Military Review

National Interest explains how PAK DA will surpass Tu-160

89
The details of the Russian project of the PAK DA strategic bomber are kept secret, although some things can be predicted right now, writes The National Interest. The National Interest, generally speaking, is often engaged in "predictions" about the characteristics of military equipment, which is still only in perspective.




According to last year’s forecasts, the publication notes, Perspective aviation the long-range aviation complex (PAK DA) is to make its first flight in the region of 2025-2026; finally entering mass production towards the end of the twenties. According to the established tradition, the production car will receive the name "Tu", since a significant part of the development belongs to the Tupolev Design Bureau.

The bureau is currently working on the production of the new Tu-160M2 bomber, which is said to have “severely delayed” PAK DA progress, which was “a victim of a lack of resources” for both projects.

It is known that the PAK DA inherited the basic concept of application from previous generations - the Tu-95 and Tu-160 bombers. Since the main weapons for these machines are long-range cruise missiles penetrating the enemy’s air defense (X-55СМ and X-101), it is very likely that a new generation bomber will adopt their modified versions "or something completely new." In particular, it is possible that the well-known hypersonic missile “Dagger” will also be in the arsenal.

However, the latter is doubtful, since the MiG-31 is much more preferable for the role of the carrier of this type of weapon due to the presence of the proper speed characteristics and a suitable profile for the interceptor. In addition, the “Dagger” has very specific dimensions, which are hardly suitable for PAK DA.

The overall concept is still vague


The National Interest, in fact, recognizes that most of the publicly available information about the Russian project consists primarily of assumptions.

In particular, it is still unclear whether the newest bomber will be made according to the “flying wing” scheme and generally somehow correspond to the design of the American analogue of the B-2 Spirit.

NI explains why PAK DA will surpass the Tu-160.

It is expected that the PAK DA will have half the mass compared to the Tu-160, but at the same time the range will increase to 15 000 kilometers from the current 12 thousand. Other options and features often include two engines, the ability to use shorter airfields for take-off and landing, and subsonic speed. In addition, the review suggests that the PAK DA electronic systems will be largely unified with the earlier Tu-160M2, but will receive a wider range of capabilities.
Photos used:
www.tupolev.ru
89 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. stels_07
    stels_07 3 October 2019 09: 24
    +3
    I see no reason for Pak, yes, the main thing for the bomber now is to bring the missiles to the frontier of defeat, and it is better to send meager means to tactical aviation
    1. U-58
      U-58 3 October 2019 10: 58
      +2
      But I see.
      If you fly across the pole to bomb North Dakota, then NORAD awaits you.
      And from what distance is it necessary to launch rockets to hit your target?
      1. siberalt
        siberalt 3 October 2019 12: 11
        +2
        And what, armata has already joined the army? winked
        1. Greg Miller
          Greg Miller 3 October 2019 12: 28
          +4
          Quote: siberalt
          And what, armata has already joined the army? winked

          Yes, like the Su-57 ...
      2. stels_07
        stels_07 3 October 2019 13: 07
        0
        Pak and they will not make invisible, 3maha will not fly, it’s better to play a couple of dozen Tu 160, the economy will not fade anyway.
      3. pafegosoff
        pafegosoff 3 October 2019 15: 15
        +4
        What is the distance?
        As we were taught in the 1970s at the school: "Flight only in one direction. Twenty other airplanes are allocated to one carrier when the burning plane already falls. By the way, even our old man OPB-11-RBP-4 (Norden's heir 1944, stolen with B-29). had an automatic mode - opening bomb bays, dropping bombs (bombs) in the specified modes, if the navigator was killed in combat - until the bombs were dropped, the pilots' control of the aircraft was disabled.
        So with PAK YES. They found you, launched a rocket, waited for its dangerous approach and launched a rocket for the purpose that is achievable from a given point. And then - how lucky with salvation ...
        1. pavelty
          pavelty 3 October 2019 16: 41
          -2
          Sorry for the sarcasm. In a tank school?))
  2. bessmertniy
    bessmertniy 3 October 2019 09: 25
    0
    A very distant prospect. It is advisable to expedite the work on the project. hi
  3. rocket757
    rocket757 3 October 2019 09: 25
    +6
    The National Interest, generally speaking, is often engaged in "predictions" about
    and without it.
    In general, the fortunetelling.
    1. alexmach
      alexmach 3 October 2019 11: 19
      +2
      Yes, yes, fortune telling on coffee grounds. Maybe it will, and maybe nothing will happen ..
      The photo here is very beautiful.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 3 October 2019 11: 29
        +1
        Quote: alexmach
        The photo here is very beautiful.

