Tupolev Tu-160M (modernization & new production)

TMA1 said:
If true I wonder if it will be a Tor type missile.
Click to expand...
Command guidance is the worst option for such a task on such a platform. Additionally, it would demand two radars, for observation and illumination/guidance. No chance it will be Tor or something like it. A derivative of R-74M is the most likely variant, IMO.
 
TMA1 said:
Antimissiles are along with DIRCM and EW the future for aviation active protection systems. Though I'm hesitant on this as well, it does make sense that a big high value missile carrier like tu160 would be equipped with small missiles capable of defeating enemy missiles or even enemy aircraft in very close range. If true I wonder if it will be a Tor type missile.
Click to expand...
Modernized Tu-160M "Igor Sikorsky" is equipped with dummies of DIRCM system which included UV-sensors and laser turrets.
 

Attachments

  • c83cb9c808b3.png
    c83cb9c808b3.png
    321.9 KB · Views: 246
Scar said:
Strange news come from the "source in aviation industry", according to RIA Novosti.

Tu-160 got the rear-looking radar and will carry A2A missiles capable to hit enemy missiles and aircraft. :confused:

G-translated article on RIA website.
Click to expand...
In the end we were just waiting for all the speculation about self defence missiles to see actual deployment, I don't know if this will be the first case but it indeed makes sense to protect high value and strategic assets with all the technologies that are already available. To what extent this would allow to operate in highly protected environments is an interesting question, once VKS has traditionally opted for stand-off release of missiles rather than for direct bombing. The Tu-160 is an strict strategic missile carrier, but PAK-DA may take those self defence technologies even further, allowing its use even for tactical bombing in non-permissive environments.

Re. placement of weapons: the existing bay doors should have good clearance to the internal revolver launcher and lots of space for the small type of self defence missiles that should be required.

Re. kinematics of launching towards the rear sector: the most relevant factor is relative speed between incoming missile, target aircraft and interceptor, of course turning instead of accelerating in a stright line is not very efficient, but still the ratio of relative speeds should allow for a successful interception.

EDIT, short remark from Manturov regarding the Tu-160 not being substituted by the PAK-DA:

"Two planes, the Tu-160M and the PAK DA, will be simultaneously produced,"

tass.com

Russia’s Defense Ministry to receive first newly-built Tu-160M strategic bomber

Under the contract, the delivery was initially stipulated for late 2023, Industry and Trade Minister Denis Manturov noted
tass.com tass.com
 
Last edited:
Dr.Snufflebug said:
Scar said:
Strange news come from the "source in aviation industry", according to RIA Novosti.

Tu-160 got the rear-looking radar and will carry A2A missiles capable to hit enemy missiles and aircraft. :confused:

G-translated article on RIA website.
Click to expand...

A smallish missile (which it'd have to be^1) has highly limited propellant, how would it negate the (negative, for the missile) already present forward momentum? Does it have a parachute that slows it down before it jets away in a new direction?

Hah. Rear radar seems perfectly fine, but I'm sure somebody has misinterpreted the nature of some kind of more plausible
countermeasures.

^1 Where'd they install it? A smallish missile (eg MANPADS-like in a tube inside the body is how I interpret this fantasy), or a huge missile installed backwards in the rotary bays . The latter has better eh, kinematics at least, sure. But that at the expense of its offensive payload, and I mean, say what?
Click to expand...
Ehh? It makes perfect sense: the rear radar will update the missile, probably a LOAL, even capable to be an interceptor (like IRIS-T can hit incoming missiles.)
 
To release or launch a missile rearwise from a Weapon Bay, while you fly at close to Mach 1 is very dangerous. Cause you don't really have control over how the said missile would behave, it could bounce right up into the body of the aircraft due to the airflow going the opposite direction.

Perhaps you could launch it directly downward from the airframe to help increase the actually range of the missile, you don't have to make it go a complete 180 turn around in the first place.

But that is also highly unlikely.
 
 
t.me

ПАО «ОАК»

В декабре совершил первый полёт очередной усовершенствованный стратегический ракетоносец Ту-160М, разработанный ПАО «Туполев». Летчики выполнили маневры, позволяющие проверить устойчивость и управляемость самолёта в воздухе, работоспособность самолётных систем и двигателей, а также бортового...
t.me t.me
https://twitter.com/x/status/1604746273869172736
View: https://twitter.com/KomissarWhipla/status/1604746273869172736
 
Second newly builded Tu-160M and another one modernized are begins ground trials

View: https://youtu.be/xaX7q4H_mlY


uacrussia.ru

Два стратегических ракетоносца Ту-160М переданы на лётно-испытательную станцию

Новости дочерних компаний ОАК, новости ДЗО
uacrussia.ru uacrussia.ru

Also
First newly builded Tu-160M continued flight tests, now with fully-operational DIRCM system

 

Attachments

  • 30ob7rsfavx9038gckw7qd8yfcied2r4.jpg
    30ob7rsfavx9038gckw7qd8yfcied2r4.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 73
  • v5pmf9lbnnc5pzzh0enr9ogjxbluoqgc.jpg
    v5pmf9lbnnc5pzzh0enr9ogjxbluoqgc.jpg
    2.7 MB · Views: 59
  • dfi2z85uj63nc2chwandwyafswtyfp95.jpg
    dfi2z85uj63nc2chwandwyafswtyfp95.jpg
    3.9 MB · Views: 146
QuadroFX said:
Second newly builded Tu-160M and another one modernized are begins ground trials

View: https://youtu.be/xaX7q4H_mlY


uacrussia.ru

Два стратегических ракетоносца Ту-160М переданы на лётно-испытательную станцию

Новости дочерних компаний ОАК, новости ДЗО
uacrussia.ru uacrussia.ru

Also
First newly builded Tu-160M continued flight tests, now with fully-operational DIRCM system

Click to expand...

