Sukhoi Su-24BM / T-60 / T-60S / izdeliye 54 tactical bombers

[Matej]

Lets start to talk about soviet tactical bomber Sukhoi T-60S. Maybe all of you know something about that, so I can only mention that it was 80s project to replace Su-24 and Tu-22M. It ended without any flying prototype, but full scale mockup of the right half of the fuselage was made (any photo welcome .

My main question are correct dimensions. Some sources says that it had lenght of 28 meters and wingspan from 22 to 13,2 meters, while others (for example www.aeronautics.ru) are talking about much bigger plane with lenght of 38 meters and wingspan from 37 to 24 meters....

My drawing is based on smaller one.

 

[Austin]

WoW , This is the best drawing of the T-60S I have seen so far , The T-60S was suppose to be a Low RCS ,M 2 , Tactical/Substrategic Bomber which was suppose to replace the Tu-22M3 bomber.

its for the first time I am hearing that its suppose to replace the Su-22 , The Su-22 AFAIK was suppose to get completely replaced by the Su-35 , But before that they were suppose to get a comprehensive upgrade , But after the breakup , Russia opted for a cost effective , cheaper upgrade and the upgraded Su-24 will serve along with the new Su-34 (Su-27IB)

Coming back to the T-60S topic , The birsd was supposed to be in an advanced stage of design and its armament also included Long Range Supersonic & Subsonic missile , But again after the break up Russia froze the project although occasionally we would hear about it.

Eventually they would be replacing the Tu-22M3 in a decade from now , probably after going for an interim Tu-22M5 variant.

If any new Russian bomber has any chance seeing the light of the day , a decade from now its perhaps the Tu-22M replacement , The Tu-160 will serve for atleast 30 more years with upgrade.

Lets hope the T-60S sees the light of the day.

 

[flateric]

Friend of mine has seen T-60 full-scale wooden mockup (in fact it was half of a beast - half fuselage, just left wing) in one of hangars at the territory of Sukhoi OKB Moscow facilities. In fact, that's the only thing he told me, denying to say if any artist's impression including Mato's one resembles actual a/c. He also has said that was impressed by technical solution of swing wing /fuselage interaction design. I believe him because he was a first person that described me MiG MFI design ca.1990...it was funny procedure of questions and answers...the main phrase was like "Ugh...do you imagine Eurofighter? Yes? Now we take two tails...and there's wery interesting decisions in a tail area. Oh, that's enough for you to know")))

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

You beat me by 4 years then- Jon Lake introduced me to some Mikoyan designers at Farnborough 1994, and described the MFI design to me then in pretty accurate terms. (Canard delta, twin tail, ventral fins, front fuselage somewhat like a MiG-29UB, sitting on a ventral intake like two MiG-25 intakes next to each other)

In respect to the T-60S, Oleg Samolovich in his memoirs seems very scathing of this design, claiming it was a TsAGI warm-over of the T-4MS handed back to Sukhoi.

I would suggest that the Myasishchev M-60 design and the T-4MS, considered together, might give an impression of the likely T-60S shape.

Maybe Piotr Butowski will reveal what he based his impressions on?

 

[Tuomasn]

Here's what I have of this design:

Sukhoi T-60S (NOVO-C)
Wingspan: 11/22 m
Length: 28 m
Maximum TO Weight: 64,000 kg
Cruise Speed: Mach 2.0
Ceiling: 20,000 m
Maximum Range: 6,000 km
Range with Maximum Load: 2,200 km
Engines: Two Kolesov R-179-300 turbofans of 206 kN each
Weapons Load: 6,000 kg
Armament: 6 x Kh-101, Kh-15, Kh-55 or Kh-65, guided or unguided bombs

Medium-range strike aircraft to replace Tu-16, Tu-22 and Tu-22M. The initial project was begun during the 1970s at TsAGI based on the T-4MS strategic bomber. It was transferred to Sukhoi in 1981, with N. Chernyakov as chief designer. The T-60 was to be powered by two AL-41F engines, but as the weight of the aircraft increased these were changed to R-179s, resulting in the T-60S. It featured a flat lifting body fuselage and swing wings that pivoted right back to rest under the fuselage. The engines had shoulder-mounted intakes slightly forward of the wing root and two-dimensional thrust vectoring nozzles. A high-speed high-altitude flight profile with supercruise capability was planned. Weapons were to be carried on an MKU-6-172 rotary launcher in an internal bay. Originally expected to enter service in 2003.


http://www.testpilot.ru/russia/sukhoi/t/60/t60_e.htm mentions 'variable-level double-path jet, the so-called double-tube jet', with a picture. What is it?
The rumoured 'NOVO-C' designation would seem to imply there's something at Novosibirsk. But what? And how did the US discover it? I would not expect an incomplete prototype or mockup to sit outside for satellites to see.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I would speculate that the NOVO-C refers to either a subscale test model of T-60S, or possibly to a mockup or test model of the revised Su-24BM design with fixed wings.

