Next anti-submarine Tu-142M3 repaired in Taganrog

Next anti-submarine Tu-142M3 repaired in Taganrog

Long-range anti-submarine aircraft Tu-142MZ (b / n "53 black"). The first flight after repair


The next last repair at PJSC Taganrog aviation scientific and technical complex named after G.M. Beriev "the long-range anti-submarine aircraft Tu-142MZ (tail number" 53 black ") made its first flight after repair, the press service of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) reports.

According to the report, the anti-submarine Tu-142M3 was decommissioned and transferred for flight tests on January 14 of this year. After passing all the necessary tests, the aircraft will be transferred to the Naval Aviation of the Russian Navy.

The previous repaired Tu-142M3 (tail number "64 red") was transferred to the naval aviation of the Russian Navy on December 12, 2019.

The UAC noted that the scheduled repair of long-range anti-submarine aircraft of the Tu-142 family of the Russian Navy is carried out at the facilities of PJSC TANTK named after GM Beriev in Taganrog. Carrying out repairs allows you to extend the life of updated aircraft.

Tu-142M aircraft are a modernized version of the long-range Tu-142 anti-submarine aircraft, created on the basis of the Tu-95 strategic bomber. In the version of the Tu-142M3 was adopted in 1985, was mass-produced until 1994. The maximum flight range exceeds 12 km, flight speed with a mass of 000 tons at an altitude of 138 meters - up to 7000 km / h. Flight duration - 855 hours. The aircraft are equipped with submarine detection tools, as well as missiles, bombs and mines.
Photos used:
PJSC United Aircraft Corporation
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Leprikon5656 22 January 2020 14: 32 New
    • 9
    • 2
    +7
    Range 12 thousand. Flight time 9 hours, speed 855 ....? Something is wrong with math!
    1. Charik 22 January 2020 14: 33 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      can fly 12t km
    2. Starover_Z 22 January 2020 14: 38 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Quote: Leprikon5656
      Range 12 thousand. Flight time 9 hours, speed 855 ....? Something is wrong with math!

      And why, with refueling and more fly by. And they laid it out like that, because to see that they were in a hurry, there are no proofreaders now - saving.
      Here the news itself is important -
      another anti-submarine Tu-142M3 repaired
      the rest is trifles. He will not fly less, but will fly on missions and in the right regions!
    3. Piramidon 22 January 2020 15: 01 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      Quote: Leprikon5656
      Range 12 thousand. Flight time 9 hours, speed 855 ....? Something is wrong with math!

      855 km / h is the maximum speed and not cruising (economical), which has 720 km / h
    4. Der visch 22 January 2020 15: 36 New
      • 8
      • 6
      +2
      It's not a matter of mathematics ... To understand, you need to unlearn at a flight school for about five years (preferably navigational). And so believe me while on the word, everything is without deception. On the fingers to explain for a long time, tedious and unproductive ....
      1. Typhoon 22 January 2020 16: 16 New
        • 7
        • 17
        -10
        Hint that for five years in a flight school (preferably navigator) they discover miracles of movement in space and time without regard to mathematics? Or are you talking about free soaring (gliding) of strategic aviation at high altitudes with engines off? Or are you talking about tailwind and sailing aircraft?
        1. Piramidon 22 January 2020 16: 30 New
          • 9
          • 3
          +6
          Quote: Typhoon
          Or are you talking about tailwind and sailing aircraft?

          The irony is inappropriate here. Wind really has a big impact on the speed and range of an airplane. Aviation has such concepts as instrument, true and ground speed.
          1. Typhoon 22 January 2020 16: 39 New
            • 8
            • 17
            -9
            And it seems to me that the irony is to write nonsense about "five years at the flight school (preferably navigator)" and that this is the basis for new mathematical rules. With a flight duration of 9 hours at a speed of 855 km / h - there will be no 12000 km.
            Although, on the other hand, this explains the statistics on average salaries in the country, the country's development indicators, which are published by the Cabinet and other nonsense that is not friends with mathematics and the real situation! Probably those clowns from the government and statistics - they also studied at the flight school, at the navigational school, and for at least 5 years)
            1. RADIOACTIVE 22 January 2020 16: 55 New
              • 9
              • 1
              +8
              There is a maximum speed where the plane consumes a lot of fuel, there is an economical flight mode "cruising speed" where the plane will fly more.
            2. Piramidon 22 January 2020 17: 03 New
              • 8
              • 1
              +7
              Quote: Typhoon
              And it seems to me that the irony is to write nonsense about "five years at the flight school (preferably navigator)" and that this is the basis for new mathematical rules. With a flight duration of 9 hours at a speed of 855 km / h - there will be no 12000 km.

