DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • ‘Canes
  • Af-Cam
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the “Buzz”
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Crazy Ivan
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT’s Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • F-35 Watch
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Bubble with Joe Buff
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar’s Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples’ Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward’z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Planes, Copters, Blimps » Bears R Us

Bears R Us

Author’s Note: An error that appeared in the below text regarding Russian air-to-air refueling capabilities has been amended to reflect the author’s (me, in other words) original intent. Apologies go out from Defense tech and the author for this inadvertent yet gargantuan transposition of terms. The corrected text appears below in bold type. Thanks.
Taking a look at the picture to the right, you’d be excused if you thought it was taken in the mid 1980’s.bear_watching.jpg
It was taken in Sept of last year and there are many more of these photos lately.
A little less than a month ago Former Soviet KGB head and current Russian President Vlad Putin told the world that the Russians would, after a 15 year hiatus, begin long range reconnaissance flights again with their strategic bomber assets, most notably the Tu-95 Bear.
Whether or not this will mean anything in the long term of geostrategic military hegemony or is just a flexing of an increasingly atrophied strategic recon arm remains to be seen. The Bear, however, is the characteristic icon of these flights, with US and allied intercepts occurring around the world — in the Indian Ocean, along the US east coast, in the western Pacific, around the North Cape of Norway and many points in-between.
The Bear, first slipping the surly bonds of earth in the early to mid 1950’s, remains Russia’s premier strategic long range bomber. Powered by 4 BIG Kuznetsov NK-12MV turboprops (pumping out 14,795 shaft-horsepower (shp) each — by comparison, the C-130 and P-3 aircraft’s Allison T56 turbo props generate only 4,600 shp each), the bug bomber can reach speeds up to 525 mph, making it one of the fastest prop aircraft in the world and definitely the fastest BIG prop-driven aircraft.
Comparisons are somewhat moot with the US’s aged long-range strategic bomber, the B-52, which was discussed here on DT with its upgraded avionics system. I say moot because while both are big and have a strategic use, that’s where the similarities end!
The B-52 has 8 Pratt & Whitney TF33 turbofan engines, pumping out 17,000 lbs of thrust from each engine (compare that to the shaft horsepower of those Bear Kuznetsovs above). Those engines, as smoky as they are at times, can push the BUFF up to 650 mph.
Ranges are somewhat similar, with the Bear reaching out to around 8,200 miles and the BUFF able to make 8,800 miles unrefueled. Both aircraft have air-to-air refueling capabilities, making their true range almost unlimited, Tu-95-Bear_6 tanking.jpghowever Russian air-refueling tactics, techniques and procedures are far below that of the US and her allies.
There’s not much on the unclass side regarding the usage of the big Russian bomber over the years, but it appears that it was never used in any conventional bombing roles, whether in Afghanistan or any other nation where Soviet/Russian hardware was employed. It appears it has been used strictly in a deterrence mode, oftentimes to let the carrier battle group know that it is targeted — after a fashion.
There are about 71 scattered through out Russia (compared to 85 B-52s). Ukraine had some at the dissolution of the USSR, but transferred those back to Moscow as part of a debt reduction deal. India has a few, obtained in the late 80’s for long-range reconnaissance and ASW. Like the BUFF, they’ll be around for a while.
Some good webpages to get more info are at Global Security and Federation of American Scientists.
–Pinch Paisley

Share |

September 7th, 2007 | Planes, Copters, Blimps | 372422 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2007/09/07/bears-r-us/Bears+R+Us2007-09-07+22%3A00%3A12murdoc You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Armor-Piercing Grenade Hitting US Troops | Wazzup Wid OBL? » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Bill says:
    September 7, 2007 at 3:44 pm

    When did the Soviets get “far in advance of the US” when it comes to air-to-air refueling ops?

    Reply
  2. David says:
    September 7, 2007 at 4:58 pm

    “however Russian air-refueling tactics, techniques and procedures are far beyond that of the US and her allies.“
    I think you meant to say the opposite

    Reply
  3. Doz says:
    September 7, 2007 at 9:36 pm

    “There’s not much on the unclass side regarding the usage of the big Russian bomber over the years, but it appears that it was never used in any conventional bombing roles, whether in Afghanistan or any other nation where Soviet/Russian hardware was employed.“
    Tu-95MS16 aircraft (which make up approximately half of Russia’s current Tu-95MS force) are being upgraded to Tu-95MSM standard as they go through overhaul. This gives them a new missile launch control system, designated Sigma, that equips them to use conventional weaponry — particularly the Kh-555 remanufacture of the Kh-55 (aka CALCMski) — and the “stealth” conventional Kh-101 and nuclear Kh-102 cruise missiles. The first upgrade was IIRC in 1999.
    The Tu-160s are getting the same upgrade, amongst others (both the Tu-95MS16 and Tu-160 have the same missile launch control system, whereas the Tu-95MS6 has an older model, hence it’s ability to only fire 6 cruise missiles at a time as opposed to the Tu-95MS16s 16.)

