Added: 3 years ago
From: LIMAMESA
Views: 4,359
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (29)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • pROBABLEMENTE ES COPIA, PERO LO SUPERARON Y POR MUCHO. a TAL GRADO QUE COMPITE POR EL PRIMER PUESTO ENTRE LOS BOMBARDEROS DE TODOS LOS TIEMPOS.

  • Sí es una copia.

  • russia coppied the design of the B1B, now they are copying the design of the F-22 on their friking t-50

  • @PILUPACKSXXX yes the wright brothers copied it too,

  • @PILUPACKSXXX Americans can see better than they can think. The RCS(Radar-cross section stealth)demands stealth aircraft to be shaped as follows(triangle or diamond).We all know that triangle is a horrible way to shape aircraft with (B-2) but the diamond shape is aerodynamically capable and requires little computer assistance to fly. The T-50 and J-20 follows this and ofcourse the WINGS will look the same as the F-22 (diamond),but everything else is different.Russia gave USA modern RCS anyway :D

  • @999cheetos999 Ha, small world. Didn't expect to see you here.

    A quick thing to mention about the Tu-160 is it's lack of weapons, & how it only launches cruise missiles. It only can launch 6-12 cruise missiles due to it only having rotary launchers & not internal pylons.

    Whereas the B-1 has 3 internal bays that are very diverse.

    targetlock . org . uk/b-1/weapons . html

    A quick note about the F-15E, these are the pylons:

    f-15e . info/joomla/en/weapons/weapons­-stores/122-external-stores

  • @999cheetos999 I added the F-15E link just because we discussed it before. That site also has all the varying bomb loads. The F-15E has 15 hardpoints, 2 avionics hardpoints, & can have even more on the wing rails.

    s362974870 . onlinehome . us/forums/air/index . php?showtopic=182918

    But also, the B-1B almost never uses it's external pylons. But can still carry more assorted weapons internally due to more bomb bays & more versatile bomb bays whereas the Tu-22M carries a wide variety of weapons.

  • The T-160 is larger... but it can't fly as far, doesn't have a real defensive avionics system, can't land a bomb within inches of a target like the B-1, etc... add to that the fact that Russia can't afford to keep them flying half the time.... well, its clear which has won.

  • @IIKiboshII why Russia wouldn't be able to keep them flying?

  • @gtamodman122 to keep an airplane flying costs a lot of money. Everypart in an aircraft is old and overpriced and built to break. The B-1 takes over 64 man hours of maint to fly one sortie hour. The 160 is even greater because they cut corners building. Russia doesn't have the funding to fly the sortie hours to keep training up, so they only keep a few crews on hand, and only fly the jet once in a blue moon.

  • @IIKiboshII I understand how costly it can be to maintain a strategic bomber of this size in service,but Russia has a whole lot of natural resources (and it currently uses them more than ever) and they bring a lot of money to Russia.I believe the Blackjack is gonna be kept in service for a long time to come.

  • @gtamodman122 what I said was that it rarely flies, has outdated systems, can't land bombs on target, and is costly. Russia does have natrual resources, but has other things to spend that money on. It cannot afford to fly the sortie hours needed to keep all crews at a good training level. Most crews may fly the jet once every few months. Its why we do not fear the Blackjack, but every year, the Russians come over and inspect the B-1 and have us under satellite survaillance.

  • @IIKiboshII True indeed.Especially after the sovie Union went down they barely fly,and they haven't undergone a CMUP yet (they maintain their strategic nuclear strike capabilities).But the reasons you mentioned aren't the reasons you shouldn't fear the Blackjack,because the most important reason is that there is no Cold War any more :-P

  • @gtamodman122 this is very true.

  • How can it to be a copy, if they are very different?

    If the russians made the copies, they never were hiding it.

    If they made a copy of B-29 (Tu-4), they say it with no hiding.

    Remember MiG-15 and F-86. They are very similar, but no one call it a copy. They are similar, because they were solving the same missions.

  • @Example626 The Tu-4 was a reversed engineered B29 from four damaged over Japan which landed or crashed in the USSR. The foot pedals of the Tu-4 even had Boeing written on them as they were cast using B29 originals. The T-160 is only a copy of the B1 in that it was produced in response to the original B1A, which never entered production, which was much faster than the B1B. The fuselage of the T-160 is more like a Tu- 144 than a B1 although the wing arrangement is very similar.

  • @binaway Stalin wanted B-29's VERY BADLY. The USSR wanted to buy from USA, but USA banned the use of strategic bombers/exports in foreign states. What USSR did was steal from the USA, but who can blame them?It was replaced anyway with a much better bomber, the Tu-16. The Tu-160 was inspired from the Concorde and the wing design of the Tu-22/M. I can also say that the B-1B is a copy of the Tu-22 series :D. The Tu-160 SMC aircraft,its bigger,it uses anti-flash coat, B-1 is SB aicraft,small,black

  • yo le voy mas al tu-160 los que piensan que lo americano es lo mejor esta equivocado pinches gringos son unas basuras que quieren al mundo nomas pa ellos arriba russia

  • @elmulaomar locochon tambien informate tambien los russos atraparon scientificos despues dela segunda guerra mundial despues de la guerra los russos no podian hacer un motor de jet que fuera economico y que pudiera producir la misma fuerza que los motors ingleses. los ingleses les fasilitaron un motor ingles en los 50tas para poder tener la misma capabilidad de motor

  • Hmm que idiotes es el video, el T-160: Tiene varios récords mundiales, como el haber volado 1.000 kilómetros con 30 toneladas de carga útil a una velocidad promedio de 1.720 km/h, y 2000 kilómetros con 275 toneladas de peso a una velocidad media de 1.678 km/h a 11.250 metros de altura.

    Es el avión más potente en el mundo, superando a su análogo el B-1 Lancer.

    Diseño soviético de bombardero estratégico, siendo el avión de combate más pesado construido.

    Limamesa, mejor informate ;)

  • @darthlooO tu-160 y el b1b lancer son 2 aviones muy diferentes. EL TU-160 ES UN BOMBARDERO DE ALTA ALTURA ES MAS GRANDE SUS MOTORES MAS PODEROSOS Y CARGAR MAS PESO. PERO SU DEVILIDAD ES FACIL DE DETECTAR

    B1B THE BONE-- ES UN BOMBARDERO DE ALTURA Y DE BAJA ALTURA EN LA CAMPANA DE IRAQ FUE EL PRIMERO QUE HABRIO EL PASO 8 B1B DESTRUYERON ESTRUCTURAS DE MISSILES TIERRA AIRE. VOLANDO A 300PIES DE ALTURA A MAS DE 800 MILLAS POR HORA DE NOCHE NADIE SUPO QUE LOS DESTRUYO

  • @erikclay2003

    El Tu 160, no solo es mas barato, sino que tambien puede llevar mas peso en bombas y seguir siendo supersonico...

    la unica ventaja del b2 es que los radares no lo detectan facilmente.

    Explicame como el Tu-160 paso por el territorio de Canada sin ser detectado, y eso que USA tiene potentes radares y es aliado de Canada.

  • Muito bom parabens

    gostei da musica qual o nome?

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more