Military Review

New details of the resumption of construction of the Tu-160

84
In late April, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu during a visit to the Kazan Aviation Production Association. S.P. Gorbunova declared the need to resume the serial construction of Tu-160 strategic bombers. According to the head of the military department, this aircraft is a unique machine, several decades ahead of its time, due to which its potential has not yet been fully utilized. For this reason, the Minister demanded to study the existing possibilities and begin restoring the production of aircraft.

Soon after the statements of the Minister of Defense, the first information appeared about certain features of the hypothetical program for the resumption of the construction of bombers. In mid-July, the leadership of the military announced new data on a promising project. In particular, the approximate timing of its implementation and the impact on other projects currently being developed were disclosed. According to the latest data, the Ministry of Defense is planning to modernize the equipment available to the troops, as well as to build new aircraft.



On July 17, Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov visited the Kuznetsov enterprise (Samara), which develops and produces aviation engines. During this visit, the Deputy Minister spoke about some of the plans of the military department regarding the modernization and construction of Tu-160 aircraft. So, after the upgrade, the existing aircraft will receive the Tu-160M ​​index. New production vehicles, in turn, will receive the designation Tu-160M2.

The development of two projects should take several years. According to current plans, the development work on the Tu-160M project will be completed in 2021 year. The development of the project Tu-160М2 will take two years more. This information allows you to roughly imagine when work will begin on the modernization of existing aircraft and the construction of new ones.

The Samara Kuznetsov Plant was previously engaged in the manufacture of the NK-32 turbojet engines, which were installed on Tu-160 serial bombers. In the near future, this company will have to resume full production of aircraft power plants. According to Yu. Borisov, in 2017, the enterprise “Kuznetsov” will be charged with a serious burden. The plant will have to produce NK-32 engines at a rate of about 20-22 products per year. In addition, it is assumed that Samara experts will not only make new engines, but also maintain the efficiency of those already used.

In addition, the Deputy Minister of Defense noted that an updated version of the NK-32 engine should appear in the future. By improving the characteristics of this product in comparison with the basic version, it is planned to raise the main indicators of the aircraft. In particular, the range of the new version of the bomber should increase by about a thousand kilometers. Y. Borisov said that the NK-32 engine was upgraded, which resulted in a number of new nodes. As a result, increased efficiency and resource that accordingly should affect the characteristics of both the engine and the aircraft.

Probably, the updated engines will be installed on existing Tu-160 aircraft during their repair and modernization. In this case, the main focus is currently not on updating existing machines, but on building new ones. It was for their equipment created an updated engine.

Development work on the Tu-160М2 project should be completed in the 2023 year. After this, enterprises in the aviation industry will be able to start building serial bomber upgrades. Y. Borisov announced plans for the rate of production of new equipment. After 2023, it is planned to build at least three new aircraft every year. The duration of serial production and the total number of aircraft planned for the order has not yet been specified.

Commenting on the mutual influence of Tu-160М / М2 and PAK DA projects on each other, Y. Borisov noted that the production of the latter will have to be shifted slightly. Otherwise, according to the deputy minister, “what's the point?” Thus, the new serial Tu-160М2 will appear a bit earlier than the first samples of the promising bomber PAK DA.

Thanks to recent statements by the Deputy Minister of Defense, the volume of official information on the project to resume construction of the Tu-160 has increased significantly. Previously, only some of the plans of the military and the aviation industry were known, and now the timing of the implementation of various phases of the project and other features of a promising program have become public knowledge.

Earlier, the Ministry of Defense and defense industry enterprises announced some information about the new project. So, just a day after the first statements by Minister S. Shoigu, the Radio Electronics Concern (KRET) expressed its readiness to participate in the new project. According to the press service of the enterprise, KRET is ready to start creating a highly efficient electronic warfare complex and other equipment to equip the upgraded and new production Tu-160.

At the end of May, the Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force, Colonel-General Viktor Bondarev, spoke about some of the features of the planned construction of new bombers. In order to recoup all the costs of production, it will be necessary to build at least 50 new aircraft for several years. In this case, the program will be the most profitable in terms of financing and costs.

As follows from recent reports of officials, in the coming years, the aviation industry will be engaged in upgrading the existing 16 Tu-160 bombers, as well as preparing for the construction of a new technology in the updated version. The first serial Tu-160М2 will appear no earlier than 2023 of the year, which, however, will lead to a slight shift in the time frame for the implementation of the PAK DA project. Nevertheless, despite such shifts and substantial costs, the project currently being developed will significantly increase the potential of Russian long-range aviation and extend the service life of equipment, which will also have a positive effect on its combat capability.


On the materials of the sites:
http://tass.ru/
http://ria.ru/
http://lenta.ru/
http://defendingrussia.ru/
Author:
Photos used:
Wikimedia Commons
84 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. Igor39
    Igor39 22 July 2015 06: 06
    +5
    "At the end of May, the Air Force Commander-in-Chief, Colonel-General Viktor Bondarev, spoke about some of the features of the planned construction of new bombers. To recoup all production costs, it will be necessary to build at least 50 new aircraft within several years."

    And it is said above that at least three planes a year will be built, in short, all Tu 2040 will be built by 160, and by 2050 PAK YES can be produced by an experienced one, somewhere like that.
    1. Sasha 19871987
      Sasha 19871987 22 July 2015 10: 10
      +5
      the beginning of the matter is already half the battle ... success to aircraft manufacturers ...
      1. akribos
        akribos 22 July 2015 14: 06
        +2
        Unfortunately, this does not always apply to us.
    2. vladimirZ
      vladimirZ 22 July 2015 11: 15
      +6
      Quote Igor39 (3):
      And it’s said above that at least three planes a year will be built,in short, all Tu 2040s will be built by 160, and by 2050 PAK YES can produce an experienced one,.


