Could Blackjack bombers reach USA?

[Mike]

Remember the Soviet "Blackjack" bomber that the U.S.S.R. started to
deploy in the late 1980s?

Wasn't this plane a virtual copy of the American B-1 in many ways?

What about it's range? Could the BlackJack bomber have taken off in
the Soviet Union and bombed the United States?

Or was it closer to a medium-range bomber like the "Backfire"?

[Ken Duffey]

Mike wrote:

> Remember the Soviet "Blackjack" bomber that the U.S.S.R. started to
> deploy in the late 1980s?

First flight 18 December 1981. First production flight 10 October 1984.
Operational with 184th GvTBAP at Priluki, Ukraine, 17 April 1987.

Currently approx 15 operational at Engels, Russia.

> Wasn't this plane a virtual copy of the American B-1 in many ways?

Same general shape, very much larger and supersonic. Max take-off weight
606,260lb - (B-1B - 477,000lb).

Max speed 1,242mph - (B-1B 789mph).

> What about it's range? Could the BlackJack bomber have taken off in
> the Soviet Union and bombed the United States?

Range, loaded on internal fuel - 7,640 miles (B-1B - 3,444 miles)
Equipped for IFR.

> Or was it closer to a medium-range bomber like the "Backfire"?

No

http://mysite.freeserve.com/aircraft_pages/tu-160.html

For a size comparison - scroll down about halfway at :-
http://www.flankerman.fsnet.co.uk/modl_tu160.html

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++

[Henry J. Cobb]

(Mike) wrote in message >...
> Remember the Soviet "Blackjack" bomber that the U.S.S.R. started to
> deploy in the late 1980s?
>
> Wasn't this plane a virtual copy of the American B-1 in many ways?

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/bomber/tu160/index.shtml
Though the Tu-160 bears a remarkable resemblance to the American B-1
bomber, the Blackjack is far larger, being the world's largest combat
aircraft. The cockpit contains joysticks similar to those in fighters,
but the Tu-160 does not have any electronic Heads-Up-Displays (HUDs)
like most western aircraft.

> What about it's range? Could the BlackJack bomber have taken off in
> the Soviet Union and bombed the United States?

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/bomber/tu-160.htm
Range
14.000 km (with a load of 9.000kg)
10.500 km (with a load of 40.000 kg)

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/tu160/
The Tu-16 is capable of carrying the strategic cruise missile Kh-55MS,
which is known in the West by the NATO designation and codename AS-15
Kent.
....
The maximum range is 3,000km, and it is armed with a 200-kiloton
nuclear warhead.

-HJC

[Yossarian]

(Mike) wrote in message >...
> Remember the Soviet "Blackjack" bomber that the U.S.S.R. started to
> deploy in the late 1980s?
>
> Wasn't this plane a virtual copy of the American B-1 in many ways?
>
> What about it's range? Could the BlackJack bomber have taken off in
> the Soviet Union and bombed the United States?
>
> Or was it closer to a medium-range bomber like the "Backfire"?

How interesting you should mention it. See
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3406043.stm for today's BBC article
on the B1-ski.

Pondering,
Yossarian

[Scott Ferrin]

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 20:42:21 +0000, Ken Duffey
> wrote:

>Mike wrote:
>
>> Remember the Soviet "Blackjack" bomber that the U.S.S.R. started to
>> deploy in the late 1980s?
>
>First flight 18 December 1981. First production flight 10 October 1984.
>Operational with 184th GvTBAP at Priluki, Ukraine, 17 April 1987.
>
>Currently approx 15 operational at Engels, Russia.
>
>> Wasn't this plane a virtual copy of the American B-1 in many ways?
>
>Same general shape, very much larger and supersonic. Max take-off weight
>606,260lb - (B-1B - 477,000lb).
>
>Max speed 1,242mph - (B-1B 789mph).
>
>> What about it's range? Could the BlackJack bomber have taken off in
>> the Soviet Union and bombed the United States?
>
>Range, loaded on internal fuel - 7,640 miles (B-1B - 3,444 miles)
>Equipped for IFR.


Those are brochure numbers for the Blackjack. In the real world (at
least as far as FAI records go) the B-1 has the Blackjack beat in the
paylaod/range department.

[Tank Fixer]

In article >,
on 17 Jan 2004 16:29:00 -0800,
Henry J. Cobb attempted to say.....
> Though the Tu-160 bears a remarkable resemblance to the American B-1
> bomber, the Blackjack is far larger, being the world's largest combat
> aircraft.

Say what ?

Larger than a B-52 even ?



--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

[robert arndt]

(Yossarian) wrote in message >...
> (Mike) wrote in message >...
> > Remember the Soviet "Blackjack" bomber that the U.S.S.R. started to
> > deploy in the late 1980s?
> >
> > Wasn't this plane a virtual copy of the American B-1 in many ways?
> >
> > What about it's range? Could the BlackJack bomber have taken off in
> > the Soviet Union and bombed the United States?
> >
> > Or was it closer to a medium-range bomber like the "Backfire"?

Tupolev Tu-160
First Designated: "Aircraft 70" in direct response to B-1A, 1973
First Flight: Dec 19, 1981
Initial Order: 100 aircraft; 30 produced before line closed in 1992
Remaining Aircraft: Russia- 15, Ukraine- 19 original, 8 transferred to
Russia in 99/00, 3 ex-Ukrainian aircraft sold to US as satellite
launchers in 1999, rest scrapped
Crew: 4 (two pilots side-by-side, navigator/bombadier, ESO behind
them)
Powerplants: Four Samara/Trud NK-231 turbofans 30,865 lb dry and
55,115lb w/afterburning
Max. Speed @ 40,000': Mach 2.05
Rate of climb: 13,780 fpm
Ceiling: 49,200'
Radius of action @ Mach 1.3: 1,080nm
Max. Range: 12,300km
Internal fuel: 376,990 lb (in-flight refuelling probe also, seldom
used)
Armament: Max. Load 88,185lb comprising free-fall bombs or ASMs in two
internal bomb bays. One rotary launcher can be carried in each bay to
carry 6 Kh-55MS ALCMs or 12 Kh-15P SRAMs.

