Did Ukraine really scrap her Backfires?

[Big-E]

What is this? It looks like a Tu-22M with two AS-4 Kitchens next to it. :fly

 

[LancerMc]

I am sorry to say so but yes their gone, only a few examples were saved for Museums like the one in the picture. I attaching a link from the U.S. Ukrainian Embassy detailing the ceremony.

http://images.google.com/imgres?img...&hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLG,GGLG:2006-26,GGLG:en&sa=N

 

[Big-E]

You wouldn't happen to know where the muesem piece is would you?

 

[LancerMc]

I can't find anything online as of yet, but I'll check my old publications I don't have on hand to see where they went. If I remember corretly one went to museum you see in your picture, one to Monino is Russia, and I believe another is Western Europe (maybe Germany).

If anyone else knows the answers please feel free to answer Big-E's question.

 

[Apocalypse]

Yeah, i agree thats a museum. I dont think u can see that many types of aircraft bunched together anywhere else

Sorry, i dont have any info about the decommisioning of the Ukrainian Backfires

 

[RubiconNZ]

TU 160's

They scrapped their Blackjacks which was sad enough.

According to wiki which I'm sure youv'e read, but for those who have..

"Ukraine possessed an additional 29 (TU 22ms), but since the Ukrainian government's renunciation of nuclear weapons, those aircraft have been destroyed, the last in 2004."

Belarus apparently has 52 but most are supposed to be in a really average state of repair.

 

[contedicavour]

They scrapped their Blackjacks which was sad enough,

According to wiki which I'm sure youv'e read, but for those who have..

"Ukraine possessed an additional 29, but since the Ukrainian government's renunciation of nuclear weapons, those aircraft have been destroyed, the last in 2004."

Belarus apparently has 52 but most are supposed to be in a really average state of repair.

It is strange that Russia didn't negotiate to buy the second hand TU160s , for instance in exchange for the precious natural gas that is vital to the Ukrainian economy.

cheers

 

[RubiconNZ]

TU 160's

It is strange that Russia didn't negotiate to buy the second hand TU160s , for instance in exchange for the precious natural gas that is vital to the Ukrainian economy.

cheers

Yeah I agree, perhaps Ukraine wouldn't sell them back, guess the thinking behind it may been of the less long range weapons Russia had the better. Perhaps they got some major money for doing it from the disarmement commisions or what ever, I mean China I would assume would be gagging for them at a cheap price, pure speculation of course.

 

[contedicavour]

Yeah I agree, perhaps Ukraine wouldn't sell them back, guess the thinking behind it may been of the less long range weapons Russia had the better. Perhaps they go some major money for doing it from the disarmement commisions or what ever, I mean China I would assume would be gagging for them, pure speculation of course.

Hmm it sounds very plausible that the US may have outspent Russia in a bidding war over the destiny of the bombers... back then with less expensive oil Putin had less money available.
Nice Forsyth or Clancy type scenarios

cheers

 

[Rich]

To see a TU-22M with AS-4's is a museum scene I would do some traveling for. The Backfire was a big part of the scene in the 70's and also a system that was never far from our minds. I'd love to actually see one just once in my life.

 

[Michael RVR]

I'm pretty sure i did read something about russia taking some Tu-160's off Ukraine for.. debt reduction ? Something like that i think.

May have only been a couple though...

 

[LancerMc]

A small number of Tu-160's were returned to Russian at the beginning of the Cold War. There were 7-8 I believe remaining in the Ukraine, but these we later scrapped when Ukraine and Russia couldn't come to an agreement on the return of the last few Tu-160's.

 

[Ths]

I think the newsflash that said that the Russians will prioritise the strategic weapons sheds some light.

There seems to be a concentration on replacing outworn equipment - maninly doing something about the sorry state of the submarine fleet.

Interesting enough there was talk about an updated Tu-160.
If memory serves me then Russian has about 30 reasonably operational Tu-160 (I'm very open for corrections here).
The interesting part is the very limited effort into the most flexible of the weapons - the bomber. And apparently the least flexible the ICBM's in silos having the most relative success.

This could be part of the explanation as to why Putin is pressing the oil weapon so hard - it is risky to threaten your costoumers. - and it is winning over enviromental sceptics in Europe to a "greener" profile.

 

[Chrom]

I
If memory serves me then Russian has about 30 reasonably operational Tu-160 (I'm very open for corrections here).
The interesting part is the very limited effort into the most flexible of the weapons - the bomber. And apparently the least flexible the ICBM's in silos having the most relative success.

This could be part of the explanation as to why Putin is pressing the oil weapon so hard - it is risky to threaten your costoumers. - and it is winning over enviromental sceptics in Europe to a "greener" profile.

Russia have only 16 (may be now 17) Tu-160. 30 was the number ever produced. Strategic bomber is the most inflexible , expencive and vulnerable weapon of all other strategic nuclear platforms. Still its a part of famous nuclear triade which insures Russia security, so Tu-160 will be maintained in Russia invertory for foreseeable future.

 

[Ths]

Chrom: Thanks for setting me straight.

We do differ about the flexibility of strategic bombers.

Flexibility:
- Redirection in flight.
- Vulnerability depends on dispersal facilities.
- Can be used against non-strategic targets - ask B-52 and B-1 crews.
- You know yourself where they are.
- Great range in more tactical roles.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

Chrom: Thanks for setting me straight.

We do differ about the flexibility of strategic bombers.

Flexibility:
- Redirection in flight.
- Vulnerability depends on dispersal facilities.
- Can be used against non-strategic targets - ask B-52 and B-1 crews.
- You know yourself where they are.
- Great range in more tactical roles.