      In short, the current top government of Russia does not resist the introduction of a planned economy, but it still requires its presence.
      The market cannot "settle" the required number of the required aircraft.
      The production of airplanes, space rockets and other complex equipment is the pinnacle of the technological production chain and the national economy, which requires the coordination of thousands of enterprises, and therefore the state planned economy.
      And only "lawyers", such as Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and the builder at the post of the Ministry of Defense Shoigu, can think that the plane can be produced by dropping one hundred, another billion rubles to the plant, and now it will appear like a "clear falcon in all its glory" before order by the overlord.
      1. shans2
        shans2 22 July 2015 13: 23
        +6
        How does it break you from Shoigu))) kakol shol?
        1. vladimirZ
          vladimirZ 22 July 2015 17: 12
          +5
          How does it break you from Shoigu))) kakol shol?
          -shans2

          Everyone must do their job. As they say, what was taught. And not like this: "the boots are sharpened by the pastry, and the pies are baked by the shoemaker."
          Enough for us furniture makers, managers, builders at the head of the Ministry of Defense, no matter what good image he has.
          Where do you say the exaggerated companies of "scientists", "production workers", organization-disorganization of a division / regiment-brigade / battalion-division / regiment, destroyed military schools and academies, sourcing, replacing the proven logistic military units by wars and time, etc. "reforms" of people who do not know military service and specifics.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    3. sub307
      sub307 22 July 2015 12: 10
      +2
      In any case, the potential inherent in the TU-160 should be used to the maximum extent possible.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. Su24
      Su24 26 July 2015 22: 32
      -1
      Yes, the PAK YES program shift was simply and not easy. Therefore, we decided to somehow fill the gap.
    6. The comment was deleted.
  2. qwert
    qwert 22 July 2015 07: 14
    +17
    Quote: Igor39
    And it is said above that at least three planes a year will be built, in short, all Tu 2040 will be built by 160, and by 2050 PAK YES can be produced by an experienced one, somewhere like that.

    Only thirty-five years ??? Between the MiG-9 and the MiG-25 was 21 years old. But between the Su-7 and Su-27 is just 35 years old. Can you imagine if we produced and flew on "sevens" before 1987 ???
    And another 35 years is the gap between the first flight of Ilya Muromets and the Myasishchevsky 4M. It's like we would have spent the entire Patriotic War on "Muromtsy". According to the mind, the Tu-160M2 should go into production in a maximum of two years and, naturally, they should not be produced three per year.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 22 July 2015 10: 37
      +10
      Quote: qwert
      Only thirty-five years ??? Between the MiG-9 and the MiG-25 was 21 years old. But between the Su-7 and Su-27 is just 35 years old. Can you imagine if we produced and flew on "sevens" before 1987 ???

      Do not confuse fighters and strategists.
      Both we and the United States are still flying strategic bombs developed immediately after the end of World War II. A new generation of current strategists comes once every 25-30 years, and the old generation remains to serve until the impossibility of further repair and extension of the resource.

      In general, after the long-range ALCMs were developed, the performance characteristics of the carriers themselves became not so critical: the strategists turned into a platform for launching the ALCMs in the launch area. Much more important on time (or a little earlier smile ) to change the ALCM, since it is they that will have everything for which generations of projectiles and fighters so often change: an air defense breakthrough, a flight on an MV with an envelope of the terrain (or an inconspicuous flight), an accurate exit to the target and strike.

      Think of the strategic bomber as the "flying airfield" on which the ALCMs are based. The analogue of the Su-7 is the X-20. The analogue of the Su-27 is the Kh-55.
      1. qwert
        qwert 24 July 2015 07: 31
        0
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Do not confuse fighters and strategists.

        And "Ilya Muromets" also recorded in fighters ???
        Good. Mizhdu Pe-8 and Tu-95 passed 15 years.
        Between IL-4 and Tu-16 15 years.
        Between IL-4 and T-4 by the way, too, 35 years.
        Feel the difference in specifications and equipment.
        The fact that second-generation reactive strategists of the M-52 type did not go into the series. 8 years after the Tu-95 and M4, this is a separate conversation. PACK also has a certain risk for 35 years of development to become outdated and not correspond to the time. I will say such a risk for 35 years higher than for 8.
        1. Gogia
          Gogia 24 July 2015 16: 43
          0
          Look what pe-8 is and in the book of Shavrin how much it was made. He was outdated by the beginning of the war. Do not compare that time. The I-16 aircraft cost about 8000 rubles in production. And it was done at a plywood factory with a team of 200 people. 95 car is another. They often fly over my house :) If you get up near the TU-22M3, it’s breathtaking in size, and 95 the car is a kapets !!! Huge to trembling. Now they don’t want to rush, because with the advent of hypersonic weapons the whole military doctrine can change to hell. Ballistics can fall off altogether. And on this plane, you can work out promising new complexes. By the way, they said that they would have to plow the documentation for the digitalization of 200 people for 3 years.
      2. Gogia
        Gogia 24 July 2015 16: 36
        0
        Correctly!!! when developing an aircraft, it is necessary to make maximum use of the possibilities of its subsequent modernization in terms of engines and equipment and weapons. And then they will make the rocket half a meter longer or 10 cm thicker and give them a new plane. You need to think with your head and expect that planes should fly for such 50 years.
    2. Alex_Rarog
      Alex_Rarog 22 July 2015 10: 56
      +5
      And what's the point in your comparison of fighters and bombers?
      A fighter is a plane that is directly involved in the battle! He must always surpass the enemy. But the strategist is all too much. His task is to barrage in the launch area for hours and days if necessary ... He is only a flying launcher for missiles no more.
      1. qwert
        qwert 24 July 2015 07: 35
        0
        Quote: Alex_Rarog
        And what's the point in your comparison of fighters and bombers?

