Tu-160: the swan song has not yet been sung

83

This year marks 35 years since the Tu-160 strategic bomber or, in our opinion, the White Swan, stands guard over the interests of the country. In the camp of our probables, it is called "Black Jack", which some incorrectly translate as "black jack", in fact, "Black jack" is a swinging blow with a club that knocks down. A fairer title, in my opinion.

Is 35 years too long? Basically, no. Not so long ago, we had articles about the B-52 and Tu-95, which celebrated their seventieth anniversary in military service, so 35 years is so, seeds ...



In principle, all the problems and possibilities of old aircraft were discussed quite well in those materials, but the Tu-160 is already from a different generation.


It all started in the sixties, when the peak of "love and friendship" between the USSR and the USA prevented satellites from flying in space. Both countries struggled to build up their nuclear arsenals and, of course, their means of delivery.

The USSR had a Tu-95 turboprop and a 3M jet, the USA had a B-52. Then it was believed that subsonic aircraft could not be guaranteed to overcome the air defense of a developed country, because work was carried out in both countries, but if in the United States over a strategic aviation worked closely, then in the USSR they preferred to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles.

But in 1964, an event occurred that somewhat turned the aviation world of the USSR upside down: an experimental strategic bomber North American XB-70 "Valkyrie" made its first flight in the United States.


The aircraft, which developed a cruising speed of Mach 3 at an altitude of 21 kilometers, was conceived as an invulnerable bomber that could reach heights where enemy air defenses would be powerless, and it was supposed to be protected from interceptors by the North American XF-108 "Rapier" personal fighter, which would be equipped with the same engines on borohydride fuel.

The project, as they say, “did not play”, the Valkyrie and Rapier were not mass-produced for many reasons, but the Valkyrie played its role: in the USSR they thought about creating a high-altitude supersonic interceptor that could destroy such aircraft outside air defense actions. This is how it started story MiG-25, which we also recently wrote about. (MiG-25: the final departure into history)

Further, the Americans, disappointed in the prospects for a high-altitude breakthrough of the Soviet air defense, concentrated on creating an aircraft capable of bypassing air defense at low altitudes and delivering strikes. Thus began the story of the Rockwell B-1 Lancer.


And here, in parallel with the creation of the MiG-25, work began on the creation of "the same, but better" strategic supersonic missile carrier. So, by the relevant Decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR in 1967, work began on the project, which later became the Tu-160.

The aircraft was supposed to carry up to 45 tons of combat load for a range of up to 13 km at a speed of 000 km/h.

The most interesting thing is that initially the Sukhoi and Myasishchev design bureaus worked on the aircraft. Tupolev Design Bureau joined only in 1969, having come not empty-handed, but with developments on the Tu-144.

The T-4MS designed by Sukhoi and the M-18 designed by Myasishchev met in the competition. Myasishchev's plane won, but then an incident occurred: the M-18 formally won, but the Tupolev Design Bureau was further instructed to work on the plane. This was explained by the lack of production space at the Myasishchev Design Bureau. However, these twists and turns are worthy of a separate story, since the Tupolev engineers rejected most of the developments on the M-18 and actually built their own aircraft, however, leaving some of the ideas of the Myasishchev Design Bureau engineers.

In November 1981, the Tu-160 made its first flight, for which test pilot Boris Veremey received the title of Hero of the Soviet Union.


The plane got big. Much larger than the B-1B, which was supposed to covertly penetrate enemy air defense systems. The dimensions of the Tu-160 gave the aircraft many titles. It still remains the largest and most powerful supersonic aircraft in the history of military aviation, the largest variable-sweep wing aircraft and the record holder for maximum takeoff weight. 245 tons of takeoff weight and 45 tons of combat load - so far no one could exceed this.

What can I say if the Tu-160 takes 171 liters of fuel in an ordinary flight. These are three railway tanks. And he burns this fuel, overcoming about 000 kilometers. Well, 13 world records for distance, altitude and flight speed.

Naturally, the weapons were such that they could plunge anyone into fear and horror. Inside the fuselage, in the compartments, there were two drum launchers MKU-6-5U, which could carry six X-55SM and X-15S missiles.

Tu-160: the swan song has not yet been sung

Over time, even more nightmarish creations of the human mind, X-101 and X-555, were registered there.


They were in such a hurry with the aircraft that they began to assemble and send it to the Air Force before the state tests were completed. Well, as always, I really wanted to get ahead of the United States, although today it looks pretty stupid: there is nothing more than political pluses. The "raw" machine for defense, if it plays, then only in the minus.

They planned to build 100 aircraft and this would be very significant. But alas, the Soviet Union ended earlier, they managed to build only 25 cars. And one more nuance: 19 of them ended up on the territory of independent Ukraine, since under the USSR they were based as part of 184 TBAPs in Priluki.

It turned out in a peculiar way: the planes were in Ukraine, while the manufacturers of spare parts, repair, flight personnel and technical staff ended up in Russia. The Ukrainians were going to use the Tu-160s they inherited as carriers of non-nuclear weapons, but alas, there were not enough funds and specialists for flights, many of whom quit or left for Russia.


And then, in the mid-nineties, the drama began in the history of the Tu-160. The good American partners of the new Ukraine, within the framework of the Nunn-Lugar program, paid the Ukrainians for the destruction of the Tu-160 and Tu-95MS. And as always, the Ukrainians, who needed money, agreed to cut the planes.


Until 2001, 10 aircraft were destroyed, one Tu-160 became a museum exhibit. Moreover, it was practically a new car, only 430 flight hours!

As you can see, dollars, brought in on time and where necessary, work wonders, working much more efficiently than high-altitude interceptors and anti-aircraft missiles.

Luckily for us, the impoverishment and plundering of Ukraine proceeded at such a pace that there was not enough money for everyone, and therefore the Russian side managed to exchange planes for oil and gas. For $285 million, Russia received 8 Tu-160s, 3 Tu-95s and over 500 missiles.

In 1992, the first point was made in the history of the Tu-160. It seems that in exchange for stopping the construction of the V-2 in the United States, Russia stopped building the Tu-160. Completed 6 aircraft were handed over to the Air Force in 1994, at which point the production of the Tu-160 ceased.

However, the period turned out to be a semicolon. And in 2000, the Air Force accepted the aircraft, already produced in Russia. He received the name first "Ilya Muromets", and then was renamed "Alexander Golovanov".

And in 2005, a significant event took place: by decree of President Putin, the Tu-160 was officially adopted by the Russian Air Force. Plus, the aircraft was somewhat modernized by installing NK-32-01 engines with an increased resource and increasing the amount of fuel taken during air refueling from 43 to 50 tons.

Somehow, quietly and almost imperceptibly, they began to assemble the NK-32 engines again, the second modernization of the NK-32-02 appeared, they began to study the possibilities for the production of aircraft, in 2007 Russia announced that it was starting strategic aviation flights again.