        Tu 160 in technological coloring.
        But what will be .... it will be. Let's see when \ if they do.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 3 October 2019 14: 43
            +1
            not painted, it is clear, processed differently, anodized, oxidized, clad or something else. Protective covering. Laminated aluminum is all silver.
    2. Piramidon
      Piramidon 3 October 2019 17: 37
      0
      Quote: rocket757
      In general, the fortunetelling.

      He keeps on that. There are also all sorts of Chinese "expert predictors" often shine.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 3 October 2019 19: 25
        0
        Quote: Piramidon
        here all sorts of Chinese "predictor experts" often shine

        We have enough of our own .... the imported ones probably have a cool percentage of "hits"!
  4. Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 3 October 2019 09: 27
    +10
    Content article: will be this, this, this. And there will not be one, this one and that one! request
    1. iConst
      iConst 3 October 2019 09: 54
      +5
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      Content article: will be this, this, this. And there will not be one, this one and that one! request

      My opinion is that there is no clarity among senior management. In the general structure of the sun.
      But it is not because of the impossibility to calculate who will be the most likely opponent. Maybe America will be blown away in ten years, when everyone will run away from the buck and stop lending to it. And will China become?

      It stems from the definition of how Russia sees itself in the global military plan. Those. what we want: to be a new hegemon or "if necessary - we will come and pile on anyone" or "we do not touch you - do not touch us, otherwise we will sting painfully."
      Then it becomes clear what kind of aircraft structure is needed.

      I don’t know how our people think, for the Americans it looks something like this: A certain fantastic, but quite achievable picture of the future is being drawn - a certain wish. It is called "future reality". Then a "snapshot" of the current state is taken. It is called "current reality". And chains of overcoming are drawn - tasks on the way to achieving the wishlist.

      Moreover, they have such virtual games constantly. When too costly "stones" appear in the chains, the plan is adjusted and re-evaluated. It happens - rejected and everything starts anew.
      1. ccsr
        ccsr 3 October 2019 13: 47
        +1
        Quote: iConst
        My opinion is that there is no clarity among senior management. In the general structure of the sun.
        But it is not because of the impossibility to calculate who will be the most likely opponent. Maybe America will be blown away in ten years, when everyone will run away from the buck and stop lending to it. And will China become?

        But in any case, we, as in a preference, should be laid on a 4: 0 alignment, and therefore we must prepare for the worst, even if there are hints of a drop in US military power.
        Unfortunately, the article is based on fortune-telling, and this is understandable, because only a limited circle of military specialists knows in what proportions the finances are laid for the modernization of the Tu-160 and the development of the PAK DA. If you know this, then it will be possible to indirectly calculate what YES will be with us by 2030. And all other statements can be sent to the basket - none of the writers here knows these numbers, which means that there is a fortune-telling on the coffee grounds.
  5. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 3 October 2019 09: 34
    +3
    We need a modern aircraft with an almost civilian resource and an assortment of weapons from the Kyrgyz Republic to bombs .... not sharpened for one thing.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 3 October 2019 09: 50
      0
      They will do something similar to the UAV Hunter. It will work out all the aerodynamics, control.
      You get a workable stealth bomber.
      1. Potato
        Potato 3 October 2019 10: 20
        +1
        Sense of stealth at such low LTH? Finding stealth is not a problem; they will not be able to secretly go to the missile launch area. And the speed is not enough for a quick entry or exit. Intercepting such an aircraft will be easier even without looking at the stealth. A bomber is such a wolf whose legs save
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 3 October 2019 10: 25
          +1
          Exactly the opposite.
          A bomber is such a wolf that its legs have never saved.
          Because light fighter legs are always faster.
          Running away from interceptors is impossible. But stealthily get to the object of the bombing and stealthily fly back - you can.
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 3 October 2019 11: 55
            -3
            On TV (a series of Shock Force and others) a long time ago it was said that this American stealth technology does not work, planes are perfectly visible, the Yugoslavs shot down one F-117))
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 3 October 2019 12: 03
              +1
              And ... what? , "Impact force" said so? - then it definitely does not work. laughing
              1. PROXOR
                PROXOR 3 October 2019 13: 26
                -5
                Well, you can cheat as much as you like, but the fact remains. For radars with different ranges of operation, neither the FU-117, nor the FU-22, nor the FU-35 are considered invisible.