        The above has already answered.
        "Ilya Muromets" and Myasishevsky M4 are not fighters, but strategic bombers, and 35 years between them. I wrote this.
    3. vladimir_krm
      vladimir_krm 22 July 2015 11: 20
      +2
      Nothing strange: compare the level of difficulty and price.
    4. Rus2012
      Rus2012 22 July 2015 12: 01
      +3
      Quote: qwert
      According to the mind, Tu-160М2 should go into production in a maximum of two years, and naturally they should be produced not three at a time.

      ... there is a network schedule, accordingly, it is not linear.
      Most likely in 10 years all 50 machines will be operational. Those. by 21, they will decide on a set of measures (and machine equipment, capacities) to bring the 160th to the letter "M". Until the 23rd - building berths for new ones. And within 10 years from the 21st year, all 50 boards (together with the old gliders) will be operational ...
      PAK-DA after that will go into series in the same workshops, but already on its own equipment.
      1. qwert
        qwert 24 July 2015 07: 37
        0
        Quote: Rus2012
        . there is a network schedule, respectively, it is not linear.
        Most likely in 10 years all 50 machines will go into operation.

        Hard to believe, after reducing the order for PACFU from 50 to 12 pieces.
        Although I am here again accused that it is not worth comparing a fighter and a strategist. Does anyone really think that if there was a plan for a series of PAKDs now, it would not be cut back even more than PAKFu ???????? hi
      2. Gogia
        Gogia 24 July 2015 16: 45
        0
        These machines the 22nd factory made a maximum of 3 pieces a year !!! It was during the USSR when 30000 qualified people worked at the plant. In my opinion, it is necessary to modify TU22M3 and make M5, for example, under X-101/102, the more machines the more reliable, and 200 of them can already be put in operation
    5. bastard
      bastard 22 July 2015 12: 26
      +12
      Quote: qwert
      Only thirty-five years ??? Between the MiG-9 and the MiG-25 was 21 years old. But between the Su-7 and Su-27 is just 35 years old. Can you imagine if we produced and flew on "sevens" before 1987 ???

      When M. L. Mil was alive (he headed the design bureau from 1947 to 1970 (23)), a new helicopter came out every 2-3 years. Out of order; Mi-1, Mi-2, Mi-4, Mi-6, Mi-8, Mi-10, Mi-10k, Mi-12, Mi-24.
      In your pocket slide rule and Bradis tables. All!
      Everything else is in the head.

      GLORY TO THE GREAT DEMOCRATS AND CITIZENS ... ... insert the desired. For a quarter of a century, nothing has been done with the help of computers. A computer cannot generate an idea, is incapable of creativity, it can count, facilitate the routine, but nothing more. ... Our designers really looked to the future and were many years ahead of their time!
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 22 July 2015 16: 23
        -1
        Quote: villain
        When M. L. Mil was alive (he headed the design bureau from 1947 to 1970 (23)), a new helicopter came out every 2-3 years. Out of order; Mi-1, Mi-2, Mi-4, Mi-6, Mi-8, Mi-10, Mi-10k, Mi-12, Mi-24.
        In your pocket slide rule and Bradis tables. All!
        Everything else is in the head.

        Glory to the great democrats and citizens. . . insert the desired one.

        So what? When Tupolev and Myasishchev were alive, new strategists in the entire history of the USSR came out only 4 times. Tu-4, Tu-95, M-4 / 3M (I consider them to be type 1, since 3M is the refinement of the M-4 to the Customer’s requirements) and Tu-160. All.
        1. aviator65
          aviator65 22 July 2015 20: 09
          +3
          Quote: Alexey RA
          So what? When Tupolev and Myasishchev were alive, new strategists in the entire history of the USSR came out only 4 times. Tu-4, Tu-95, M-4 / 3M (I consider them to be type 1, since 3M is the refinement of the M-4 to the Customer’s requirements) and Tu-160. All.

          Yes. But at the same time OCD was constantly conducted. Tested prototypes. Just look at the number of modifications of the aircraft listed by you and the time frame for which they were created. And here in 10-15 years, after more than 30 years in service, the first major modification ... Honestly, I would be more pleased with the message about the start of the construction of a new aircraft factory and the opening of vocational training centers for manufacturing specialists, and the salary industry should be raised. Then it would be possible to really talk about the implementation of such large-scale projects. And so ... That PAK FA, that PAK YES, that other PAKs, I am silent about aircraft carriers. All this really looks while you can use the Soviet backlogs, but, alas, they are not unlimited.
          1. Gogia
            Gogia 24 July 2015 16: 52
            0
            And what about training? Everything is great. KAI got off to hell. Now some economists and PR specialists are being trained, old teachers, who are 1,2,3 facts. died or retired. In Kazan, nothing was left of aviation education. It is a fact. I once said: To build houses around 22 beautiful and tall plants and click on the CIS - we recruit aviators with large salaries. Only trial period, etc. As accepted - you have good housing, worked 10 years - in the property. From all over the former USSR people would be crowded. And problems with personnel and training would be solved. Only in our winter shovels you won’t interrogate the snow, but in the summer g *; on.
    6. oldkap22
      oldkap22 23 July 2015 08: 16
      0
      Before starting the series, it’s necessary to fine-tune the cooperation to restore the technology (and preferably at a new level ...) to recruit workers for the production lines .... Better later. Why drive the marriage (Infrastructure and Pilots also need to be prepared ... then there are less disasters and Bg-above)
      1. Dikson
        Dikson 23 July 2015 16: 40
        0
        yeah .. just over these 10 years it may be possible to teach current engineers and workers how to read blueprints 30 years ago .. and buy machines and teach them how to work ..
    7. Gogia
      Gogia 24 July 2015 16: 34
      0
      At the factory, all the stocks were laid out, a vacuum welding chamber 15 meters long and many meters high was also stolen back in the 90s - this technology and the camera in Kiev were developed by Academician Paton, but this office has already died ... So it will not have to be new but work very close. The TU-160 aircraft was developed in the early 70s before the first flight - 10 years is the norm. This is not a plywood biplane.
  3. Belousov
    Belousov 22 July 2015 07: 42
    0
    They are going to build a little. And a very long time. I hope that all the same a sound mind will prevail and they will build at least 5-6 pieces, moreover, from 2019 onwards. This is still not a fundamentally new development, where much needs to be combined, it is the restoration of old ties. Even taking into account the fact that many subcontractors either closed or changed their profile of activity, construction should begin much earlier.
    1. qwert
      qwert 24 July 2015 07: 38
      0
      Now they seem to be ready to build two Tu-160 pieces a year each .... It’s unlikely that the PAKD will be built faster
  4. AZB15
    AZB15 22 July 2015 07: 46
    +1
    On the last note about the Tu-160M, I wrote my bossy opinion, put 4 minus. But, I’ll write again and again: NIKOLAI IVAN HARITON ULYANA YAKOV WILL NOT !!! 100%
  5. Commune Angel
    Commune Angel 22 July 2015 07: 46
    +15
    This is certainly not the TU-160 ... but you need to keep in mind ..
    1. AZB15
      AZB15 22 July 2015 08: 35
      +3
      Mother, mother, mother ... and if the layout is reduced, but the engine is more powerful, well, what will start? He flew up, shot, self-destructed and everything, ends in the water.
    2. Sivan
      Sivan 22 July 2015 14: 48
      0
      The only problem is accuracy: giving it a pretty good swing!
      1. Commune Angel
        Commune Angel 22 July 2015 17: 43
        +1
        But imagine such a sniper rifle flew up ... landed ... "stuck" with slingshots into the ground ... worked on the target ... and ...
      2. sania1304
        sania1304 22 July 2015 23: 11
        0
        and for such a thing, only 1 shot is needed. Or a grenade.
    3. partizan86
      partizan86 22 July 2015 23: 57
      0
      People are discussing and it’s clear that they didn’t play shooting games)
      Already full of vehicles with a machine gun or missiles, and a smaller one can just fly up and explode. Such a kamikaze is cheaper and easier to manage)
    4. cherkas.oe
      cherkas.oe 23 July 2015 13: 03
      0
      It buzzes loudly, maneuvers and induces slowly, even a stick away from shelter is no problem.
  6. Article 2 of the article
    Article 2 of the article 22 July 2015 07: 53
    +9
    Somehow everything is too "muddy" and incomprehensible with the timing. Impression, a hundred don’t know what they want, whether PAK YES, or TU-160M2?
    1. Atlas
      Atlas 22 July 2015 23: 18
      +1
      Personally, my opinion is this: to rivet more than TU160M2 then PAK YES is not really needed
      1. Gogia
        Gogia 24 July 2015 16: 54
        0
        Yes, not TU160 damn it, but TU-22M3 !!!!! and more!!!! and under them
    2. oldkap22
      oldkap22 23 July 2015 08: 25
      0
      I would like to PACK YES, but it seems, while not pulling (quickly)
  7. Bongo
    Bongo 22 July 2015 08: 04
    +10
    Development work on the project Tu-160М2 should be completed in 2023 year. After this, the aviation industry enterprises will be able to build the updated serial bombers.

    By that time, "either the donkey will die, or the padishah will die." There are a lot of plans, God forbid, that 10% of all this will be embodied in a wonderful future!
  8. kapitan281271
    kapitan281271 22 July 2015 08: 26
    -3
    Yes, they know what they want, they know, but it’s cloudy because we need to brainwash us so that we do not know and do not imagine the scale of the collapse of industry and the military-industrial complex in particular.
  9. almamatkulov. 79
    almamatkulov. 79 22 July 2015 08: 28
    +4
    with the existing collapse of the real sector of the economy, a clumsy financing system and a complete collapse of personnel potential, the production dates for the first 160M-2 are quite real. My father-in-law returned to the defense plant 20 years later, so he says: God forbid our factory to produce something - it will cost more to yourself.
  10. gregor6549
    gregor6549 22 July 2015 08: 32
    +13
    PAK YES so far no more than PR. That is, there is a certain preliminary project (that is, the general outline of PAK DA) under which the aircraft manufacturing corporation would like to knock out serious money from the budget, without promising specific deadlines for the implementation of this project in metal. But Shoigu is a specific man. He wants (and rightly wants) to have a tit in his hands as soon as possible and not a crane in the sky 10 years after 20ti.
    All the same, for the production and development of the TU160 M2 there is a substantial reserve. And even with this reserve, it will seem necessary to spend many years until the modernized planes become operational.
    According to PAK YES, so far there is nothing but general sketches on paper and a mass of promises, and it is not known when it will appear. And TTX PAK YES is unlikely to be much cooler than TTX TUSHKA.
    Again, who needs this steepness if long-range bombers have long been nothing but a means of delivering missiles and bombs over long distances and they have a chance to reach the launch point only if they have decent cover with fighters on the entire flight route outside of Russia.
    Mattresses solve this problem with the help of AUG fighters, and fighters deployed at advanced air bases in Europe and Asia. Russia has no such opportunities so far and they are unlikely to appear. She will have to allocate escort fighters such as MIG31 and tankers to cover the bombers to feed both in flight.
    On the whole, very noticeable group air targets are obtained in which the radar, etc., visibility of the bombers themselves will not play a special role. A much larger role in these groups will be played by the ability to fight off adversary fighters before launching missiles or dropping bombs and when moving away from the launch line. Without this, the TU160 flight to the BZ will in most cases be a one-way flight with a very small probability of reaching this end
    1. gallville
      gallville 22 July 2015 10: 36
      +1
      Quote: gregor6549
      Again, who needs this steepness if long-range bombers have long been nothing but a means of delivering missiles and bombs over long distances and chances to reach the launch point they have it only in case of decent cover by fighters on the entire flight route outside the territory of Russia.

