Tupolev Tu-95 Bear

There is the upgrade of Tu-95. That will ensure them a service decades from now, well the ones that get this latest upgrade that is.
And on top of this, they are slowly producing AND upgrading Tu-160M.

This means they are not in a hurry of getting the Pak-Da into service. But that said, i have no doubt it will happen.
At some point they need to get rid of the hoplessy Navy striker Tu-22M's.. they are something of a dissepointment as a modern Strategical platform by now.

There is also a modernization program for the Tu-22M3. And I don't understand why you consider it hopeless or a disappointment; I think it is generally considered a very capable platform in terms of range, speed, and payload. The fact that all three bomber types are undergoing modernization does indicate PAK DA is a long term plan.

If you take Tu-22M, and try to grade it. Then the ONLY capability that ONLY matters is the combo Weapon and platform!
Unless you get a hard-on seeing it do FAB-500 bombing run over Syria..:p
The Kh-22 and Tu-22M is a symbiosis. Now the world and time has long since moved on. The Kh-22 is long ago seen as antiq weapon. The airframe of Tu-22 was basicly build around the massive Kh-22, hense they are basicly one and the same.
As for mission range on Tu-22, no its not great by any stretch. Even now i think they have put back on the refueling probes due to end of START II treaty.

Now if they made accomondation for say Kinzal or Kh-101 on it.. i would had to change my opinion

The Kh-22 is a pretty fearsome weapon, and moreover there is a modernization/production (not sure if is a refurbishment or not) in the form of the Kh-32. The latter seems like roughly the Kh-22 with modern electronics and seeker. You also apparently are unaware of the Kh-15. Additionally, Russia has stated that Tu-22M3 will be updated to carry Kinzhal, though I think that is a pending modification. The range seems adequate for theater needs;Tu-22M wasn't intended as a strategic platform; it replaced medium ranged platforms like Tu-16 and Tu-22.

The use of free fall ordnance in Syria seems more like a cost saving measure than an absolute limitation.
 
Now if they made accomondation for say Kinzal or Kh-101 on it.. i would had to change my opinion

Kh-50 is basically Kh-101 downsized for Tu-22M3.

Well the Kh-101 has really taken its time.. they got it right in the end with its Trapez design.
Folded wings etc. Fits nicely on the barrel magazin inside Tu-160. All great.

Kh-22(Kh-50?) still looks like a throwback design from the 60's..
Its Huge, its fast. But really, just how deadly is it today against AEGIS and all its missiles today..

Edit:
Did you mean the Kh-55?
I guess we are talking about the Kh-32. But really, its form and size is almost identical to good old Kh-22.

 
Last edited:
There is the upgrade of Tu-95. That will ensure them a service decades from now, well the ones that get this latest upgrade that is.
And on top of this, they are slowly producing AND upgrading Tu-160M.

This means they are not in a hurry of getting the Pak-Da into service. But that said, i have no doubt it will happen.
At some point they need to get rid of the hoplessy Navy striker Tu-22M's.. they are something of a dissepointment as a modern Strategical platform by now.

There is also a modernization program for the Tu-22M3. And I don't understand why you consider it hopeless or a disappointment; I think it is generally considered a very capable platform in terms of range, speed, and payload. The fact that all three bomber types are undergoing modernization does indicate PAK DA is a long term plan.

If you take Tu-22M, and try to grade it. Then the ONLY capability that ONLY matters is the combo Weapon and platform!
Unless you get a hard-on seeing it do FAB-500 bombing run over Syria..:p
The Kh-22 and Tu-22M is a symbiosis. Now the world and time has long since moved on. The Kh-22 is long ago seen as antiq weapon. The airframe of Tu-22 was basicly build around the massive Kh-22, hense they are basicly one and the same.
As for mission range on Tu-22, no its not great by any stretch. Even now i think they have put back on the refueling probes due to end of START II treaty.

Now if they made accomondation for say Kinzal or Kh-101 on it.. i would had to change my opinion

The Kh-22 is a pretty fearsome weapon, and moreover there is a modernization/production (not sure if is a refurbishment or not) in the form of the Kh-32. The latter seems like roughly the Kh-22 with modern electronics and seeker. You also apparently are unaware of the Kh-15. Additionally, Russia has stated that Tu-22M3 will be updated to carry Kinzhal, though I think that is a pending modification. The range seems adequate for theater needs;Tu-22M wasn't intended as a strategic platform; it replaced medium ranged platforms like Tu-16 and Tu-22.

The use of free fall ordnance in Syria seems more like a cost saving measure than an absolute limitation.


The mediocre Bomb bays on Tu-22M does not accomondate for anything else than KaB-500 dude.. in which does not make them mediocre anymore..

And debating if Tu-22M IS a Strategical or NOT as a platform is beside the point. What is important is to have a modern bomber that can deliver multiple different weapons. Different Missions. Not just one singel dedicated one as the Kh-22.

Besides.. Russia do have their "new" Tactical Frontline Bomber. The Su-34. And its far more versitile vs Tu-22M.
 
Last edited:
I hate to see that.

These and Super-Connies are the two loveliest airframes ever, to me.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom