"It is now clear that the Russians will never build a PAK DA": the US comments on the first flight of a completely new Tu-160M

On Wednesday, January 12, a new strategic bomber-missile carrier Tu-160M ​​took off from the Kazan aircraft plant for the first time. The test flight took place at an altitude of 600 meters and lasted about 30 minutes. At the same time, the pilots performed a number of maneuvers to test the flight qualities of the upgraded missile carrier.

For the production of Tu-160M ​​at the enterprise in Kazan, it was necessary to improve some technological processes. In particular, the production of airframe units was restored, the technology of welding titanium parts in vacuum was applied. The assembly of the aircraft became possible thanks to the cooperation of the Kazan plant with several enterprises in the field of mechanical engineering, metallurgy and other industries that are part of the state corporation Rostec.

Minister of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation Denis Manturov emphasized that aircraft manufacturers were able to restore the full production cycle of the missile carrier and use a modernized engine, new control and navigation systems. Further development of this platform will allow its use for new weapons systems.

The head of PJSC UAC, Yuri Slyusar, noted that in the course of work on the Tu-160M ​​it was necessary to form a fundamentally new digital environment, which was carried out by the efforts of several aircraft design bureaus. The new bomber was built practically from scratch.

Readers of the American magazine The Drive reacted in a peculiar way to this news.

The real achievement of the Russians lies not in the very fact of building the first aircraft, which, although very combat-ready, but devoid of modern design, but in a purely industrial revival. Most of the Tu-160 parts were not produced after the collapse of the USSR, that is, more than 30 years

- considers Tokyo Morose.

Is Urban Forest camouflage back in vogue?

- asks Irl Sanders IV, assessing the appearance of the new missile carrier, still unpainted.

This is why I think they will never develop a PAK YES. They don't have the resources to do this. They will build what was built before. The same goes for the super-duper modern T-14 and Su-57.

- Spartangreen21 is pessimistic.

The United States is building the B-21 Raider, a modern bomber based on the most advanced stealth and electronic warfare technologies. Meanwhile, Russia has taken off a 40-year-old replica of the American B-1 bomber. That says it all

- criticized KBabcock.

Awesome achievement! The people involved should applaud themselves, and rightly so. I do not know of a single military aircraft, the serial production of which would be resumed after such a significant period of time. It will be interesting to see how many of these cars will eventually be built.

- appreciated by TomeOfStuff.

Everything new is well forgotten old. The Tu-160 is back in production, the US Air Force is purchasing the F-15E again ... What does this mean? This shows how stalled the development of military aviation.

- believes Constant Peg.

Typical Russians. “Eh, test flight in a blizzard? Yes, why not, these things should take off in any weather! Go!"

- posted by Greyvagabond.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Bulanov Offline Bulanov
    Bulanov (Vladimir) 13 January 2022 13: 28
    They will build what was built before.

    Well, the Russian Federation can at least renew what the USSR built earlier. But the United States can in no way resume the construction of a rocket for a flight to the moon. They have lost their technology. And where did they lose them, without war and disintegration into different States? Or maybe there was no flight? If the Russian Federation was able to resume, then why can't the United States resume?
    1. 3danimal Offline 3danimal
      3danimal 15 January 2022 00: 29
      Can you even compare the scale (their incommensurability) of the moon missions and the production of a small number of modified bombers in the 80s?
      With what, then, can we compare the conditional resumption in Russia of the program of manned flight to the Moon - with the conditional construction (its impossibility) of "them" starship "Enterprise"?
      After all, it is also necessary to criticize smartly, and not at the level of a schoolboy ..
      1. Efimiuch Offline Efimiuch
        Efimiuch (Alexander) 15 January 2022 18: 31
        Why criticize, everyone goes their own way. This us on each message criticize.
        If this is all junk, we show cartoons, we can’t do anything and we don’t know how, everyone sleep peacefully. What amers had an awl in the ass stirred.
  2. Mikhail L. Offline Mikhail L.
    Mikhail L. 13 January 2022 14: 57
    Regarding "That's why I think they will never develop PAK YES."
    Firstly: there is an American film with the aphoristic name "Never say never".
    Secondly: there is an old adage: "The turkey also thought, but he got into the soup!"
    1. alexneg13 Offline alexneg13
      alexneg13 (Alexander) 14 January 2022 01: 42
      Meanwhile, Russia has taken to the air a 40-year-old copy of the American B-1 bomber.