      X-101 missile launch range 5000 km. Where is there "for" the territory of Russia for a bomber to fly with it?
      So far they will launch the Tu-160m2 series and the pack and develop a rocket of even longer range flight.
      Quote: gregor6549
      In general, very noticeable group air targets are obtained in which radar, etc. prominence of the bombers themselves already a special role will not play.

      Just the opposite. The concept of the pack is an inconspicuous launch vehicle over the endless territory of its own state (Russia). At the same time, covered by its own air defense and air force.
      Thus, when a preemptive strike is received from the enemy, there is a chance to strike back with one of the elements of the nuclear triad in this case, the pack.
      The appearance of the pack and looms like this:
      1. stealth, necessary the more the closer to the border of its territory.
      2. long stay in the air. Because Only vehicles on duty in the air will be able to launch in the event of an attack by a "potential enemy".
      But what is interesting, the Tu-160 with its supersonic sound and glider does not fit into such an ideology. Despite the armament is the same as in the pack yes (as far as stated).
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 22 July 2015 10: 43
        +7
        Quote: gallville
        The appearance of the pack and looms like this:
        1. stealth, necessary the more the closer to the border of its territory.
        2. long stay in the air. Because Only vehicles on duty in the air will be able to launch in the event of an attack by a "potential enemy".

        Budget option: an airship made of radio-absorbing / radio-transparent materials, stuffed with revolvers with ALCM. smile
    2. vladimir_krm
      vladimir_krm 22 July 2015 11: 26
      +1
      Mattresses with AUG have no more chances. Compare the missile launch range from a fighter or attack aircraft, and with the Tu-160, you will be surprised. Tu-160 in the air defense zone for a long time no longer need to enter.
      And one more thing: if everything is decided by the AUG and European bases, then why are the Yankees still armed with the B-52, B-1, B-2, and also they plan to build a new one?
  11. Tjeck
    Tjeck 22 July 2015 09: 40
    0
    I don’t like it, it’s better to let the Tu-22s clip, but not until 2050 and not 3 pieces a year .. at such a pace it’s not a fact that we will stop the Wehrmacht of model 41, shame and shame!
  12. FID
    FID 22 July 2015 10: 38
    +10
    How to teach a donkey to read? Money and 50 years term, and then - ... But the donkey will die for sure .... The documentation will be developed and called Tu-160M2 - "P A K D A" !!!!
    1. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 22 July 2015 11: 30
      -2
      Quote: SSI
      How to teach a donkey to read? Money and a 50 year term, and there

      Now it’s much easier to teach a donkey to learn how to fly: there are supercomputers that can simulate all flight modes, and not like before a bunch of static models for the construction of which extra money was spent. If they design in a modern way, it will turn out much faster and cheaper.
      1. aviator65
        aviator65 22 July 2015 20: 20
        +1
        Quote: Lt. air force reserve
        If they design in a modern way, it will turn out much faster and cheaper.

        Yeah. The challenger is already there. It is called SSJ100.
        Supercomputers are great, of course! But, here are the designers from the generation "spoiled" by autocad ... Yes, they also have a bunch of effective managers in addition - this, they knew, is a terrible force, however!
        1. Lt. Air Force stock
          Lt. Air Force stock 22 July 2015 21: 35
          0
          Quote: aviator65
          But, here are the designers from the generation "spoiled" by autocad ...

          No one uses auto-cad there. Superjet 100 was designed on the CATIA computer-aided design system.
          The same system was used to design modern Boeings, the A380, the Virginia submarine, and the ITER fusion reactor.
          1. aviator65
            aviator65 22 July 2015 23: 22
            +2
            So what? Has this system designed all of the above? Or should design thought still be present?
            1. Lt. Air Force stock
              Lt. Air Force stock 23 July 2015 00: 18
              0
              Quote: aviator65
              So what? Has this system designed all of the above? Or should design thought still be present?

              It's not about the design idea, but that everything is much faster and easier with supercomputers. Previously, the designer spat on the kulman, but now it’s easier and faster on the computer and without marriage, he didn’t sharpen a pencil, a millimeter error accidentally happened if he did not notice during the marriage. With a computer, everything is easier on the keyboard; you set all sizes quickly and conveniently (I recall school drafting lessons, this is generally disgusting).
  13. rubin6286
    rubin6286 22 July 2015 10: 43
    +7
    The article is informative, but the impression of it is sad. No matter what our “commanders” say, the strategic aviation fleet is steadily decreasing, the machines are aging mentally and physically, including and “white swans”, of which there are only 16 pieces.

    For purely pragmatic reasons, today it is more profitable to modernize and produce something that is not yet completely outdated than to create a completely new, “raw” one and then bring it to perfection for a long time, especially since the final result of the work is unpredictable. In this sense, the decision to resume production of the Tu-160 seems to me quite reasonable, and the PAK DA project looks like a matter of distant and vague prospects.

    I already wrote that the planned production rate of Tu-160 in the amount of 3 aircraft per year, scanty and until 2025 will only allow to support these aircraft in the amount that is available today.

    Obviously, this state of affairs suits the military and political leadership of the country and, apparently, preference is given to other priorities, especially since they are trying to persistently drag the country into a local military conflict.