That is a truly massive bomb bay, what sort of guided weapons will the new modernised Tu-160s carry? Would they carry GPS guided weapons?
 
I was under the impression these were predominantly cruise missile platforms for Kh-101 and the like, but I don't know their weapon loadouts well.
 
Regarding bomb-bays for supersonic drops...

Was it PLUTO / SLAM that would slide them out of tail ?? Perhaps with a stabilising drogue ?? IIRC, was the only way to prevent turbulence tumbling everything apart, or potentially tossing even a rotating bay's 'drop' back against fuselage ??

( I'm reminded of the fatal woes a supersonic recon drone encountered when launched supersonic... )
 
Last edited:
QuadroFX said:
FighterJock said:
QuadroFX said:
FighterJock said:
Would they carry GPS guided weapons?
Click to expand...
No, it is impossible.
Click to expand...

Thanks QuadroFX, so it is just going to be a missile carrier, that is a shame.
Click to expand...
Don't know what you think of, but it is impossible to use any GPS-systems on Russian weapon-systems, only GLONASS.
How do you think you reacted if anybody asking about using GLONASS-guided weapons on B-1B? Pff.
Click to expand...

GLONASS was what I was meaning QuadroFX. Sorry. :oops:
 
I'd expect most GPS weapons to be able to use any of the various constellations (Navstar, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou, etc.) since all it takes is slightly different software. My phone can use multiple GPS networks, why not a missile? With the obvious caveat that the encrypted precision signals (P(Y) for Navstar) are not available to all users.
 
TomS said:
I'd expect most GPS weapons to be able to use any of the various constellations (Navstar, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou, etc.) since all it takes is slightly different software. My phone can use multiple GPS networks, why not a missile? With the obvious caveat that the encrypted precision signals (P(Y) for Navstar) are not available to all users.
Click to expand...
Your phone is probably newer ;)
The real answer is : Do you trust any other network then your own?
If country A could detect that enemy B is using their network, they could spoof the coordinates send to the missile and send it somewhere else. ( But as far as I know there is no way of knowing that)
 
One of those satnav networks is Russian owned & controlled.
The others are not.
And many of these others are are owned and controlled by current adversaries (US, EU) of Russia (due to the laters current conduct) and are imposing wide ranging sanctions.
And however much Russia may wish to draw China closer to them in terms of alliance they will not want to rely on them re: satnav (and face major problems if China decides to lock them out at at China’s discretion).
TomS said:
I'd expect most GPS weapons to be able to use any of the various constellations (Navstar, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou, etc.) since all it takes is slightly different software. My phone can use multiple GPS networks, why not a missile? With the obvious caveat that the encrypted precision signals (P(Y) for Navstar) are not available to all users.
Click to expand...
 
The spoofing consideration may well be the answer to why we've seen Western commercial GPS receivers in even modern Russian combat aircraft such as the Su-34. If the US is jamming/spoofing GLONASS, how do you detect that, and will they simultaneously degrade their own system (which Ukraine is presumably using)? Having GPS along for the ride may provide an additional way of detecting attempts to jam GLONASS (by watching for disagreements with GPS) and some redundancy in the event that it happens.

Not sure how well this can be automated for a missile guidance system to switch between the various GNSS networks, though.
 
You could design an algorithm to vote out outlying fixes.

The US used to reserve the possibility of applying Selective Availability to reduce the accuracy of Navstar GPS in specific areas, but they repudiated that years ago because so many civilian users depend on it for life-safety applications.

It's interesting that some civilian observers https://gpsjam.org/) are inferring that there is GPS jamming happening inside Russia, perhaps to interfere with GPS-guided missiles. There may be GLONASS jamming happening in Ukraine as well, but the methodology being used can't tell. It relies on reported navigational accuracy from ADS-B user aircraft. But there are no public ADS-B sharing receivers operating in Ukraine and few if any airborne ADS-B transmitters.
 
Nah not if the source is correct. The missile was stated to have a range of about 6500 klicks. And about ruskies using western satellite navigation it is a good question. I think there are multiple reasons. Increasing accuracy particularly in areas where glonass might not have solid coverage. I also agree with the other potential reasons previously mentioned above.
 
TMA1 said:
Nah not if the source is correct. The missile was stated to have a range of about 6500 klicks. And about ruskies using western satellite navigation it is a good question. I think there are multiple reasons. Increasing accuracy particularly in areas where glonass might not have solid coverage. I also agree with the other potential reasons previously mentioned above.
Click to expand...
IIRC original news article didn't state that particular missile in the bay was Kh-BD with a range of 6500 km. It stated there is such a missile in Tu-160 arsenal. I might be wrong but this is how i understood it.
 
TMA1 said:
Nah not if the source is correct. The missile was stated to have a range of about 6500 klicks. And about ruskies using western satellite navigation it is a good question. I think there are multiple reasons. Increasing accuracy particularly in areas where glonass might not have solid coverage. I also agree with the other potential reasons previously mentioned above.
Click to expand...


Come on, only since a strange source says so it must be that way? How often have there been announcements like this and shown was something totally different. I totally agree with @Scar simply since the missile looks exactly like a Kh-55 with CFTs.

By the way, here is a clear & not-blurred image of that "secret" missile:

1695023154439.png
 
flateric said:
'Strange source' is Commander of the long-range aviation Lieutenant General Sergei Kobylash. And unblurred photo shows the other missile and other type of plane.
Click to expand...


Again, and as such @TMA1 was correct with his post, I need to apologise.

Sorry for this unprofessional posting and I'll try to improve.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom