Tu-160M2

[Royalistflyer]

What price the Tu-160M2? Apparently new avionics and new engines. Any thoughts?

[Thrust Augmentation]

Price - Now, who knows, but Russia knocked back the Ukranian ones at $75 million each in the early nineties.

Thoughts - Is it for real, is it another that's been drawn from storage or is it a parts bin special?

[Royalistflyer]

I didn't mean "price" but what do we think. The one rolled out is a parts bin job which has new avionics etc., and intended for testing before re-starting the line.

[Thrust Augmentation]

I'm wondering if it's not just propaganda as the Blackjack has been going back into production several times over the last few years? Can't remember where I read it, but one if not more articles were suggesting that the upgraded avionics were yet to come & not featured in the first M2 airframe.

Any way you look at it the Tu-160 is an impressive aircraft, M2 or not - there are suggestions that 50 M2's will be produced at 3>4 per year. Will the Tu-160 although less numerous become Russia's long standing stalwart in the same way as the B-52 is to the US?

[ORAC]

Russia rolls out first newly built Tu-160 Blackjack strategic bomber (http://www.aviationanalysis.net/2017/11/russia-rolls-out-first-newly-built-tu160m-strategic-bomber.html)

TASS: Military & Defense - Russia to upgrade Tu-22M3 strategic bombers in 2018 (http://tass.com/defense/976261)

[A_Van]

I'm wondering if it's not just propaganda ....



Yes.
Some experts here already mentioned several times that all the Russian stuff is made of plastic and worth nothing. Thus, no worries for those across the pond :rolleyes:

[MPN11]

I don't suppose any of this might be 'fake news' generated by the Russians?

No, perish the thought. Obviously it's a new arms race to scare the West.

[Cazalet33]

here are suggestions that 50 M2's will be produced at 3>4 per year. Will the Tu-160 although less numerous become Russia's long standing stalwart in the same way as the B-52 is to the US?

Woohoo! Scarey, innit.

At that rate it will take them 215 years to make as many Blackjacks as B52s that have already been made.

"Bomber gap", anyone?

[Thrust Augmentation]

Woohoo! Scarey, innit.

At that rate it will take them 215 years to make as many Blackjacks as B52s that have already been made.

"Bomber gap", anyone?

No way, that long - I couldn't calculate the timescale by myself....

Bomber gap - 50 in around 14 years would give a force of around 65, not far away from operational B-52 numbers.

Should bomber gap still interest you have a look at maybe B1-B vs Tu-22M3 numbers. What the Tu may lack is spec, it makes up for in numbers does it not?

[YellowTom]

Whenever anyone builds new combat aircraft it’s never good news so even with a slow rate of production it’s not good news. Counting the “gaps” doesn’t help when all it takes is one with a new EW sig no one was looking for to slip through and make the headlines. Anyway, doesn’t Russia already have more combat capable bombers than the US? They knew what they were doing in many ways with their missions to Syria.

[dead_pan]

1970s (60s?) vintage airframe with a makeover? What they really need to do is start afresh with a brand new design - that's the only way Russia will be taken seriously on the world stage ;)

[Heathrow Harry]

yeah but they can do it (relatively ) quickly whereas a state of the art new build will take them 15 years to in-service

If they aren't going to use them against the USA they still have an awful lot of utility against quite a bit of the rest of the world - including China and W Europe.

Presumably they found them very useful in their Middle East meddling