According to this http://news.sarbc.ru/main/news/07/07/2006/61123.html, they received 5 Blackjack this year. Based on that, they might have 20 flying ones by early next year.

 

[swerve]

According to this http://news.sarbc.ru/main/news/07/07/2006/61123.html, they received 5 Blackjack this year. Based on that, they might have 20 flying ones by early next year.

Unfortunately, I can't read Russian, so I'd be grateful for your help. Does the article say the 5 are aircraft not previously in Russian service? Or could it be referring to upgrades of existing Russian aircraft? Official statements have only referred to a single new aircraft to be delivered this year or next, but Kazan was given a contract to upgrade all the existing aircraft. I suspect these 5 are re-entering service after being upgraded.

I see it refers to "Модернизированному" & "спутники". Is the latter part of a reference to having satnav added? Or Glonass-guided weapons? It would fit the published information about the upgrade, which is that (as well as a thorough physical overhaul) it includes new avionics, including targeting systems, & the ability to carry new missiles.

 

[LancerMc]

From the publications I have read, the Russian AF received 1 new Tu-160 this year. This aircraft was Tupolev production prototype that was overhauled from storage to meet the new upgrade variant. The other 4 aircraft were to be the other initial Tu-160's upgraded for this year. President Putin still hopes to build a few new Tu-160's but as of recently does not have the funds to do so.

 

[Timber]

Strategic Aviation
Strategic aviation units form the 37th Air Army of the Supreme High Command (Strategic) of the Russian Air Force. The commander of the 37th army — Lt. General Igor Khvorov — was appointed by a presidential decree of 15 November 2002.

As of July 2006, the 37th Air Army included 78 strategic bombers that can carry up to 872 long-range cruise missiles.

Number of bombers Total cruise missiles
Bomber Number of cruise missiles and their type
Tu-95MS6 (Bear H6) 32 6 Kh-55 (AS-15A) 192
Tu-95MS16 (Bear H16) 32 16 Kh-55 (AS-15A) 512
Tu-160 (Blackjack) 14 12 Kh-55SM (AS-15B) 168
Total 78 872

Strategic aviation units
The 37th Air Army includes two heavy-bomber divisions of Tu-160 and Tu-95MS aircraft. In addition to these, the army includes four divisions of Tu-22M3 (Backfire C) bombers.

The 22nd Guards Heavy-Bomber Division, based in Engels (Saratov oblast), includes two bomber regiments: the 121st Guards regiment of Tu-160 bombers and the 184th regiment of Tu-95MS bombers. The division currently includes 14 Tu-160 aircraft and 18 Tu-95MS bombers. Two new Tu-160 aircraft are expected to join the division in 2005.

In addition to this, the 22nd division may include the 203rd Regiment of Il-78 tankers, which is based in Ryazan. Ryazan is also a place of a training center, which can be used a base for bombers of the division (as of July 2005, six Tu-95MS bombers were deployed in Ryazan).

The 326th Heavy-Bomber Division is based in Ukrainka (Khabarovsk kray). The division includes the 79th regiment and 182nd Guards regiments of Tu-95MS bombers. The total number of bombers deployed in Ukrainka is 40.

Strategic bombers
The Tu-95MS (Bear H) strategic bomber was developed at the A. N. Tupolev Design Bureau. Serial production of the bomber continued from 1984 to 1991 at the aviation plant in Kuybyshev (currently Aviakor Aviation Plant, Samara). The bomber is equipped with turboprop engines. It can carry six Kh-55 cruise missiles in the bomb bay. The Tu-95MS16 version of the bomber can carry additional ten missiles under wings, but this significantly reduces bomber's range.

The Tu-160 (Blackjack) strategic bomber was developed at the A. N. Tupolev Design Bureau and produced at the aviation plant in Kazan (currently S. P. Gorbunov Kazan Aviation Production Association). The bomber can carry 12 Kh-55 cruise missiles in the bomb bay. One of the two new Tu-160 bombers that are expected to join the force in 2005 will be equipped for carrying gravity bombs.

Cruise missiles
The Kh-55 (AS-15, RKV-500A) long-range air-launched cruise missiles were developed at the Raduga Design Bureau (Dubna, Moscow oblast). Production of the missiles began in 1983 at the Dubna Machine-Building Plant. The Kh-55SM (AS-15B, RKV-500B) version of the missile, which can be deployed on Tu-160 bombers, has extra fuel tanks and extended range. In 1999 Russia tested an improved version of the Kh-55 missiles, which became known as Kh-555. Reportedly, this missile is a non-nuclear version of Kh-55. It will be carried by Tu-160 bombers.

Russia is currently developing a new long-range cruise missile, which would probably replace Kh-55. The conventional version of the new missile is known as Kh-101, the nuclear version is usually referred to as Kh-102.

http://russianforces.org/aviation/

 

[Chrom]

Chrom: Thanks for setting me straight.
We do differ about the flexibility of strategic bombers.
Flexibility:
- Redirection in flight.

Compare it to to 30 min flight time for ICBM... they have "redirection" in silos, which is much better in my book...

- Vulnerability depends on dispersal facilities.

Either way its much more vulnerable than both ICBM's and SSBN's.

- Can be used against non-strategic targets - ask B-52 and B-1 crews.

Its like to use microscop instead of hammer. Well, B-52 and T-95 are ok, they are just common long range bombers. But Tu-160 is not - its a specialized, very expencive cruise missile deliver platform. Its almost impossible to use against anything without nuclear CM.

- You know yourself where they are.

Huh? How its different from other weapon platforms?

- Great range in more tactical roles.

Already covered. Tu-95 and Tu-22M are much more efficient in that role.
Note - i partially agree with you about general "strategic bomber". But Tu-160 (and B-1/B-2 for that matter) is not one.