And in 2007, the film "07 Changes Course" was released. The film, of course, does not even pull on the “C grade”, because it is miserable both in terms of production and performance by the actors, but Tu-160 “Alexander Molodchiy” played the main role in it.

In 2008, the 16th Tu-160, named "Vitaly Kopylov", came to the Russian Aerospace Forces. Like "Alexander Golovanov", it was an aircraft assembled from the Soviet backlog, with old-style units.


Then everyone was distracted from the Tu-160, because they decided to develop and build the PAK DA at an urgent and accelerated pace. This project was to replace all Soviet long-range aircraft. However, the hotheads soon cooled down, the "successes" under the PAK FA program made us think that planes are needed tomorrow, and not in 30 years.

As a result, President Putin ordered to stop entertainment with searchlights and start resuming mass production of the Tu-160M, aircraft equipped with the latest Russian capabilities. In May 2015, a corresponding decree was signed.

It should be noted the heroism of Russian aircraft manufacturers, who re-mastered the seemingly lost technologies for titanium welding and the production of such complex machines. But they did it, Putin's order that the Aerospace Forces need 50 vehicles is an order. I don’t know what it cost the Kazan aircraft builders, but they did it and the first Tu-160M ​​completely Russian-built “Pyotr Deinekin” is already undergoing a test cycle.


In 2015, the baptism of fire of the Tu-160 took place. Yes, the targets were not very significant for an aircraft of this class, but Russian strategists worked out their missiles on the positions of terrorists in Syria. The Kh-555 and Kh-101 missiles showed their seriousness and also passed the battle test. The targets were hit "with high quality".

This test was the first use of a strategic aircraft created in the 70s of the last century. But did this prove the relevance of the Tu-160?


Indeed, today many are concerned about the question: how modern and in demand is an aircraft that will cost that much money? And how can the Tu-160M ​​perform the tasks for which it was created, that is, a breakthrough in layered air defense?

Modern means of destroying aircraft over these thirty years have made a fair leap in evolution. Anti-aircraft missile systems began to shoot further and more accurately. Missiles have not become “smarter”, but it has become more difficult to knock them off course.

Experts in certain sources believe that the Tu-160M ​​will receive a modernized complex of on-board radio-electronic equipment, it will be equipped with new means of communication, navigation and control. Promisingly new means of destruction will appear, which we still do not know about for various reasons. All this sounds nice, but does not answer the main question: what is the relevance of the Tu-160M ​​based on and how is it supported?

And not only in Russia they are racking their brains over this. The Americans have problems about the same plan. For them, the main question today is whether the Lancer B-1B is worth it, which at first they also wanted to cut as unnecessary, and now they decided to give a second chance as a carrier of hypersonic weapons.

Of course, it will be interesting for us to observe the development of the ARRW (Air Launched Rapid Response Weapon) project, the product of which was the AGM-183A rocket. Perhaps the American hypersonic development will compete with our "Dagger", and perhaps not.

But the fate of the B-1B is not so exciting for all of us, how much is the need for the Tu-160M ​​and the understanding of whether this aircraft will be able to justify the sums spent on it in the future?


First, let's answer a few questions.

Will the Tu-160 be able to quietly approach the US borders? - Not. Satellite constellations and other means of tracking will "see" the bombers much earlier than they come within striking distance.

Is the Tu-160 the strongest component of the nuclear triad? - Not. Submarines carry more missiles and are more powerful. We are not even talking about ground launchers.

Can the Tu-160 be called invulnerable? - Not. Although the aircraft is equipped with protective equipment, a targeted attack by 2-4 fighters will negate all efforts to protect the bomber, and it will be destroyed.

Is the supersonic speed of the Tu-160 a guarantee that the bomber will be able to fulfill all the tasks assigned to it? - Not. The speed of the Tu-160 is high, but the speed of modern missiles is still higher. As well as many aircraft, attacking on counter courses, they are able to "get" the Tu-160.

So maybe we should abandon these aircraft altogether?

And again "no".

It may seem strange, but the Tu-160 is suitable not only for beautiful parade flights and the personification of the capabilities of the Russian Aerospace Forces. Moreover, 17 cars (including Pyotr Deinekin) do not look as impressive as 60 American B-1Bs or 80 B-52s. A question of efficiency.


So where can such an aircraft as the Tu-160 come in handy and why is it strong?

The main advantage of the Tu-160 is its speed. Yes, now some will point their fingers at what was written above, and so: depending on what tasks will be discussed. If it’s one thing to go point-blank to American targets and shoot the drums of your revolvers at them. Let's look at the problem from a slightly different angle.

So, the tension in relations between the US and the Russian Federation reaches almost a maximum. Almost - this means that nuclear missile carriers are still occupying positions in the oceans, but the US AUGs are moving towards the Pacific borders of our country, which, say, nevertheless grappled with Japan over the Kuriles. The Japanese fleet is also beginning to twitch in our direction.

And in such a situation, at a distance, the Tu-160 can have a very big impact on the development of events. The plane is fast. He is not just fast, not every fighter in the world will be able to catch up with him. When the interceptor starts from the ground, and the bomber is already doing 2500 km / h at an altitude of 15 km - go ahead, catch up! This is mathematics, and she is against this. The interceptor must give out 3-3,5 thousand km / h in order to catch up with the Tu-160, and even then, this will not happen immediately.

Who can get so hot with us except for the MiG-31? That's it... And besides, the fuel supply on the fighters is somewhat different from that of the Tu-160.

The strength of the "White Swan" is manifested precisely when the plane has ALREADY taken off and hangs around in the area of ​​​​events. naturally, with a full combat load, and better in the company of their own kind.


This turns out to be such a joker that can do a lot precisely because the plane can very quickly be where it needs to be. More precisely, it is necessary to command, which gives orders.

A submarine in a combat position (meaning SSGN, we are not erasing the world into dust yet) is good. But the main trump card of the submarine is that it can come to the area of ​​​​events covertly. But not quickly. And the Tu-160 may not be covert, but very quickly. And the tactical balance is broken for any AUG, because the planes still have to take off (we are silent that the F / A-18 "carcass" simply does not catch up) and depict something, and the strategist is already "fingering in the area." And cruise missiles are a very mean thing. It's not fast, but it's accurate. And the X-555 starts quite normally from such distances that not a single American air defense system works at such distances.

The closer the aircraft can approach before launching the missiles, the less time is left for air defense to respond. And the more difficult it is to intercept a missile, which, due to its harmfulness, will still maneuver and fly over the very waves.

And you can immediately go from hypersonic. To indicate the seriousness of intentions. The Tu-160 is ideal for the role of the Kinzhal carrier, because the first stage from it is at least slower than from the MiG-31, but it will definitely carry more than one missile. And for a greater distance.