- "International Directory of Military Aircraft 2002/2003"

Rob

[Michael Petukhov]

Scott Ferrin > wrote in message >...
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 20:42:21 +0000, Ken Duffey
> > wrote:
>
> >Mike wrote:
> >
> >> Remember the Soviet "Blackjack" bomber that the U.S.S.R. started to
> >> deploy in the late 1980s?
> >
> >First flight 18 December 1981. First production flight 10 October 1984.
> >Operational with 184th GvTBAP at Priluki, Ukraine, 17 April 1987.
> >
> >Currently approx 15 operational at Engels, Russia.
> >
> >> Wasn't this plane a virtual copy of the American B-1 in many ways?
> >
> >Same general shape, very much larger and supersonic. Max take-off weight
> >606,260lb - (B-1B - 477,000lb).
> >
> >Max speed 1,242mph - (B-1B 789mph).
> >
> >> What about it's range? Could the BlackJack bomber have taken off in
> >> the Soviet Union and bombed the United States?
> >
> >Range, loaded on internal fuel - 7,640 miles (B-1B - 3,444 miles)
> >Equipped for IFR.
>
>
> Those are brochure numbers for the Blackjack.

How about B1 are the cited numbers for B1 are brochure numbers
as well?

> In the real world (at
> least as far as FAI records go) the B-1 has the Blackjack beat in the
> paylaod/range department.

In its department where B1 is the only one amybe. Tu160
is much bigger?much faster and longer lange. Anyway
do you have any doubts about the question asked
"Could Blackjack bombers reach USA?"

Michael

[TJ]

"Yossarian"

> How interesting you should mention it. See
> for today's BBC article
> on the B1-ski.
>
> Pondering,
> Yossarian

"Mr Mikhaylov said the long-range bombers would take part in joint
Russian-US exercises over the North Atlantic in 2004. "

Michael must be seething!

TJ

[TJ]

robert arndt wrote:

>3 ex-Ukrainian aircraft sold to US as satellite
> launchers in 1999..

Some dodgy info there in IDMA 2002/3. It was projected but in the end this
did not take place. It should have been plainly obvious to IDMA researchers
that the sale/project did not go ahead.

TJ

[Cub Driver]

>What about it's range? Could the BlackJack bomber have taken off in
>the Soviet Union and bombed the United States?

Well, a late-model Piper Cub could take off in the former USSR and
bomb the United States, or at least that portion of it that is
inhabited by Alaskans.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[BUFDRVR]

>Say what ?
>
>Larger than a B-52 even ?

Actually, yes, but only slightly.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

[BUFDRVR]

>Anyway
>do you have any doubts about the question asked
>"Could Blackjack bombers reach USA?"

Perhaps, but only a very few. Their mission capable rates were as low as 25%,
and that was in 1995.

I've told this story before, but its a good one and still makes me chuckle. In
1995 Barksdale AFB was host to two Russian Bear Bombers (Tu-95), their crews
and leadership. On the second day of their visit, several BUFF and Bear crews
were out on the flightline exchanging tours of their respective aircraft. A
B-1B from Dyess had weather diverted into Barksdale the previous night and as
the BUFF and Bear crews were doing their exterior tour of the Bear, the B-1B
attempted to leave and head back to Dyess. Due to the tremendous noise the B-1
created as it took off, all conversation, both Russian and translated English
stopped and everyone diverted their attention to the B-1 taking off. As the
B-1 got halfway down the runway, and almost directly in front of the Bears, a
puff of white smoke appeared and the throttles were brought back to idle.
Everyone continued to watch as the B-1 taxied to the end of the runway where it
was joined by emergency response vehicles. As the B-1 made the turn off the
runway, hydraulic fluid could be seen, literally, pouring out from underneath
the aircraft. The B-1 stopped, the entry hatch opened and the crew performed an
emergency egress. With the noise now gone, both BUFF and Bear crews returned
their attention to the exterior of the Bear. Before the tour could resume, one
of the Bear crewmembers looked at the others and uttered something in Russian
which made the rest of the Bear crewmembers burst out in laughter. When a BUFF
squadron commander asked what the joke was, the translator looked afraid to
answer. Just then in pretty good English, one of the Bear crewmembers pointed
to the B-1B, now in the hammerhead and surrounded by emergency vehicles and
said; "Just like Tu-160....piece of ****". At that, all the BUFF crews began to
roar with laughter, which made the Bear crews, and their concerned translator,
more relaxed and they began to laugh out loud again. It was truely a moment of
international bonding, crews of bombers built in the 1960s having a laugh at
the expense of their newer "replacement aircraft". Any way, when asked about
the Tu-160's mission capable rate, a rather gruff Russian Colonel said less
than 1 in 4 is flyable at any given time.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

[Scott Ferrin]

>> >Range, loaded on internal fuel - 7,640 miles (B-1B - 3,444 miles)
>> >Equipped for IFR.
>>
>>
>> Those are brochure numbers for the Blackjack.
>
>How about B1 are the cited numbers for B1 are brochure numbers
>as well?

Pretty much from what I understand. The B-1 is definitely faster than
789 mph though I'd be surprised if any operational aircraft had done a
takeoff at 477,000lbs.




>
>> In the real world (at
>> least as far as FAI records go) the B-1 has the Blackjack beat in the
>> paylaod/range department.
>
>In its department where B1 is the only one amybe. Tu160
>is much bigger?much faster and longer lange.


Speed over a closed circuit of 5000 km with 30000 kg payload : 1054.21
km/h

Date of flight: 17/09/1987
Pilot: H. Brent HEDGPETH (USA)
Crew: Robert A. CHAMBERLAIN (copilot)
Course/place: Palmdale, CA (USA)

Aircraft:
Rockwell B-1B (4 General Electric F 101-GE-102, 14 700 kg each)
Registered 'S/N70'



Speed over a closed circuit of 5000 km with 30000 kg payload : 1017.80
km/h

Date of flight: 28/05/1990
Pilot: Serguei OSSIPOV (USSR)
Crew: D.N. MATVEEV (USSR)
Course/place: Podmoskovnoe Aerodrome (USSR)

Aircraft:
Tupolev Aircraft "70N-304" (Tupolev TU-160 "Blackjack") (4 Model "P",
25 000 kg each)



As you can see, with the same 30,000kg payload flown over a distance
of 5000km, the Blackjack was slower than the B-1B. Since the
Blackjack's record attempt was flown at a later date one would assume
they'd try to beat the B-1's. If they did try they failed. The
Blackjack also holds no 10,000km speed records while the B-1 does.
While this in itself doesn't say the Blackjack can't fly that far, it
doesn't exactly help it's case either.



As for the Blackjack being faster, the lower speed of the B-1b was
intentional. The original B-1A reached Mach 2.22 which was faster
than the Blackjack. That speed was judged so important that pretty
much nobody cared when they gave it up. As for the Blackjack being
bigger. . .well if you think an aircraft that needs to be 27% heavier
and 83% more powerful to do an inferior job is something to brag
about. . .well, that's your business.





> Anyway
>do you have any doubts about the question asked
>"Could Blackjack bombers reach USA?"

