• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Tupolev Tu-95

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
469
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Rare inflight footage from inside a Russian Tu-95 shows the Bear’s coaxial contra-rotating propellers"
Feb 15 2015

by David Cenciotti

Source:
http://theaviationist.com/2015/02/15/bear-contra-rotating-blades/

Here’s an interesting footage filmed form inside a Russian Tu-95 Bear bomber like the ones that skirt northern Europe’s airspaces every now and then.

Although it does not show anything special about the plane, the rare video lets you have a close look at the eight-bladed coaxial contra-rotating propellers Kuznetsov NK-12 engines of the Tu-95.

Indeed, the only propeller-powered strategic bomber still in operational use today, features the typical two propellers, arranged one behind the other, which increase efficiency and performance.

An in-flight, engine shutdown and restart cycle can be seen in the clip.
http://youtu.be/aZG-HLU48LU
 

_Del_

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
520
Reaction score
176
Looks like a stroboscopic effect as opposed to a shutdown or restart, but a cool video nonetheless.
 

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,559
Reaction score
569
_Del_ said:
Looks like a stroboscopic effect as opposed to a shutdown or restart, but a cool video nonetheless.
This bizarre stroboscopic effect, is produce by today digital camcorder,
There CCD are unable to take high speed like rotating propellors.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
11,717
Reaction score
1,841
In current events:

"Meanwhile, Russia says it has has started deploying its “strategic” aviation - long range Tu-95 and Tu-160 bombers flying eight-hour missions out of Mozdok and Engels airbases in southern Russia. Several have already carried out their first strikes, according to today’s briefing."

Daily Telegraph
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,064
Reaction score
1,053
Michel Van said:
This bizarre stroboscopic effect, is produce by today digital camcorder,
There CCD are unable to take high speed like rotating propellors.
It's not new to CCD cameras. Film cameras do the same thing when the prop RPMs are close to a multiple of the camera's frame rate. You can even see it in person sometimes. Essentially, people have a frame rate too, though it is less hard-wired than a camera's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagon-wheel_effect
 

Hobbes

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
828
Reaction score
192
The footage taken of the right wing shows the wagon wheel effect, with props looking like they're turning slowly while they actually run at full speed. The motion blur is evident. In the shot of the left wing, the propeller blades are much sharper, so I suspect they're actually stopped. You can see the extreme blade pitch (i.e. they're feathered). Unusual that they would shut down both engines on the left side, though.
 

gtg947h

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Apr 10, 2008
Messages
90
Reaction score
11
Hobbes said:
The footage taken of the right wing shows the wagon wheel effect, with props looking like they're turning slowly while they actually run at full speed. The motion blur is evident. In the shot of the left wing, the propeller blades are much sharper, so I suspect they're actually stopped. You can see the extreme blade pitch (i.e. they're feathered). Unusual that they would shut down both engines on the left side, though.
Extreme blade pitch is normal, at least...
http://i1.wp.com/news.usni.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Russian_Bear_H_Aircraft_MOD_45158140.jpg
 

kaiserbill

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
1,299
Reaction score
118
First Tu-95MSM actually - deep modernized Tu-95MS: modernized engines, new electronic warfare, new weapons, according Tupolev design bureau.
What did they do with the engines?
FADEC?
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,340
Reaction score
614
The new engines NK-12MPM with also the new propellers have less vibration than the older ones. So the Tupolew Tu-95MSM has now better performance especially during take-off.

[...]“The NK-12MPM engine developed by the Samara-based Kuznetsov public company (part of the UEC [United Engine Corporation] within Rostec) is a modification of the NK-12MP, the world’s most powerful (15,000 hp) serial-produced turbo-prop engine,” says a statement obtained by TASS last year.

“It allows improving the aircraft’s take-off characteristics and increasing the load-carrying capacity and the flight range of the missile-carrying bomber. The new powerplant uses more powerful propellers created by Aerosila Research and Production Enterprise while the new design solutions have almost halved the vibration level,” the statement reads.[...]
Source: https://theaviationist.com/2020/08/...msm-bear-bomber-performing-its-maiden-flight/
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,467
Reaction score
283
Very much the B-52 of the Russian Air Force especially with that 2040 end of service date.
It will be very interesting as to what style of bomber the VKS replaces the Tu-95 with come 2040.
 

GARGEAN

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
425
Reaction score
144
Most probably it will appear much earlier (PAK DA). But fleet wide replacement is a long way.
 

Josh_TN

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
346
Reaction score
128
Also, like the B-52, the Tu-95 would probably be the last bomber type to be replaced. I can see Backfires and Blackjacks getting replaced by PAK DA long before anyone thinks of taking Bears with this upgrade out of service.
 

