User Panel
Posted: 4/19/2017 7:09:00 PM EDT
its big
not exactly fast (cruise speed of 441 mph) It certainly cant hide from radar The only thing it can really do is carry a nuke or cruise missle it wouldnt really prove useful unless you were trying to attack a 3rd world country Any modern country would pick it up on radar far before it had a chance to actually do anything. |
|
I have pondered the same.
It is very obsolete, especially against modern countries. In for answers. |
|
Quoted:
The only thing it can really do is carry a nuke or cruise missle View Quote It's also old. Not exactly the latest and greatest. The Russians love their cruise missiles. It's also used as a maritime patrol craft I believe. |
|
It's a long range maritime patrol aircraft. Think P8 with counter rotating propellers.
|
|
|
|
A cheap old terd that ties up a trillion dollar f22 or three sounds pretty useful to me.
|
|
Launch massive salvos of AS-4 ASCMs at carrier battle groups from long range to overwhelm defenses.
|
|
In a nuclear war scenario the bombers fly to failsafe, which is obvious and slow. It's kind of a "last invitation to the let's work this out table". The missiles would do the first strike, then the bombers, with a final cleanup by some boomers, ...just to make sure doomsday stays doomsday.
But the TU-95 is still a high flyer and heavy lifter, and would be useful, just like the B-52 is useful, in the kinds of shitty little wars we've had for the last 72 years. |
|
I'd imagine its ECM suite isn't bad for all of those reasons
its the Red version of our BUFF. They do the same thing we do with the BUFF: conventional bombing in areas with air superiority established, cruise missile launching, and maritime patrol---yes we've used the BUFF to find ships a good chunk of their Bears are actually newer than our BUFFs. Last BUFF rolled off the assembly line in June 1962 and I've read that the newest Bears are early 1980s vintage as a BUFF crew chief who knows what its capable of I don't underestimate what either it or the Bear is capable of 2015-2016 time frame the Russian Air Force used them to drop conventional cruise missiles on ISIS and Syrian rebels, so they still are very capable |
|
Quoted:
Growing up in the cold war I a fascinated by this pic Bigly cruise missle http://www.ausairpower.net/VVS/Kh-20-Kangaroo-Bear-C-2S.jpg And its rear turret looked cool http://i.imgur.com/JhbFKym.jpg View Quote |
|
The US is an important country and maintains a fleet of big obsolete bombers.
Russia (strongly wants you to believe) is an important country, therefore maintains a fleet of big even obsoleter bombers too. It's four-dimensional Putin poker and you best keep up. |
|
The TU-95 was designed to launch nuclear tipped cruise missiles to targets that were missed after the main nuclear strike. Meaning it was going to be used as sort of a mop of weapon.
|
|
|
Like many Russian tools, it is as capable as it needs to be for them to do the jobs they want it to do.
It isn't designed to be wiz bang look how cool it is...it is designed to get specific jobs done. It also has uber long range and a large internal volume/weight that it can carry. |
|
|
It's probably cheap to operate and gets them press time for the harassment.
|
|
|
|
Quoted:
its big not exactly fast (cruise speed of 441 mph) It certainly cant hide from radar The only thing it can really do is carry a nuke or cruise missle it wouldnt really prove useful unless you were trying to attack a 3rd world country Any modern country would pick it up on radar far before it had a chance to actually do anything. View Quote Answered your own question |
|
|
I bet none of the crew has any hearing left by the time they leave the service.
|
|
One of the most efficient engines, of its type, ever made. It has range, efficiency, payload and low cost.
It can loiter for years at a fraction of the cost of the blackjack bombers. |
|
|
|
|
If I am reading this correctly the range without ordnance is greater for the B-52 than the TU-95.
They look very similar actually. The climb rate of the B-52 kicks its ass though. TU-95 General characteristics ) Empty weight: 90,000 kg (198,000 lb) Loaded weight: 171,000 kg (376,200 lb) Max. takeoff weight: 188,000 kg (414,500 lb) Powerplant: 4 × Kuznetsov NK-12M turboprops, 11,000 kW (14,800 shp)[45] each Performance Maximum speed: 830 km/h (516 mph)[4] Range: 15,000 km (8,100 nmi, 9,400 mi) unrefueled Service ceiling: 13,716 m (45,000 ft) Rate of climb: 10 m/s (2,000 ft/min) Wing loading: 606 kg/m² (124 lb/ft²) Power/mass: 235 W/kg (0.143 hp/lb) B-52 General characteristics Empty weight: 185,000 lb (83,250 kg) Loaded weight: 265,000 lb (120,000 kg) Max. takeoff weight: 488,000 lb (220,000 kg) Fuel capacity: 47,975 U.S. gal (39,948 imp gal; 181,610 L) Zero-lift drag coefficient: 0.0119 (estimated) Drag area: 47.60 sq?ft (4.42 m²) Aspect ratio: 8.56 Powerplant: 8 × Pratt & Whitney TF33-P-3/103 turbofans, 17,000 lbf (76 kN) each Performance Maximum speed: 560 kn (650 mph, 1,047 km/h) Cruise speed: 442 kn (525 mph, 844 km/h) Combat radius: 4,480 mi (3,890 nmi, 7,210 km) Ferry range: 10,145 mi (8,764 nmi, 16,232 km) Service ceiling: 50,000 ft (15,000 m) Rate of climb: 6,270 ft/min (31.85 m/s) Wing loading: 120 lb/ft² (586 kg/m²) Thrust/weight: 0.31 Lift-to-drag ratio: 21.5 (estimated) |
|
Its job is to sound badass
It does its job: Failed To Load Title |
|
These large bombers could be used to release swarms of drones that don't have the range themselves.
|
|
It's probably the most useful combat aircraft the broke-ass Russians can actually afford to operate on a semi-regular basis.
|
|
Seems to me it would be an effective long range scouting plane to engage carrier groups, notifies the fast movers. Seems to me it would also be an effective cruise missile carrier to engage carrier and convoy groups heading to Europe in WWIII.
I bet it could be used quite effectively if properly planned for. Red Storm Rising sure made it seem plausible. |
|
|
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it"..........
those supersonic , contra-rotating prop blades have an interesting effect on its signature as well...... |
|
It's very versatile, cheaply operated, with some great specs previously mentioned.
and RHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. Posted on another forum ear protection is pretty much negated by the noise. |
|
|
Seems like it's still a great bomb-truck if used appropriately.
|
|
Quoted:
I'd like to see the innards of the prop gearbox. View Quote Failed To Load Title |
|
I'm a BIG fan of U.S. Bomber power!!! BONE, BUFF and SPIRIT.... But I kinda have a soft spot for these... Would be cool if we captured one and called it our own... Wonder if one of those Bombers have ever landed in our Airbases during friendlier times?
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.