It probably had the range for a one way trip, but any aircraft that
can fly far enough could say the same.

[Henry J. Cobb]

Tank Fixer > wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> on 17 Jan 2004 16:29:00 -0800,
> Henry J. Cobb attempted to say.....
> > Though the Tu-160 bears a remarkable resemblance to the American B-1
> > bomber, the Blackjack is far larger, being the world's largest combat
> > aircraft.
>
> Say what ?
>
> Larger than a B-52 even ?

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/bomber/tu-160.htm
Maximum take-off weight 275.000 kg

http://globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/b-52-specs.htm
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 488,000 pounds (219,600 kilograms)

-HJC

[Spot]

Yep, the B-1 is a real piece of ****...

Responsible for over 10% of the DMPIs struck in OIF with less than 1% of the
sorties...
9.4 DMPIs struck per sortie...
Went downtown Baghdad and Tikrit everyday, even in broad daylight, sometimes
with no SEAD support...
MC rate better than many aircraft during OIF...
"The weapon of choice"--CAOC Director

Hope you had a good laugh back then...

BONE WSO


"BUFDRVR" > wrote in message
...
> >Anyway
> >do you have any doubts about the question asked
> >"Could Blackjack bombers reach USA?"
>
> Perhaps, but only a very few. Their mission capable rates were as low as
25%,
> and that was in 1995.
>
> I've told this story before, but its a good one and still makes me
chuckle. In
> 1995 Barksdale AFB was host to two Russian Bear Bombers (Tu-95), their
crews
> and leadership. On the second day of their visit, several BUFF and Bear
crews
> were out on the flightline exchanging tours of their respective aircraft.
A
> B-1B from Dyess had weather diverted into Barksdale the previous night and
as
> the BUFF and Bear crews were doing their exterior tour of the Bear, the
B-1B
> attempted to leave and head back to Dyess. Due to the tremendous noise the
B-1
> created as it took off, all conversation, both Russian and translated
English
> stopped and everyone diverted their attention to the B-1 taking off. As
the
> B-1 got halfway down the runway, and almost directly in front of the
Bears, a
> puff of white smoke appeared and the throttles were brought back to idle.
> Everyone continued to watch as the B-1 taxied to the end of the runway
where it
> was joined by emergency response vehicles. As the B-1 made the turn off
the
> runway, hydraulic fluid could be seen, literally, pouring out from
underneath
> the aircraft. The B-1 stopped, the entry hatch opened and the crew
performed an
> emergency egress. With the noise now gone, both BUFF and Bear crews
returned
> their attention to the exterior of the Bear. Before the tour could resume,
one
> of the Bear crewmembers looked at the others and uttered something in
Russian
> which made the rest of the Bear crewmembers burst out in laughter. When a
BUFF
> squadron commander asked what the joke was, the translator looked afraid
to
> answer. Just then in pretty good English, one of the Bear crewmembers
pointed
> to the B-1B, now in the hammerhead and surrounded by emergency vehicles
and
> said; "Just like Tu-160....piece of ****". At that, all the BUFF crews
began to
> roar with laughter, which made the Bear crews, and their concerned
translator,
> more relaxed and they began to laugh out loud again. It was truely a
moment of
> international bonding, crews of bombers built in the 1960s having a laugh
at
> the expense of their newer "replacement aircraft". Any way, when asked
about
> the Tu-160's mission capable rate, a rather gruff Russian Colonel said
less
> than 1 in 4 is flyable at any given time.
>
>
> BUFDRVR
>
> "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
> everyone on Bear Creek"

[Jim Baker]

"BUFDRVR" > wrote in message
...
> >Anyway
> >do you have any doubts about the question asked
> >"Could Blackjack bombers reach USA?"
>
> Perhaps, but only a very few. Their mission capable rates were as low as
25%,
> and that was in 1995.
>
> I've told this story before, but its a good one and still makes me
chuckle. In
> 1995 Barksdale AFB was host to two Russian Bear Bombers (Tu-95), their
crews
> and leadership. On the second day of their visit, several BUFF and Bear
crews
> were out on the flightline exchanging tours of their respective aircraft.
A
> B-1B from Dyess had weather diverted into Barksdale the previous night and
as
> the BUFF and Bear crews were doing their exterior tour of the Bear, the
B-1B
> attempted to leave and head back to Dyess. Due to the tremendous noise the
B-1
> created as it took off, all conversation, both Russian and translated
English
> stopped and everyone diverted their attention to the B-1 taking off. As
the
> B-1 got halfway down the runway, and almost directly in front of the
Bears, a
> puff of white smoke appeared and the throttles were brought back to idle.
> Everyone continued to watch as the B-1 taxied to the end of the runway
where it
> was joined by emergency response vehicles. As the B-1 made the turn off
the
> runway, hydraulic fluid could be seen, literally, pouring out from
underneath
> the aircraft. The B-1 stopped, the entry hatch opened and the crew
performed an
> emergency egress. With the noise now gone, both BUFF and Bear crews
returned
> their attention to the exterior of the Bear. Before the tour could resume,
one
> of the Bear crewmembers looked at the others and uttered something in
Russian
> which made the rest of the Bear crewmembers burst out in laughter. When a
BUFF
> squadron commander asked what the joke was, the translator looked afraid
to
> answer. Just then in pretty good English, one of the Bear crewmembers
pointed
> to the B-1B, now in the hammerhead and surrounded by emergency vehicles
and
> said; "Just like Tu-160....piece of ****". At that, all the BUFF crews
began to
> roar with laughter, which made the Bear crews, and their concerned
translator,
> more relaxed and they began to laugh out loud again. It was truely a
moment of
> international bonding, crews of bombers built in the 1960s having a laugh
at
> the expense of their newer "replacement aircraft". Any way, when asked
about
> the Tu-160's mission capable rate, a rather gruff Russian Colonel said
less
> than 1 in 4 is flyable at any given time.
>
>
> BUFDRVR