The Tu-160 is an ideal weapon for the first circle of defense, capable of meeting the enemy at a considerable distance. It’s not so necessary to hack into US air defense, it’s difficult, and it’s not our business to be the first to attack. But to meet those who are coming on an official, but completely unfriendly visit - for this, the Tu-160 and its missiles are suitable like no other.


If the time comes to wipe out the continent of North America, ICBM submarines and mine monsters will do just fine.

Today, an aircraft like the Tu-160 is not very good for breaking through the curtains of fighters, air defense systems and electronic warfare systems. That is, what we have, speaking of a breakthrough in the air defense system. But this is an ideal weapon, a shield extended 3-5 thousand kilometers from the country's borders. Well, a sword that can very sensitively hit the enemy.

When we are talking not about the first nuclear strike, not about the second, but about a preventive one, on the distant approaches to our borders, here the Tu-160 is simply perfect.

I have repeatedly said in my articles that the US defense tactics, which are calculated from floating airfields advanced far from the borders, are not bad. If there is no weapon capable of drowning these airfields. That is why the military in the United States is so nervous when looking in the direction of our submarine strategic missile carriers, it would be nice if they also became nervous about the fact that Russia has more than fifty (as Putin planned) strategic air missile carriers.

We are accustomed to the fact that the strategic bomber is considered without fail as a weapon of the first strike or retaliation. This is not true. Nowadays, this is a tool for surgically precise impact on the situation, capable of incapacitating the AUG, the supply fleet, bridges, military bases and other targets, being OUTSIDE the air defense and at distances inaccessible to ground-based OTRK.

So in our time, a properly prepared and modernized Tu-160 is very useful and relevant. The only question is how to apply it. But this aircraft can really have a big impact on the balance of power in any region of the world in any conflict.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

83 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +12
    12 August 2022 05: 17
    What an elegant and charming white swan!
  2. +10
    12 August 2022 05: 23

    What a sad picture and at the same time evidence of the end of the Cold War, unfortunately not in our favor - an American-made Cat excavator rips apart the Tu-160 with its bucket ...
    1. +14
      12 August 2022 05: 44
      It’s not a bucket hanging there, hydraulic shears are hanging there, but of course this does not change the essence. Too bad we lost so much...
    2. +16
      12 August 2022 05: 59
      It would be better if I didn’t see this photo - my heart bleeds and tears in my eyes ...
      1. +1
        12 August 2022 06: 34
        Quote: aleks neym_2
        It would be better if I didn’t see this photo - my heart bleeds and tears in my eyes ..

        could not drag this photo here - radishes!
    3. +14
      12 August 2022 07: 52
      I am not a romantic, but when I see how planes and ships are destroyed, I hear their cry of living souls. After all, every plane or ship carries a particle of the soul of its creators. That's why sailors cry when their ship dies.
    4. +6
      12 August 2022 13: 24
      Please note that the Sopka radar, its electronic components, and other wing base antennas were removed in the bow of this poor fellow. And also no engines.
      So, the whole thing was filmed under the supervision of ours and written off in the 2nd, 4th or 5th category of spare parts.
      And the best thing in the womb of the IL-76 transporter was exported to Kazan and Engels, where it is still used to support operated vehicles.
      The rest is somewhere in Ukraine.
    5. 0
      14 October 2022 21: 40
      This is in Ukraine. And a number of pilots were built = many of them fought in the "Afghan" .... The men in uniform roared ... And then the rest were scratched out .. The whole story. And here's another (already) story
      https://inforuss.info/uleteli-oni-uleteli-tak-chtoby/
  3. +11
    12 August 2022 05: 46
    With the resources available today, Russia will not be able to keep that 160 in the air on alert, just like the United States could not keep the b52. Alas, there is no money for this.
    1. +8
      12 August 2022 06: 43
      Quote: realist
      With the resources available today, Russia will not be able to keep that 160 in the air on alert, just like the United States could not keep the b52. Alas, there is no money for this.

      But the Tu-95 can. It's a completely different economy. We need an inexpensive subsonic carrier with Tu-95 dimensions and PD-14 engines. They could no longer be produced piece by piece, like the Tu-160. Yes, and the loss would not be so terrible.
      1. -2
        12 August 2022 11: 53
        Quote: Stas157
        Quote: realist
        With the resources available today, Russia will not be able to keep that 160 in the air on alert, just like the United States could not keep the b52. Alas, there is no money for this.

        But the Tu-95 can. It's a completely different economy. We need an inexpensive subsonic carrier with Tu-95 dimensions and PD-14 engines. They could no longer be produced piece by piece, like the Tu-160. Yes, and the loss would not be so terrible.


        PAK DA will eventually replace all strategic bombers. Its dimensions are smaller than those of the Tu-95, and the engines are different.
      2. 0
        12 August 2022 19: 18
        Tu 95, turboprop, right? Maybe an 124 is better on the platform, is it more like?
        1. 0
          13 August 2022 09: 21
          Rather, on the basis of civilian vehicles capable of hanging in the air for a day on duty.
      3. 0
        13 August 2022 11: 10
        Stas 157:

        —-To be honest, I was convinced by all the "No" of the Author.

        - And the scenario in which the TU-160 is a means of defense did not convince me. But it doesn’t matter, the main thing in VO is that those who see the rationality of what is proposed in the topic.
  4. +13
    12 August 2022 05: 57
    The plane is cool and beautiful!
    But for such an aircraft and its successful use, in addition to the crew, you also need a cool command, which will give the order for its use! Unfortunately, this command does not always show its best side in the NWO! I mean command with big stars on shoulder straps ..
  5. +3
    12 August 2022 05: 58
    But this aircraft can really have a big impact on the balance of power in any region of the world in any conflict.
    Well, thank God, the "Swan" is justified and can continue to sail in the sky. feel
  6. +7
    12 August 2022 06: 08
    Happy Air Force Day to all involved!
    1. +1
      13 August 2022 17: 36
      And everyone who is involved in the GVF!
      1. 0
        13 August 2022 18: 55
        Quote: Tol100v
        And everyone who is involved in the GVF!

        Well, they too at the same time! True, they didn’t take them to the Civil Air Fleet, but they assembled the Tu-154 (internship) in the SChK workshop (all fingers were in sealant, each rivet had to be smeared)))
  7. +7
    12 August 2022 06: 15
    the author did not consider the main trump card of the Tu-160 is the launch of hypersonic missiles with a ramjet engine, only he can do this (supersonic and dimensions)
  8. 0
    12 August 2022 06: 17
    Well, I don’t understand why our bombers of this type should break through air defense with themselves if they are designed to strike with long-range cruise missiles?
    L-logic =) Why would an aircraft that carries cruise missiles for 2500+ KM overcome air defense systems? These are all questions about missiles.
    As you can see, our warriors and the government decided to do an endless stream of "analogues" in 1 copy for parades.
    Although we just need good and trouble-free equipment, in large quantities. We don’t print dollars like the United States, why all these prodigies? I personally don’t understand.
    1. -8
      12 August 2022 12: 20
      that's exactly what you don't understand)))
    2. 0
      19 August 2022 07: 15
      What are you carrying? recourse
  9. +9
    12 August 2022 06: 26
    The author has a mess in his head: he believes that the interceptor will not intercept the bomber on a collision course, but will catch up.
  10. 0
    12 August 2022 06: 37
    The value of this aircraft is that in some hours it can unload on targets in the Baltic region, equip itself with a new one and do the same in the Pacific region.
    1. -1
      12 August 2022 10: 46
      Quote: Krabong
      The value of this aircraft is that in some hours it can unload on targets in the Baltic region, equip itself with a new one and do the same in the Pacific region.