      And nothing that "Swan" was created a year earlier than B-1? So who stole from whom? And the TU-160 is larger and more efficient in size. This refers to the text of the article.
      1. 3danimal Offline 3danimal
        3danimal 16 January 2022 06: 30
        But nothing that "Swan" was created a year earlier than B-1? So who stole from whom?

        B-1A (supersonic, 2,2M) - first flight December 23, 1974;
        Tu-160 - first flight December 18, 1981.
        So who stole what from whom? smile
        IMHO - none. The general appearance and layout are often repeated for aircraft from different countries, largely due to similar customer requirements (physics, aerodynamics - international).
        1. alexneg13 Offline alexneg13
          alexneg13 (Alexander) 16 January 2022 20: 12
          Sorry, I confused it with the B-1B, which first flew in 1984.
          1. 3danimal Offline 3danimal
            3danimal 16 January 2022 23: 57
            Clear good
            The following is interesting: at the time of the first flight of the Tu-160, the Americans already considered the concept of a high-altitude supersonic bomber to be insufficiently effective, since they began to completely remake the original B-1A project into a low-altitude version of the B-1B with less radar visibility .. The question is, why is that?
            And isn't it a mistake to resurrect the Tu-160 (which will take resources for itself), instead of focusing on the new PAK-DA?
  3. beeper Offline beeper
    beeper 13 January 2022 15: 13
    "It is now clear that the Russians will never build a PAK YES.": in the USA they comment on the first flight of a completely new Tu-160M

    Why ?! what
    It does not interfere! tongue
    And in this case, even just one huge solid-milled titanium center section of the Tu-160, with swivel joints of the movable wing consoles, already speaks volumes!
    1. wamp Offline wamp
      wamp 13 January 2022 15: 36
      Quote: pishchak
      in this case, even just one huge solid-milled, with swivel joints of the movable wing consoles, titanium center section

      This is called the "bearing beam" (the wings are swiveling). And it is welded (electron beam welding in vacuum!?).
      1. beeper Offline beeper
        beeper 13 January 2022 18: 07
        Well, yes, aka Wamp, thanks for the amendment, center section beam all-welded, not solid milled.
        These are solid milled console panels.
        In a petty way, without clinging to nuances (without taking our readers aside by any "technological flood"), aka Wamp, I hope you agree with the "red thread" - the essence of my previous comment that such a complex load-bearing structure as a titanium center section Tu- 160, eloquently testifies to a really high level of Russian aircraft production and materials, or do you deny it ?! winked
        1. wamp Offline wamp
          wamp 13 January 2022 19: 52
          Quote: pishchak
          ... Do you agree with the "red thread" - the essence of my previous comment ...

