Rocket engineer: Russia needs a mobilization missile carrier

59 863 33

After the terrorist attacks of the Kyiv regime, aimed against the bases of the strategic aviation of the Russian Aerospace Forces, many experts expressed their point of view regarding the further development prospects of this component of the Russian nuclear triad. For example, rocket engineer Alexey Vasiliev expressed an interesting opinion in his blog.

According to his conclusions, after the events of June 1, Russia needs a mobilization missile carrier, i.e. a carrier of a large number of cruise missiles.



In addition to the need to equip tactical aviation with mass cruise missiles, it is worth analyzing the prospects for strategic aviation. After all, the Tu-95 and Tu-22 are no longer produced, and the Tu-160 - it is good if they make one per year. At the same time, we have been running a classified PAK DA program for many years (the Prospective Long-Range Aviation Complex has been developed since 2009. - Ed.), which, according to numerous Western sources, involves subsonic stealth, conceptually similar to the American B-2. A flying wing with the lowest possible visibility. Judging by the development time, it is very complex, and it is quite possible that Western sources are close to the truth.

- he noted.

The expert is sure that the experience of the ongoing air defense in Ukraine should make major adjustments to the concept of the future bomber. In his opinion, the previous appearance of the PAK DA is practically meaningless. This was obvious a long time ago, but now it has become more obvious. The thing is that flying even at a high altitude over enemy territory with air defense, even with a minimum effective dispersion area (EPR), largely means a virtually guaranteed loss of the aircraft. The era of free-falling bombs is a thing of the past, and if you need to strike where there is no air defense, then you can use tactical and even transport aircraft.

That is, at the moment, the "strategists" have retained the function of exclusively missile carriers. Moreover, if small cruise missiles can be carried by conventional tactical aircraft, then for "strategists" heavy long-range cruise missiles like the Kh-101 with air defense penetration systems, on-board jammers, precise guidance, jamming resistance, the ability to be stored for a long time and mainly for very expensive targets or under the SBC remain justified. The second option of equipment, aeroballistic missiles with a long range like the "Kinzhal", and the third option, for the use of cruise missiles with a very large warhead, to destroy especially strong targets. Conventionally speaking, against bridges and bunkers, with a warhead of 1,5-2 tons. And air basing allows for flexibility of maneuver selection for the launch point, to act as the first stage to increase the range, to provide the opportunity to concentrate on the desired target at the right time to break through the air defense

- he specified.

In this regard, it becomes obvious that since the aircraft does not need to enter the enemy's air defense zone and its role is limited to being an air platform for launch, it does not need any "invisibility" or other "bells and whistles" that significantly increase the cost of the design, and most importantly - allow "mastering" the means forever and in any volumes without any real result. Therefore, it is necessary to get rid of completely unnecessary technical requirements for the promising PAK DA, if an aircraft based on a serially produced airliner can be used as an air platform.

In fact, this is a mobilization missile carrier. We currently have two of these in a conventional series, these are the Tu-214 and the MS-21. The second option is good in many ways, but if we want to count on at least some export potential, it is better not to militarize it. At the same time, on the basis of the Tu-214, it is possible to make a missile carrier, an AWACS aircraft, an anti-submarine defense aircraft, a reconnaissance aircraft, a tanker, a cargo-passenger mail carrier for everyday use. And, it turns out, it is possible to load production, have the ability to produce several dozen aircraft per year, have significant unification between aircraft with different tasks in the army and special services, and a bonus - the ability to disperse to civilian airports if necessary. Which in a special period will be extremely important for the survival of the air part of the triad

he explained.

He emphasized that it is much easier to create a new missile carrier based on the Tu-214 than to develop it from scratch. The airframe definitely needs to be redesigned to a minimum, if we can get by with an external suspension of cruise missiles or the creation of simplified bomb bays for missiles inside. Special communications, control and other equipment already exist, and they only need to be integrated into the aircraft without a lot of research and development work with new design elements that are only just being created.

If there is any skepticism about this, then I will remind you that the Tu-95MS, in fact, comes from the anti-submarine Tu-142, and that comes from the early Tu-95, the wide-body version of which was the passenger Tu-114. And the Tu-95 is a Tu-85 with a turboprop engine, the Tu-85 is an enlarged Tu-4, that is, a metric Soviet version of the B-29.

He summed up.