That's a great story! Here's another.
In late 1989, my crew was selected to fly a B-1B to Luke AFB for a kind of
static display. This display was arranged as the reciprocal for the
Minister of Defense of the USSR and his staff. You might recall that our
CJCS visited the USSR in the middle/late '80s and this was the U.S. turn to
reciprocate this unprecedented, high-level military exchange. On the ramp
at Luke, arranged in a semi-circle, was a KC-10, C-5, F-15C, F-16, B-1B and
B-52H. At the arranged time we all trooped out to our jets and waited.
Soon, a caravan of civilian stretch limos, suburbans and staff cars pulled
up and out gets a big crowd of military, U.S. & USSR, and civilians. After
some milling about, the civilians (wives of the visitors and their hosts)
head off and the military types walked slowly into the lare semicircle of
aircraft. A couple of minutes later, they come walking with purpose
straight over to us, a Major and three Captains. Sooo, this is my 15
minutes of fame I figure and I stride out to greet the highest ranking
military member of, arguably, the 2nd strongest nation in the world. We
exchange salutes, shake hands, he looks over the Bone, and I ask if he'd
like a tour inside. A hush falls over the crowd, the MoD looks pensive and
says........ "Nyet!" I was relieved since he was a big dude and I'm not
sure it would have been that easy getting him up there. Anyway, he sent two
staff members with me to go inside, and several others with the Co, O and D
for a tour of the outside. I have no idea what rank the two officers were
that went up with me, just that they were bomber pilots who were now working
in the MoD. One of them spoke good English so he translated for the other
guy and me. The Russian only speaker asked pretty innocuous questions about
how the aircraft worked, how it was to fly, my thoughts about its
performance etc. I told him the general P.R. answers but gave him a fairly
detailed description of our mainteance and birthing-of-a-new-weapon system
problems (those were in the news a lot at that time) that our Ops and MX
people were battling through. He listened and said that they were having
the same problems with the Blackjack only much worse. They had difficulty
getting more than a couple of sorties a day off the ground. I told him that
we were getting a lot more off the ground than that and were flying, fleet
wide, several dozen sorties a day. He responded that they knew that in the
MoD and were convinced that the "American Air Force" would solve the
problems and the B-1B would be their biggest air breathing threat. I then
said that I had flown the B-52 for 5 years and that there were many more
B-52s on alert than B-1Bs and he waved his hand and said "...not a problem,
we can shoot down slow B-52, we are not sure about shooting down B-1". (Of
course, the whole world knew that a C-172 could fly into Red Square unharmed
so I took that statement with a grain of salt). After some more
pleasantries, we climbed out and he handed me a couple of little boxes with
hero of the soviet union type trinkets inside and they went on their way to
the next aircraft. I noticed that the MoD and the crew looked in the
fighters, talked to the crew of the Buff and the other heavies but didn't go
inside any off them, and then trooped back to their caravan. They drove out
to some bleachers at midfield and soon the TBirds showed up and did a show.
Before the group left, a Lt Col came up to us in a hurry and asked if we
wanted our picture taken with the VCJCS. I said sure, bring him on over.
LOL. Pretty neat day. Anyway, I got the distinct impression that even in
the early days of the B-1B fielding, the people responsible for planning the
defense of the USSR knew of the teething problems the Bone was going
through, but were distinctly worried about the Bone making it through their
defenses. So I guess the Piece-of-**** scale is proportional and sliding
based on rank and seriousness of the job of the observer.

Regards,

Jim

[Ken Duffey]

BUFDRVR wrote:

> >Anyway
> >do you have any doubts about the question asked
> >"Could Blackjack bombers reach USA?"
>
> Perhaps, but only a very few. Their mission capable rates were as low as 25%,
> and that was in 1995.
>
> I've told this story before, but its a good one and still makes me chuckle. In
> 1995 Barksdale AFB was host to two Russian Bear Bombers (Tu-95), their crews
> and leadership. On the second day of their visit, several BUFF and Bear crews
> were out on the flightline exchanging tours of their respective aircraft. A
> B-1B from Dyess had weather diverted into Barksdale the previous night and as
> the BUFF and Bear crews were doing their exterior tour of the Bear, the B-1B
> attempted to leave and head back to Dyess. Due to the tremendous noise the B-1
> created as it took off, all conversation, both Russian and translated English
> stopped and everyone diverted their attention to the B-1 taking off. As the
> B-1 got halfway down the runway, and almost directly in front of the Bears, a
> puff of white smoke appeared and the throttles were brought back to idle.
> Everyone continued to watch as the B-1 taxied to the end of the runway where it
> was joined by emergency response vehicles. As the B-1 made the turn off the
> runway, hydraulic fluid could be seen, literally, pouring out from underneath
> the aircraft. The B-1 stopped, the entry hatch opened and the crew performed an
> emergency egress. With the noise now gone, both BUFF and Bear crews returned
> their attention to the exterior of the Bear. Before the tour could resume, one
> of the Bear crewmembers looked at the others and uttered something in Russian
> which made the rest of the Bear crewmembers burst out in laughter. When a BUFF
> squadron commander asked what the joke was, the translator looked afraid to
> answer. Just then in pretty good English, one of the Bear crewmembers pointed
> to the B-1B, now in the hammerhead and surrounded by emergency vehicles and
> said; "Just like Tu-160....piece of ****". At that, all the BUFF crews began to
> roar with laughter, which made the Bear crews, and their concerned translator,
> more relaxed and they began to laugh out loud again. It was truely a moment of
> international bonding, crews of bombers built in the 1960s having a laugh at
> the expense of their newer "replacement aircraft". Any way, when asked about
> the Tu-160's mission capable rate, a rather gruff Russian Colonel said less
> than 1 in 4 is flyable at any given time.
>
> BUFDRVR
>
> "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
> everyone on Bear Creek"

Bufdrvr,

I have been meaning to ask you this since last August..........

I visited the MAKS airshow at Zhukovsky, Moscow and amongst the aircraft on display
was an operational example of both the Tu-95MS and Tu-160 from Engels.

Also on display - for the first time - were some visiting USAF a/c - KC-135, C-130,
F-15, F-16 plus a Buff from Minot - I just checked my photo of it - and I can't
make out the full serial - but it was AF xx 027 on the fin and 1027 on the forward
fuselage. It also had a red fin flash with yellow lettering that looks something
like 'Badoms' ??

I took the photo from a tethered balloon at the limit of my lens!

We couldn't get near the crews for the Russian crowd (not that I wanted too - I was
there to see Russian a/c, I can see Buffs at RAF Fairford anytime). The crews of
all the visiting a/c must have been overwhelmed by the Russian public who were
asking for autographs, getting their photos taken with the American running dog
agressors etc

What I wondered was whether you had heard any feedback from these visiting crews??

How was the evil empire ?

How did they enjoy the visit, what was the Russian hospitality like, how were they
treated, what was their impressions of the RusAF etc etc.

How did they route to Moscow - did they mingle with the crews of the Tu-95/Tu-160
etc

Anything ?

Cheers

Ken

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++

[Tank Fixer]

In article >,
on 18 Jan 2004 13:43:18 GMT,
BUFDRVR attempted to say .....

> >Say what ?
> >
> >Larger than a B-52 even ?
>
> Actually, yes, but only slightly.


