One of the most impressive and advanced designs the T-60S is an intermediate range bomber with a lifting body design variable geometry wings and 2 dimensional thrust vectoring capabilities and appears to be stealthy. If Russia somehow does manage to get this amazing aircraft flying, it will give Russia a new ability to project power. On another note why hasn't Russia tried to export the TU-160?
Russian advanced bomber T-60S
- Thread starter fylr71
- Start date
contedicavour
New Member
Good question. I guess Blackjacks TU-160 haven't been exported because there aren't enough around even in Russian service and that the production line is closed. Maintenance must also be extremely complicated. Anyway, if even the Tu-22M Backfire hasn't been exported, I doubt the much more expensive Blackjack would have a chance... though China hasn't stopped surprising us... so who knows.fylr71 said:
cheers
chinawhite
New Member
The TU-160 is only as good as its weapons. Mainly the Kh-55, Kh-65 which cant be exported according to the MTCR . Not quite to sure of its low-level penertation capabilities. Large, costly and capabilitless[*] it wouldn't be much use to other countries planning a conventional war.
I have read the russians have modernized theirs with terrain-following radar
I have read the russians have modernized theirs with terrain-following radar
also i dont think anyone other than india,china,venezuela or iran would be able to afford the tu160 in substantial numbers,i dont think a couple of tu160's would offer any substantial advantage during the wartime,besies they would require a lot of infrastructure.contedicavour said:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #9
Really only China and MAYBE India could afford the Tu-160 and have the ability to maintain them. Either way it is unlikely that either country would purchase it. What would make sense however is to have a joint venture on the T-60s, similar to the Russo-Indian PakFa. (although India pulled out because a disagreement regarding the number of engines) Either way if it was built the T-60s would give Russia something that could really help their strategic stuation.aaaditya said:
Do they really need to improve their strategic situation?
Their remaining mobile and immobile land based ICBMs, SSBNs and Tu-160 and the introduction of Topol-M it doesn't look like a new strategic bomber is worth the money.
I would put it into the airforce for maintenance, training and development of smaller fighter/bomber planes.
Their remaining mobile and immobile land based ICBMs, SSBNs and Tu-160 and the introduction of Topol-M it doesn't look like a new strategic bomber is worth the money.
I would put it into the airforce for maintenance, training and development of smaller fighter/bomber planes.
contedicavour
New Member
Fully agree. Even modernizing TU22M and TU160 would be higher priorities. Otherwise at this rhythm Russia will end up with a very small core of very modern SU30, MIG29SMT, TU160, TU60 and literally more than a thousand obsolete and not operational TU22, TU22M, SU24, MIG31, MIG29, SU27 1st generation, etc. Quality's great, quantity matters also, especially for a country spanning almost half the world between its Western and Eastern borders.Waylander said:
cheers
The Tu-160 is able to carry a heavier payload than the B-1, and it is also faster. And the Tu-160 was designed to counter the B-1, which you can see even with your eyes - which means that it can do basically the same things. This means that the Tu-160 is (even) worse at doing it's thing than the B-1.chinawhite said:
Remember the Tu-160 was designed to counter the B-1A not the B-1B. The B-1A had similar numbers is speed and range to the Tu-160. Both those aircraft were meant to fly at high altitude to launch ALCM's. The B-1B was meant to fly at high speed and low level to launch ALCM's and SRAM's. Just because they look similar doesn't mean they have similar missions. With the Lancer's role today, you can't really even compare them anymore. The B-1B is a dirt mover, and the Tu-160 is a nuclear deterrent.
To maintain a strategic fleet of Tu-160's would cost to much money for most nations. China wants to be a economic super power and project power in the region of Asia. They have ICBM's to attack the U.S., they don't need Tu-160's to attack instead. They would be bettor off buying Tu-22M3's to protect their home waters and attack naval threats.
To maintain a strategic fleet of Tu-160's would cost to much money for most nations. China wants to be a economic super power and project power in the region of Asia. They have ICBM's to attack the U.S., they don't need Tu-160's to attack instead. They would be bettor off buying Tu-22M3's to protect their home waters and attack naval threats.
Is there really a role for strategic bombers for the Russians? As nuclear deterrents their huge numbers of ICBMs are very credible. Is it for mounting AShM attacks on carrier fleets? If it's for controlling Russia's "near abroad" or for counter insurgency operations, such a degree of stealth wouldn't really be important. The B-52's for example still get the job done and they're even older than the backfires aren't they?
The Tu-160 give the russians now a big strike ability which gives them a long range and provides a fast reaction time both with conventional and nuclear weapons.
Why should they give up the nuclear capabilities of this bomber just because they just need its conventional capabilities at the moment.
Why should they give up the nuclear capabilities of this bomber just because they just need its conventional capabilities at the moment.
Right now there is an idea to use tu160 with high precision conventional missiles. Targets are chechen guys in Georgia's Pankicia and terrorist's base all over the world - that's new Putin's anti-terrorist doctrine. But I didn't hear about any performed operation.
In my opinion su34 fits much better fo that role. Much cheaper to maintenance, perfect armored. tu160 is a strategic nuclear weapon, no reason to load it with this type of operation.
The worst thing we have only 10 su34 and WM plans only 50-60 crafts in a 2-3 years. MOD also said we'll sell no such crafts even to our close partners like India and China
In my opinion su34 fits much better fo that role. Much cheaper to maintenance, perfect armored. tu160 is a strategic nuclear weapon, no reason to load it with this type of operation.
The worst thing we have only 10 su34 and WM plans only 50-60 crafts in a 2-3 years. MOD also said we'll sell no such crafts even to our close partners like India and China