Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RuAF News and development Thread part 15

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 15 (1 members and 14 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • WP840
    Whisky Papa
    • Feb 2006
    • 1962

    How does the Russian AWACS compare to it's American equivalents?
    If you're not living on the edge then you're taking up too much space!

    Comment

    • KGB
      KGB
      Senior Member
      • Mar 2016
      • 1426

      Is this tu 160m a new bird or not ? Even if its a prototype. Why would you need a prototype for a reproduction ? It matters. The nay sayers are out in droves and not believing it. They think its a refit.

      if its new, we need some proof

      Comment

      • paralay
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Aug 2005
        • 1411

        This plane, most likely, was made before 1991. Now it was equipped with equipment and engines. Tu-160M2 will be completely new

        Comment

        • haavarla
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Dec 2008
          • 6699

          It would be the same as those "new" build Su-27SM3. The Tu is newly assembled by stocked parts from older production.
          It doesn't matter. This is a new Tu-160, period.
          Thanks

          Comment

          • Deino
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Jan 2000
            • 4226

            It would be the same as those "new" build Su-27SM3. The Tu is newly assembled by stocked parts from older production.
            It doesn't matter. This is a new Tu-160, period.
            Not exactly. NEW in the meaning of a "new-built" and that's no question indeed, but if You look at some media outlets from certain Russian "sources", which state it is a complete redesigned aircraft featuring a 100% new internal structure + materials and only shape-wise they are the same it is not a new bird if it is built from parts constructed around 1991+.

            That's the point.
            ...

            He was my North, my South, my East and West,
            My working week and my Sunday rest,
            My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
            I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

            The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
            Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
            Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
            For nothing now can ever come to any good.
            -------------------------------------------------
            W.H.Auden (1945)

            Comment

            • haavarla
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Dec 2008
              • 6699

              Deino. What have we learned from taking news media outlets seriously?

              This is a new Tu-160 with a new serial or tail number. Its a new addition to the existing Tu-160 fleet.
              Now you guys don't think they made a few improvements as well?

              We are basicly debating nothing here..
              Last edited by haavarla; 18th November 2017, 17:56.
              Thanks

              Comment

              • JSR
                JSR
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Aug 2011
                • 4976

                Where is Russia getting all the money to pour into bomber updates. I can see the reason for more Tu-160M2s, but now the Tu-22 upgrades. Wish they would concentrate on PAK-DA big time and get on with it. I know the workshops need modernizing, but the Tu-160M2 production line will do that. Cockpit all glass, new radar, electronics, ECM systems etc, put all into Tu-160M2s and then get your stealth bomber out. Their bomber fleet is almost as big as the US and yet their fighter forces are 25%-30% of the US.
                There shall not be any problem with money. They are going to do the largest and most complex exercises in Far East.
                Fighters are less needed than bombers. Bombers give you standoff capability against naval vessels like Pacific. And in one sortie destroy much more targets.
                There is more space for protection and laser weopon. more engine power for Radar like big Ship.
                http://tass.com/defense/951195
                Russias modernized strategic bombers to get protection from all types of missiles

                Comment

                • Trident
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • May 2004
                  • 3965

                  Originally posted by Sab3r329 View Post
                  EDIT: What the **** is this? I have never seen it before. -> http://npk-spp.ru/deyatelnost/avioni...stantsiya.html
                  Panoramic IR scanner - a bit like EODAS for ground based air defences in function, though based on a scanning-mirror sensor (think DDM-NG or PIMAWS).

                  Something very similar is found on the German Wiesel LeFlaSys SHORADS, which has a rotating turret though (seen that thing in action a couple of years ago, the rotational speed has to be seen to be believed - I'd estimate about 120rpm):

                  http://data3.primeportal.net/apc/ulr...t_22_of_31.jpg
                  sigpic

                  Comment

                  • TomcatViP
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Nov 2011
                    • 6109

                    Multi-spectral and small targets are words of importance. It might be a sensor for counter-uas systems (micro) and sniper detection.
                    Last edited by TomcatViP; 18th November 2017, 18:05.

                    Comment

                    • Deino
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Jan 2000
                      • 4226

                      Deino. What have we learned from taking news media outlets seriously?

                      This is a new Tu-160 with a new serial or tail number. Its a new addition to the existing Tu-160 fleet.
                      Now you guys don't think they made a few improvements as well?

