Match-up= B-1B Lancer vs. Tu-160 Blackjack

Vote!

  • Rockwell B-1B Lancer

    Votes: 8 53.3%
  • Tupolev Tu-160 Blackjack

    Votes: 7 46.7%

  • Total voters
    15

Mikoyan

Digimortal
Joined
Sep 23, 2001
Messages
3,493
Location
Sweden
Ok, i will here post a poll, due to my sick interest in aircraft debates. :crazyeyes
Okay, Rockwell B-1 or Tupolev Tu-160?

pn_w1255.jpg

or
pn_w2716.jpg
 
Both Aircraft are remarkably similar, but I belive the Rockwell a/c has better range and payload.
 

Attachments

  • b-1%20clouds.jpg
    b-1%20clouds.jpg
    28.1 KB · Views: 406
On these topics it is possible to be objetive if the real information is in front of ours eyes, so I repeat:
Tu-160:

Soviet Designation
TU-160

US-Designation
Blackjack

Design Bureau
OKB-156 Tupolev

Manufacturer
Plant Nr. 22 Kazan

Power Plant
4 HK-32 turbojet engines

Thrust
25.000 kg each

Length
54.1

Height
13.1

Wingspan
35.6m (minimum), 55.7m (maximum)

Wing surface
232 sqm

Speed
2200 km/h (maximum), 1030 km/h (ground)

Ceiling
16.000m

Weight (empty)
110.000kg

Fuel weight
148.000 kg

Maximum take-off weight
275.000 kg

Normal weapons load
9.000 kg

Maximum weapons load
40.000 kg

Range
+14.000 km (with a load of 9.000kg)

+10.500 km (with a load of 40.000 kg)

Armament
12 H-55 or 24 H-15 missiles

free falling bombs
?

Systems
?

Crew
4

Accomodation
?

Unit cost
?

Approved
?

Development began
1975

First Flight
12/19/1981

Series production started
1984

Date deployed
1987

Inventory
?


B-1b Lancer:

Primary Function: Long-range, multi-role, heavy bomber.

Builder: Rockwell International, North American Aircraft.

Operations Air Frame and Integration: Offensive avionics, Boeing Military Airplane; defensive avionics, AIL Division.

Power Plant: Four General Electric F-101-GE-102 turbofan engine with afterburner.

Thrust: 30,000-plus pounds (13,500-plus kilograms) with afterburner, per engine.

Length: 147 feet (44.8 meters).

Wingspan: 137 feet (41.8 meters) extended forward, 78 feet (23.8 meters) swept aft.

Height: 34 feet (10.4 meters).

Weight: Empty, approximately 185,000 pounds (83,250 kilograms).

Maximum Takeoff Weight: 477,000 pounds (214,650 kilograms).

Speed: 716 knots (Mach 1,25), 607-plus knots at sea level (Mach 0,92)

Range: Intercontinental, unrefueled.

Endurance: With refueling, crew endurance.

Ceiling: 30,000 feet (9,000 meters).

Crew: Four (aircraft commander, pilot, offensive systems officer, and defensive systems officer).

Armament: Up to 84 Mark 82 conventional 500-pound bombs internally with external hard points for an additional 12 weapons. Also can be reconfigured to carry a wide range of nuclear weapons (maximun 29,030 kilograms).

Date Deployed: June 1985.Unit Cost: $200-plus million per aircraft.

Inventory: Active force, 94; ANG, 0; Reserve , 0.

The B1b range with normal load is of 12000 km, so you are totally wrong, Alcibiaties of Athenae.
 
I said I didn't know for sure, but I am sure that the Backfire isn't trans-continental, this was a big point in the 80s, it's inability to reach USA and back, where as the the B-1 could reach Soviet airspace and back.

I see 14,000 and 13,500 km as ranges, but what is your source for the backfire?
 
We are not speaking about "backfire". We are speaking about Tu-160 "Blackjack". Tu-26 "backfire" is an soviet bomber (today used in antivessel purposes) derived from Tu-22 "blinder" in service with russian air forces since 1961. Tu-26 and Tu-22 range are about 5500 km.

Airplanes are my passion, so, my sources are very diverse, from infinity of books and collections, up to specializing magazines and webs sites (Jane's Database, Air Forces Monthly, Aircraft Review ...). Thus the diverse sources can be confirmed, and I assure you that the information of above is trustworthy.

(Except for a detail: the speed of B1b at the sea level belongs to 458 knots (Mach 0,8), 607 knots is cruise speed, sorry. :crazyeyes ).
 
Ah, I see.

OK, thanks. ;)
 
Pavelsu: How can you say that the Blackjack has a higher payload capacity than the Lancer, and then only list the NUCLEAR (28000kg) capacity of the Lancer, not the total (60,000kg)?

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/b-1b/index.html

Look there for total payload cap (I think it's in lbs though, not kg)
And yes, I know that site sucks, but I don't have my bookmarks on this system or my books in front of me, but they'll say the same thing anyways.

Plus, you're comparing what the B-1B has ACTUALLY done to what the Russians SAY the Blackjack can do (which nobody ever believes) but has never actually done, so in a way it's not a fair matchup. I seem to remember that the B1-B holds over 25 world records in its class. I'll try to find some proof.

For my $MONEY$ the TU-160 is a better plane, but overall it doesn't look that way. Either way, it's an interesting debate :D
 
Have anybody heard Tu-160 in action?Have somebody really tried to use that to bombard ?US warplanes are very often in action.I really want to know if somebody had heard soviet warplanes in action?
 
What the Russians say is so credible as what the North Americans say, dont be so innocent.

About records, all airplanes models hold a lot of records, surely Tu-160 too (example: Cessna 172 have more than 1000 records ;) ) , there are very different records types and most are so specific that do not mean anything.

As for to the weight that appear in the page to which you refer, surely they are not additives (or they are enormously exaggerated), since adding external and internal load, results near 80000 kg (four times one b-52), which, undoubtedly, is a silly thing.
 
The Blackjack and backfire are impressive pieces of hardware.

The Russians also hold many records for aerodynamic and supersonic flight.

And before the North Americans get worried at being left out,
The USAF has a fine history of long range bombers and extraordinary flights!


:D

PS
Has any on ever noticed the simiarities between the German Go229 and the US B2 spirit bombers? They are spookily similar!
 
Thanks Mikoyan, but with regard to the of Tu-26 "Backfire" range (5500 km possibly), is necessary to have in bill that was not designed to attack United States since all the objetives there are covered already (decades ago) by ICBMs.
 
You have reason, there is many western " flying wing "designs (Northrop XB-35 (1946), Northrop XB-35 (1946) or the english Armsrong-Whitworth AW.52 (1947)), realized just after the fall of Germany. The question seems resolved.
 
Back
Top Bottom