    It is not clear another. Russia aggressively "climbs" with its civilian aircraft products into the international market, although there is a sheer dominance of Boeing and Airbus, and it’s not just that military aircraft, and even An-2s, are not produced. To whom, how much and for how much are these Superjets and MS-21s "getting in"? It seems to me that the "madhouse" in the aircraft industry that was in the 90s continues to this day.
    1. FID
      FID 22 July 2015 11: 10
      +9
      Quote: rubin6286
      It seems to me that the "madhouse" in the aircraft industry that was in the 90s continues to this day.

      You are right, it continues ... And as for the release of more than 3 aircraft, I repeat - in the USSR KAPO produced NO MORE than 4 Tu-160 aircraft per year. To surpass this figure? Now? With our LIBERAL? My opinion (I might be wrong, but ...) - they won’t!
      1. engineer74
        engineer74 22 July 2015 11: 24
        0
        The glider (the "hardware" itself) and the engines - I think they can do more, with normal production preparation (XXI century, all the same) and a sane personnel policy. But to put everything together and debug it to get exactly the plane is unlikely. request
        IMHO
        1. FID
          FID 22 July 2015 11: 33
          +4
          Quote: engineer74
          Glider (the hardware itself)

          The center section was welded from titanium in a special chamber ... What is the state of the chamber? Titan buys Boeing and Airbus ... And you say - "iron" ...
          1. engineer74
            engineer74 22 July 2015 12: 08
            +1
            We still have enough titanium! The camera, according to the comments from the previous article, has long been commissioned to "ferrous metal", but the very technologies of electron beam welding in vacuum and welding of titanium in inert gas media in Russia live and flourish! Technological issues can be resolved quickly enough. Problems will be where creative "manual" head work is required, where the rigid algorithms of those are not rolled. processes. For your "garden" ("shavings production" wink ) I am calm - there will be a control center - we will do it, but for yours (ACS, etc.) not very much. "Cadres decide everything!" (C)
            IMHO
            1. FID
              FID 22 July 2015 12: 17
              +4
              Quote: engineer74
              there will be a control center - we will do it, but not very much for yours (ACS, etc.). "Cadres are everything!

              There are no personnel .... Self-propelled guns are developed on another (Chinese) element base, but who will work hard without days off and holidays ??? There used to be an idea, now money ...
              1. engineer74
                engineer74 22 July 2015 12: 33
                +4
                That's it, we need an Idea and Stalin's People's Commissars. Money does not solve anything in more or less serious projects ...
                1. FID
                  FID 22 July 2015 12: 38
                  +6
                  Quote: engineer74
                  That's it, we need an Idea and Stalin's People's Commissars. Money does not solve anything in more or less serious projects ..

                  How right you are! And when the people’s mind wakes up ????
                  1. engineer74
                    engineer74 22 July 2015 12: 54
                    +6
                    The concept of the people is too general, the majority has already entered the "stall of the consumer", unfortunately. Power should give a creative Idea, at least for the sake of self-preservation! But the personnel should be provided by the People.
                    1. FID
                      FID 22 July 2015 13: 33
                      +3
                      Quote: engineer74
                      People are too general

                      You are right, but how long will it last? Fucked already ...
      2. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 22 July 2015 11: 35
        -1
        Quote: SSI
        You are right, it continues ... And as for the release of more than 3 aircraft, I repeat - in the USSR KAPO produced NO MORE than 4 Tu-160 aircraft per year. To surpass this figure? Now? With our LIBERAL? My opinion (I might be wrong, but ...) - they won’t!

        If they build a modern line, then I understand that the comparison is not correct, but the United States builds passenger planes like hot cakes, of course, any bomber is more difficult to build than a passenger plane, but you can if you wish.
        As for the USA, I still don’t understand why B2 costs 2 billion, and the Virginia submarine is 1,8 billion? Is building a bomber harder than a multipurpose submarine?
    2. vladimir_krm
      vladimir_krm 22 July 2015 17: 59
      0
      And how many do they need? In the nuclear triad, ballistic missiles and submarines are more important.
      As for the citizen, it is necessary to do. This is also import substitution. To get the superjet to zero, you need to sell 260 pieces, it seems. And cooperation with Boeing made it possible to purchase machine tools and equipment, which also make PAK FA.
      And in addition to the MS-21, they also make a long-haul with the Chinese, that is, there will be a complete passenger line. There is someone to sell.
  14. IAlex
    IAlex 22 July 2015 11: 09
    +4
    In general, it’s clear from the article: That the US-led reformers destroyed factories for the production of engines for heavy aircraft and design bureaus for their development, and now they quietly try to revive the plants for the production of engines and design bricks in 8 years so that they can at least At the first stages, update the rariter, then release the rarity, and then somehow by 2030 try to create a PAK YES ...

    At the same time, the plan will suffer another failure, because according to the established timeframes it is already obvious that there will be no extreme initiators, especially because all the remaining pensioners from the USSR will discard their hooves by that time, and young engineers are willing to work for 20 thousand rubles. they are not qualified at the factories and it is hard to find them, and the "engineers" for setting up 1C, Cisco for their normal salaries cannot and will not do such a wretched job ...
  15. arnulla
    arnulla 22 July 2015 11: 15
    -2
    Eight years to resume production? !!!
    1. FID
      FID 22 July 2015 11: 19
      +4
      On the development of DOCUMENTATION, if I can read ...
      1. aviator65
        aviator65 22 July 2015 20: 24
        +1
        Quote: SSI
        Eight years to resume production? !!!

        The main process! The process is life, the result is death. (M.M. Zhvanetsky)
    2. burmundia
      burmundia 22 July 2015 11: 54
      0
      Quote: arnulla
      Eight years to resume production? !!!