              1. I didn’t write anything about the flight school, so it’s not the right place.
              2. Once again, I repeat that 855 km / h is the MAXIMUM speed at which the entire flight cannot continue. Cruising at the Tu-142 is 720 km / h. At this speed, he can hold out in the air for 14-15 hours. Range and time also depend on fueling and payload. You can refuel just centrally, or you can "under the cork" (with the filling through the neck of the tanks). I do not know this figure on the Tu-142, but on our Tu-95 RC it gave an additional 5 tons of fuel.
              1. Typhoon 22 January 2020 17: 17 New
                • 1
                • 15
                -14
                We read the technical specifications and knit with fantasies:
                https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D1%83-142
                http://www.airwar.ru/enc/sea/tu142m3.html
                1. Piramidon 22 January 2020 17: 34 New
                  • 10
                  • 2
                  +8
                  Quote: Typhoon
                  We read the technical specifications and knit with fantasies:
                  https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D1%83-142
                  http://www.airwar.ru/enc/sea/tu142m3.html

                  The Wiki article and actual flight are two big differences.
          2. Grits 23 January 2020 06: 52 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Quote: Piramidon
            Aviation has such concepts as instrument, true and ground speed.

            Wow. You have opened to me a new and incomprehensible to me. That is, we fly, it means, in the designated way, but, it turns out, we fly at all there. And the devices, in general, what the hell do they show ... wassat
            I won’t fly on airplanes anymore.
            1. Piramidon 23 January 2020 09: 45 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              Quote: Gritsa
              Wow. You have opened to me a new and incomprehensible to me. That is, we fly, it means, in the designated way, but, it turns out, we fly at all there. And the devices, in general, show what the hell.

              Well, about where we are flying, I did not say anything. And as for speed, the devices do not show the “damn what”, but what is needed. If interested, then for a general idea, you can read here
              https://interesnye-istorii.in.ua/aircraft-speeds/
              1. Grits 25 January 2020 06: 48 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Piramidon
                If interested, then for a general idea, you can read here

                Thank you, figured out.
    5. The comment was deleted.
    6. The comment was deleted.
    7. venik 22 January 2020 17: 05 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Quote: Leprikon5656
      Range 12 thousand. Flight time 9 hours, speed 855 ....? Something is wrong with math!

      ========
      Sorry! But this is something "wrong with your logic"! 855 km / h - this is the maximum flight speed! Cruising speed or speed barrage - much less !!!
      1. rich 22 January 2020 23: 31 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3




        Flight performance (for Tu-142MZ)
        Crew 10 people
        commander
        assistant commander
        ship navigator
        navigator navigator
        navigator operator
        onboard engineer
        airborne communications operator
        operator of RSE number 1
        operator of RSE number 2
        KOU stern firing system operator
        TTX
        Wingspan: 50,2 m
        Length: 51,55 m
        Height: 14,7 m
        Wing area: 289,9 m²
        Weight:
        empty aircraft: 93 891 kg
        maximum take-off: 185 t
        maximum flight (after refueling in the air): 187 t
        fuel mass: 83,9 t
        Engine Engine type: turboprop, with coaxial screws of opposite rotation AB-60K
        Model: "NK-12MP"
        Power: 4 × 11,19 MW / 4 × 15 thousand liters. with.
        Flight characteristics
        Maximum speed at height: 855 km / h
        Cruising speed: 720 km / h
        Takeoff speed: - 300 km / h
        Landing speed: - 270 km / h
        Ceiling: 13 500 m
        Combat radius 5200 km
        Length of takeoff: 2300 m
        path length:
        Operational Overload: 2,5 G
    8. maidan.izrailovich 23 January 2020 06: 10 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      speed 855 ....