          You seem to be a little out of your mind, like am .
          I just corrected you and did not express any attitude towards you.
          1. beeper Offline beeper
            beeper 14 January 2022 00: 36
            For the "technological amendment" I thanked you, aka Wamp, didn't I! smile
            And I just asked, in the essence of the topic under discussion, do you agree that such as the center section of the Tu-160, independently manufactured, very technologically and structurally complex prefabricated part from a difficult structural material (which is also completely Russian-made) indicates a fairly high the production level of the Russian aircraft industry?!
            And you, aka Wamp, suddenly, purely feminine ( what ?!), "wound up half a turn" and immediately began to "evaluate" my personal qualities, so which of us is "a little crazy" ?!
            If you, aka Wamp, were offended by something in my previous comment, then I ask you to generously forgive and not hold a grudge - I will continue to take into account this "fine mental organization" of yours ... feel
            1. wamp Offline wamp
              wamp 14 January 2022 06: 53
              Are you trying to "hit" me?
              Slide on. bully
              1. beeper Offline beeper
                beeper 14 January 2022 14: 04
                Aka Wamp, how could you think that?! what
                It was not even in my thoughts to "hit" (and, moreover, due to my eternal kindness, I did not expect to stumble upon such an inadequate reaction)! No.
                I see that you are strongly offended by me?! request
                I promise to continue to bypass, the tenth road, you and your comments! yes
  4. S WITH Offline S WITH
    S WITH (N S) 13 January 2022 16: 23
    and where are the comments? or are they hidden for the Russian ip?))

    Tu160 if sheathed with composite, then the EPR will not be much inferior to their "super duper" B-2, and the speed is 2 times higher
    1. wamp Offline wamp
      wamp 13 January 2022 16: 54
      Quote: S S
      and where are the comments? Or are they hidden for the Russian ip?

      You probably have some kind of AD-blocker cuts.
  5. Baltika3 Offline Baltika3
    Baltika3 (Baltika3) 13 January 2022 16: 31
    It was necessary not to suffer with rebar, but to start building the T-34 right away. They would have fallen into a stupor there - what's the catch. And they would never have come out of the stupor.
    1. Vladimir Daetoya (Vladimir Daetoya) 13 January 2022 18: 39
      Well, yes, while they were demonstrating our new inflatable tanks, NATO did not fall into a stupor, but with laughter moved towards the Russian borders.
      1. Baltika3 Offline Baltika3
        Baltika3 (Baltika3) 13 January 2022 19: 08
        Still, the T-34 is a real piece of iron - not an armata, not an inflatable tank. Proven, cool looking, cheap. Russia will master 500 pieces a year. Cannon, maybe just put a new one. In just 4 years, the same 2000 fittings will be obtained.
  6. zloybond Offline zloybond
    zloybond (steppenwolf) 13 January 2022 17: 17
    I think there is no point in sleeping with brave comments in response. Until it is put into operation, until it goes into production, until it destroys a couple of states - there is nothing to brag about at all.
  7. Svetlana Kozlova (Svetlana Kozlova) 13 January 2022 20: 46
    For some reason, everyone forgets that the main US bomber fleet falls on the I-52, which is already 60 years old. It is foolish to get out and change the airframe of an aircraft if it is close to perfection and build aircraft at exorbitant prices with the same characteristics. Let the Americans do it. And in the new Tu-160 everything is new, from engines to avionics. He will also have new weapons.
    1. beeper Offline beeper
      beeper 14 January 2022 01: 13
      Tu-160-this is already a "run-in" design supersonic bomber - therefore, the fundamental principles of the airframe of the aircraft remained unchanged.
      A new PAK YES, so bayali, will fly without "supersonic", at subsonic speeds(and without the function of changing the sweep of the wing in flight) are completely different (simpler conditions for loads, for heating the skin and without significant "drift of the aerodynamic focus", as it happens overnight when switching to "supersonic" and back) approaches to design bomber airframe and completely different requirements for the applied structural materials.
      Do not overly emphasize the opinions of these American commoners.
      After all, American "sofas", for the most part, are the same committed superficial "experts" as elsewhere in the "couch troops" - "they do not notice the logs in their own eyes, but they will expose a huge mountain of guano in someone else's eye." yes
    2. alexneg13 Offline alexneg13
      alexneg13 (Alexander) 14 January 2022 08: 56
      They (Americans) are now in vogue for fancy flying pans. Bullshit-35 can only fight macaques, and then depending on the weather. But an expensive and very sophisticated parody of a military samul. In short, a penguin from penguinostan.
  8. Valery Vinokurov (valery vinokurov) 13 January 2022 22: 44
    Handsome. Just wondering why the swan is green?
    1. beeper Offline beeper
      beeper 14 January 2022 00: 45
      Quote: Valery Vinokurov
      Handsome. Just wondering why the swan is green?