      YES and that's fine. Surely there is no longer any equipment and equipment, but about specialists in general is a sore subject. It’s very difficult to build aircraft, I know a little work.
      1. aviator65
        aviator65 22 July 2015 23: 56
        0
        I am amazed how Tupolev was able only 6 (!) Years after the end of the most terrible war to take into the air an absolutely revolutionary machine in its class, which successfully flies and serves to this day! This is me about the Tu-95. It may be because people understood the assigned tasks very specifically and realized that what they create is required tomorrow, the maximum the day after tomorrow, but not in 20-30 years. Yes, the launch of the same Tu-4 (aka B29) in a series demanded in fact to create a new generation aviation industry. Do you recall the year of launching this series of cars? It seems that today the main thing is not to create something new, but to talk more about it in more ways. And then it itself will appear, after 30 years. Only interesting, but then it will still need someone7
  16. KGB WATCH YOU
    KGB WATCH YOU 22 July 2015 12: 12
    +5
    Here you go broke of course. You know how much the USSR a year produced Tu-160? Much simpler in comparison with the Tu-160M2, with its brilliant military industry - if I remember correctly 3-4 pieces a year! So rejoice, if the managers fulfill their promise - 3 pcs per year.
  17. AAV
    AAV 22 July 2015 13: 16
    -2
    "In order to recoup all production costs, at least 50 new aircraft will have to be built within several years."

    Suppose production built 50 new aircraft. The next question the MO has for their purchase ?! Or, as often happens, a design bureau has developed, the industry has produced a new ultramodern model of equipment, but the consumer does not have money for it ... In this case, if your money does not have to be sold to strangers. Was the question of delivering the TU-160 to foreign customers interesting? ...
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 22 July 2015 13: 49
      +1
      Quote: AAV
      In this case, if your money does not have to be sold to others. It was interesting to consider the issue of delivery of TU-160 to foreign customers? ...

      And forgive whom you offer to sell them? what Of the real potential buyers only India and China. Hindus in the past bought long-range anti-warheads Tu-142 (based on Tu-95 strategists), while the Chinese in the past received Tu-16 and were very interested in Tu-22М3. But India has been buying American weapons more and more recently, and in the PRC, selling such cars will eventually cost more.
    2. rubin6286
      rubin6286 22 July 2015 14: 12
      0
      Have you changed your mind? There is a state defense order for the production of military equipment and money has been paid for this. Everything that is to be sold abroad goes through the Rosvooruzhenie company. It gives permission for the corresponding nomenclature and quantity.
  18. gregor6549
    gregor6549 22 July 2015 14: 38
    0
    For those commentators who rest on the missile's flight range, the flight range is good when the coordinates of the target are precisely known and this target is not moving anywhere. To strike at such targets, there is a sufficient number of mine, underwater and mobile ICBMs, and if this number is not enough to defeat all such important targets, Russia will rivet more. That actually not so long ago was announced as one of the priorities of Russia's defense policy. Long-range bombers in our time, as a rule, are needed to "clean up" the targets of incomplete ICBMs and defeat large land or sea targets that can move, if not in time, then in space (AUG, groupings of troops, mobile supply bases of these groups, etc. Here long-range bombers are needed to work on such "fidgets."
  19. Zingvar
    Zingvar 22 July 2015 15: 40
    -4
    TU-160 needs not less than 50 pieces, but not less than 150. And one should not forget that those made in the last century also need to be modernized. And another plane crashes for various reasons, too, can not be forgotten.
    1. oldkap22
      oldkap22 23 July 2015 09: 03
      +2
      DIRECT TO TUKHACHEVSHCHINA somehow ... Leave the country without pants but with "a bunch of TU -160 MMMM
  20. gregor6549
    gregor6549 22 July 2015 16: 27
    0
    [quote = ZeroZeroSeventh] Original. Reconnaissance by the forces of strategic aviation. [/ Quote] That's right. There will be no other forces where the "strategists" will act. Perhaps at the initial stage, some kind of target designation will come from satellites, but it is unlikely during that time that strategists will need to get to the launch lines of their missiles.

    [/ quote] Where, you say, will take off? And what kind of "usually"? [/ Quote]

