AislepathLight From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 562 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2404 times:
I realize that there are many problems with the Russian Air force today, and that the US actually keeps the planes flight worthy, and I understand the pointing of fingers that someone was coping someone else. I am gonna compare the bombers, but would like input on which one you guys think is better
Comparison 1
TU95 has a similar role to the B52-- which one is better, and will last longer?
-I think that the B52 was more successful in its original role, but the TU95 was more adaptable and more effective doing everything. My wager is that the Bear stays longer, doing its ASW work. The bear looks like it will become the mainstay of the Russian air force, because of the really small production numbers and disrepair of the TU160s. This coupled with huge numbers and spares, both from scrapped TU95. The Buffs are getting old, with the newest models being 45 years old. Age, spares, fatigue, and many other factors make them go sooner.
Comparison 2
TU160 has a similar to the B1B-- which one is better, and will last longer (yes, I understand that they had different original missions, but now that Russia is doing an upgrade similar to the CMUP they are really similar roles)?
-I think that the B1B will last longer but theTU160 was a better aircraft, as it retained its mach 2 capabilities, even if it is a lot larger. Here are the specs:
TU160 B1B
Wingspan, fully swept 35.6m 23.85m
Wingspan, fully spread 55.7m 41.66m
Length 54.1m 44.42m
MTOW 275000kg 216367kg
Thrust to weight Ratio 36% 26%
Max speed (at sea level) 1030km/h 963km/h
Max Range 13950km 12040km
"We have slain a large dragon, but we now live in a jungle filled with a bewildering variety of poisonous snakes."
F4wso From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 974 posts, RR: 13 Reply 2, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2256 times:
I was hoping one of the two 28 BW B-1s that were at the 2005 Moscow airshow would have done a flyby with a Tu-160. That would have been a "Kodak moment". since it didn't happen, the highlight of the show for me was the Tu-95 leading a Tu-22 and a Tu-160 in a flyby.
Gary
Cottage Grove, MN, USA
Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 21 Reply 3, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2255 times:
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 21 Reply 4, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2160 times:
1) define "better".
2) The B-52 will remain in service until 2045 if current plans don't change. I wonder how many Bears will be left in 40 years given the current maintenance regime.
3) speed isn't everything. Sure the Blackjack is faster than the Lancer, but if you're facing Mach 5 SAMs that difference is irrelevant. And remember that both sides expected the other to have laserguns for air defence by now...
4) The Tu-22M (Tu-26) Backfire is in service with Russian Naval Aviation, possibly with the Ukrainian airforce, and maybe still with the Russian Strategic forces. There have also been reports of some being sold to China and Iran. The Tu-22 Blinder is AFAIK no longer in service in Russia, but I could be mistaken.
I cannot think of anything the B-52 has not done except going supersonic and achieving any level of stealth. They test new systems for the B-1 and B-2 on the B-52 and it can deliver conventional dumb bombs, smart bombs, cruise missiles, nuclear warheads and everything else IIRC. What cant it do now or in the future?
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
AislepathLight From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 562 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 2017 times:
Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 5): What cant it do now or in the future?
Maritime Patrol Stuff-- as the TU95 can do.
Quoting Jwenting (Reply 4): 2) The B-52 will remain in service until 2045 if current plans don't change. I wonder how many Bears will be left in 40 years given the current maintenance regime.
Given the current rise in gas prices, I don't know how many B52s or TU95s there will be, and the TU95s are very econmical aircraft. The Buffs are getting old, and the TU95s are falling apart, even though some of them are built within the past 15 years. Why can't the Russians keep their airforce togeather?
"We have slain a large dragon, but we now live in a jungle filled with a bewildering variety of poisonous snakes."
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 562 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, 
From Malta, joined Dec 2004, 1122 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