      Can not.
      1. The term of preparation for departure is measured in tens of hours.
      2. The flight range with a full load drops very much. From Engels in full load, he will fly at best to Krasnoyarsk.
      1. +10
        12 August 2022 11: 15
        1. The term of preparation for departure is measured in tens of hours

        The period of pre-flight preparation is measured by the time of refueling the aircraft, loading combat equipment and light maintenance by its engineering and technical service. I am an aeronautical engineer...

        Flight range with full load drops very much

        You forget about aerial refueling...
        1. +1
          12 August 2022 11: 27
          Quote: Luminman
          1. The term of preparation for departure is measured in tens of hours

          The period of pre-flight preparation is measured by the time of refueling the aircraft, loading combat equipment and light maintenance by its engineering and technical service. I am an aeronautical engineer...

          For the preparation of this aircraft, 64 selovek-hours are required for each hour of flight of the machine.
          As part of the JSC providing the flight, there are 15 specialized machines.
          There are still plenty of failures for avionics.
          The same Baikal, as it was inoperable, is now buggy on every flight. And he is not alone.
          1. 0
            12 August 2022 13: 46
            Quote: SovAr238A
            For the preparation of this aircraft, 64 selovek-hours are required for each hour of flight of the machine.

            Where is this from? From RTE? And how many hours is the standard for pre-flight, pre-flight, re-flight, post-flight?

            Quote: SovAr238A
            As part of the JSC providing the flight, there are 15 specialized machines.

            AO is aircraft equipment.

            Quote: SovAr238A
            The same Baikal, as it was inoperable, is now buggy on every flight. And he is not alone.

            It's a defense complex. Are you aware that it is not used in every flight? By the way, do you know the ingredients? What is L-103 for example?
      2. 0
        12 August 2022 13: 48
        What is there, it won’t crawl to Saratov and it will hurt itself on the Volga wassat
      3. 0
        19 August 2022 07: 19
        And in Ukraine, he will not be able to boot?
  11. +6
    12 August 2022 06: 39
    Quote: Roman Skomorokhov
    Will the Tu-160 be able to quietly approach the US borders? - Not. Satellite constellations and other means of tracking will "see" the bombers much earlier than they come within striking distance.
    Approaching within striking distance does NOT require approaching US lines. Thanks to long-range missiles, it will not be necessary to break through the ground-based air defense system; you don’t have to enter the air defense zone to launch missiles.
    The US AUGs are moving towards the Pacific borders of our country... And the tactical balance is broken for any AUG, because the planes still have to take off (we are silent that the F / A-18 "carcass" simply does not catch up)...
    But what, the Tu-160 will definitely fly over the enemy’s AUG? Why not fly around the AUG for 1500-2000 km from it, so as not to enter the sea air defense zone? In the end, you can generally fly through the North Pole.
    1. +7
      12 August 2022 13: 27
      How does it not have to break through the ground air defense of the United States and Canada?
      Where can he strike with a missile range, even if it is 4500-4800 km without entering the air defense zone?
      Only in Alaska, maximum.
      The distance to targets in the continental US is much greater.

      NO (!!!) missiles for attacking the AUG and Tu-160 ships currently carry and cannot carry. Their not just for him.
      And again, attacking the AUG is only possible from a distance of 300-350 km when it is detected by the radar of the anti-ship missile carrier and the missile heads capture the target.
      In another way.
  12. +5
    12 August 2022 07: 15
    I wonder why our military showed footage of the Tu-160 in Syria, but do not do the same in Ukraine?
    1. +6
      12 August 2022 07: 41
      Yes, according to the one that in Syria, the Allah-Babahs of all air defense only had Arrows and jihad mobiles with ZU-23-2. And the Ukrainians have the S-300 and the Buk, and it seems like soon the Norwegian wunderwaffles will be urged on. And there are only 160 TU-16s, and the loss of any of them will be the same loud propaganda success of country 404 as the loss of a cruiser. Or maybe louder.
      1. +2
        12 August 2022 20: 28
        Quote: Nagan
        Yes, according to the one that in Syria, the Allah-Babahs of all air defense only had Arrows and jihad mobiles with ZU-23-2. And the Ukrainians have the S-300 and the Buk, and it seems like soon the Norwegian wunderwaffles will be urged on. And there are only 160 TU-16s, and the loss of any of them will be the same loud propaganda success of country 404 as the loss of a cruiser. Or maybe louder.

        Honestly, it's not even funny.
        The missile launch range of the TU-160 is outrageous.
        X-101 under 5000 km.
        X-555 under 2000 km. How long has Ukrainian air defense been firing at 2000 km?

        And regarding the Cruiser that you are talking about - I have long cited in my articles as an argument that the Tu-160 can strike from a safe distance from the depths of the territory, while all its infrastructure is far from the "war".
        And the fleet in these waters is extremely vulnerable, as is its infrastructure.

        And what do we see in the end? Fleet our chekhryzhat as they want.
        Air defense passes Highmars over bridges and some infrastructure.
        That all ships in the World Cup are essentially floating targets that can fire at anti-ship missiles at any moment. And the passage of a missile is a probabilistic event, it is impossible to shoot down everything.

        And the fact that they were not drowned is only because the West is not ready for such a level of escalation (the complete destruction of the Black Sea Fleet along with its infrastructure).
        And technically... it could have been done 100 times already.
        1. +1
          12 August 2022 21: 59
          Quote: Alexander Vorontsov
          The missile launch range of the TU-160 is outrageous.
          X-101 under 5000 km.
          X-555 under 2000 km.

          Aren't they overpriced? How many Calibers can be produced for the price of each? Add here the cost of an hour of Carcass's flight, and the late Leonid Ilyich, who said "The economy must be economical," will be spinning in his grave like a fan. And there are not so many goals that justify such costs.
          The Tu-160, of course, can carry something cheaper, but in order to launch it, and even more so to drop free-falling cast iron, you will have to enter the air defense zone, with all the attendant risks.
          Of course, no one canceled training flights and missile launches, and it’s somehow more correct to take out a real target in / out than a conditional target at a training ground.
  13. +2
    12 August 2022 07: 18
    It is very interesting why the author was going to put forward the Tu-160 against the AUG, and most importantly, how does he propose to detect these AUGs?
    1. 0
      12 August 2022 09: 04
      "Satellite constellations and other means of tracking will "see" the bombers much earlier than they come within striking distance."
      We also have tracking satellites.
      1. +4
        12 August 2022 13: 32
        There are very few of those reconnaissance satellites and their resource in orbit is very limited.
        Today they cannot even effectively look at Ukraine, not to mention the world's oceans.
      2. +1
        12 August 2022 18: 22
        We also have tracking satellites.

        Truth? And what prevented these "tracking satellites" from discovering the bases of still flying Ukrainian aircraft and their still operating air defense systems for six months?
        1. +4
          12 August 2022 20: 42
          Quote: ramzay21
          Truth? And what prevented these "tracking satellites" from discovering the bases of still flying Ukrainian aircraft and their still operating air defense systems for six months?

          A set of factors that fundamentally distinguish the AUG from a single aircraft.
          1) Mobility. An airplane can fly from one part of Ukraine to another in just 30 minutes. We looked at the pictures - there are no planes. After how much to check a specific airfield again? The AUG moves at a maximum speed of 30 knots, which makes it possible to schedule inspections.
          2) The ability to disguise. The plane can be hidden so that even looking at the satellite image you will not see it. As you understand, an aircraft carrier cannot go under water.
          3) bases were still found, you initially put the question incorrectly - you need to add bases for ALL aircraft.

          And speaking of airfields... have you ever seen footage of pilots landing and taking off from public roads? And if we talk about Soviet aircraft, then with all my skepticism about the Su-25 .... I have to admit that something, but to sit down almost on a village road, and then taxi almost into a barn ... he may well.
          1. 0
            12 August 2022 23: 00
            That is, detecting aircraft (not a single aircraft) hidden at a maximum of two dozen airfields or disguised S-300 systems is a problem, and detecting an aircraft carrier constantly moving at a speed of 60 km per hour on millions of square kilometers of water is nonsense. Awesome!

            You read Vice Admiral Koreev about how the Liana satellite system, which includes active RTR satellites with nuclear reactors, the Tu-16R reconnaissance air regiment, several TFRs and many submarines in 1982, could not detect the American AUG, which, while remaining undetected, worked out attacks on the main base SSBN Pacific Fleet from a distance of 300 km.
            And the capabilities of the Pacific Fleet of the USSR cannot be compared with the Pacific Fleet of the Russian Federation, which is armed with neither Liana with active RTR satellites, nor air reconnaissance regiments, nor MRA divisions, just like there is no MRA at all, from MAPL only half-dead Kuzbass and one Yasen-M, and instead of many TFRs, several corvettes with non-working air defense.
            1. +1
              13 August 2022 10: 07
              Quote: ramzay21
              That is, to detect aircraft (not a single aircraft)
              constantly moving at a speed of 60 km per hour is nonsense. Awesome!

              I recognize Timokhin's style.
              Mix a couple of facts with a dozen assumptions that have nothing to do with reality. And on the basis of this, build reasoning.

              Well, let's take for example
              detect aircraft (not a single aircraft)

              Where did you get "not a single plane" from?
              Since the time of the king of peas, the military, as a separate area of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbactivity, have been thinking through and improving the issues of withdrawing aviation from strikes, and attention to "dispersal". Therefore, it is possible to destroy aircraft in dense packs only at the beginning of the war.


              Second question. Where did you get a maximum of 20 airfields from?
              Do you know that the USSR developed the airfield network in Ukraine very actively and you want to say that there are 20 airfields there?))) You send this joke to KVN.

              If you google the list of Ukrainian airports (a much larger unit than the operational airfield) there will be 40 of them.

              In one of my articles, I posted a video where our Aerospace Forces are working out the "deployment" of an operational airfield on a section of the route. This is a standard procedure.
              And now a question for connoisseurs - what do you think, Ukraine was preparing for war?
              Do you think they are supervised by people from the Pentagon?
              And what do you think, the Pentagon does not understand that Russia has a lot of long-range calibers and we will destroy aircraft on the ground, and therefore it is necessary to develop measures to remove aircraft from under attack?

              I can find any barn in Ukraine on a Google map and ask you a question - do you guarantee that there is no MLRS in this barn? tanka? air defense?
              Or have you not seen the footage of the Ukrainian MLRS based in the shopping center?
              Or have you not seen the footage of how they are reloading in the field from civilian trucks?
              Or have you not seen the footage of how the Ukrainian military jump out of the ambulance in a pack, and not because they became ill and they called it, but because they move on it.
              Or did you not see tanks and air defense standing close to residential buildings?

              Moreover, in the place of our opponents, in the first days of the war, I would have hijacked all the planes to Poland, where they would have undergone the most serious maintenance, and then sent them 2-3 pieces to Ukraine. So look for fistulas of these 2-3 sides throughout Ukraine. In fact, this is no different from the supply of any other weapons to Ukraine. And we can’t roam around the warehouse where this or that equipment is stored because these are not Ukrainian warehouses. And not at Ukrainian factories and maintenance points, this technique is brought to life.

              Despite the fact that, in addition to aircraft, reconnaissance resources must also be spent on everything else - to look for air defense systems, MLRS, artillery, control logistics, understanding where the enemy has what forces.

              With such inputs, if I were in the place of our command, at some point I would have given up searching for aircraft, in view of the extremely inefficient efficiency of using reconnaissance resources in the presence of more priority tasks for available funds.
              1. -1
                13 August 2022 20: 43
                I recognize Timokhin's style.

                I absolutely agree with Timokhin and he turned out to be right, it is a pity that you did not understand this.

                And you got away from the original question.
                Aircraft must make sorties, for this they must leave shelters, taxi to the runway and take off, and even if there are 100 airfields, they are all motionless in the same place, and if everything is so good with our satellite constellation and everything is so simple, then why Our satellites have not caught planes taxiing out of shelters in six months, although their account is in the tens and they make sorties every day?
                Why did the RTR satellites not detect the operation of radars and radio traffic at certain frequencies, which is typical for functioning airfields?
                Why didn't the RTR satellites detect the work of the S-300 or Buk air defense systems in six months?
                Why didn’t our satellites detect tank columns freely moving around Ukraine and supply columns in six months?
                Why are anti-ship missiles and MLRS installations not being detected, which should leave shelters and advance to positions?

