The TU-95 Bear Lives On
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
The TU-95 Bear Lives On
I wonder which will stay in service longer, the TU-95 or the B-52? Apologies for the hack-handed translation - via google.
"Туполев" получил госконтракт на глубокую модернизацию "стратега" Ту-95МС
Tupolev received state contract for a deep modernization of the strategic Tu-95MS
Moscow. 13 August. INTERFAX.RU - Tupolev has signed a contract with the Russian Defense Ministry to create a deeply modernized strategic missile carrier Tu-95MSM, the company's general director, Alexander Konyukhov, told Interfax.
"The contract for deep modernization - Tu-95MSM - was signed a month and a half ago, and the work was deployed at the Taganrog Aviation Plant (Beriev-IFTTC) ," said Konyukhov. "The first Tu-95MSM departure is planned for the end of 2019," said the head of Tupolev. He also noted that the decision to upgrade the fleet of Tu-95MS military aircraft will be made by the Ministry of Defense following the results of state tests.
In addition, the state tests of the strategic missile carrier Tu-95MS with the upgraded engine NK-12MPM are currently underway - they will be completed by the end of 2018. "The tests are proceeding successfully, the ICG (state joint tests - IF) we will complete by the end of this year," said Konyukhov. He noted that during the tests the strategic missile carrier Tu-95MS with the modernized engine confirms the declared characteristics.
As reported, at the moment on a planned basis, major repairs and upgrades of the strategic missile carriers Tu-160 and Tu-95MS are being carried out, which significantly prolongs their service life. Also "Tupolev" is working on creating prototypes of deeply modernized Tu-160M aircraft. Chief of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces Valery Gerasimov earlier stated that within the modernization of the Tu-160 and Tu-95MS, "they install more powerful engines, on-board radio electronic equipment is transferred to the domestic element base, and the range of weapons used is being expanded."
The chairman of the State Duma Defense Committee, Vladimir Shamanov, reported that Tu-160 and Tu-95MS aircraft were being modernized for the use of new long-range cruise missiles.
In June, the source of Interfax in the aviation industry reported that all the long-range Tu-95MS long-range aircraft will receive new navigation equipment in place of the morally obsolete, developed in the 60-70s of the last century. Then Konyukhov, responding to a question from the agency, said that "the installation of modern flight and navigation equipment for combat aircraft was financed by the Ministry of Defense and carried out by the forces of Tupolev on schedule."
The strategic missile carriers Tu-95MS and Tu-160 are an air component of the nuclear triad.Tu-95MS is designed to solve shock problems to defeat the most important targets in remote areas and in the deep rear of the continental theaters of military operations. Long-range aircraft of the Russian Air Force were involved in the Syrian operation, for the strategic missile carriers Tu-160 and Tu-95MS it was the first combat application. According to Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, during the operation in Syria, the Russian "strategists" Tu-160 and Tu-95MS struck 66 blows with cruise missiles at the targets of terrorists, each of which destroyed the target.
"Туполев" получил госконтракт на глубокую модернизацию "стратега" Ту-95МС
Tupolev received state contract for a deep modernization of the strategic Tu-95MS
Moscow. 13 August. INTERFAX.RU - Tupolev has signed a contract with the Russian Defense Ministry to create a deeply modernized strategic missile carrier Tu-95MSM, the company's general director, Alexander Konyukhov, told Interfax.
"The contract for deep modernization - Tu-95MSM - was signed a month and a half ago, and the work was deployed at the Taganrog Aviation Plant (Beriev-IFTTC) ," said Konyukhov. "The first Tu-95MSM departure is planned for the end of 2019," said the head of Tupolev. He also noted that the decision to upgrade the fleet of Tu-95MS military aircraft will be made by the Ministry of Defense following the results of state tests.
In addition, the state tests of the strategic missile carrier Tu-95MS with the upgraded engine NK-12MPM are currently underway - they will be completed by the end of 2018. "The tests are proceeding successfully, the ICG (state joint tests - IF) we will complete by the end of this year," said Konyukhov. He noted that during the tests the strategic missile carrier Tu-95MS with the modernized engine confirms the declared characteristics.