I agree its unlikely to assign a reporting name to a half-finished mockup.

 

[flateric]

NOVO-C stays for third in order configuration information received obviously from insider from Novosibirsk's SibNIIA, a branch of TzAGI that later become an 'rebel castle' for aerodynamics ideas that were more revolutionary than 'old' TzAGI's school. SibNIIA made a very important, say critical, aerodynamics input in such Sukhoi projects as T-10 and T-10-M families. I more tyhan sure that NOVO-C is not T-60 related as Samoilovitch's concern was that TzAGI was heavily involved in T-60C design.

 

[SOC]

NOVO-C isn't a reporting name per se, it's an identifier signifying the third new aircraft type seen at Novosibirsk, before they figured out just what it was. Kinda like the RAM- series designators given to aircraft seen at Zhukovskii before they were identified.

Oh, and NOVO-C is associated with the T-60S.

Also, someone out there has a drawing that is very, very similar to what the T-60S configuration looks like. That much has been revealed by a senior Russian AF official in the open press, although he declined to say who had produced the drawing!

Regarding a T-4MS connection, this is very possible. Remember, the T-4MS was seen as the most promising design during the competition which resulted in the Tu-160. In the end, the powers that be didn't want to have Sukhoi distracted while they were still trying to work out the T-10s issues and delay the AF's new fighter. Ergo, Myasischev's second place design was handed to Tupolev, who refined it and produced the Tu-160. So, given the merits of the T-4MS design, it's possible that there is a connection between the T-4MS and the T-60S.

 

[flateric]

I'm sorry to say but 'senior Russian AF official revealing T-60S image for open press' is an creature whose existance I belive much less than in bigfoot or Nessy. It just was never. We like do everything without fanfairs, especially what we doesn't do at all.

May be you just mean these Pyotr Butovsky drawings? I suspect that something really behind them, at least his MFI drawings were pretty close to factual. He's a very strange personality to me - Poland citizen that gained access to many things shown to rare Russian. My respect to him!

 

[Tuomasn]

NOVO-C stays for third in order configuration information received obviously from insider from Novosibirsk's SibNIIA, a branch of TzAGI that later become an 'rebel castle' for aerodynamics ideas that were more revolutionary than 'old' TzAGI's school. SibNIIA made a very important, say critical, aerodynamics input in such Sukhoi projects as T-10 and T-10-M families. I more tyhan sure that NOVO-C is not T-60 related as Samoilovitch's concern was that TzAGI was heavily involved in T-60C design.

SibNIIA airframes should have a 'SIB-x' designation, ie. SIB-A is the SLM-22/32 subscale S-32 (Su-47) test model.

 

[flateric]

Damn. you are right, Tuomas...what the hell NOVO is then, I don't know...sometimes useful to re-read books. How could I forget that SIB is SibNIA stuff..Shame on me(((

 

[SOC]

NOVO is Novosibirsk. And I didn't mean that a senior official has actually produced a drawing, but rather that one of them has stated that one of the drawings out there is very, very close to the T-60S design. Again, he declined, of course, to say which one it was. I'll try to find that interview.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

NOVO refers specifically to the Sukhoi NAPO factory at Novosibirsk, where they built the Su-24M.

As to NOVO-A, NOVO-B, where did the Su-24MR and Su-24MP get built and test flown from?

I believe that these "test centre" designations (SIB = SIBNIA, BL = Barnaul, RAM = Ramenskoye etc) were *specifically* for photographic intelligence only.

 

[flateric]

Flateric <F> torturing guy from Sukhoi OKB <SG> at MAKS 2005 airshow:

SG - "...how did you say? T-what? T-...60? <smiling>
F - "yes, yes, t-60. T-60S!"
SG - I don't know such an designation <smiling>
F - But I've read, that...you have it...it based on T-4MC...I EVEN HAVE SEEN AN PROVISIUONAL IMAGE
SG - Oh, you know, there are much of unproven information has been published in western press
F - but that sounds silly...I have read Samoilovitch book!
SG - Oh, you know...let's say, T-4MC aerodynamic scheme has impacted many later studies at Sukhoy OKB...Oh, sorry, I must go, they call me to restaraunt <smiling>

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I've invited Piotr Butowski to visit the forum. Hopefully he will have time to do so!

 

[SOC]

I believe that these "test centre" designations (SIB = SIBNIA, BL = Barnaul, RAM = Ramenskoye etc) were *specifically* for photographic intelligence only.

That would be correct.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

And my speculation that NOVO-A and NOVO-B might be the Su-24MR and Su-24MP?

Just kidding Sean, you don't have to answer ;D

If SIB-A was allocated to the SLM-22/32 scale models ( http://www.khai.edu/niipfm/english/slm22-en.htm), technically NOVO designations might not require actual aircraft either.

 

[Gavin]

I've always assumed that this drawing represents the T-60S, no?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

As a rough cariacature, perhaps. It was presented as an example of stealth work done, so the important parts are the labelling of the diagram to show what RCS reduction measures were undertaken.

 

[flateric]

It's a soviet in-firm placard style that is well known for me, you just would wonder how gracious Buran shuttle looked like on such masterpieces sometimes. I bet thing looks like some real project (T-54?) but proportions and overall shape is weird.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

1 - Structural modification to leading edge on wing and fuselage structure
2 - Structural modification to leading edge of vertical fin
3 - Variable geometry wing - 65 to 28 degrees
4 - RAM within radar bay
6 - Radome material (frequency selective material)
8 - Metallic canopy coating

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

It appears to me that this drawing shows a stowable VG wing embedded in a delta wing, like the D-24 Alliance. Thoughts?

 

[Gavin]

It appears to me that this drawing shows a stowable VG wing embedded in a delta wing, like the D-24 Alliance. Thoughts?

Yes, exactly. I think you're right. Earlier in this thread, when Flateric mentioned someone who had seen a mockup and described being impressed with the "solution" of the wing, I thought it might be in reference to this design feature.

but proportions and overall shape is weird

There's a similar drawing that is thought to be related to the PAK FA, and the proportions are "weird" in the same way. The tail seems to be very much exaggerated. For the T-60S, Matej might be closer to the right proportions, but I suspect he has the wing design wong.

I think this has been posted on this forum before.

 

[Matej]

For the T-60S, Matej might be closer to the right proportions, but I suspect he has the wing design wong.

Yes I have. When I was creating it, I had in mind that it should be something in Su-24 style. But in the light of the new information aircraft was delta-shaped with WG wings, that folded fully under the fuselage. Interesting things are happening behind this forum so wait for a new info from me and flateric.

 

[SOC]

What are you guys working on? Hurry up already! ;D

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Well, now we know how much info the USAF has on the T-60S

 

[SOC]

Or, you know that I don't wanna get arrested :-X

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

In "Soviet Secret Projects" Yefim Gordon suggests that the T-60S engines did not have afterburners, and the design was capable of high supersonic speed in dry thrust only.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

So, here's a first (very bad, drawn freehand with a pen) attempt at a revised T-60S layout.

I've tried to blend some features of the TsNII sketch with Piotr Butowski's sketch. The cockpit is Su-34 influenced, or more correctly the Su-34 cockpit is T-60S influenced The inward canted tailfins were a feature of the early S-37 Berkut, so I've retained this from the Butowski sketch.

Unanswered questions must be:

How is the swivelling wing part implemented? It presumably doesn't have an outboard pivot: where would the pivot be located? Would the wing pivot about the leading edge, or translate back when pivoting like the early British VG concepts?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

BTW: this sketch looks a little "fat" for supercruise, I think the rear fuselage needs to be thinned somewhat. However I not willing to lose the "sting" from the TsNII sketch- it seems a "Sukhoi" touch.

D-24 "Alliance" for comparison:

 

[paralay]

Т-60 three times put into production in Novosibirsk, did equipment, and then all reworked, but business and is not has gone...

 

[sferrin]

Anybody know what this is? The reason I put it here is because I've seen the T-60 designation attached to it at some time in the past.

 

[frank]

Many years ago when I saw it in Flight International magazine, it was attributed to MiG as a stealth bomber.

Anybody know what this is? The reason I put it here is because I've seen the T-60 designation attached to it at some time in the past.

 

[flateric]

So, here's a first (very bad, drawn freehand with a pen) attempt at a revised T-60S layout.

Comparing to TzNII scetch
1). Tails were canted inward and were further from centerline
2). B-2 like centroplane
3). B-2 style inlets implemented

I fear to ask more questions as I know that we are entering 'Pervy Otdel' (Security Dept) territory, and I don't want problems for my friend. T-54 as well as T-60 is still classified.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

T-54???

;D

By "Centroplane" you mean the lifting body fuselage?

 

[flateric]

Yep, T-54. He described what he has seen and wings sliding under the fuselage make me thought that it was T-60 as a/c was really close to production stage.
But later he said that it was C-54 and after I replied with facts of C-54 as we all know it, he said that missed a letters, it was T-54 mockup, pre-pre T-60. He has seen nothing directly T-60 related.

 

[JAZZ]

Anybody know what this is? The reason I put it here is because I've seen the T-60 designation attached to it at some time in the past.

This was published in Flight International 31 january - 6 February 2006. Caption reads 'a Mikoyan artist depicts stealth'

All it is, is a bit of fun from the art department of Mikoyan turning a B2 into a canard wing bomber.

 

[frank]

It was also in an FI issue 8 or 10 or so years ago. Does the 2006 issue offer additional info?

Anybody know what this is? The reason I put it here is because I've seen the T-60 designation attached to it at some time in the past.

This was published in Flight International 31 january - 6 February 2006. Caption reads 'a Mikoyan artist depicts stealth'

All it is, is a bit of fun from the art department of Mikoyan turning a B2 into a canard wing bomber.

 

[JAZZ]

Sorry about that frank... my post should have read 1996 and not 2006...force of habit

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Nice artwork by Paralay