                      We are basicly debating nothing here..
                      Yes and no. I agree with you, that taking news outlets seriously not always leads to facts ... but in certain forums just a certain group of - to be careful - "Russian-supporters exactly claim such things and if You question alone such statements or such news outlets they immediately condemn you as biased, anti-Russian and so on. Exactly these guys are hyping nothing to everything.

                      Point is: it is based on an old - in fact very old - airframe, finished with new engines, new avionics and maybe certain new parts but structure-wise it is the old Tu-160 ... just a new-built. Period, and IMO discussing these differences is not talking about nothing.

                      Deino
                      ...

                      He was my North, my South, my East and West,
                      My working week and my Sunday rest,
                      My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
                      I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

                      The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
                      Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
                      Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
                      For nothing now can ever come to any good.
                      -------------------------------------------------
                      W.H.Auden (1945)

                      Comment

                      • TomcatViP
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Nov 2011
                        • 6109

                        - to be careful - "Russian-supporters exactly claim such things and if You question alone such statements or such news outlets they immediately condemn you as biased, anti-Russian and so on. Exactly these guys are hyping nothing to everything.
                        If you think it happens only in Russia...

                        Comment

                        • TR1
                          TR1
                          http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                          • Oct 2010
                          • 9821

                          which state it is a complete redesigned aircraft featuring a 100% new internal structure + materials and only shape-wise they are the same it is not a new bird if it is built from parts constructed around 1991+.
                          Kind of like how in some places Chinese supporters try to claim vast internal changes and advances in Flanker ripoffs. So what?

                          From the photos of the stored aiframe, they had a significant amount of work to do to finish the bird up. Given how many enterprises are involved across Russia and how long of a break KAPO has had in building Tu-160s, this is a major accomplishment and people are rightfully happy. This is a major step towards future Tu-160M2 production, and even a completely vanilla Tu-160 is a big boon to a small existing force.
                          sigpic

                          Comment

                          • KRATOS1133
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Mar 2013
                            • 37

                            I got some avia-porn for ya





                            Comment

                            • KGB
                              KGB
                              Senior Member
                              • Mar 2016
                              • 1426

                              @Deino
                              just a new-built
                              That's all that im asking. It wouldnt be called a tu 160 if it was a new design. So to even ponder that is illogical.


                              Military equipment is not like consumer goods. Nothing would change on the tu 160 if there wasn't a new aerodynamic breakthrough. And if there was, they would call it something else. Because it wouldn;t be a tu 160 if it was different.

                              But watch all the nay sayers take advantage of this confusion. USA stronks will say, only after confronted with pictures proving that more than 16 tu 160's exist, that these are mothballed ones that weren't destroyed when they were supposed to be back in 91. (I dont mean on this forum. But its already being said elsewhere)

                              The last B1 Lancer was produced in 1988.
                              Last edited by KGB; 18th November 2017, 19:12.

                              Comment

                              • Marcellogo
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Jun 2014
                                • 1838

                                @ Whisky Papa

                                Compared to the A-50 and E-3, A-100 radar is an AESA and for the look of it there are new radars both above than under the cockpit + a quite large set new antennas on the top of T-shaped tail, + jammers on the wingtip, so surely a way greater ESM and ECM capability.
                                Last edited by Marcellogo; 18th November 2017, 21:26.

                                Comment

                                • Lonevolk
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Aug 2005
                                  • 746

                                  Point is: it is based on an old - in fact very old - airframe, finished with new engines, new avionics and maybe certain new parts but structure-wise it is the old Tu-160 ... just a new-built. Period, and IMO discussing these differences is not talking about nothing.

                                  Deino
                                  It is well known that there are 4 unfinished airframes from the early 90's which will be finished as part of the Tu-160M2 project...why is this such a big revelation ??

                                  Comment

                                  • stealthflanker
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • Sep 2015
                                    • 1016

                                    Im curious on what solution employed by A-100. is it like Phalcon or like E-2D Hawkeye :3.

                                    Comment

                                    • KGB
                                      KGB
                                      Senior Member
                                      • Mar 2016
                                      • 1426

                                      @Lonewalk

                                      There were some titanium sub structures left over. No wings , tail or anything that you'd call a jet.

                                      Comment

                                      • meme expert
                                        Rank 4 Registered User
                                        • Sep 2017
                                        • 45

                                        So now the AWACS will also serve an ESM role ?

                                        Comment

                                        • KGB
                                          KGB
                                          Senior Member
                                          • Mar 2016
                                          • 1426

                                          Surprised that there's no talk of tu 160 export to india yet

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X