                And I also remind you of the recent history of the Israel Defense Forces, who chased our MIG-25R and could not do anything while they were walking over your territory. And those perls at maximum height with a speed under 3M.

                So all your stories about the fact that the bomber is not fed "legs" are your speculations of the delitant. If a PAK DA is made with a cruising speed of 4-5M, no fighter will catch up with it. Why catch up, they won't even have time to take off, let alone catch up. And the prerequisites go to this. Nothing prevents a bomber with a second scramjet power plant to be made, as at one time the T-4 was given the opportunity to go to 18000 at a speed of 3000 km / h. At that time, the NIODE fighter could not catch up with the SOTKU.
                1. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 3 October 2019 14: 20
                  -2
                  Give up! You convinced me (almost wink )
                  But we must convince the designers of PAK-YES too!
                  Otherwise, they are developing a subsonic stealth type "tailless flying wing"
                  After the incontrovertible facts you have cited, it looks like sabotage. And even treason. am
                2. 3danimal
                  3danimal 3 October 2019 18: 59
                  -1
                  I am sure that your active help would be very useful to the domestic developers of PAK DA and Scramjet. They rack their brains, and then a person brings a ready-made solution, how and what needs to be done. Perhaps the prizes will be shared.
                3. 3danimal
                  3danimal 3 October 2019 19: 02
                  0
                  I wonder how your transcription will be called "A-10"? )
            2. stels_07
              stels_07 3 October 2019 13: 10
              0
              It works, only it doesn’t work, but a product with reduced EPR
          2. Voyager
            Voyager 3 October 2019 12: 23
            -1
            Well, it depends on what to compare. Tu-160 is able to speed better than some fighters.
            1. PROXOR
              PROXOR 3 October 2019 14: 01
              -3
              2200km / h for the FU-22 is quite easily achievable speed.
              1. Voyager
                Voyager 3 October 2019 17: 57
                -2
                There are less than 200 of them and they all know where the hell. The main opponent in the future is the F-35
                1. PROXOR
                  PROXOR 4 October 2019 09: 53
                  0
                  160x and even less. And the Yankees have the sour park Fu-15. this fighter also reaches 2200km / h.
          3. Potato
            Potato 7 October 2019 08: 58
            0
            Tell this to the mosquitoes that turned Germany’s air defense on propellers until the end of the war as they wanted.
        2. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 3 October 2019 10: 36
          +1
          The performance characteristics of any bomber are laughable in comparison with an anti-aircraft missile or fighter.
          1. PROXOR
            PROXOR 3 October 2019 13: 29
            0
            So they said until the striped comrades until in 1972 they found out about the presence of the USSR SOTKI (T-4). 3000km / h at an altitude of 18000. Not a single rocket, not a single fighter at that time could catch it.
            If you bring PAK YES at a speed of 5-6M, the same story will be. Let me remind you, but only we can intercept targets at speeds close to hypersound.
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 3 October 2019 13: 51
              0
              So it was with SR71 them. Could not bring down. But we are talking about a production aircraft that has a CR (different) that are difficult to bring down with a range of 1500 km.
              1. PROXOR
                PROXOR 3 October 2019 14: 02
                0
                TU160 + X-101. X-101 has a launch range of 5500 km. More questions?
      2. Chaldon48
        Chaldon48 3 October 2019 12: 22
        0
        In your opinion it will be almost a drone?
      3. Piramidon
        Piramidon 3 October 2019 17: 44
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        get a workable stealth bomber.