Ah, ok.
For some reason I'd thought it only a bit larger than a B1.



--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

[Ken Duffey]

Tank Fixer wrote:

> In article >,
> on 18 Jan 2004 13:43:18 GMT,
> BUFDRVR attempted to say .....
>
> > >Say what ?
> > >
> > >Larger than a B-52 even ?
> >
> > Actually, yes, but only slightly.
>
> Ah, ok.
> For some reason I'd thought it only a bit larger than a B1.
>
> --
> When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
> variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

I built a 1:72 scale model of a Tu-160. About 3/4 of the way down the page
at http://www.flankerman.fsnet.co.uk/modl_tu160.html
is a plan view of a Tu-160 with a B-1 superimposed over it.

And down at the bottom of -
http://www.flankerman.fsnet.co.uk/modl_tu160_page3.html
there are photos of the finished model Tu-160 next to a model B-1 and Tu-22M
Backfire for size comparison.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++

[Ron]

>Ah, ok.
>For some reason I'd thought it only a bit larger than a B1.

I beleive about 25% bigger


Ron
Pilot/Wildland Firefighter

[BUFDRVR]

>Yep, the B-1 is a real piece of ****...

Aww, did I hurt your feelings? I'm sorry, circa 1995 the B-1B was relatively
useless suffering from problems in its conventional munitions upgrade program
and a horrible MC rate. They have, fortunately, fixed many of the problems.

>Responsible for over 10% of the DMPIs struck in OIF with less than 1% of the
>sorties...

Whatever....who gave you those numbers anyway?

>9.4 DMPIs struck per sortie...

So?

>Went downtown Baghdad and Tikrit everyday, even in broad daylight, sometimes
>with no SEAD support...

Wow!!! Really??? Uhh, you do realize nearly everyone did that right?

>MC rate better than many aircraft during OIF...

Great job, first legitimate achievment you've quoted so far.

>"The weapon of choice"--CAOC Director

LOL.....yeah, we've got several quotes in the BUFF world as well that we use to
pat ourselves on the back, they don't really mean much more than your MWS some
how impressive one of the *numerous* CAOC directors working the floor at PSAB.

>Hope you had a good laugh back then...
>

Gimme a break. You take yourself (and your jet) far too seriously. In 1995
there were serious concerns about the future of the B-1B. At the time all they
could deliver were Mk-82s and CBU-87s, the latter suffering from several
problems. At the same time the Bone was capable of delivering just Mk-82s, it
was touted by someone in the Pentagon as the; "back bone of the bomber force".
Needless to say this didn't go over well in the BUFF world and having a Bone
show case an aborted takeoff right in front of visiting Russian aircrew, would
have been funny even if the anaolgy with the Blackjack hadn't been drawn.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

[BUFDRVR]

> So I guess the Piece-of-**** scale is proportional and sliding
>based on rank and seriousness of the job of the observer.
>

Absolutely. You've got to remember, it was Bear crews who were laughing. I
think the thing that made it a true "bonding" was that everyone realized the
similarities between BUFF crews and Bear crews. Both were flying 30+ year old
aircraft. Both were more capable than their replacements, yet took a back seat
to them, at least publically. And both crews seemed to get a feeling of lack of
respect from their own Air Force.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

[BUFDRVR]

>but it was AF xx 027 on the fin and 1027 on the forward
>fuselage.

That would have been 61027 on the tail.

>It also had a red fin flash with yellow lettering that looks something
>like 'Badoms' ??

Barrons. The 23rd BS is known as the "Barrons"

>What I wondered was whether you had heard any feedback from these visiting
>crews??

Just a 1 minute conversation. They said it was a great experience, the
Russians treated them very well, both civilian and military and that they hoped
to get back there in the future.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

[BUFDRVR]

>>Ah, ok.
>>For some reason I'd thought it only a bit larger than a B1.
>
>I beleive about 25% bigger

That's the number I've heard as well, 25%.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

[robert arndt]

"TJ" > wrote in message >...
> robert arndt wrote:
>
> >3 ex-Ukrainian aircraft sold to US as satellite
> > launchers in 1999..
>
> Some dodgy info there in IDMA 2002/3. It was projected but in the end this
> did not take place. It should have been plainly obvious to IDMA researchers
> that the sale/project did not go ahead.
>
> TJ

My bad. IDMA does note that the status of that sale is still unclear.
I should have included that in the info provided but I was typing
fast.
Apparently, in 1999 3 ex-Ukrainian AF Tu-160s were to be sold to US
company Platforms International Corp of Mojave. In March 1999 the
Ukrainian Govt. authorised the sale of the aircraft for $20 mil to
include spares and support for use in satellite launching. The
aircraft are to remain at Priluki and be maintained and flown from
there by local crews, transitioning to customer countries for
satellite launches.
The IDMA 2002/2003 was being compiled in 2001 so at that time the
status must have been unclear.
Thanks for clearing that up. So, when was the status officially
changed to no sale?
The above information comes from "Directory of Military Aircraft of
the World" which was published in 2001. No word from that book if the
sale went through or not so I'm assuming that the order was cancelled
after IDMA 2002/2003 was published in early 2002?

Rob

[Mike]

Thanks for all the info and replies, guys.

I also didn't realize that there are still Blackjacks in service.

I hope they don't end up getting sold to China.



(Mike) wrote in message >...
> Remember the Soviet "Blackjack" bomber that the U.S.S.R. started to
> deploy in the late 1980s?
>
> Wasn't this plane a virtual copy of the American B-1 in many ways?
>
> What about it's range? Could the BlackJack bomber have taken off in
> the Soviet Union and bombed the United States?
>
> Or was it closer to a medium-range bomber like the "Backfire"?

[fudog50]

Great stories BUFDRVR and Jim Baker,
Thats what make coming back to these NG's worthwhile, the real stories
as told and remembered by the real people. Wish there were more like
that, learned a lot on this one, thanks.

On 17 Jan 2004 11:44:54 -0800, (Mike) wrote:

>Remember the Soviet "Blackjack" bomber that the U.S.S.R. started to
>deploy in the late 1980s?
>
>Wasn't this plane a virtual copy of the American B-1 in many ways?
>
>What about it's range? Could the BlackJack bomber have taken off in
>the Soviet Union and bombed the United States?
>
>Or was it closer to a medium-range bomber like the "Backfire"?

