cost. (And the development of strike systems, instead of missile defense is an example. The cost is less, the effectiveness in depriving the enemy of the desire to strike higher).
    If these machines are capable of performing assigned tasks in the current conditions and in the short term, then why not. New machines are being developed, but they will not blow it. And when necessary, they will be shown.
    1. aagor
      April 24 2018 09: 22
      0
      You think in the concept of unlimited military budgets. Author.
  46. Tektor
    Tektor April 23 2018 13: 35
    0
    Baikal. To do this, you will need to use large-sized antennas based on the PAR. Such a complex of increased power will require a completely new expensive development, and it will be very difficult to place it on an airplane in view of the large dimensions of the antennas.
    Just information. AFAR can be used on the basis of monolithic emitters: for a frequency of 1 GHz, a power of 25 W has been achieved, and for 4 GHz - 18 W per transistor in an AlGaN system. If you make an antenna like the AFAR Su-57 from 1500 modules, then the power will be more than 37 kW. And this power can be directed into a narrow beam ...
    1. aagor
      April 24 2018 09: 25
      0
      What you describe refers to narrow-band systems, that is, it will override any one frequency band. The rest of the radar will see you freely. Broadband modules have much lower efficiency, that is, there is a problem of heat removal. Author.
  47. Curious
    Curious April 23 2018 15: 29
    0
    Summing up the brief results of two-day drilling, we can see that this strategic airplane is urgently needed for couch strategists. Without him, they are not comfortable on the sofas, there is nothing to "threaten the Swede". Therefore, I propose introducing a tax on all individuals of 10% of the income on the restoration of strategic aviation. What is 10% when it is necessary to save the country. Given that the majority of couch strategists have scanty incomes, take 90% from them.
    1. Salomet
      Salomet April 23 2018 16: 47
      +1
      Judging by shopping trips, they already take 90% of theirs. Yes, and gas prices are the same as they do not behave "economically".
      I repeat with the scale of the Russian Federation and the geography of "partners" without strategists it will be tight. hi
    2. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm April 24 2018 21: 50
      +2
      Quote: Curious
      Therefore, I propose introducing a tax on all individuals of 10% of the income on the restoration of strategic aviation.

      Nabiullina for five years will not buy up American CB that's enough for aviation and ships.
  48. Conserp
    Conserp April 23 2018 23: 20
    +2
    For example, for the Su-27, the F-15 general scheme was used with its own processing - the air intakes were moved from under the wings to the bottom and the wing is located below.

    After this passage, it became apparent that The author is a complete zero in aircraft design.
    Extremely illiterate nonsense.

    If the author does not lie and really worked somewhere as an electronics subcontractor, I will advise the author not to write anything outside his competence, because this is the level of the baseboard.
  49. wisealtair
    wisealtair April 24 2018 09: 15
    +2
    Quote: aagor
    The author did not offer to cut any kind of aircraft, but on the contrary stated that let them reach their natural end. The main thesis is that it is impossible to start production of new Tu-160m2 because it is impossible to penetrate into any air defense. .


    Since modern air defense can see and shoot down fighters of the 5th generation, then in general all aviation must be canceled.
    1. aagor
      April 26 2018 22: 27
      0
      Air defense cannot see airplanes with 0.01 EPR square meters. more than 70-100 km, that is, the plane will launch missiles earlier. Author.
  50. Nikolay Kuznetsov
    Nikolay Kuznetsov April 24 2018 09: 20
    0
    In short, he is not needed! Apparently out of date in production ... Honestly, I always thought how it can be applied? After all, knocking it down is a couple of nonsense by modern means ... Such devices can only be used against countries such as Afghanistan, and even then, if they did not buy an air defense system ..