It should be noted that Ukraine managed to integrate Western equipment and weapons into Soviet fighters fairly quickly.
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    3 June 2025 12: 46
    Wouldn't it be easier to convert the Il-76 into a missile carrier? AWACS aircraft and tankers based on it have long been made. The problem is the extremely small number of serially produced aircraft.
  2. +3
    3 June 2025 13: 07
    A really interesting view and apparently in the right direction!
    1. +7
      3 June 2025 14: 05
      But we are again running into their tiny, if not approaching zero, number. And our civil aviation is on its last legs. None of the effective ones have sat down and will sit down, no one has been hanged and will be hanged, so the situation is unlikely to change much for the better.
      1. +6
        3 June 2025 14: 48
        civil aviation is on its last legs

        I remember how a former worker from the Saratov aircraft factory who worked for me as a security guard came to me to quit. I asked him why he was quitting, how he would live? To which he answered me with tears in his eyes: I'm moving to the village to live, I can't drive to work every day past the factory to which I devoted my whole life and watch how another shopping center is being made out of it. My heart can't take it. And it couldn't take it, he died without having time to move out of sight.
        1. +3
          3 June 2025 15: 00
          A Soviet person with an innate concept of "Conscience".
          1. +2
            3 June 2025 19: 28
            Yes, namesake! He was an amazing worker! The whole team went to the funeral, it is difficult to say what feelings overwhelmed us then more, compassion or indignation at the injustice of the choice of the old woman with the scythe.
      2. +1
        4 June 2025 14: 57
        Now everything will go faster. In Russia, practically all aircraft instrumentation and other equipment for the aviation industry is now our own. Tests have been passed and production has been established. That is, enterprises - manufacturers and design bureaus have appeared for practically the entire aviation spectrum of equipment and devices. This is worth a lot. All the competencies of the former USSR have been restored. So things will go faster. True, Ukraine is still distracting aviation production. But this is temporary.
  3. 0
    3 June 2025 13: 45
    It's okay to fight with the Papuans...
  4. +7
    3 June 2025 14: 02
    They cannot replace the AN-2.
    1. +6
      3 June 2025 20: 41
      By the way, yes... What new missile carriers can we talk about if the pro-government effective managers cannot launch production of the Baikal to replace the An-2. The money was embezzled, but there is no plane.
      1. +1
        4 June 2025 15: 08
        The plane exists, but the bourgeoisie does not supply foreign engines. They made their own engine, installed it on board instead of the foreign one and are currently conducting or have already conducted certification with it. Three planes have already started flying.
        The rest of what they print or write, that the plane was not made but the money was embezzled, is the usual propaganda from Russia's ill-wishers. The poor are suffering, all the lies are being collected from the Internet and various dubious sources. They are all thinking, what other harm can they do to Russia, what else can they pollute our people's brains with? And the country lives and develops quite successfully, to the envy of these ill-wishers.
        1. 0
          5 June 2025 16: 45
          You probably live in some other Russia, you are probably a Muscovite.

          The project to create the light multi-purpose turboprop aircraft "Baikal" (LMS-901) has been closed, said the Presidential Plenipotentiary Representative in the Far Eastern Federal District, Yuri Trutnev.
          1. -1
            7 June 2025 11: 37
            Tell me, is Trutnev one of those who knows how to sign where he is shown?
          2. +1
            8 June 2025 11: 39
            Vitaly Shorokhov, Technical Director of the Ural Civil Aviation Plant (UZGA), confirmed to TASS that the program to create the light-engine passenger aircraft "Baikal" is being implemented in accordance with the schedule established by the state contract: two flight models have already been created.
            In one day, the media “buried” and “revived” the Baikal aircraft project
            Following Yuri Trutnev's statements, the Ministry of Industry and Trade responded: the ministry reported that work on creating the light aircraft "Baikal" (LMS-901) is continuing
            "Currently, the third flight model with the VK-800 engine is being produced, with testing scheduled for the end of this year, which will allow the aircraft to be certified within the specified timeframe of 2026." Wikipedia continues to display a headline about an unrealized project, well, who would have doubted it.
  5. -2
    3 June 2025 15: 19
    It's always like this, until the cock pecks your ass, so you could rely on the old delivery guys
  6. +6
    3 June 2025 15: 19
    design tire mounts on fenders right away
  7. +1
    3 June 2025 16: 31
    Rocket engineer Alexey Vasiliev expressed an interesting opinion on his blog.