        Stealth for a strategist, this is a chimera. On the fig, he needs him if in the future it will be possible to launch missiles long before entering the enemy’s air defense zone. Everything goes to the point that he can be launched over his territory.
      4. abc_alex
        abc_alex 4 October 2019 09: 57
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        But we must convince the designers of PAK-YES too!
        Otherwise, they are developing a subsonic stealth type "tailless flying wing"




        This "stealth" was given to you. You just fixated on it. :)
        I already wrote to you and gave examples of the fact that a "flying wing" is just a layout diagram, and not an attribute of "stealth". This scheme gives a gain in flight range and nothing more.
        The statesmen were forced to fence in "stealth" due to the fact that they made a bad decision to equip bombers with free-fall bombs.
        And Pak-FA is designed by a missile carrier, why would he need "stealth" if he can launch a rocket from 1000 km away from the target? New CDs can be launched in Japan or Spain without crossing the borders of the Russian Federation at all. Why stealth?

        They will not repeat the failures of the US military-industrial complex in Russia, do not hope, they will not make a fuss of lame goblins or billion-dollar spirits. wink
    2. mark1
      mark1 3 October 2019 11: 52
      +2
      Quote: Zaurbek
      We need a modern aircraft with an almost civilian resource and an assortment of weapons from the Kyrgyz Republic to bombs .... not sharpened for one thing.

      Are you talking about the B-52? I’m afraid the Tu-95 will not work - too loud, as soon as sound detectors haven’t thought of detecting it.
      we need a hypersonic aerospace strike apparatus, and the above-mentioned "comrades" do an excellent job of delivering CDs and bombing aborigines (by the way, CDs can be very "stealth")
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 3 October 2019 12: 00
        +1
        Any bomber is now a victim when it is discovered. Why is a super-expensive aircraft needed? If he uses primary weapons beyond detection? Stealth will help reduce these limits. And in local wars you can bomb! Now it can only Tu22 underperformance! And that is not the whole arsenal of bombs.
        1. mark1
          mark1 3 October 2019 12: 17
          +1
          The task of a modern strategic bomber is to deliver an instant strike from the least expected direction at the moment. Such problems can only be solved (with a shortage of time) by hypersonic aerospace forces (C - aircraft). The properties of "stealth" are welcomed but not absolute. For all sorts of evil terrorists, etc. quite enough, say, an IL-96 with a bomb bay and pylons under the wing - it will be very "cheap, reliable and practical"
          The Tu-160 fits in very part with this concept. - because it is produced.
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 3 October 2019 13: 54
            0
            This problem will be solved by a regular bomber with duty in the air with 12 CU .... which you’ll catch horseradish.
            1. mark1
              mark1 3 October 2019 13: 57
              0
              I understand that you did not carefully read what I wrote (in principle, of course, you don’t owe anything to anyone ...)
        2. PROXOR
          PROXOR 3 October 2019 13: 45
          -2
          Now the Tu-160 missile X-555 with 2500 km reaches the target. At the same time, for the maximum effect on the combat course, the 160th is suitable at a maximum speed of 2M.
          FU-15 with PTB have a range of 3900, FU-22 and even less. While the strategists are spotted, while the on-duty units have time to rise to intercept, and with the PTB, gaining height and speed is harder than on the lung. TU160 will already take off all 7 X-555s and will already fly off at a speed of 2M.
          So the speed for the strategist is MEGAACTUAL! The higher the speed, the less time the enemy takes at least some countermeasures.
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 3 October 2019 13: 54
            0
            Technically cheaper spacecraft with warhead
            1. PROXOR
              PROXOR 3 October 2019 14: 05
              0
              RK Vanguard. Only he can cover a distance greater than the Tu-160 or Tu-95. And all the ICBMs. But it is a doomsday weapon.
              1. Zaurbek
                Zaurbek 3 October 2019 14: 39
                +2
                No. Buran type variant with blocks with warhead or bch
      2. Piramidon
        Piramidon 3 October 2019 17: 58
        -1
        Quote: mark1
        I’m afraid the Tu-95 will not work - too loud, as soon as sound detectors haven’t thought of detecting it.