[Michael Petukhov]

Scott Ferrin > wrote in message >...
> >> >Range, loaded on internal fuel - 7,640 miles (B-1B - 3,444 miles)
> >> >Equipped for IFR.
> >>
> >>
> >> Those are brochure numbers for the Blackjack.
> >
> >How about B1 are the cited numbers for B1 are brochure numbers
> >as well?
>
> Pretty much from what I understand. The B-1 is definitely faster than
> 789 mph though I'd be surprised if any operational aircraft had done a
> takeoff at 477,000lbs.
>
>
>
>
> >
> >> In the real world (at
> >> least as far as FAI records go) the B-1 has the Blackjack beat in the
> >> paylaod/range department.
> >
> >In its department where B1 is the only one amybe. Tu160
> >is much bigger?much faster and longer lange.
>
>
> Speed over a closed circuit of 5000 km with 30000 kg payload : 1054.21
> km/h
>
> Date of flight: 17/09/1987
> Pilot: H. Brent HEDGPETH (USA)
> Crew: Robert A. CHAMBERLAIN (copilot)
> Course/place: Palmdale, CA (USA)
>
> Aircraft:
> Rockwell B-1B (4 General Electric F 101-GE-102, 14 700 kg each)
> Registered 'S/N70'
>
>
>
> Speed over a closed circuit of 5000 km with 30000 kg payload : 1017.80
> km/h
>
> Date of flight: 28/05/1990
> Pilot: Serguei OSSIPOV (USSR)
> Crew: D.N. MATVEEV (USSR)
> Course/place: Podmoskovnoe Aerodrome (USSR)
>
> Aircraft:
> Tupolev Aircraft "70N-304" (Tupolev TU-160 "Blackjack") (4 Model "P",
> 25 000 kg each)
>
>
>
> As you can see, with the same 30,000kg payload flown over a distance
> of 5000km, the Blackjack was slower than the B-1B. Since the
> Blackjack's record attempt was flown at a later date one would assume
> they'd try to beat the B-1's. If they did try they failed. The
> Blackjack also holds no 10,000km speed records while the B-1 does.
> While this in itself doesn't say the Blackjack can't fly that far, it
> doesn't exactly help it's case either.
>

Well nobody claims that neither Tu-160 nor B1 can go supesonic for
5000 km. But why you skipped shorter range records? Unlike B1
Tu160 can go supersonic for distances of 1000-2000 km. The later
is very important for the battle applications particualrly
to hit and escape from fighters attention:

Records:

Speed over a closed circuit of 1000 km with 30000 kg payload
Podmoskovnoe 1726.90 km/h Lev Vasilyevich KOZLOV Tu-160 15/05/1990

Speed over a closed circuit of 2000 km with 30000 kg payload
Podmoskovnoe 1678.00 km/h B.I. VEREMEY Tu-160 03/11/1989

Something which B1-B is not capable at all.

Michael

>
>
> As for the Blackjack being faster, the lower speed of the B-1b was
> intentional. The original B-1A reached Mach 2.22 which was faster
> than the Blackjack. That speed was judged so important that pretty
> much nobody cared when they gave it up. As for the Blackjack being
> bigger. . .well if you think an aircraft that needs to be 27% heavier
> and 83% more powerful to do an inferior job is something to brag
> about. . .well, that's your business.
>
>
>
>
>
> > Anyway
> >do you have any doubts about the question asked
> >"Could Blackjack bombers reach USA?"
>
> It probably had the range for a one way trip, but any aircraft that
> can fly far enough could say the same.

[Michael Petukhov]

Scott Ferrin > wrote in message >...
>
>
> As for the Blackjack being faster, the lower speed of the B-1b was
> intentional. The original B-1A reached Mach 2.22 which was faster
> than the Blackjack. That speed was judged so important that pretty
> much nobody cared when they gave it up. As for the Blackjack being
> bigger. . .well if you think an aircraft that needs to be 27% heavier
> and 83% more powerful to do an inferior job is something to brag
> about. . .well, that's your business.
>

Just to add a few words about their inferior job. Who else can do
this inferior job in this world, but americans and russians? Nobody

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/5/30/123624.shtml

"... In the early morning of May 14, six Russian strategic bombers,
namely two TU-160Cs and four TU-95MCs belonging to the 37th Strategic
Aviation Army, left the Engels airbase near Saratov city and reached
the Indian Ocean five hours later. There the TU-95 fired two strategic
cruise missiles X-55 (3,000-km range, usually with a nuclear warhead),
which "precisely hit ground targets."

The Tu-160 bombers flew further and, at a 2,500-km distance, simulated
the firing of several X-55 missiles at Diego-Garcia Island. The
targets included a U.S. strategic aviation airbase, a naval base, the
command and control center of U.S. strategic submarines in the Pacific
Ocean, the U.S. electronic reconnaissance center and a nuclear warhead
storage facility.

Several hours later, the six strategic bombers returned to Engels
airbase. According to Russian Air Force Commander-in-Chief Col.-Gen.
Vladimir Mikhailov, 1) Russian strategic bombers "visited" the Indian
Ocean for the first time since 1990 and 2) the Russian top military
command has a definite interest in this region.

On May 15, TU-95 and TU-160 strategic bombers and TU-22 long-range
bombers accomplished military training over the Polar and Pacific
oceans. All the bombers had a full battle load: Each T-95 carried 6
X-55 missiles, each TU-160 12 missiles. The X-55 usually is equipped
with a 200-kiloton nuclear warhead. All the bombers simulated hitting
important U.S and U.K. targets.

However, in accordance with direct orders from Putin to Russian
Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov, this time – in contrast with strategic
aviation maneuvers in 1999 – Russian bombers didn't approach the
borders of Norway, Iceland, Canada, the U.K. and the U.S. This was
done to provide a "friendly environment" for the visits of Secretary
of State Colin Powell to Moscow on May 16 and President Bush to
Petersburg on May 30.

During the maneuvers over the Pacific Ocean on May 15, four TU-22
long-range bombers (two from the 37th AF Army, two from the Russian
Pacific Ocean Fleet) simulated the simultaneous firing of four X-22
anti-ship missiles at the U.S. aircraft Karl Winson, which was moving
at this time from the Yokosoka base in Japan to the coast of North
Korea.

Maneuvers of Russian bombers in the airspace over the three oceans
have been supported by the Russian Northern Fleet, Pacific Fleet,
Strategic Missile Troops, Space Troops and two air force and air
defense armies.

Gen. Mikhailov claimed that a) all goals of the maneuvers were reached
and b) in July and August, the 37th Strategic Aviation Army will hold
similar large-scale maneuvers (apparently against American and British
targets), though the number of participating strategic bombers and
long-range bombers will increase two to three times.

Remarkably, on May 16, a united group of the Russian Navy, compiled
from the vessels from the Pacific Fleet and Black Sea Fleet, held
"enemy [U.S. and U.K.] aircraft groups destruction maneuvers" in the
Indian Ocean.