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,348
Reaction score
496
The old maxim comes to mind: "If it works, don't … mesh with it."
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,064
Reaction score
1,053
If/when the PAK-DA does replace the Tu-95 bombers, what replaces the Tu-142s?
 

kaiserbill

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
1,299
Reaction score
118
I can see Backfires and Blackjacks getting replaced by PAK DA long before anyone thinks of taking Bears with this upgrade out of service.
Not so sure of that.
The Blackjack seems to have a long a long life ahead, by various reports and indications.
Not only have there been numerous reports of the Russians revamping and reinstalling the manufacturing capabilities of producing the large central titanium body of the fuselage/wing box, but they have been actively working on the upgrading of production facilities for the NK321 engine, as the below link explains once run through a translation. Reports indicate this engine (or a variant rather) might power the new bomber being designed, but also that there is the possibility that more Tu-160 airframes (Tu-160M2?) are to be produced.
Perhaps Flateric or some of our other Russian members would confirm?

 
Last edited:

Josh_TN

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
346
Reaction score
128
IMO, there are too few airframes for Tu-160 to remain in service next to another modern bomber. I think the B-2 was going to be the first bomber the US replaces for the same reasons, except that the B-1s are spend and being drawn down to such small numbers that their replacement will probably be a requirement first. If you want my honest opinion, the PAK DA won't even enter service. But if it does, I do suspect the Bear will be the last thing replaced.
 

haavarla

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
21
Reaction score
20
There is the upgrade of Tu-95. That will ensure them a service decades from now, well the ones that get this latest upgrade that is.
And on top of this, they are slowly producing AND upgrading Tu-160M.

This means they are not in a hurry of getting the Pak-Da into service. But that said, i have no doubt it will happen.
At some point they need to get rid of the hoplessy Navy striker Tu-22M's.. they are something of a dissepointment as a modern Strategical platform by now.
 

Josh_TN

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
346
Reaction score
128
If you want my honest opinion, the PAK DA won't even enter service.
Is there any base for that opinion, or just "feel"?
I just a feeling. I think Russia's defense budget is struggling to recapitalize its legacy nuclear force and introduce brand new nuclear system types, all while modernizing its conventional forces across the board. I think projects with very long lead times might find that the money spigot has run out in the future. The US, specifically the US Navy, is similarly going to have a crushing budget problem in the future for new systems. Is there any kind of first flight/deployment time frame that has been published for PAK DA?
 

Josh_TN

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
346
Reaction score
128
There is the upgrade of Tu-95. That will ensure them a service decades from now, well the ones that get this latest upgrade that is.
And on top of this, they are slowly producing AND upgrading Tu-160M.

This means they are not in a hurry of getting the Pak-Da into service. But that said, i have no doubt it will happen.
At some point they need to get rid of the hoplessy Navy striker Tu-22M's.. they are something of a dissepointment as a modern Strategical platform by now.
There is also a modernization program for the Tu-22M3. And I don't understand why you consider it hopeless or a disappointment; I think it is generally considered a very capable platform in terms of range, speed, and payload. The fact that all three bomber types are undergoing modernization does indicate PAK DA is a long term plan.
 

Evgeniy

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
55
Reaction score
52
f/when the PAK-DA does replace the Tu-95 bombers, what replaces the Tu-142s?

Well, there is only one option, this is the old Tu-204P project.


Yes, it's like all the chatter now, but there is no other option.
And this option will be the most adequate.
 

haavarla

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
21
Reaction score
20
There is the upgrade of Tu-95. That will ensure them a service decades from now, well the ones that get this latest upgrade that is.
And on top of this, they are slowly producing AND upgrading Tu-160M.

This means they are not in a hurry of getting the Pak-Da into service. But that said, i have no doubt it will happen.
At some point they need to get rid of the hoplessy Navy striker Tu-22M's.. they are something of a dissepointment as a modern Strategical platform by now.
There is also a modernization program for the Tu-22M3. And I don't understand why you consider it hopeless or a disappointment; I think it is generally considered a very capable platform in terms of range, speed, and payload. The fact that all three bomber types are undergoing modernization does indicate PAK DA is a long term plan.
If you take Tu-22M, and try to grade it. Then the ONLY capability that ONLY matters is the combo Weapon and platform!
Unless you get a hard-on seeing it do FAB-500 bombing run over Syria..:p
The Kh-22 and Tu-22M is a symbiosis. Now the world and time has long since moved on. The Kh-22 is long ago seen as antiq weapon. The airframe of Tu-22 was basicly build around the massive Kh-22, hense they are basicly one and the same.
As for mission range on Tu-22, no its not great by any stretch. Even now i think they have put back on the refueling probes due to end of START II treaty.

Now if they made accomondation for say Kinzal or Kh-101 on it.. i would had to change my opinion
 

Josh_TN

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
346
Reaction score
128
There is the upgrade of Tu-95. That will ensure them a service decades from now, well the ones that get this latest upgrade that is.
And on top of this, they are slowly producing AND upgrading Tu-160M.