      This, freshly assembled, Tu-160, which has just begun to undergo factory tests, has not yet been painted (it is written in the Article) in the acceptance "combat colors" of strategic aviation.
    2. Screw Offline Screw
      Screw (Gennady) 14 January 2022 02: 35
      Because a newborn and roars to the whole sky like a newborn is alive, therefore.
  9. Anton Fireman Offline Anton Fireman
    Anton Fireman (Anton Fireman) 14 January 2022 09: 36
    this is no longer a swan, this is a goose, one thing is good, the production base has been restored
  10. Vissarion Golubov (Vissarion Golubov) 14 January 2022 09: 56
    Now there is confidence that we can build a new generation bomber! Those. all components of the nuclear triad will be at the level of ! And the Kazanians are supermen!
  11. Vladimir Androsov_2 (Vladimir Androsov) 14 January 2022 14: 25
    It seems that Americans are infected with arrogance and arrogance from birth, there the last smelly bum is happy and proud that he is an American, it happens that a star-striped American flag sticks out of the box from under the refrigerator where the bum spends the night. The society is uneducated and zombified, it is not worth expecting intelligible comments from them, we should be treated as mentally ill.
    1. shinobi Offline shinobi
      shinobi (Yuri) 16 January 2022 04: 36
      This was passed on to them from the British. From the Angles, Adolf knocked down a few arrogance. This is only to be, but a start has been made.
      PS: They began to forget, it's time for them to organize a new Vietnam and Korea in one bottle. With Afghanistan to boot
  12. Praskovya Offline Praskovya
    Praskovya (Praskovya) 14 January 2022 16: 15
    Do not confuse the concepts of NEW and MODERNIZED.
    1. Avarron Offline Avarron
      Avarron (Sergei) 14 January 2022 18: 33
      So it is both modernized and new.
      1. Praskovya Offline Praskovya
        Praskovya (Praskovya) 18 January 2022 11: 26
        If IL-2 is built now, it will also be new.
        1. Avarron Offline Avarron
          Avarron (Sergei) 18 January 2022 13: 27
          Exactly. And at the same time, it will be quite effective against barmaley. And even against Ukrainians.
  13. bzbo Offline bzbo
    bzbo (Black doctor) 14 January 2022 16: 57
    A PAK YES inside the Tu 160 is enclosed. For the sake of secrecy
  14. mykola kovacs Offline mykola kovacs
    mykola kovacs (mykola kovac) 14 January 2022 17: 19
    The funniest thing is that the US cannot build an analogue! Well, no way.
  15. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
    Sapsan136 (Alexander) 14 January 2022 19: 01
    The United States is building supposedly invisible aircraft, which in Yugoslavia were shot down by museum S-125 air defense systems and cannot replace engines with B-52s ... but they like to speak for Russia ...
  16. 3danimal Offline 3danimal
    3danimal 15 January 2022 00: 33
    But in fact: will PAK-DA be implemented at all in the foreseeable future in the amount of at least a dozen pieces? With such complexities and rates, in fact - a technological blockade?
  17. shinobi Offline shinobi
    shinobi (Yuri) 16 January 2022 04: 27
    Tu-160 copy of B-1? The patient forgot to take the medicine in his shirt. They are not even close. The laws of aerodynamics set the general external similarity. But the funny thing is, they don’t even read their own analysts. PAK YES is washed down in addition to, and not instead of, existing strategists. This is a trifle, details. Obama said the economy is torn to shreds, which means there are no resources. The country that sells these resources to the United States (titanium, steel, gas, RD, polymers and many other little things) and a third of the globe, of course, has no resources. Oh stupid sheep.