Concretely, the Moskva missile cruiser launched a P-500 Bazalt
anti-ship cruise missile. This missile has a 480-km radius and is
usually equipped with a 350-kiloton nuclear warhead. The Moskva
missile cruiser has eight cruise missile launchers and a store of 16
Bazalt missiles..."

[Kevin Brooks]

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
...
> Scott Ferrin > wrote in message
>...
> >
> >
> > As for the Blackjack being faster, the lower speed of the B-1b was
> > intentional. The original B-1A reached Mach 2.22 which was faster
> > than the Blackjack. That speed was judged so important that pretty
> > much nobody cared when they gave it up. As for the Blackjack being
> > bigger. . .well if you think an aircraft that needs to be 27% heavier
> > and 83% more powerful to do an inferior job is something to brag
> > about. . .well, that's your business.
> >
>
> Just to add a few words about their inferior job. Who else can do
> this inferior job in this world, but americans and russians? Nobody
>
> http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/5/30/123624.shtml
>
> "... In the early morning of May 14, six Russian strategic bombers,
> namely two TU-160Cs and four TU-95MCs belonging to the 37th Strategic
> Aviation Army, left the Engels airbase near Saratov city and reached
> the Indian Ocean five hours later. There the TU-95 fired two strategic
> cruise missiles X-55 (3,000-km range, usually with a nuclear warhead),
> which "precisely hit ground targets."

You are rather desperate if you are still depending on that training
exercise conducted nearly a year ago, with no "opposing force", to buttress
your fragile ego, Michael. Are we supposed to be impressed that you managed
to get *six whole bombers* into the air at one time?

Brooks

<snip>

[Scott Ferrin]

>Well nobody claims that neither Tu-160 nor B1 can go supesonic for
>5000 km. But why you skipped shorter range records? Unlike B1
>Tu160 can go supersonic for distances of 1000-2000 km. The later
>is very important for the battle applications particualrly
>to hit and escape from fighters attention:


I skipped the shorter ranged records because the higher speed of the
Blackjack was never in doubt. I was questioning warload and range
which is why I quoted that particular record.

[BUFDRVR]

>The Tu-160 bombers flew further and, at a 2,500-km distance, simulated
>the firing of several X-55 missiles at Diego-Garcia Island.

First off, the ability of the X-55 to fly over 1600 nm is highly debateable.
Secondly, a round trip from Engels AB to a point 2,500km from Diego Garcia and
back to Engels is a distance of over 6824 km (in a straight line). If there was
no in flight refueling done, this mission simply did not happen.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

[Ken Duffey]

BUFDRVR wrote:

> >>Ah, ok.
> >>For some reason I'd thought it only a bit larger than a B1.
> >
> >I beleive about 25% bigger
>
> That's the number I've heard as well, 25%.
>
> BUFDRVR
>
> "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
> everyone on Bear Creek"

You do know of course that it is fitted with US equipment don't you ??

Have you heard of 'Carlucci's Panel' ??? <g>

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++

[TJ]

(BUFDRVR) wrote in message >...
> >Anyway
> >do you have any doubts about the question asked
> >"Could Blackjack bombers reach USA?"
>
> Perhaps, but only a very few. Their mission capable rates were as low as 25%,
> and that was in 1995.
>
> I've told this story before, but its a good one and still makes me chuckle. In
> 1995 Barksdale AFB was host to two Russian Bear Bombers (Tu-95), their crews
> and leadership. On the second day of their visit, several BUFF and Bear crews
> were out on the flightline exchanging tours of their respective aircraft. A
> B-1B from Dyess had weather diverted into Barksdale the previous night and as
> the BUFF and Bear crews were doing their exterior tour of the Bear, the B-1B
> attempted to leave and head back to Dyess. Due to the tremendous noise the B-1
> created as it took off, all conversation, both Russian and translated English
> stopped and everyone diverted their attention to the B-1 taking off. As the
> B-1 got halfway down the runway, and almost directly in front of the Bears, a
> puff of white smoke appeared and the throttles were brought back to idle.
> Everyone continued to watch as the B-1 taxied to the end of the runway where it
> was joined by emergency response vehicles. As the B-1 made the turn off the
> runway, hydraulic fluid could be seen, literally, pouring out from underneath
> the aircraft. The B-1 stopped, the entry hatch opened and the crew performed an
> emergency egress. With the noise now gone, both BUFF and Bear crews returned
> their attention to the exterior of the Bear. Before the tour could resume, one
> of the Bear crewmembers looked at the others and uttered something in Russian
> which made the rest of the Bear crewmembers burst out in laughter. When a BUFF
> squadron commander asked what the joke was, the translator looked afraid to
> answer. Just then in pretty good English, one of the Bear crewmembers pointed
> to the B-1B, now in the hammerhead and surrounded by emergency vehicles and
> said; "Just like Tu-160....piece of ****". At that, all the BUFF crews began to
> roar with laughter, which made the Bear crews, and their concerned translator,
> more relaxed and they began to laugh out loud again. It was truely a moment of
> international bonding, crews of bombers built in the 1960s having a laugh at
> the expense of their newer "replacement aircraft". Any way, when asked about
> the Tu-160's mission capable rate, a rather gruff Russian Colonel said less
> than 1 in 4 is flyable at any given time.
>
>
> BUFDRVR
>
> "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
> everyone on Bear Creek"

Nice story BUFDRVR, thanks for posting it again. Just one point. Those BEAR
H that the US hosted were new build aircraft and only rolled off the
production line during the 80's. They could even have been only a few years
old as the last BEAR H rolled off the production line in the early
90's! (1991/92 IIRC)

TJ

[[email protected]]

robert arndt > wrote:

> Tupolev Tu-160
> First Designated: "Aircraft 70" in direct response to B-1A, 1973
> First Flight: Dec 19, 1981
> Initial Order: 100 aircraft; 30 produced before line closed in 1992
> Remaining Aircraft: Russia- 15, Ukraine- 19 original, 8 transferred to
> Russia in 99/00, 3 ex-Ukrainian aircraft sold to US as satellite
> launchers in 1999, rest scrapped

"Satellite launchers"? Really? Is someone actually doing this,
or even working on it? Just curious because it seems to me that
piggy-back spacecraft on aircraft is an underexploited concept.
I'm sure there are all sorts of good reasons why, but if someone
is actually doing this I'd love to see pointers to articles, etc.

Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.

[BUFDRVR]

>Those BEAR
>H that the US hosted were new build aircraft and only rolled off the
>production line during the 80's.