This means they are not in a hurry of getting the Pak-Da into service. But that said, i have no doubt it will happen.
At some point they need to get rid of the hoplessy Navy striker Tu-22M's.. they are something of a dissepointment as a modern Strategical platform by now.
There is also a modernization program for the Tu-22M3. And I don't understand why you consider it hopeless or a disappointment; I think it is generally considered a very capable platform in terms of range, speed, and payload. The fact that all three bomber types are undergoing modernization does indicate PAK DA is a long term plan.
If you take Tu-22M, and try to grade it. Then the ONLY capability that ONLY matters is the combo Weapon and platform!
Unless you get a hard-on seeing it do FAB-500 bombing run over Syria..:p
The Kh-22 and Tu-22M is a symbiosis. Now the world and time has long since moved on. The Kh-22 is long ago seen as antiq weapon. The airframe of Tu-22 was basicly build around the massive Kh-22, hense they are basicly one and the same.
As for mission range on Tu-22, no its not great by any stretch. Even now i think they have put back on the refueling probes due to end of START II treaty.

Now if they made accomondation for say Kinzal or Kh-101 on it.. i would had to change my opinion
The Kh-22 is a pretty fearsome weapon, and moreover there is a modernization/production (not sure if is a refurbishment or not) in the form of the Kh-32. The latter seems like roughly the Kh-22 with modern electronics and seeker. You also apparently are unaware of the Kh-15. Additionally, Russia has stated that Tu-22M3 will be updated to carry Kinzhal, though I think that is a pending modification. The range seems adequate for theater needs;Tu-22M wasn't intended as a strategic platform; it replaced medium ranged platforms like Tu-16 and Tu-22.

The use of free fall ordnance in Syria seems more like a cost saving measure than an absolute limitation.
 

haavarla

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
21
Reaction score
20
Now if they made accomondation for say Kinzal or Kh-101 on it.. i would had to change my opinion
Kh-50 is basically Kh-101 downsized for Tu-22M3.
Well the Kh-101 has really taken its time.. they got it right in the end with its Trapez design.
Folded wings etc. Fits nicely on the barrel magazin inside Tu-160. All great.

Kh-22(Kh-50?) still looks like a throwback design from the 60's..
Its Huge, its fast. But really, just how deadly is it today against AEGIS and all its missiles today..

Edit:
Did you mean the Kh-55?
I guess we are talking about the Kh-32. But really, its form and size is almost identical to good old Kh-22.

 
Last edited:

haavarla

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
21
Reaction score
20
There is the upgrade of Tu-95. That will ensure them a service decades from now, well the ones that get this latest upgrade that is.
And on top of this, they are slowly producing AND upgrading Tu-160M.

This means they are not in a hurry of getting the Pak-Da into service. But that said, i have no doubt it will happen.
At some point they need to get rid of the hoplessy Navy striker Tu-22M's.. they are something of a dissepointment as a modern Strategical platform by now.
There is also a modernization program for the Tu-22M3. And I don't understand why you consider it hopeless or a disappointment; I think it is generally considered a very capable platform in terms of range, speed, and payload. The fact that all three bomber types are undergoing modernization does indicate PAK DA is a long term plan.
If you take Tu-22M, and try to grade it. Then the ONLY capability that ONLY matters is the combo Weapon and platform!
Unless you get a hard-on seeing it do FAB-500 bombing run over Syria..:p
The Kh-22 and Tu-22M is a symbiosis. Now the world and time has long since moved on. The Kh-22 is long ago seen as antiq weapon. The airframe of Tu-22 was basicly build around the massive Kh-22, hense they are basicly one and the same.
As for mission range on Tu-22, no its not great by any stretch. Even now i think they have put back on the refueling probes due to end of START II treaty.

Now if they made accomondation for say Kinzal or Kh-101 on it.. i would had to change my opinion
The Kh-22 is a pretty fearsome weapon, and moreover there is a modernization/production (not sure if is a refurbishment or not) in the form of the Kh-32. The latter seems like roughly the Kh-22 with modern electronics and seeker. You also apparently are unaware of the Kh-15. Additionally, Russia has stated that Tu-22M3 will be updated to carry Kinzhal, though I think that is a pending modification. The range seems adequate for theater needs;Tu-22M wasn't intended as a strategic platform; it replaced medium ranged platforms like Tu-16 and Tu-22.

The use of free fall ordnance in Syria seems more like a cost saving measure than an absolute limitation.

The mediocre Bomb bays on Tu-22M does not accomondate for anything else than KaB-500 dude.. in which does not make them mediocre anymore..

And debating if Tu-22M IS a Strategical or NOT as a platform is beside the point. What is important is to have a modern bomber that can deliver multiple different weapons. Different Missions. Not just one singel dedicated one as the Kh-22.

Besides.. Russia do have their "new" Tactical Frontline Bomber. The Su-34. And its far more versitile vs Tu-22M.
 
Last edited:
Top