FS, I think you missed the point. The Tu5 is NOT strong because of it's weight. It is strong, because it was designed according to higher failure tolerance standards than comparable western jets. The weight penalty is the price for a stronger structure.
I don't think anybody is saying that this is inherently a good thing (not to mention the 8.5 tons/hr fuel consumption...). It simply makes some accidents more survivable in a Tu5 than in other types. Surviveability has nothing to do with the causes leading up to an accident. Both of the MA incidents I outlined above were the result of monumental screwups that should have easily been prevented with a little CRM (and remember, in both cases there were three wise guys up front, not two). However the fact that everybody walked away after both had nothing to do with the causes, and all to do with the strength of the aircraft structure.
Regardless of the direct failure causes, I'm sure in this particular Russian case it certainly helped to have an extra pair of eyes and hands in the cockpit.