As reported, at the moment on a planned basis, major repairs and upgrades of the strategic missile carriers Tu-160 and Tu-95MS are being carried out, which significantly prolongs their service life. Also "Tupolev" is working on creating prototypes of deeply modernized Tu-160M aircraft. Chief of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces Valery Gerasimov earlier stated that within the modernization of the Tu-160 and Tu-95MS, "they install more powerful engines, on-board radio electronic equipment is transferred to the domestic element base, and the range of weapons used is being expanded."
The chairman of the State Duma Defense Committee, Vladimir Shamanov, reported that Tu-160 and Tu-95MS aircraft were being modernized for the use of new long-range cruise missiles.
In June, the source of Interfax in the aviation industry reported that all the long-range Tu-95MS long-range aircraft will receive new navigation equipment in place of the morally obsolete, developed in the 60-70s of the last century. Then Konyukhov, responding to a question from the agency, said that "the installation of modern flight and navigation equipment for combat aircraft was financed by the Ministry of Defense and carried out by the forces of Tupolev on schedule."
The strategic missile carriers Tu-95MS and Tu-160 are an air component of the nuclear triad.Tu-95MS is designed to solve shock problems to defeat the most important targets in remote areas and in the deep rear of the continental theaters of military operations. Long-range aircraft of the Russian Air Force were involved in the Syrian operation, for the strategic missile carriers Tu-160 and Tu-95MS it was the first combat application. According to Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, during the operation in Syria, the Russian "strategists" Tu-160 and Tu-95MS struck 66 blows with cruise missiles at the targets of terrorists, each of which destroyed the target.
Interesting ORAC. Saw my first Bear in 1973, somewhere North of the Shetlands during an Op Dragonfly sortie. Amazing to think that these aircraft could conceivably achieve a century in service, even though there will probably be something of the "Trigger's broom" about them.
(PS I am intrigued by "morally obsolete" navigation equipment!)
(PS I am intrigued by "morally obsolete" navigation equipment!)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Lighten up, the translation is a fairly accurate one of the sense of the original - and applies to the navigation equipment which if 60s era is probably the equivalent of NDB. Note I compared the upgrade and life of the TU-95 to that of the B-52.
p.s. it’s decrepitude, not decrepitness.....
p.s. it’s decrepitude, not decrepitness.....
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends a lot on how you define "longer". If longer means the latest calendar date then the TU-95 has a big advantage in that the last Bear H (TU-95MS) was built in 86 and the last Buff in 62, a 24 year difference. If longer means the most calendar years in continuous service then the TU-95 still has the advantage. Both the Bear and Buff first flew in late 52 and have been in continuous service since. But the Bear enjoyed a much longer production period, with the last Bear being delivered 24 years after the last Buff. On the other hand, USAF is investing a LOT of money to keep the Buff relevant and safely flying for a few more decades. And the Buff has the advantage of being able to accept modern commercially developed and supported engines, while the Bear is dependent on engines unique to the Bear. It's hard to say how much longer those turboprops will remain supportable, and that may be the driving factor rather than airframe fatigue life.
Page 29.
88 Tu-95MS built by factory # 86 at Taganrog & factory # 18 at Kuibyshev-Bezymyanka. Initial production was at factory # 86 at Taganrog, but in late 1982/early 1983 it was transferred to Kuibyshev again, where it continued until 1992 (the production line was scrapped in 1995).
I was working at Lockheed Air Service at KIDL in 1959 when the TU-114 arrived bearing Frol Kozlov who was, I think, the president of the Soviet Union under Stalin. Kozlov was to meet President Eisenhower. The TU-114 transport was to the TU-95 Bear bomber as the Stratocruiser was to the B-29/B-50.