    I didn't understand the first question. And this rule was formulated back in the days of the former Soviet Union and at the very top. In any case, this was how it was formed during the Zapad 81 exercises, where D.F. Ustinov and all the commanders. Moreover, it was formed not only by our strategists but also by foreign ones.
    1. rubin6286
      rubin6286 22 July 2015 17: 20
      +1
      Son!
      You are either a storyteller yourself, or you have read a lot of fairy tales "with a military bias." Long-range aviation is included in the first strike potential. In a threatening period, along with the deployment of ground-based ICBMs and SSBNs, long-range aircraft take to the air and, on command, deliver a missile and bomb strike at pre-planned targets. After that, nothing will be left on Earth. There will be no "cleansing" anymore - there is no one and no one to clean up, nowhere to take off and nowhere to land. There can be no question of any reconnaissance by long-range aviation after a nuclear strike. Both our and the "foreign" strategists have long understood this. The US has now adopted the doctrine of a "global strike" with precision weapons, designed to minimize the result of a Russian nuclear strike. I advise you to study it carefully; it is possible that then a lot will become clear to you.
      1. gregor6549
        gregor6549 23 July 2015 08: 29
        0
        Are you rude, boy? It's not good to eat. Moreover, when the "son" is already under 80 and he has managed not only to read but also to do something in his life, including in the field of aviation.
        1. rubin6286
          rubin6286 23 July 2015 11: 48
          0
          Dear Gregor! If you are really under 80, then the "son" is me, but, truth, not the "granddaughters". This is the age of wisdom. Who knows if my generation will live to these years.
          I also remind you of “Zero Zero Seventh,” that the American “global strike strategy” is not at all a “parallel theme,” but, as philosophers say, “an objective reality given in sensations.”
          Its essence is to destroy ground-based launchers of our ballistic missiles with high-precision weapons, and those of them that will nevertheless be launched can be intercepted by the missile defense forces on a vertical section of the trajectory or section of the ballistic turn, while the rocket is still above its own territory. The main link of the missile defense is the Aegis system, deployed on the ships of the US Navy of the destroyer class and also planned to be deployed in Western Europe: in Poland, Romania, etc. Since missiles of the Strategic Missile Forces and submarines fly along a ballistic trajectory and are designed for the maximum range, knowing the location of the launchers, you can use the computer to calculate the approximate coordinates of the target in the United States and take measures to cover these objects, but with long-range aviation it is more difficult, especially if the car in the air. Their missiles fly not very fast, but rather low. They are difficult to detect and shoot down. That is only why long-distance aviation has not been completely abandoned today. Russia “senses” American ships already in the Black Sea in the Baltic. In response, “Iskanders” appear in the Kaliningrad region and Tu-22M3 missile carriers in the Crimea.
  21. Frau Dr. KiK
    Frau Dr. KiK 22 July 2015 19: 55
    -3
    It’s good, It’s as not as the White Swan the property of the Late USSR of more modern Russia. Hooray! Glory to the Russian Man! Glory to the heroes! Hooray!
  22. DHA
    DHA 22 July 2015 21: 09
    0
    Under the Soviets, they did things that are still relevant. I don’t understand how such a country could be destroyed, well, the hunchback is understandable, but the whole top, the generals? is it really all so "toothless"
  23. SlavaP
    SlavaP 22 July 2015 22: 39
    +1
    Late, oh late! Before 2024 there is still much that can happen. And as for the 95, it has advantages and even potential: why replace the engines with modern, economical ones, and let it soar by 12-14 hours, go catch it in the sky. Supersonic is a fuel resource that will burn in two hours.
  24. partizan86
    partizan86 23 July 2015 00: 03
    0
    The plane is certainly good, but the Americans have written off their smaller counterparts, from which it was copied, like f-111, as morally obsolete. Although, they did not write off the B-52, but we are bears (Tu-95), but for some reason they are needed. The next generation needs to be created, and even with the resumption of construction, the timeline does not stand up to criticism.
    1. KGB WATCH YOU
      KGB WATCH YOU 23 July 2015 00: 25
      +2
      F-111 is more likely an analogue of the Su-24 and Su-34. And the analogue of the Tu-160 is the B-1B, of which 66 pcs. in service with the United States (2012).
  25. Non-jumping
    Non-jumping 23 July 2015 01: 30
    +1
    According to current plans (!), Only the development work on the project to modernize the already issued Tu-160 to the state of Tu-160M ​​should be completed in 2021? What were you doing before ?!
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 23 July 2015 11: 25
      +2
      Non-jumping


      The same as today.

      They planned and dreamed, but did nothing.
      See the post below.
  26. 961
    961 23 July 2015 10: 17
    +2
    Dreams Dreams !! and who will do something ??? in the defense industry, not a single highly qualified specialist and worker remained. The reformers dispersed everyone. And the youth do not want to work for a penny. So all this will remain only as a projection project and nothing more (IMHO)
  27. aviamed90
    aviamed90 23 July 2015 11: 17
    0
    Let's recall the recent past:

    "On October 11, 2010, Aviation Explorer - OJSC Kuznetsov (the former Motorostroitel plant, Samara) in 2013 plans to transfer the first NK-32 engine to the Ministry of Defense, produced on new production equipment using new technologies," reports ARMS- TASS, Stanislav Romashchev, head of the department of information technological systems of OJSC Kuznetsov, told about it.

    According to him, in 2014, the plant plans to release 4-5 of such engines, designed to equip the Tu-160 strategic bomber. In the period before 2020, the Russian military will supply several dozen NK-32 with a constant increase in production volumes.

    As Romashchev noted, a part of the new production equipment has already been delivered to the Samara plant and the acquisition of an additional number of machines is ongoing. In this regard, the entire manufacturing technology of the NK-32 engine, mass-produced in Samara with 1983, is being processed. The new version provides for the use of digital CAD and CALM technologies. Plant specialists are trained to work on new equipment, including abroad.

    Romashchev said that in the new production process, the capacities available at the enterprise-developer, SNTK im. Kuznetsova.

    At the same time, the specialist noted, the NK-32 engine itself will not undergo significant modernization. "The military said that the engine is reliable, of high quality, there is no need to change it much, its potential will last for another 20-30 years," Romaschev said.

    According to him, the main changes are planned in the control system NK-32, which was developed back in Soviet times.

    NK-32 is a two-circuit turbojet three-shaft engine with a common afterburner (TRDDF). It is one of the largest and most powerful aircraft engines in the world. It is currently used on strategic missile-carrying bombers Tu-160, and is also installed on the Tu-144LL supersonic "flying laboratory."

    (article "The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation will receive the first NK-32 engine for the Tu-160 in 2013", the "News" section of the website www.aex.ru ("Aviation Explorer" - the commonwealth of aviation experts)).

    Does anyone else have at least a drop of optimism?
    Some plans and promises (almost spells).
    Nothing more.

    But ...
    I would like to believe!
  28. leon1204id
    leon1204id 27 July 2015 23: 09
    -1
    And so while we are building huge planes, armada will appear, tens of thousands of small smart strike UAVs that, starting at the same time with 100% probability, will overcome any missile defense and air defense and find their goals even without satellite navigation. That's what will happen to us instead of B2. , in the same stead only at the back.
    1. datt551
      datt551 29 July 2015 20: 38
      0
      THE PRINCE OF THE VOVA WILL NOT APPEAR. They will be destroyed as HELIOS PRIME