        This is depending on what he will be armed with. If he will be armed with a missile launched for hz. how many kilometers to the target, then no sound pickup will hear him. You are behind the times. The time of free-falling bombs, for which it was necessary to appear directly above the target, is a thing of the past.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 3 October 2019 18: 05
          -3
          "The time of free-fall bombs, for which it was necessary to appear directly above the target, is a thing of the past" ////
          -----
          Not going away. Not free falling, of course, but exact. But you need to go over the goal. Otherwise, do not hit deep underground bunkers, warehouses and factories.
          You can’t get to the bottom with rockets.
          Only special expensive concrete bombs. To deliver them, you need strategic bombers.
          1. Piramidon
            Piramidon 3 October 2019 18: 19
            -1
            Quote: voyaka uh
            You can’t get to the bottom with rockets.

            Why? The evolution of missiles is not standing still either. Not today, so tomorrow, but they will get to the bottom. Do you think that to our command post somewhere in the Urals our enemies will also break through half the country on airplanes to drop the usual "cast iron" on them?
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 3 October 2019 18: 28
              -1
              Even a missile with a nuclear warhead does not replace a concrete bomb. Not that effect. And it is impossible to place a heavy warhead with concrete-piercing capabilities on a cruise missile. Because you need to increase the engine power and fuel supply many times. This will not be Caliber, but a monster. He and the bomber will not pick it up.
          2. abc_alex
            abc_alex 4 October 2019 10: 02
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            To deliver them, you need strategic bombers.

            ???? In fact, special heavy-duty anti-bunker bombs are not dropped by strategists from the United States. They do not fit into strategists. They are being dropped from BTA aircraft.
        2. mark1
          mark1 3 October 2019 18: 49
          0
          This is not me behind the times. you do not read this carefully. I replied to the Zaurbek post, which included, among other things, free-falling bombs. My answer was a small (tiny such) sarcasm. smile And it’s too early to write off bombs.
  6. gabonskijfront
    gabonskijfront 3 October 2019 09: 43
    +2
    We don’t have bases and aircraft carriers, how are we going to project force? Only strategic aviation and high-precision missile systems. These are our real Russian weapons, the rest do not need them.
  7. Andrei. BUT.
    Andrei. BUT. 3 October 2019 09: 51
    +7
    An article for the sake of an article ..
  8. Potato
    Potato 3 October 2019 10: 15
    +2
    Judging by the flight characteristics, it will be something like a 747 Boeing, but a stealth. Is such a plane needed? It seems to me that this is rather a step back compared to that of 160 ...
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 3 October 2019 10: 39
      +3
      We need any new aircraft with a high range and high resource. Everything that makes the Tu160 can make a subsonic plane half as much as a light one. Stealth bun for survival apparatus.
  9. Gust
    Gust 3 October 2019 10: 25
    +6
    I still can’t understand why we need PAK YES. Where and what will he project?