The TU-114 was certainly impressive. It was parked across the ramp from our maintenance office in the IAB. I was on midnight shift and of course had gone over to gawk at it. It was cordoned off of course and guarded by Port Authority police. A group of men wearing suspiciously clean Pan American mechanic's coveralls appeared. Up drove a Port Authority van and all the police went into it and drove away. One of the Pan Am dressed people pulled the boarding stand which, even at its maximum extension had required an extension ladder to reach the pax door. The Russians on board were not amused and were yelling loudly but stranded way up there.
Having implicated Pan Am enough the men pulled a quick change and now wore TWA coveralls. Their leader approached our little Lockheed group who had retreated to our line office. He produced a letter from a person who sat atop the entire Lockheed Aircraft Company requiring us to assist these gentlemen in any way they wanted.
What followed then was sheer joy for me, carrying a ladder and assisting a structural expert. He had a hand-held hardness tester which he applied to struts, prop blades, skin and other parts. A small camera took a rapid succession of shots of the very impressive welds the Russians used to put the gear together. Some were huge in size. obviously had done but of excellent quality. He applied a gauge made of thin steel sections and locked it and got the airfoil profile of the props blade. Another of these men, I think by then he was wearing a Northwest coverall was atop our van behind an engine and was shooting pictures up the tailpipe.We finally all cleared off, the Police returned and eventually the boarding steps were driven back up.
Meanwhile, during the time that followed, Pan American was busy pilot training with the first B.707 deliveries. Also very impressive, thundering down the runway and then rotating and- climbing away quite steeply on a pillar of dense black smoke. They wee of course all JT3C powered water wagons but they only had training fuel on board and an empty cabin and so were quite light. The Russians must have noted these
Finally the TU-114 was to go home, nonstop to Moscow no less. It was night and I don't think the neighborhood around Idlewile (now JFK) got any sleep for, even at idle, the noise from those engines and contra-props was thunderous. It taxied out and every airline employee around was out on the IAB ramp to see it go. It had a large orangy-red anti-collision light atop the towering fin which was distinctive. She lined up and the power went up. Even across more than a mile of airfield your very gut pulsed in time with the roar. He rolled and rolled and finally way out there we saw it lift. It went up a bit and then the nose lifted some more as if the pilot was trying to imitate thise B.707 trainer takeoffs. I swear the aircraft appeared to sink and there were cries and gasps from the crowd. Down went the nose and we all watched that orangy-red light slowly climb up and away.
The US Air Force folks we had assisted that first night had advised us not to discuss this. However I think 59 years is long enough and I suspect their tech report has been stamped de-classified by now..
The TU-114 was certainly impressive. It was parked across the ramp from our maintenance office in the IAB. I was on midnight shift and of course had gone over to gawk at it. It was cordoned off of course and guarded by Port Authority police. A group of men wearing suspiciously clean Pan American mechanic's coveralls appeared. Up drove a Port Authority van and all the police went into it and drove away. One of the Pan Am dressed people pulled the boarding stand which, even at its maximum extension had required an extension ladder to reach the pax door. The Russians on board were not amused and were yelling loudly but stranded way up there.
Having implicated Pan Am enough the men pulled a quick change and now wore TWA coveralls. Their leader approached our little Lockheed group who had retreated to our line office. He produced a letter from a person who sat atop the entire Lockheed Aircraft Company requiring us to assist these gentlemen in any way they wanted.
What followed then was sheer joy for me, carrying a ladder and assisting a structural expert. He had a hand-held hardness tester which he applied to struts, prop blades, skin and other parts. A small camera took a rapid succession of shots of the very impressive welds the Russians used to put the gear together. Some were huge in size. obviously had done but of excellent quality. He applied a gauge made of thin steel sections and locked it and got the airfoil profile of the props blade. Another of these men, I think by then he was wearing a Northwest coverall was atop our van behind an engine and was shooting pictures up the tailpipe.We finally all cleared off, the Police returned and eventually the boarding steps were driven back up.
Meanwhile, during the time that followed, Pan American was busy pilot training with the first B.707 deliveries. Also very impressive, thundering down the runway and then rotating and- climbing away quite steeply on a pillar of dense black smoke. They wee of course all JT3C powered water wagons but they only had training fuel on board and an empty cabin and so were quite light. The Russians must have noted these
Finally the TU-114 was to go home, nonstop to Moscow no less. It was night and I don't think the neighborhood around Idlewile (now JFK) got any sleep for, even at idle, the noise from those engines and contra-props was thunderous. It taxied out and every airline employee around was out on the IAB ramp to see it go. It had a large orangy-red anti-collision light atop the towering fin which was distinctive. She lined up and the power went up. Even across more than a mile of airfield your very gut pulsed in time with the roar. He rolled and rolled and finally way out there we saw it lift. It went up a bit and then the nose lifted some more as if the pilot was trying to imitate thise B.707 trainer takeoffs. I swear the aircraft appeared to sink and there were cries and gasps from the crowd. Down went the nose and we all watched that orangy-red light slowly climb up and away.
The US Air Force folks we had assisted that first night had advised us not to discuss this. However I think 59 years is long enough and I suspect their tech report has been stamped de-classified by now..
Last edited by tonytales; 17th Aug 2018 at 04:41.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 65
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tonytales,
Many thanks for sharing this your very interesting personal experience, impressive.
As for the plane itself, IMHO it was recognized long ago (as soon as long-range A2S stuff appeared) that all those beasts (like Tu-95 and B-52) are just platforms to carry missiles without any requirements (anymore) to break (or squeeze through) the ADS. In this capacity they can serve until they can fly.
As for "morally obsolete", this straightforward translation indeed sounds funny (like any idiom that does not have a good equivalent in another language). Actually this means obsolete design, though hardware itself maybe quite new and robust. E.g., somewhere in the world there are still cars being produced with carburator engines, and for them this term is also applicable (in Rus lang.).
Many thanks for sharing this your very interesting personal experience, impressive.
As for the plane itself, IMHO it was recognized long ago (as soon as long-range A2S stuff appeared) that all those beasts (like Tu-95 and B-52) are just platforms to carry missiles without any requirements (anymore) to break (or squeeze through) the ADS. In this capacity they can serve until they can fly.
As for "morally obsolete", this straightforward translation indeed sounds funny (like any idiom that does not have a good equivalent in another language). Actually this means obsolete design, though hardware itself maybe quite new and robust. E.g., somewhere in the world there are still cars being produced with carburator engines, and for them this term is also applicable (in Rus lang.).
Perhaps "Conceptually obsolete" would be a better translation?
"Morally" just isn't the right word at all, it has no application at all that's relevant to the usage here.
"Morally" just isn't the right word at all, it has no application at all that's relevant to the usage here.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" It's hard to say how much longer those turboprops will remain supportable "
I guess - if it's an important enough weapons system they'll pay whatever it takes - until someone can sell them the idea of something newer I guess.............
I guess - if it's an important enough weapons system they'll pay whatever it takes - until someone can sell them the idea of something newer I guess.............
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Tonytales,
Not just back then. Back in the 1980s when contra-rotating unducted fans were seen as the next big thing there was much interest in the Bear engines and gearbox; so much so that RR persuaded the MOD that they could learn a lot by recording the sound of the engines from astern in flight.
Sparing no expense on such a high-tech endeavour, one of the LU QRA F-4s was fitted hooks on the inside of the canopy frames and the pilot and navigator each issued with portable tape recorders and microphones. The next time they were scrambled for a Bear intercept they duly hung the mikes on the hooks, started their recorders and then sat in the engine wake for the next 60 minutes recording.
No permanent damage to their hearing - I think......
Not just back then. Back in the 1980s when contra-rotating unducted fans were seen as the next big thing there was much interest in the Bear engines and gearbox; so much so that RR persuaded the MOD that they could learn a lot by recording the sound of the engines from astern in flight.
