@realIBeliX the tupolev 22 has engines near the vertical tail. but the tu-160 has engines on the bottom of the main wings just like the b-1. They may have taken some of the design from the tu-22, but they also copied a lot directly from the b-1 bomber.
@realIBeliX well, like the overall shape of the plane, and the swing-wing design, and the engines mounted under the main wings. It is normal for militaries and a lot of industry to copy from one another, and often when one country copies another country's hardware, they make it even better in the process.
@realIBeliX well I am American. I think Russia and the USA have a lot in common, and they should be very good friends. They are both large and powerful countries, with great grain growing capacity, and have a lot of natural resources. The reason they should be friends is that they are similar in size and they should both work together to get rid of out-dated missile systems such as ICBM's.
@creativeprojects720 Agree on that. Military itself is similar, no other nation in world has such weapons as Russia and US, only, real copies (China, Britain).
@000sansan tu-160 and b-1b are dufferent aircrafts in nature, tu160 is desined to carry long range nuclera tipped cruise missiles meant for carrier battle groups thus making it a stretegic aircrafe, lancer is mabe for conventional bombings of individual targers, these aircrafts are different in role, size, and many other things
Те и Американските политици , изглеждат , като че говорят сами , само къде са шимпанзета и при тоува первое качество. Тука сеа или сега ми се мръщи една ноува легенда , която ОЩЕ НЕ СЪМ ПРОЧЕЛ МОЛИТВИТЕ ИМ , моля простете
Света се смени ,не е онова време на хенри форд, който експлоатира населението, американското население стана мислещо, което е присъщо на човека и май не е правилно да казвам американско население, амъ като съвсем ги окупират ще се разбере кой лъже.
Russian efforts to maintain its revived fleet of Tu-160 long-range bombers has come up short because the Russian Air Force cannot order enough Tu-160 engines to keep the engine factory going. The air force only wants about five NK-32 engines a year. Each Tu-160 is fitted with four of these 3.5 ton engines. Most of these engines were built 10-20 years ago, and have been overhauled many times.
I agree we are unlikely to see more advanced technology bombers in significant numbers. Not only are the cold-war era missions they were designed for largely absent from modern conflict, but also that drones and helicopters are both cheap and expendable. You can loose a hundred drones and half a dozen helos for every B2, and still be in pocket.
Those discussions about who would win if[..] are just pointless. In a war involving the US and Russia there could not possibly be a winner. Even though the Americans would most likely come out ahead since they have been able to invest way more money into their research and to produce the weapons they have developed in greater numbers through a favorable economy,it really wouldn't count as a victory.Both sides would suffer immense losses and start going down a path of mutually assured destruction
Those discussions about who would win if[..] are just pointless. In a war involving the US and Russia there could not possibly be a winner. Even though the Americans would most likely come out ahead since they have been able to invest way more money into their research and to produce the weapons they have developed in greater numbers through a favorable economy,it really wouldn't count as a victory.Both sides would suffer immense losses and start going down a path of mutually assured destruction
Truly impressive bird; however, almost pointless in today's world. Without stealth, that thing will get taken out very quickly if they try to use it for what it was made for.
@CTSV4MEE Not true. We still have plenty of uses for the B1 and this things is a larger, superior version of the B1. Loaded with standoff cruise missiles, this bird still represents a credible threat to anyone.
@CTSV4MEE : I disagree with the notion that all future aerial warfare will be based on stealth. Apart from being ridiculously expensive, the true capabilities of stealth planes are yet to be fully tested in combat. F-117 and B-2 saw combat vs enemies with either no air force or with limited air force/air defense capabilities, and still lost one to the Serbs in the balkans. Nobody knows what to expect from such planes if deployed vs nations with modern air defense systems and air force.
@vonkaunaz The Serbs got lucky with that one. They used a mobile phone network and still had to filter out all the low level signatures that got picked up to find the F-117. If a whole group has been attacking I imagine it would have been much harder to shoot down.