                Answer these questions honestly for yourself and you will understand why these wonderful satellites are not able to detect the AUG if the commander of this AUG does not want our satellite to detect this AUG.
  14. -4
    12 August 2022 07: 33
    Have you heard about the sale of the Tu160 to India? We did not have time to master the production, as we are already going to sell https://inosmi.ru/20220810/tu-160-255437980.html
    1. -2
      12 August 2022 08: 26
      The Chinese proceed from what the Indian officials said and do not exclude the possibility that someone could provoke the Sino-Russian relations. They remind the Chinese that in the 1965 border war between China and India, the Soviet Union supported India, and that if the choice was China or India, the Russians would always side with India to weaken China, just as the US uses Ukraine to weaken Russia.
  15. +7
    12 August 2022 07: 34
    a tool for surgically precise impact on the situation, capable of incapacitating the AUG, the supply fleet, bridges, military bases and other targets
    And the bridge in Zatoka is still standing, and the trains are still going through it. Or does it mean that the above tasks will be solved using special warheads?
  16. 0
    12 August 2022 08: 13
    Bridges you say can disable ..
  17. -1
    12 August 2022 08: 18
    The plane just looks beautiful, its features show optimality. Well, is it galoshes? And yes, the aircraft is needed specifically to support the aircraft.
  18. -7
    12 August 2022 08: 38
    that's right
    While there are no other new aircraft, and with effective managers it will not be easy for them to appear, they need to fly on what they have.
    And 35 years is not such a long time. Just yesterday there was news - someone sold a batch of SU (su 25 like) 40 years old development. and nothing, order
  19. +7
    12 August 2022 09: 10
    There is a question of target designation. It must be solved simultaneously with the construction of such aircraft. For floating airfields are not a static target, they move.
  20. 0
    12 August 2022 09: 28
    After the SVO, I propose to pick up the Tu160 from the museum in Ukraine and return it to service
    1. +1
      12 August 2022 10: 38
      Quote: Zaurbek
      After the SVO, I propose to pick up the Tu160 from the museum in Ukraine and return it to service

      Alas, this is not possible for many reasons.
  21. +2
    12 August 2022 10: 38
    The author of the article generally turns everything upside down and is not shy about juggling.

    1. Why would a fighter defending a territory chase a bomber?
    After all, the bomber itself flies to you. And he must be met.
    Missiles on a collision course, perfectly induced. The GOS radar is perfectly aimed both at the aircraft itself, and for it, the turbines open from the opposite angle are generally honey to capture the target.
    The IR seeker is also perfectly aimed at the very hot edges of the air intakes and the leading edges of the wings.
    No need to catch up with the bomber, why write such nonsense.

    2. Tu-160, like all other aircraft, has a direct relationship in terms of maximum takeoff weight and in fuel and weapons, respectively, in flight range. Or a full load of weapons, but then there will be much less fuel and the flight range is less and the flight speed is less.
    Almost 3 times change.
    From those record figures that were made in greenhouse conditions.
    3. The aircraft cannot fly supersonic for a long time. Supersonic, this is for the Tu-160, an extreme mode, both for engines, for the fuselage, and for fuel consumption. You can find information that the flight time at maximum speed is limited to 12-15 minutes. And all
    Next comes the inevitable damage to the elements.
    4. That purpose and those goals that the author describes for the Tu-160 could well be applied in Ukraine. But as we see the course of the SVO, success in such an application is extremely imperceptible.
    Minimum. And they work, judging by the missiles, mainly Tu-22. And about the decommissioning of the AUG, the author is generally a dreamer. Or rather, not even a harmless visionary, but specifically a hat thrower who deliberately lies in an article that will be read by tens of thousands of people, and some of them will be misled by the deliberate deception of the author.

    A preventive nuclear strike by Tu-160 forces? What is this?
    On the one hand, the author understands that the massive rise of strategists will be detected by our geopolitical enemy instantly, respectively, what kind of preventive are we talking about?
    What part of the objects on the territory of the enemy can be destroyed by the forces of the existing Tu-160? Mizer!
    There is absolutely no expediency in such a meager preventive strike.
    Then why write about this blow at all?
    In general, not an article, but a bunch of deliberate juggling that has nothing to do with reality.
    1. -3
      12 August 2022 13: 33
      Quote: SovAr238A
      Missiles on a collision course, perfectly induced. The GOS radar is perfectly aimed both at the aircraft itself, and for it, the turbines open from the opposite angle are generally honey to capture the target.

      Do you have turbos in the front? Can you see the flame in the combustion chamber in front?

      Quote: SovAr238A
      The IR seeker is also perfectly aimed at the very hot edges of the air intakes and the leading edges of the wings.

      How do they warm up? It flies at 900 km/h.

      Quote: SovAr238A
      Or a full load of weapons, but then there will be much less fuel and the flight range is less and the flight speed is less.

      How will the speed be slower? All weapons are inside!

      Quote: SovAr238A
      Almost 3 times change.

      Do you think if you underfill 25 tons out of 150, then it changes 3 times?

      Quote: SovAr238A
      3. The aircraft cannot fly supersonic for a long time. Supersonic, this is for the Tu-160, an extreme mode, both for engines, for the fuselage, and for fuel consumption. You can find information that the flight time at maximum speed is limited to 12-15 minutes. And all
      Next comes the inevitable damage to the elements.

      Where did you get such nonsense? Read about the records and what happened to this plane.
      1. +2
        12 August 2022 13: 49
        Quote: Flying
        Quote: SovAr238A
        Missiles on a collision course, perfectly induced. The GOS radar is perfectly aimed both at the aircraft itself, and for it, the turbines open from the opposite angle are generally honey to capture the target.

        Do you have turbos in the front? Can you see the flame in the combustion chamber in front?

        Quote: SovAr238A
        The IR seeker is also perfectly aimed at the very hot edges of the air intakes and the leading edges of the wings.

        How do they warm up? It flies at 900 km/h.

        Quote: SovAr238A
        Or a full load of weapons, but then there will be much less fuel and the flight range is less and the flight speed is less.

        How will the speed be slower? All weapons are inside!

        Quote: SovAr238A
        Almost 3 times change.

        Do you think if you underfill 25 tons out of 150, then it changes 3 times?

        Quote: SovAr238A
        3. The aircraft cannot fly supersonic for a long time. Supersonic, this is for the Tu-160, an extreme mode, both for engines, for the fuselage, and for fuel consumption. You can find information that the flight time at maximum speed is limited to 12-15 minutes. And all
        Next comes the inevitable damage to the elements.

        Where did you get such nonsense? Read about the records and what happened to this plane.

        What are you flying on?
        The fact that the temperature of the leading edges of the wings reaches 600-700 degrees you do not know, flying?
        At speeds of 1000-1500, the edge temperature may well be up to 250 degrees.
        The fact that the rotating compressor blades are the best target for the AFAR radar in the front area, don't you know, Flying?
        The speed of a loaded aircraft, as well as the flight range, is directly dependent on the weight of the aircraft. The same Tu-95 with a full load has a combat radius of no more than 3500 km, and they give him 12 ...
        Judging by the fact that you absolutely do not know the simplest things, you obviously did not fly a hang glider ...
        1. -1
          12 August 2022 14: 57
          Quote: SovAr238A
          What are you flying on?

          On the balalaika laughing

          Quote: SovAr238A
          At speeds of 1000-1500, the edge temperature may well be up to 250 degrees.

          It is written in Russian in white 900 ± 50 km / h he has a cruiser. Why 250 degrees at 1000 km/h? GOST 25431 study, and then write nonsense. According to this logic, did the concorde melt at M=2 (more than 2100 km/h)? Or is it different?


          Quote: SovAr238A
          The fact that the rotating compressor blades are the best target for the AFAR radar in the front area, don't you know, Flying?

          You wrote about the turbine! Changed shoes?

          Quote: SovAr238A
          The speed of a loaded aircraft, as well as the flight range, is directly dependent on the weight of the aircraft.

          Well, tell me, what is the speed of the Tu-160 with a mass of 250 tons, 220 tons, 200 tons?
  22. 0
    12 August 2022 10: 39
    Explanatory article, plus to the author.
  23. 0
    12 August 2022 11: 17
    It seems to me that the concept (at the same technical level) of a (trans)sonic bomber with a spacious and versatile bomb bay, civilian turbojet engines, avionics, a cabin ... is more promising than the supersonic Tu160.
  24. +7
    12 August 2022 11: 23
    At first, many confuse Tu-95 and Tu-95MS. Unlike the American B-52s, produced in the shaggy years, the Tu-95MS is a re-launch of a redesigned version of the Tu-95 in the eighties, because the machine is relatively new.
    Secondly, it is necessary to build not only the Tu-160, but also the Tu-95MS. The planes complement each other perfectly. If the first is capable of a rapid breakthrough, then the strength of the second is the possibility of long patrols.
    And given the geographical position of the Russian Federation, this is the best solution. It is in strategic aviation that you need to invest and not divert resources to the construction of troughs called aircraft carriers, whose finest hour has already passed during WWII.
    Thirdlyabout invisibility. Reducing radar visibility is a good thing, but it should be without fanaticism. That is, not to the detriment of performance characteristics. You need to understand that there is no absolute radar invisibility, it is only in certain ranges and then temporarily. For the same early warning radars, it does not exist at all. You can get creative with materials, coatings, but there is no escape from the fact that there is a zone of compacted air in front of the aircraft. And this is more than enough for the radar.
    1. +1
      12 August 2022 20: 49
      Quote: vovochkarzhevsky
      And given the geographical position of the Russian Federation, this is the best solution. It is in strategic aviation that you need to invest and not divert resources to the construction of troughs called aircraft carriers, whose finest hour has already passed during WWII.

      Exactly. He wrote about this in his article.
  25. +4
    12 August 2022 11: 30
    but if in the USA they worked closely on strategic aviation, then in the USSR they preferred to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles.

    True, in those years in the United States they "did not even forget about the improvement of ballistic missiles", starting with the putting on combat duty of the first intercontinental missiles of the SM-65 "Atlant" type in 1959 and further - intercontinental missiles of the type HGM-25A "Titan", LGM -25C Titanium-2".
    The project, as they say, "did not play", "Valkyrie" and "Rapier" were not mass-produced for many reasons

    Basically for one reason. The boron fuel that these planes used is such a fierce kapets, "what can not be said in a fairy tale, not described with a pen" (c)
    Further, the Americans, disappointed in the prospects for a high-altitude air defense breakthrough

    Well, how disappointed .. the high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft SR-71 "Blackbird", for example, was very much used, for example ...
    Can the Tu-160 be called invulnerable? - Not.

    Actually, humanity has not yet invented a SINGLE aircraft at all, which could be called invulnerable.
    When the interceptor starts from the ground, and the bomber is already doing 2500 km / h at an altitude of 15 km - go ahead, catch up! This is mathematics, and she is against this.

    If the bomber is not a stealth aircraft, the interceptor will fly towards it on a collision course rather than catching up. Because the bomber will be detected early enough by the radars of the air defense system.
    when the plane has ALREADY taken off and is dangling in the area of ​​events. naturally, with a full combat load, and better in the company of their own kind.

    True, no one guarantees that in the conditions of a hypothetical "threatened period" fighters of a hypothetical potential enemy will not "hang out" nearby. Most likely just the same very much even will be.
    because the planes still have to take off and portray something, and the strategist is already “fingering in the area”

    Nothing actually prevents the fighters of the aircraft carrier group of a hypothetical potential enemy from "fingering" right next to the bomber. Periodically rotating the composition of aircraft as fuel runs out / pilot fatigue accumulates.
    just doesn't catch up

    The same air-to-air missile of the AIM-120C / D AMRAAM type develops a speed of about Mach 4.
    1. 0
      12 August 2022 13: 43
      Quote: Terran Ghost
      Basically for one reason. The boron fuel that these planes used is such a fierce kapets, "what can not be said in a fairy tale, not described with a pen" (c)

      What other boron fuel? This is a project. Valkyrie flew on JP-6 kerosene. But the fact that the Stratofortress carried four skybolts, and the Valkyrie, in theory, one castrated, even played very well. Well, the creation of the S-200 and MiG-25P goes without saying.

      Quote: Terran Ghost
      Nothing actually prevents the fighters of the aircraft carrier group of a hypothetical potential enemy from "fingering" right next to the bomber. Periodically rotating the composition of aircraft as fuel runs out / pilot fatigue accumulates.

      What should he do there? Hornets do not fly further than 800 km from the deck.

      Quote: Terran Ghost
      The same air-to-air missile of the AIM-120C / D AMRAAM type develops a speed of about Mach 4.

      And how long does it shoot? How is the X-55 at 1500+ km?
  26. -6
    12 August 2022 12: 54
    another sodom of trolls and retirees began. Generals and commanders with big stars are no good. The bomber idea is outdated. no one will give the order because Abramovich will not allow it. Everyone is corrupt, you need to make IL2 and bomb everyone. the author is a dumbass, everyone is incompetent, and so on. Americans are also stupid people. gave money for a failed project. In short: everything is bad, and that’s just the thing, because we brought kerosene to him and then we were young and the women loved us (sometimes).
    And the plane is beautiful and most importantly - WE HAVE IT!
  27. 0
    12 August 2022 13: 30
    Something in the comments sparked a senseless argument. Although this is partly the fault of the author that he made several mistakes in the details of the application and therefore made an incorrect general conclusion.

    The task of the swan is to quickly fly to a dangerous region, make a volley of long-range missiles (they can be both subsonic and super / hypersonic) and just as quickly return to refuel and be ready for the next flight. At the same time, the aircraft itself, due to the use of long-range missiles, will not even enter the coverage area of ​​most enemy air defense systems.