Sparing no expense on such a high-tech endeavour, one of the LU QRA F-4s was fitted hooks on the inside of the canopy frames and the pilot and navigator each issued with portable tape recorders and microphones. The next time they were scrambled for a Bear intercept they duly hung the mikes on the hooks, started their recorders and then sat in the engine wake for the next 60 minutes recording.
No permanent damage to their hearing - I think......
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Lost, but often Indonesia
Posts: 652
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Dook,
When you say the Bear was noisy, how noisy is noisy? So noisy it was an ordeal? I suppose it's hard to quantify without knowing dB numbers. I'm also curious to know how noisy it usually was in your own aircraft, would you be able to converse normally if someone was next to you or is that out of the question? Was there much difference between the different types you flew and between say a 50's fighter and a more modern type? And is a jet fighter radically noisier than an airliner? I'm guessing yes as the engine is only a few metres behind you compared to 20 metres or so a B777? Sorry for all the questions about something I'll never be able to experience for myself! (I have been up the front of modern airliners in flight).
Cheers
Octane
When you say the Bear was noisy, how noisy is noisy? So noisy it was an ordeal? I suppose it's hard to quantify without knowing dB numbers. I'm also curious to know how noisy it usually was in your own aircraft, would you be able to converse normally if someone was next to you or is that out of the question? Was there much difference between the different types you flew and between say a 50's fighter and a more modern type? And is a jet fighter radically noisier than an airliner? I'm guessing yes as the engine is only a few metres behind you compared to 20 metres or so a B777? Sorry for all the questions about something I'll never be able to experience for myself! (I have been up the front of modern airliners in flight).
Cheers
Octane
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Dook,
When you say the Bear was noisy, how noisy is noisy? So noisy it was an ordeal? I suppose it's hard to quantify without knowing dB numbers. I'm also curious to know how noisy it usually was in your own aircraft, would you be able to converse normally if someone was next to you or is that out of the question? Was there much difference between the different types you flew and between say a 50's fighter and a more modern type? And is a jet fighter radically noisier than an airliner? I'm guessing yes as the engine is only a few metres behind you compared to 20 metres or so a B777? Sorry for all the questions about something I'll never be able to experience for myself! (I have been up the front of modern airliners in flight).
Cheers
Octane
When you say the Bear was noisy, how noisy is noisy? So noisy it was an ordeal? I suppose it's hard to quantify without knowing dB numbers. I'm also curious to know how noisy it usually was in your own aircraft, would you be able to converse normally if someone was next to you or is that out of the question? Was there much difference between the different types you flew and between say a 50's fighter and a more modern type? And is a jet fighter radically noisier than an airliner? I'm guessing yes as the engine is only a few metres behind you compared to 20 metres or so a B777? Sorry for all the questions about something I'll never be able to experience for myself! (I have been up the front of modern airliners in flight).
Cheers
Octane
Even after all these years the TU-114 (an obviously the TU-95 Bear) were unique - In later years my office was in an Eastern Air hangar near the end of a runway. I could barely hear most aircraft powering up for takeoff but when Braniff started bringing the Concorde down, it certainly got my attention. However, it was a thunderous roar. The Russki beasts had a throbbing, pulsing sound (certainly from the props) that got into your very chest and guts.
I saw the unducted fan engine at the P&QW museum a couple of years back. One could see at a glance that it was a loser in the noise category.
I saw the unducted fan engine at the P&QW museum a couple of years back. One could see at a glance that it was a loser in the noise category.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Always struck me as strange that the A-400M guys never thought of using NK-12's - or at least brought the Russians into the engine project - a de-rated NK-12 might have been a better bet than the developing a new turboprop but I guess the cash flow wouldn't have been as attractive
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allow a Russian engine manufacturer to get in on the latest engine technology we have, or are/were developing!
Got any more brilliant ideas?
-RP
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fun fact: The NK-12 engine was designed by german Junkers engineers under the leadership of austrian Ferdinand Brandner, that had been deported to the Soviet Union after the war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuznetsov_NK-12
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuznetsov_NK-12