    No one has justified why stealth is better than the Tu160 + X101 bundle. With such a range of the Kyrgyz Republic, there is no need to overcome enemy air defense, all launches from its territory. On the contrary, a high exit speed to the launch point, a large carrying capacity, and serial production are ready-made advantages. If necessary, refine the KR in terms of range to 7-8 thousand km.
    If the type of work is FAB + CAB, then the enemy’s air defense should definitely be suppressed, otherwise tryndets that PAK YES, that B-21, i.e. meaning then in stealth?
    1. Timon2155
      Timon2155 3 October 2019 11: 04
      +7
      Chip Tu-160 - multi-mode! It can fly with a folded wing very fast (~ 2200 km / h), but not for long. Type, overcomes air defense. In the 70s it was relevant, now-no. From multi-mode, here is the variable sweep, more weight, the complexity of the glider, engines and much more. The concept changed yesterday, but we do not have a suitable aircraft, we use the Tu-160 in the form of a simple non-supersonic carrier. Now no one in their right mind will send him to overcome the air defense missile launched from the Tu-160, this will do it better, faster and the carrier will be guaranteed to remain intact. The range of missiles today can be brought up to 7000-8000km. Therefore, we come to a subsonic banal missile / bomb carrier. But it will be much simpler, easier, more economical and, possibly, cheaper than the Tu-160. This will allow them to be built in large quantities, to operate in different parts of the country from airfields easier. A sort of platform for launching missiles and bombs (in the absence of air defense). This is not a step backwards, as many think. If the carrier was complex and smart before, and the missile is dumb, today, on the contrary, the carrier will be simple and cheap, while the missile will be smart and long-range. Therefore, whatever one may say, we get a modern long-playing analogue of the Tu-95 and B-52.
      1. Fregate
        Fregate 3 October 2019 11: 28
        0
        Then maybe it was necessary to restore the production of Tu-95 and not 160. Well, with modernization, of course. Or in addition to 160 instead of PAK YES.
      2. PROXOR
        PROXOR 3 October 2019 13: 51
        0
        Who told you that 2200 km / h are not relevant right now? The faster the strategist can reach the launch point of the missile defense, the less chance they are to intercept. And even less can be done with the CD carrier.
        1. Timon2155
          Timon2155 3 October 2019 20: 33
          -1
          What time gain are you talking about? For starters, you would estimate the Tu-160 range at a speed of 2200 km / h. And it will become clear that the aircraft will not reach the launch line of the Kyrgyz Republic, to put it mildly. This is a very short-term mode, consuming fuel and range, the regime is only suitable for overcoming the old air defense.
          1. PROXOR
            PROXOR 4 October 2019 09: 52
            -1
            At least you turn on the logic. Who wrote to you about a constant speed of 2200km / h. 2200 is the speed of overcoming the boundaries of air defense. In other words, the 90th overcomes 160% of the journey at cruising subsonic speed, but the combat course (10% it performs at a maximum of 2200km / h). No need to write - in order to write something.
            1. Timon2155
              Timon2155 5 October 2019 15: 50
              -1
              Everything is in order with logic. Do you think the carrier does not graze on a combat course? Hahaha))) They begin to graze him immediately, as he goes around the corner of Scandinavia. And the relay is passed from the fighter to the fighter. And how can a 10% range from 2200 km / h help here? No way! Yes, and the gain itself in half an hour at such a speed is not so hot what a win. But they always carry extra cargo with them in the form of a complex glider, engines with afterburners, adjustable air intakes. Hence the excess weight, the inability to work with airdromes is simpler, the cost of the board is higher. Let the rocket cover these 10% of the distance. That was my logic. I did not see your logic, or it is out of date for eleven years. And yes, they wrote funny things about overcoming the frontiers of air defense. Do you think this is relevant for a missile carrier with a missile range of 5-6 thousand km? Do you think they will send him directly to the mouth of the air defense? Or is it still such tactics, remnants of the past? And is that your logic? Maybe you do not need to write this?
              1. PROXOR
                PROXOR 7 October 2019 12: 29
                0
                I'M IN AFIG WITH YOU !!!! That is, preparing for an attack on a potential enemy, we buzz them to "warn" going along the coast ?! Are you out of your mind ?!
                This type of aircraft goes along the trajectory that is as short as possible and at the same time as invisible to the potential adversary as possible. Those. A strategist having received a strike point, for example, radar stations on the Finnish or Norwegian coast, obviously will not go to them along the coast. It will rise higher to the pole and in a straight line will reach the launch distance. Although with the X-101 missile, he may not fly anywhere at all. Take off - let go and immediately sat down.
                As for the overseas "comrades", the stragglers will go to them along a direct path, bypassing the air defense control zones of the AUG. And the first on the raster will be a naval base in Hawaii and an over-the-horizon tracking station in Alaska.