    Reply
  4. Charles says:
    September 8, 2007 at 11:04 pm

    Funny how everyone seizes on the air-to-air refuelling capability; I was about ready to do the same until I saw the preceding comments.
    You would’ve thought that our expeditionary airforce would have greater impetus to have air to air refuelling, as opposed to the Soviet one where their landmass occupies many more timezones (not flying over oceans that much, just land and take off between Moscow and Vladivostok). Additionally, during the ‘90s when they couldn’t even keep up deterrence flights, how could they keep up air to air refuelling planes?

    Reply
  5. ohwilleke says:
    September 9, 2007 at 3:55 am

    Rather more to the point, both the U.S. and Russia have 1950s technology that is more than capable of doing immense damage. The mutual assured destruction notion is still alive and well.

    Reply
  6. GM CASSEL AMH1(AW) USN RET says:
    June 8, 2008 at 12:22 pm

    Ocean Safari: 1975 somewhere off of Norway we got three bears at once to pay us a visit. Lousy formation. And followed by Phantoms of VF-33 and VF-102. Another day at work.

    Reply
  7. buy Hellgate Palladium says:
    August 2, 2008 at 1:59 am

    Hellgate London, I played this game for four years, let me give up, I can not do. It is part of my life, although not for the life of all the games, over the past few years it has accounted for the majority of my space time, I find the time in amateur to own one of the sky, when I bored on it. In the game I spent a lot of money to buy Hellgate Palladium. And I bought my favorite things. I see a faithfully accompany so many times through the friends and feel good when friends come to chat on a single share their happiness, and feel very satisfactory thing.

    Reply
  8. Sword of the New World money says:
    August 9, 2008 at 2:49 am

    No longer limited to playing one character at a time, players can instantly switch between their favorite character classes or control them all at once. Each one of those character classes — musketeer, wizard, fighter, scout, elementalist, and the unique player characters (UPCs) — acquires, over time, an impressive set of combat stances. Each stance offers Sword of the New World money unique skills, abilities and equipment options, making every class as powerful as it is versatile.

    Reply
  9. Archlord gold says:
    August 20, 2008 at 12:55 am

    In the two years I made many good friends also spend much money to buy the Archlord gold, but I do not have a little sad, because I make many good friends, they are very kindliness.

    Reply
  10. fiesta Gold says:
    August 20, 2008 at 1:15 am

    In fact I think in the game the most important was not the fiesta Gold or the upgrade, in my mind play with friends and get more friendship were the most important.

    Reply
  11. 2moon dil says:
    August 20, 2008 at 1:30 am

    because he always play the game, so we often together to play and chat and discuss how to earn the 2moon dil, at that day I told him, I liked him, but he did not say anything, I was very sad, unknowingly the tears streaming down.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
    • And, the Vertical Landing
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
    • JFCOM’s JOE Whacks Defense Industry
    • New F-35B Hover Video
    • China’s Shipbuilding in a Regional Context
    • Debating the Pros and Cons of LCS
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
    • Petraeus to SASC Today; Israel-Palestine to Come Up? (Updated)
    Recent Comments
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      I think the approach would be a two-fold benefit for...
      ed!
    • Was the Gates Counter-USAF Sortie Fair?
      criticism of f-22 : http://www.google.com/searc...
      google
    • Was the Gates Counter-USAF Sortie Fair?
      f-22 articles with comments and replies :...
      freepublic
    • Was the Gates Counter-USAF Sortie Fair?
      criticism of f-22 :...
      criticism of f-22
    • Debating the Pros and Cons of LCS
      "The US retired the ideal littoral combat...
      Matthew S.
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
      Lockheed did put out the Surface Combat...
      Camp
    • And, the Vertical Landing
      That's an awesome deal! Did not realize that Lockheed...
      Sarcasmotron
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
      So let's get off out fat butts...
      Ranger-12
    • Petraeus to SASC Today; Israel-Palestine to Come Up? (Updated)
      Does petraeus think he is...
      landouzy
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
      The General Dynamics LCS was...
      Dark_Sentry
  • Channels:Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty |Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money |Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network:Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz |SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps |Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program |Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy |User Agreement| © 2010 Military Advantage