Zephyr Net

From: "Michael Petukhov" <petukhov@bpc.spbstu.ru>
Subject: Re: Could Blackjack bombers reach USA?
Date: Monday, January 19, 2004 4:50 AM

Scott Ferrin <sferrin@xmission.com> wrote in message news:<ls6l00hf4qb6k8pck6crfhf7urnvj0oagu@4ax.com>...
> >> >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.

From: "Michael Petukhov" <petukhov@bpc.spbstu.ru>
Subject: Re: Could Blackjack bombers reach USA?
Date: Monday, January 19, 2004 5:12 AM

Scott Ferrin <sferrin@xmission.com> wrote in message news:<ls6l00hf4qb6k8pck6crfhf7urnvj0oagu@4ax.com>...
>
>
> 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/article ... 3624.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..."


************
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.

Once again, comparison of aircraft with (slightly) different missions, neglecting the rest of the force, doctrine, tactics, and weapons that enable them to put ordnance on target. The original posts appeared to become a pissing contest involving aircraft range.... however both the B-1B and Tu-160 can easily be refueled inflight.

And da big man once again shows his insightful knowledge of aviation....

Zephyr

Uhhh read the post above your latest. It's more than a repainted B-1A but is certainly based on the B-1A "planform."

Zephyr