      This is the maximum speed. Accordingly, at maximum speed and maximum fuel consumption. And from this the range is already less.
      But his cruising speed is 720 km / h. Accordingly, the aircraft will be able to fly at this speed longer and further.
      And perhaps there is an even more economical flight mode. Here on it, apparently, and the range is indicated.
  2. antivirus 22 January 2020 15: 07 New
    • 8
    • 20
    -12
    another spoon in the barrel of power of Russia-
    -for pessemists: go to the garden to be sad, and the country continues to live (lives not as you would like)
    there are "territories" that cannot repair their air fleet - they live on alms
  3. Pavel57 22 January 2020 15: 36 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    There are few of them left. it is necessary to redeem the remnants from India and modernize.
    1. maidan.izrailovich 23 January 2020 06: 13 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      There are few of them left.

      48 on the SF and 24 on the Pacific Fleet.
      India has only 8.
      The last aircraft was built in 1994.
      It’s time to think about a replacement.
  4. Typhoon 22 January 2020 15: 44 New
    • 2
    • 19
    -17
    Can destroy ANY enemy submarine sailing under the snorkel or crashing up if there is no air support to a potential enemy. Alas, there are no other options for the destruction of modern enemy submarines in the Tu-142M3.
  5. Demagogue 22 January 2020 17: 16 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: Typhoon
    Can destroy ANY enemy submarine sailing under the snorkel or crashing up if there is no air support to a potential enemy. Alas, there are no other options for the destruction of modern enemy submarines in the Tu-142M3.

    Well, not really like that. Even old Condor and PMK can shower. Yes, even the bombs. The detection tools are old, but if he gets tsu from the ships, then he can catch and hammer with the same magnetometer. Arms fit a lot there.
    1. Piramidon 22 January 2020 17: 43 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      Quote: Demagogue
      Well, not really like that. Even old Condor and PMK can shower. Yes, even the bombs. The detection tools are old, but if he gets tsu from the ships, then he can catch and hammer with the same magnetometer. Arms fit a lot there.

      I remember they were armed with torpedoes with a nuclear warhead with a capacity of about 20 kilotons. There generally no direct hit was required. I don’t know if there are any now.
  6. Demagogue 22 January 2020 19: 11 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Piramidon

    I remember they were armed with torpedoes with a nuclear warhead with a capacity of about 20 kilotons. There generally no direct hit was required. I don’t know if there are any now.


    Well, it's too much. We need light anti-submarine aircraft torpedoes. Based on the same torpedo package possible. To get into the plane more. And for helicopters there will finally be a torpedo. Load the Tu-142 to the eyeballs with buoys and torpedoes, and he will be able to remove all the tricks from the pl and finally sink.
    1. Piramidon 22 January 2020 21: 21 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      Quote: Demagogue
      Well, it's too much.

      Busting, not busting, but there were such ones in Soviet times. When at our airport “deaf” these special means were hung on planes (for training), a tight cordon was put up and the area of ​​the bomb bay was fenced with tarpaulin screens. Those who are sticking my cons here, of course, have never seen this in their infancy.
  7. Demagogue 22 January 2020 21: 43 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Quote: Piramidon
    Quote: Demagogue
    Well, it's too much.

    Busting, not busting, but there were such ones in Soviet times. When at our airport “deaf” these special means were hung on planes (for training), a tight cordon was put up and the area of ​​the bomb bay was fenced with tarpaulin screens. Those who are sticking my cons here, of course, have never seen this in their infancy.


    That was all for the nuclear apocalypse. Now it is out of the question. We will not, in a local conflict in the Arctic, tear up the virulence 150 km from Murmansk.
    Then we need to go further: put the main caliber of 8000 mm on the potters of 203 tons and threaten to shoot vigorous shells at it from 50 km in the same Mediterranean Sea))
    1. Grits 23 January 2020 07: 01 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Demagogue
      That was all for the nuclear apocalypse. Now it is out of the question. We will not, in a local conflict in the Arctic, tear up the virulence 150 km from Murmansk.