    On the "Reporter" website there are such interesting opinions in every second comment.
    1. +2
      4 June 2025 15: 17
      .....rocket engineer Alexey Vasiliev expressed an interesting opinion on his blog......
      His blog, like him, is beyond the borders of our homeland. He writes to order, which is what he lives for.
      He is not paid for his diploma work, since he has not worked in his specialty for a long time. He decided to join the opposition as an "expert". Well, he gets his information from the Internet, like many of you. If he writes the truth, he will not be paid. So he writes what he gets money for.
  8. +3
    3 June 2025 17: 03
    What, that makes sense. Air-launched missiles.
    Only encounters a few difficulties.
    1) the low speed of development and construction of the Tu-214 and similar aircraft, which could put an end to the projects of AWACS, missile carriers, drone carriers, etc., which will become obsolete by the time they are released.
    2) a small number of these heavy cruise missiles and drones. The existing aircraft seem to be enough.
    3) Will there be enough money to spend the budget and line one's pockets (remember, Rogozins, Serdyukovs, the presidents of Tatarstan, etc. - they all made their mark and are making their mark in aviation, they all want money) and release a real series of aircraft?

    What do you think?
  9. +5
    3 June 2025 19: 49
    Remake, release, build, modernize... aren't you tired of hearing this?
    Who will do this? The country's workforce is shrinking at a Homeric rate. Those who knew how to create and design complex engineering projects have died out like mammoths or are living out their last years. The working class has been destroyed along with factories, technical schools and vocational schools. Will lawyers, marketers, merchandisers, managers, IT specialists and other office riffraff be able to work instead?
    Russia is dying!
    According to Rosstat data, the natural population decline rate has increased due to the fact that the number of births in the Russian Federation has decreased, while the number of deaths has increased. Thus, the number of deaths in the Russian Federation last year increased by 3,3% compared to 2023 - to 1,819 million people from 1,760 million.
    The number of children born in 2024, according to Rosstat, decreased by 3,4% - to 1,222 million from 1,265 million in 2023. It is noted that the reduction in the number of births continues despite the growth of state investment in various demographic measures. And the number of those who passed away, even without taking into account those lost in the war, is growing every year.
    And all this is happening today, now, every day!! And for more than thirty years in a row!
    But why all this happened - everyone can have their own opinion...
    1. +3
      4 June 2025 03: 24
      Russia is being quietly drained under beautiful slogans. The Kremlin, the Federation Council, and the deputies cannot all be stupid, not understanding that there has been nothing but chatter from the very top for 30 years.
  10. -1
    4 June 2025 02: 55
    We already have a supersonic 'swan', and even a freshly modernized one. It will be used for decades to come. They produce little, you say? Well, that's a completely different question. They'll decide - they'll increase production.
    But the subsonic 95 and 22 (themselves or with help) will soon 'go out of circulation'. I don't see anything wrong with the fact that they are slowly preparing a subsonic replacement for them. They chose a 'wing' and paid attention to stealth - because they can. What's wrong? This is not an aircraft for now. Such a machine should fly until the 22nd century. If not longer. You confidently say that it is safe for it to enter the air defense zone. But that's now. And then? I can't predict the situation in the world in 30-70 years. Maybe (for example) the 'dense air defense' will be devoured by moths. Or the 'swans' will peck it out.
    — And the TU-214, I said from the very beginning of the 'commotion' (not here, on xbt {nobody appreciated it}), that it won't really 'fit' for civilian use and it probably is dual-use. They'll repurpose the sides. A base for AWACS. Maybe something else...
  11. 0
    4 June 2025 10: 03
    I agree with the author on the prospects of strategic aviation - it will not fly within the range of enemy air defense, and will not interrupt the defense lines at supersonic speed. But the same applies to tactical strike aviation - if it does not enter enemy airspace in the SVO, if free-falling bombs are preparing to go down in history, then what is the need for super-maneuverability, supersonic and other "super"? For twisting turns at an air show? Isn't showing off a bit expensive? Even fighter aviation has demonstrated, using the example of the impossibility of effectively countering primitive enemy drones, that completely different aircraft are needed to combat air targets - less sophisticated in flight characteristics, cheaper, in fact - aircraft from the Second World War would be much more useful, provided that a relatively modern radar is installed, than our analog fighters of the 4++++++++ generation.
  12. +1
    4 June 2025 10: 50
    My opinion as an old pilot is that we need to sharply increase the production of the Tu-22M3M and modernize it to the limit, anglars with folded wings are easier and cheaper to build, and the refueling boom and multi-mode capability allow us to bring it to a strategist, what would I do, avionics for a crew of 2 people, 2 pilots are at least 2 tons of additional fuel, completely convert the avionics to digital, minus a couple more tons of weight and a couple more tons of fuel, replace the wing with carbon fiber, another couple of tons minus and new airfoils, and the quality and range of flight will increase, a stabilizer made of carbon fiber, another ton minus, a radar from the Su-57 another half a ton minus so we got a two-seater strategic bomber, and the rear turret is a no-no, another ton as a result plus 10 tons of fuel and when will we work am
    1. -1
      4 June 2025 12: 38
      And do you think you can make a lot of money from this? In today's reality, it's not realistic. That's the pun.
    2. 0
      4 June 2025 15: 24
      Hangars with folded wings are easier and cheaper to build,