                LOGIC YOU DO NOT from the WORD AT ALL!
                1. Timon2155
                  Timon2155 7 October 2019 23: 59
                  -1
                  He will go there, he will go here))) And no one will see this! And save as much as half an hour to get to the launch point! This is the only advantage of the supersonic Tu-160. Did I understand you correctly? Missed nothing? Or am I wrong? But doesn’t it bother you that the pre-flight preparation of the Tu-160 does not last very quickly? I’ll guess about 5-6 hours. We prepared the Su-24 for at least 2 hours from the moment the towing began until takeoff. Therefore, consider the time from the receipt of the order to the launch of the missiles. Half an hour bonus will solve absolutely nothing. On the contrary, if the plane was simpler, it would be possible to prepare for take-off faster! And compensate for these half an hour. Moreover, it is possible to build a larger number of simple PAK YES, arrange them at aerodromes more simply (at a constant north, for example) but closer to the missile launch point. Then even the number of launched missiles will be more = harder to intercept them. In vain you think that no one will notice the take-off: the strategist has taken off, everyone is already on guard both overseas and in Europe. And they graze him and wait. The angle of Scandinavia is an example, a reporting point from which a strategist is led, including visually, and can calmly bring down at any time. Apparently, my logic is close to rational. Therefore, carcasses do not fly with supersonic today, it makes no sense. In such a tactic, and in vain to spend the resources of a glider, engines, nobody will waste fuel.
                  1. PROXOR
                    PROXOR 8 October 2019 11: 17
                    0
                    OIVSE !!!!! Go read about the preparation of the "ship" for departure, depending on the combat readiness. I do not see any reason to correspond with you further due to your lack of understanding of the issue.
                    1. Timon2155
                      Timon2155 8 October 2019 12: 52
                      0
                      Apparently, you just have nothing to answer my calculations))) And apparently there is logic in my calculations, since it is developing the subsonic PAK YES. And your "understanding of the issue" MO sent to the furnace)))
                      1. PROXOR
                        PROXOR 11 October 2019 12: 44
                        0
                        Yes Yes. As a unification on the technology being introduced now. The same mediocrity as you are sitting there.
                      2. Timon2155
                        Timon2155 11 October 2019 15: 55
                        -1
                        I look, you have megalomania))) This is being treated.
    2. PROXOR
      PROXOR 3 October 2019 13: 49
      -2
      Now imagine for a second that the X-101 will finish so that in the last section of the KM flight, for 500 it goes to hypersound. It is practically IMPOSSIBLE to intercept such a missile with current defenses.
  10. jetfors_84
    jetfors_84 3 October 2019 10: 31
    +1
    Very informative article. Or dream on a topic?
  11. Kuroneko
    Kuroneko 3 October 2019 10: 31
    +2
    In particular, it is possible that the well-known hypersonic missile “Dagger” will also be in the arsenal.

    I already got up to repeat to VO journalists that the "Dagger" is not a rocket, but a rocket COMPLEX... The Kh-47M2 missile itself does not have a proper name, unlike the "Caliber" or "Zircon".
  12. Ross xnumx
    Ross xnumx 3 October 2019 11: 08
    0
    The bureau is currently working on the production of a new Tu-160M2 bomber, which is allegedly "greatly delayed" the advancement of PAK YESwhich has become "victim of lack of resources" for both projects.

    You know, the opinion of National Interest is not at all interesting, because with a surplus budget, complaining about a lack of funds is simply wild. Most likely here:

    yes
  13. Private-K
    Private-K 3 October 2019 11: 37
    0
    This is how avionics at PAK-DA will be completely different from the Tu-160. For electronics from the time of the 1980s did not just step, but jumped three times in comparison with the then. And the modernization of the avionics of the existing Carcasses is also being carried out. New avionics is much easier, much more productive, has much higher characteristics and potential capabilities.
    1. PROXOR
      PROXOR 3 October 2019 14: 00
      0
      And do not forget how much jumped up domestic EW funds.
      1. Private-K
        Private-K 3 October 2019 14: 02
        0
        Well, electronic warfare, of course. Everything jumped. Therefore, it is the various electronic filling that is changed first of all. And the titanium "skeleton" can be left as it was. ;)
  14. Ros 56
    Ros 56 3 October 2019 12: 33
    0
    Well, how can these chatterboxes know something when we ourselves don’t really know anything. Well, trepaki, what to take from them.
  15. betta
    betta 3 October 2019 12: 57
    0
    In peacetime, useful. Tickle the nerves of enemies. Train pilots. Develop technology. I hope there will be no war, because how to fantasize further belay
  16. Old26
    Old26 3 October 2019 13: 58
    +5
    Quote: PROXOR
    So they said until the striped comrades until in 1972 they found out about the presence of the USSR SOTKI (T-4). 3000km / h at an altitude of 18000. Not a single rocket, not a single fighter at that time could catch it.

    Blessed is he who believes. But the T-4 never appeared in the Air Force. I will not say about fighters, but the United States had a MIM-14 Nike-Hercules anti-aircraft missile system. The speed is 3,7M (for the T-4 it is 2,6M), the altitude reach is 45 km, the range is 140 km. So there was something to bring down if he appeared

    Quote: PROXOR
    If you bring PAK YES at a speed of 5-6M, the same story will be. Let me remind you, but only we can intercept targets at speeds close to hypersound.