Hmm, their tail numbers don't state a year like ours do, but those aircraft
sure looked older than 1980's, although this may have been due to Russian
maintenance than anything else.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

[Jim Yanik]

wrote in :

> robert arndt > wrote:
>
>> Tupolev Tu-160
>> First Designated: "Aircraft 70" in direct response to B-1A, 1973
>> First Flight: Dec 19, 1981
>> Initial Order: 100 aircraft; 30 produced before line closed in 1992
>> Remaining Aircraft: Russia- 15, Ukraine- 19 original, 8 transferred to
>> Russia in 99/00, 3 ex-Ukrainian aircraft sold to US as satellite
>> launchers in 1999, rest scrapped
>
> "Satellite launchers"? Really? Is someone actually doing this,
> or even working on it? Just curious because it seems to me that
> piggy-back spacecraft on aircraft is an underexploited concept.
> I'm sure there are all sorts of good reasons why, but if someone
> is actually doing this I'd love to see pointers to articles, etc.
>
> Bill Ranck
> Blacksburg, Va.
>

Pegasus (Orbital Science Corp)is a US satellite launcher dropped in flight
originally from a B-52,now from a commercial jet,L-1011,IIRC.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

[Kevin Brooks]

> wrote in message ...
> robert arndt > wrote:
>
> > Tupolev Tu-160
> > First Designated: "Aircraft 70" in direct response to B-1A, 1973
> > First Flight: Dec 19, 1981
> > Initial Order: 100 aircraft; 30 produced before line closed in 1992
> > Remaining Aircraft: Russia- 15, Ukraine- 19 original, 8 transferred to
> > Russia in 99/00, 3 ex-Ukrainian aircraft sold to US as satellite
> > launchers in 1999, rest scrapped
>
> "Satellite launchers"? Really? Is someone actually doing this,
> or even working on it? Just curious because it seems to me that
> piggy-back spacecraft on aircraft is an underexploited concept.
> I'm sure there are all sorts of good reasons why, but if someone
> is actually doing this I'd love to see pointers to articles, etc.

I believe the Blackjack-as-launch-vehicle proposal was stillborn. But the
concept is not unheard of; Orbital Science Corp had launched some 70
satellites using its Pegasus booster, first from the NASA B-52 and later
from its own converted L-1011 TriStar. See: www.orbital.com/LaunchVehicle/
SpaceLaunchVehicles/Pegasus/

Brooks

(Hey, how 'bout them Hokies? I see they are still able to snatch defeat from
the jaws of victory... <g>; just kidding--I spent about five years in
Blacksburg after leaving active duty back in the late eighties)

>
> Bill Ranck
> Blacksburg, Va.

[[email protected]]

> > wrote in message ...
> >
> > "Satellite launchers"? Really? Is someone actually doing this,
> > or even working on it? Just curious because it seems to me that
> > piggy-back spacecraft on aircraft is an underexploited concept.

> I believe the Blackjack-as-launch-vehicle proposal was stillborn. But the
> concept is not unheard of; Orbital Science Corp had launched some 70
> satellites using its Pegasus booster, first from the NASA B-52 and later
> from its own converted L-1011 TriStar. See: www.orbital.com/LaunchVehicle/
> SpaceLaunchVehicles/Pegasus/

Thanks for the pointer. Looks like Orbital does manage to launch
satellites on a pretty regular basis using this concept.

> (Hey, how 'bout them Hokies? I see they are still able to snatch defeat from
> the jaws of victory... <g>; just kidding--I spent about five years in
> Blacksburg after leaving active duty back in the late eighties)

Fortunately for me I have almost zero interest in football,
or spectator sports in general, so they can win a championship
or crash and burn and it's all the same to me. Well, except that
the stadium is between my office and my house, so every time they
decide to expand it I have to dodge construction equipment
every day for months. They're adding to it again now. Sigh.

Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.

[Kevin Brooks]

> wrote in message ...
> > > wrote in message ...

<snip>

> > (Hey, how 'bout them Hokies? I see they are still able to snatch defeat
from
> > the jaws of victory... <g>; just kidding--I spent about five years in
> > Blacksburg after leaving active duty back in the late eighties)
>
> Fortunately for me I have almost zero interest in football,
> or spectator sports in general, so they can win a championship
> or crash and burn and it's all the same to me. Well, except that
> the stadium is between my office and my house, so every time they
> decide to expand it I have to dodge construction equipment
> every day for months. They're adding to it again now. Sigh.

LOL! I spent five years there and never went to the first game--actually, I
used to wait around my place until after kickoff time during home games and
*then* go out and run my errands, thus avoiding the crowds and traffic. If
you really want to avoid the traffic, you ought to try using that bikeway we
built around the athletic complex and through campus--our "construction
survey" for it consisted of myself with my old Army rucksack filled with
stakes, hammer, and marking tape, a 100' tape measure with which to lay in
curves, and two folks from the planning department accompanying me and
blathering about "scenic impact" and similar inconsequential items ( IIRC,
within one year of constructing that trail the university came in and tore a
chunk of it out over by the golf course due to another construction project
and had to relocate it--and it was not as if they had not approved the
initial construction themselves the previous year) . Thanks for bringing
back the memories!

Brooks

>
> Bill Ranck
> Blacksburg, Va.
>
>

[Ken Duffey]

wrote:

> robert arndt > wrote:
>
> > Tupolev Tu-160
> > First Designated: "Aircraft 70" in direct response to B-1A, 1973
> > First Flight: Dec 19, 1981
> > Initial Order: 100 aircraft; 30 produced before line closed in 1992
> > Remaining Aircraft: Russia- 15, Ukraine- 19 original, 8 transferred to
> > Russia in 99/00, 3 ex-Ukrainian aircraft sold to US as satellite
> > launchers in 1999, rest scrapped
>
> "Satellite launchers"? Really? Is someone actually doing this,
> or even working on it? Just curious because it seems to me that
> piggy-back spacecraft on aircraft is an underexploited concept.
> I'm sure there are all sorts of good reasons why, but if someone
> is actually doing this I'd love to see pointers to articles, etc.
>
> Bill Ranck
> Blacksburg, Va.

There are some photos of a development Tu-160 at Zhukovsky with a satellite
launcher on my website at :-
http://mysite.freeserve.com/aircraft_pages/tu-160.html

Scroll down towards the bottom.

The large launcher - similar to the Orbital Sciences 'Pegasus' - was
nicknamed 'Burlak' - an old Russian name for the men who hauled barges along
the canals in olden days.

The name 'Diana' is also painted on the side.

IIRC, the proposal came to nothing........

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++
Ken Duffey - Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast
Flankers Website - http://www.flankers.co.uk/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++