      A folded wing and a variable-sweep wing that changes in flight are two different things. The latter makes the plane much heavier. And it is necessary to achieve supersonic speed. A folding wing is simpler and lighter because it folds not in flight but on the ground or deck. Why do you need supersonic speed? The price for it is high. Fuel consumption is 100 tons per hour with 53,5 tons of tanks. You saved 10 tons. This amount is enough for 6 minutes of flight at maximum speed.
      Where are you going to fly next? To enemy territory? You won't fly far. Are you planning to use this aircraft as a strategic one? That's another matter. Over the Arctic Ocean, that's where only strategic aircraft can fly because there is no air defense there. Why supersonic then? When for 6 minutes of supersonic you have to pay 500 km of radius, which is 2410 km, which is very little. And if you make an aircraft without changing the sweep, it will simply be another aircraft. But strategic aviation is completely ineffective, and therefore useless.
  13. 0
    4 June 2025 16: 31
    When an amateur speaks out, it's immediately noticeable. And who ever calculated the Tu-214 wing to hang (at least) 4 missiles on each side?
    And the production volume of 30 cars per year - the general director of the Kazan plant never dreamed of such a thing even in his most erotic dreams. They have been churning out 1 piece per year for the last 15-20 years
    And finally. Most cruise missiles have a range of 2-2.5 thousand km. The Tu-214 is not suitable as a carrier, because it simply will not reach the conventional launch point somewhere between Greenland and Newfoundland. A strategist needs a range at least twice as far as the 2 flies today. Better yet, 214
  14. +1
    4 June 2025 18: 36
    Quote: Alex Look
    We already have a supersonic 'swan', and even a freshly modernized one. It will be used for decades to come. They produce little, you say? Well, that's a completely different question. They'll decide - they'll increase production.
    But the subsonic 95 and 22 (themselves or with help) will soon 'go out of circulation'. I don't see anything wrong with the fact that they are slowly preparing a subsonic replacement for them. They chose a 'wing' and paid attention to stealth - because they can. What's wrong? This is not an aircraft for now. Such a machine should fly until the 22nd century. If not longer. You confidently say that it is safe for it to enter the air defense zone. But that's now. And then? I can't predict the situation in the world in 30-70 years. Maybe (for example) the 'dense air defense' will be devoured by moths. Or the 'swans' will peck it out.
    — And the TU-214, I said from the very beginning of the 'commotion' (not here, on xbt {nobody appreciated it}), that it won't really 'fit' for civilian use and it probably is dual-use. They'll repurpose the sides. A base for AWACS. Maybe something else...

    There is nothing to make "Swans" from. There is no equipment, no engines. The one shown a year ago was assembled from old stock at the factory.
    And what's the point in investing money in upgrading a product designed to specifications from the distant 70s? It has already been proven and re-proven that a variable geometry wing is a dead-end and a thing of the past. Enormous extra weight and fewer weapon suspension points.
    1. 0
      4 June 2025 19: 28
      ....fewer weapon mount points

      The White Swan has two huge weapons bays 1,92x2,3x11,28. It doesn't need to hang anything. Otherwise, everything is correct.
  15. -1
    4 June 2025 21: 30
    Let's just burn money, rather than waste it on another project that we won't do? Yes, we can't. Civil aviation, MS-21 and Vmakie, we can't. Small aviation, Baikal, we can't. We don't need Armata. Terminator turned out to be crap. Shit. What's wrong with that?
  16. +1
    5 June 2025 04: 24
    Quote from Pembo
    ....fewer weapon mount points

    The White Swan has two huge weapons bays 1,92x2,3x11,28. It doesn't need to hang anything. Otherwise, everything is correct.

    Well, just do the math. The Tu-160 carries 12 missiles inside, while the B52, which is 35 years older, carries 16 outside. The range is the same. The cruising speed is almost the same. And why the hell do you need that folding wing?
  17. -2
    5 June 2025 04: 25
    Quote: Rust1981
    Let's just burn money, rather than waste it on another project that we won't do? Yes, we can't. Civil aviation, MS-21 and Vmakie, we can't. Small aviation, Baikal, we can't. We don't need Armata. Terminator turned out to be crap. Shit. What's wrong with that?

    Maybe something needs to be corrected at the conservatory?

    M. Zhvanetsky
  18. 0
    8 June 2025 09: 16
    It's interesting - the legendary PAK DA, never seen even in prototype form, is already morally obsolete, and how long ago did we run around playing war games as kids...