    In order to discharge the load, PAK YES will be forced to reduce the speed to subsonic. And it turns out that he can have a speed of 5-6M solely in order to deliver the goods to the desired point. And about the fact that only we can shoot down targets at speeds close to hypersound - it’s better not to flatter ourselves

    Quote: Kuroneko
    It has already been pulled up to repeat to VO journalists that the "Dagger" is not a rocket, but a missile COMPLEX. The Kh-47M2 missile itself does not have a proper name, unlike the "Caliber" or "Zircon".

    It's useless, comrade. The media said that the "Dagger" is a rocket, which means it is a rocket laughing
    1. PROXOR
      PROXOR 3 October 2019 14: 11
      -2
      Quote: Old26
      Blessed is he who believes. But the T-4 never appeared in the Air Force. I will not say about fighters, but the United States had a MIM-14 Nike-Hercules anti-aircraft missile system. The speed is 3,7M (for the T-4 it is 2,6M), the altitude reach is 45 km, the range is 140 km. So there was something to bring down if he appeared

      The reaction rate of this air defense complex from the moment of detection to launch. Need to continue further?
      Quote: Old26
      In order to discharge the load, PAK YES will be forced to reduce the speed to subsonic. And it turns out that he can have a speed of 5-6M solely in order to deliver the goods to the desired point. And about the fact that only we can shoot down targets at speeds close to hypersound - it’s better not to flatter ourselves

      AND? Max 1 minute per speed reset. He opened the bomb gate, threw off the entire drum one at a time, turned around and again went into the speed set to leave the zone.
  17. garri-lin
    garri-lin 3 October 2019 14: 27
    0
    Two completely different aircraft, under the concept. Ideally, both are needed. The concept of deploying anti-ballistic missiles for protection on an airplane is gaining popularity. Tu 160 with a similar system and speed will sparkle with new colors.
  18. Old26
    Old26 3 October 2019 14: 45
    +4
    Quote: PROXOR
    The reaction rate of this air defense complex from the moment of detection to launch. Need to continue further?

    What kind of reaction of the complex are you talking about when you wrote in black and white that NOT ONE ROCKET could catch up with this plane? Moreover, there is a reaction of the complex. Or have Americans canceled radars by order? Including AWACs?

    Quote: PROXOR
    AND? Max 1 minute per speed reset. He opened the bomb gate, threw off the entire drum one at a time, turned around and again went into the speed set to leave the zone.

    Are you going to slow down from 5-6M to a speed of less than 1M in a minute? Okay, fine, he slowed down, dropped cruise missiles for another minute or two. What's next? If the enemy in that zone has nothing at all, then yes, such a number can pass. But usually the rise of strategists is monitored by all parties even at the time of take-off from the airfield. You can predict approximately the point of discharge. And I won’t be surprised if a ship group suddenly appears in the area of ​​load shedding. Even if the carrier is not affected, the discharge area will be known and it will not be so difficult to shoot down subsonic CDs ...
  19. K-36
    K-36 3 October 2019 16: 08
    0
    Quote: stels_07
    Pak and they will not make invisible, 3maha will not fly, it’s better to play a couple of dozen Tu 160, the economy will not fade anyway.



    PAK YES are designed to replace the aging Tu-95. And the Tu-160 branch will be gradually built up with new sides (while upgrading the old ones). hi
  20. amr
    amr 3 October 2019 18: 41
    +1
    Quote: Timon2155
    The range of missiles today can be brought up to 7000-8000km. Therefore, we come to a subsonic banal missile / bomb carrier. But it will be much simpler, easier, more economical and, possibly, cheaper than the Tu-160. This will allow them to be built in large quantities, to operate in different parts of the country from airfields easier. A sort of platform to launch missiles and bombs (in the absence of air defense)

    I think the best comment
  21. Umalta
    Umalta 3 October 2019 20: 02
    +1
    There is no, absolutely no information in the article, no assumptions, or a hint of analysis, just a set of phrases, nothing to discuss. sad
  22. Konstantin Blinov
    Konstantin Blinov 4 October 2019 14: 47
    +1
    The article is not about anything! How can you compare the incomparable Tu-95 and Tu-160 ???