      A local conflict between Russia and any power that has nuclear submarines armed with it smoothly develops into a vigorous war precisely with the use of such devices.
    2. Pavel57 23 January 2020 11: 46 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Then we need to go further: put the main caliber of 8000 mm on the potters of 203 tons and threaten to shoot vigorous shells at it from 50 km in the same Mediterranean Sea))

      Not a bad idea. When our artillery cruisers escorted the American AUGs, their guns were perceived by the Americans as a real threat.
  8. Moonsund 22 January 2020 22: 23 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Now about the sad. The technical level of the aircraft, outdated. When the modernization of 38x Ilov and Tu142m3 is completed, by this time the United States will increase the gap that is already dangerous for Russia both in quality and in the number of anti-submarine aircraft. By 2025, according to plans, at best 30 Il will be operational -38N. And about 20 Tu142m3. And the United States already has 50 of the latest R-8 Poseidon anti-submarine aircraft, which were put into service at the beginning of this decade. The Americans intend to bring their number to 120 cars, which will replace the outdated Orions. Survival.
    1. NKT
      NKT 22 January 2020 23: 20 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      We have a beautiful run-in platform - Tu-214, why yesterday our Poseidons did not start building on its base it is not clear.
      1. Grits 23 January 2020 07: 03 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: NKT
        We have a beautiful run-in platform - Tu-214, why yesterday our Poseidons did not start building on its base it is not clear.

        Already it seems like a decision has been made. And there are enough such aircraft in storage. since they are a burden to civilians.
      2. Pavel57 23 January 2020 13: 29 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        One comrade colonel in the Moscow Region gave a negative opinion on the PLO aircraft based on the Tu-204. The situation with aviation and the example of Poseidon makes us return to this topic.
    2. pmkemcity 23 January 2020 05: 29 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      The legacy of the terrible Stalin. It's time to put an end to Stalinism, but for now it’s clear that the mind is not enough.
      1. Pavel57 23 January 2020 13: 31 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        The legacy of Stalinism is also a nuclear weapon. Let's end it? _))).
        1. pmkemcity 23 January 2020 17: 01 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Reception "Empathy"
          This is one of the most common tricks of humor.
          Here is an example of a complete lack of knowledge of life and empathy.

          The Count’s daughter returned from school with the task of writing a story about a poor family. She began like this: "Dad was poor, mother was poor, butler was poor, driver was poor, all the servants were poor ...".
  9. Demagogue 23 January 2020 11: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Gritsa

    A local conflict between Russia and any power that has nuclear submarines armed with it smoothly develops into a vigorous war precisely with the use of such devices.


    Not at all necessary. Nobody will send strategists to participate in a local conflict. British submarines in the Falkland participated. Drown argi one of them that would immediately throw a vigorous bonba on Buenos Aires? The red line of the beginning of the nuclear response is much further.
  10. Demagogue 23 January 2020 12: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Pavel57

    Not a bad idea. When our artillery cruisers escorted the American AUGs, their guns were perceived by the Americans as a real threat.


    It could work. The projectile does not intercept. Guaranteed defeat. Especially if the range is brought up to 100 km plus. But with hypersonic cr, just about everything. Only the range is higher and more compact. Therefore, in the current realities is not relevant. If only the railgun will do.
    1. Pavel57 23 January 2020 16: 01 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      The demagogue (Andrey), in my opinion, is relevant, to go behind the AUG in the calculation of launching a hypersonic missile, which in the conditions of radio interference may not hit, or to go near the AUG at a distance of 6-12 guns.
  11. Demagogue 23 January 2020 17: 23 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Pavel57
    The demagogue (Andrey), in my opinion, is relevant, to go behind the AUG in the calculation of launching a hypersonic missile, which in the conditions of radio interference may not hit, or to go near the AUG at a distance of 6-12 guns.


    A rocket with a special warhead does not have to hit. This is all and charm. It can be blown up on approach and still destroy the target. I think the dagger on surface targets was planned mainly for use with special warheads. This does not mean that the idea with a tool cannot be developed in parallel. But the rocket is still looking better. Although the guns as in Zumwalt with a reach of 130 km could be used with special equipment, there will be a problem with tsu. Shooting far beyond the horizon. Correction will not work, but the goals are maneuvered. Accuracy is worse than rockets.
    1. Pavel57 23 January 2020 18: 09 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      What miss is permissible for a missile with a nuclear warhead?
  12. Demagogue 23 January 2020 18: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Pavel57
    What miss is permissible for a missile with a nuclear warhead?


    Well, here the art loses again. It’s unlikely that they will push more than 20 kilotons into the shell, and then it is necessary to undermine up to 500 m. And it’s better to get closer. And on a rocket a vigorous head can be put much more powerful.