    In short, the tactics of this bomber, a quick and massive missile salvo at the enemy without entering the air defense coverage area with a quick return from the interception zone to your airfield.
  28. -2
    12 August 2022 13: 42
    "Farewell, Antonina Petrovna, my unsung song" ("I haven't been to Donbass for a long time"\\Music: N.Bogoslovsky Lyrics: N.Dorizo)
  29. +5
    12 August 2022 13: 48
    Regarding the use of this missile carrier against ships, there are currently no missiles for this in the armament of the aircraft.
    They simply do not exist, and such a use of this missile carrier, unlike the Tu-22M, has never been envisaged.
  30. -1
    12 August 2022 14: 09
    The Tu-160 will only be good if the number of such vehicles ensures a guaranteed preemptive strike. To do this, they must be built in such numbers that, taking into account the need to organize shift combat duty and the normal rhythm of routine maintenance, they can effectively fulfill their mission. I can’t say how many cars this will require, but the fact that at least fifty is an unambiguous fact. Therefore, today the Tu-160 should be recognized as an insufficiently effective weapon. It is from the point of view of their small number.
  31. -1
    12 August 2022 15: 43
    Just emotions, though not worthy of our site.
    THE BEAUTY OF THE HORROR OF THE INEVITABILITY OF REVENGE!
    Once, from a taiga lake, I frightened off a pair of mute swans. Really - two cows in size, and the leader (man) looked back at me and sighed.
    After some time, I saw the take-off of a pair of "160". Just as strained, for a long time, until the end of the runway (as an engineer, I can assume that with max takeoff weight). After all, someone smart called them "White Swans" - the servants of Baba Yaga, and not the birds on the Patriarch's Ponds.
  32. 0
    12 August 2022 17: 28
    tu160 is of course wonderful, but given that his project took only third place, one can only guess how magnificent the aircraft we lost as a result of Tupolev's undercover fight
  33. +1
    12 August 2022 19: 32
    At first I read it. I read it, and then I looked at the author. And I was not surprised. good Thing!
    As you can see, dollars, brought in on time and where necessary, work wonders, working much more efficiently than high-altitude interceptors and anti-aircraft missiles.
    -This is a masterpiece!
  34. 0
    13 August 2022 17: 14
    "they managed to build only 25 cars" - in fact, more than 30 cars were assembled (~ 35 - 36).
  35. 0
    13 August 2022 19: 03
    When the interceptor starts from the ground, and the bomber is already doing 2500 km / h at an altitude of 15 km - go ahead, catch up! This is mathematics, and she is against this. The interceptor must give out 3-3,5 thousand km / h in order to catch up with the Tu-160, and even then, this will not happen immediately.
    Another nonsense. 1) Why should catch up.
    2) Supersonic flight time.
    But this is an ideal weapon, a shield extended 3-5 thousand kilometers from the country's borders. Well, a sword that can very sensitively hit the enemy.
    How nicely Roman painted about enemy air defense, but then he forgot his own words and was delirious again.
  36. 0
    18 August 2022 09: 42
    Alexander, thanks for the article, I would like to clarify two points from it:
    still grappled with Japan over the Kuriles. The Japanese fleet is also beginning to twitch in our direction.

    Will our long-range and strategic aviation be able to sink the Japanese fleet (and hit the airfields on the islands along the way), with one salvo at the start of such a conflict, if hypersound appears on the Tu-22 and Tu-160. If you can still think of how to get target designations here, Japan is not too far away. The question will be the effectiveness of the destroyers' air defense, then
    And the tactical balance is broken for any AUG, because the planes still have to take off (we are silent that the F / A-18 "carcass" simply does not catch up) and portray something, and the strategist is already "fingering in the area." And cruise missiles are a very mean thing. It's not fast, but it's accurate. And the X-555 starts quite normally from such distances that not a single American air defense system works at such distances.

    if that 160, 22 does not fly into the f-18 coverage area, how will cruise or hypersonic missiles get target designations on enemy ships 1000-1500 km away?
  37. +1
    20 August 2022 10: 09
    Modifications can change weapons and any thing beyond recognition. In good hands Tu 160 still fly and fly ......

    And in the hands of the indifferent, the thing is squeezed to the limit and thrown away, without thinking that there is nothing to replace it with. Madness .... For a combat aircraft in Russia cannot be a "foreign car".
    The author involuntarily implies that we live by exploiting Soviet technical ideas and the Soviet legacy. "Tu 160" -1981, "Caliber" - 1983.....

    "Buran", which in 1988 lifted 100 tons to LEO - was simply thrown out.
    Buran turned into a restaurant.
    Rogozin was engaged in painting rockets under nesting dolls. And the main achievement was that "today they launched a rocket again and did not kill anyone"
    1. 0
      5 October 2022 19: 35
      And you read at your leisure how many successful launches there were before and under Rogozin. I assure you, you will be surprised...
  38. 0
    20 August 2022 16: 56
    am Tu-160M ​​and Tu-22M3M are relevant only with Daggers!
  39. 0
    20 August 2022 21: 39
    awtor cus neset nado perwym udarit eto jedinstwennyj sans pobedy inace 1941 powtoritsa ne hocu Panfilowcem 2.0 stat 27 km od rozwalin Moskwy i Kremla net gwarancji sto paradom pobedy okoncitsa i ze kitajcy w Sybir ne wlezut unasledowat resursy pokojnoj Rossji etaja nelepaja boltownja "Nikogda perwymy ne primenim "istinnoj priczinoj obnaglenja NATO nenawidet ne perekratjat pust bojatsa nacnut
  40. 0
    20 August 2022 22: 08
    Quote: Nagan
    special warheads?

    samolot ne deszewoj ispolzowat obyczne oruzje raztocitelno jest w wojennoj nauke ponjatje ekonomiceskoj prawilnosti udara: bojepripas i stoimost dostawki srawnaetsa z stoimostej porazenoj celi protiw etomuwa casto USA gresili primeahr jugoslaw bezawja po 122 mmawjeub1938
  41. 0
    20 August 2022 22: 23
    Quote: Osipov9391
    cannot bear. Their not just for him

    modernizacja w nositela Cirkona ispolnima or net moj wopros do specjalistow? ja ne lotcik ja diwersant pospecjalnosti no me interesno
  42. 0
    29 September 2022 23: 08
    I don’t remember the author of the song about swans, who sang it, but I remember that the Swan folded its wings and hit the ground. Is this swan supposed to do this and sing the song of the swan while flying towards the earth?
  43. 0
    8 October 2022 09: 36
    1. There are still local conflicts where this aircraft can be used from outside the air defense operation. 2. Demonstration of power off the coast of potential. enemy. Yes, and a one-time launch of 16 cruise missiles with nuclear warheads because of a 200-mile zone is a serious argument. The strike of a pair of Tu-160s and no matter how good the air defense is, some of the missiles will miss. Nothing is perfect. And the winged ones do not go quickly, but almost along the ground. And the hilly terrain is ideal for their flight.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"