@theredraven: Didn´t know details on how the Serbs managed to put an F-117 on the dirt. What the Serbs put to use to smoke it was millions of times cheaper (mobile phone network!!) than what the Americans invested on those planes. Send them against Russia where advanced radar and air-defense systems are in place...The USA tradition of insane spending and charging mind-blowing fees will come to an end sooner than we thought, and stealth planes will never become the workhorses of any airforce.
@vonkaunaz That'd be why virtually every new fighter jet being designed by the US, Russia and China is stealthy in one way or another then?
And when you consider that the all the other wars the F-117 was in involved enemies using Russian AA systems, I'd say one loss out of the whole operational history was quite good yes?
@theredraven: Yes,Russian AA system used but not the latest stuff, which the Russians keep only for themselves.You either sell old stuff or downgraded export packages. Today it ain´t WW2 when small, cheap, disposable P-51s or P-47s were shot down by the thousands by the Germans to be replaced in thousands. Stealth is ridiculously expensive! How many B-2s are in use? Around 20? Send them all against an enemy with advanced AA, lose 3 and you lost more than 10% of your "stealth fleet". Unbearable.
@vonkaunaz The reason there are so few B-2 aircraft is because the Cold War ended and stealth bombers don't buy votes. If the Cold War had still been ongoing, I imagine they would have gone ahead with the fleet of 100 that they originally planned.
@theredraven : And given the present-day economic situation of the US, you can forget any new B-2s in a good while (maybe never again). Stealth planes will always be produced in limited numbers and used for ultra-specific reconnaissance missions, pinpoint attacks or bombing runs. Current operational fighters (Mig-31s, F.15s, F-16s, F/A-18s,Mig-29s, Su-30s,etc) are already TOO DAMN expensive to be lost in large numbers in any major war. They will never risk their stealth planes on such scenarios.
@vonkaunaz Some of those planes have been designed to have small radar signatures too.
People probably said the same about jet aircraft when they were first invented. You're right, they won't build new B-2's, they'll build something more capable. No stealth plane is truly invisible, but the radars required to spot them (especially new ones like the F-22 and T-50) need to be so powerful that for the forseeable future, stealth planes are in.
@theredraven :Tend to agree with you, but I am convinced that "conventional" jet fighters and bombers, and even props, will continue to be the workhorses of all major air forces in the world. I doubt the capabilities of the F-22, T-50 and whatever is it that the Chinese are allegedly developing. The compatibility of stealth & supersonic speed as claimed by the contractor that produced the F-22 is also yet to be tested in full combat. Both F-117 and B-2 are subsonic and nearly non-maneuverable.
As a former B-1B avionics systems tech, I do find the Tu-160 is a beautiful aircraft in it's own right, but...you can't tell me that its not based on the B-1.
So what is the story on this and why does it look like the B1.
BTW the B1 was a total fking flop and it well known in the aviation industry to be one of the biggest FAILS ever. There is a reason we still fly the B52 =)
Love these old Russian Planes. Wish the US was still operating some of our older bombers from the 50's.
Tu 160 , The white SWAN is undoubtably is the best supersonic bomber in wrold.. B1 is a stealth they say but it is a piece of crap,, during yugoslav War b1 was detected using mobile phone rays and was shot down. But TU 160 flew in American waters undetected because of its speed.
мы РОССИЯ и я все сделаю любого прибью \\кто против РОССИИ..янка шманка англичан и в француз мне ни кто \\я сам с Карелии и финнов мы тут долбим\\\ппц чухонца как и весь запад ..как пословится нет страшнее Карела хужхуже танка
If I were in Russian place I would place 6 rails for Air to Air missiles and Irbis E radar so this plane go alone in some missions. Anyway this is great plane with amazing speed for bomber, also great range!
yeah but russias economy is in the toliet so they cant even afford to put gas in the tank. just an expensive lawn ornament at the rusting, rotted down russian airfields.
@Erik0072 Ur wrong, if russia's economy was "bad" then there would have been no rearmament program since 2008 nor PAK-FA project, my theory is that by when PAK-FA enters in service by then russian economy will be way better than now, considering that russia aswell wants to do produce a stealth bomber, called PAK-DA which i think will be first flown in 2017.
What do I think now? Well, just let me tell you what I think now. I think your an amature who knows nothing, likes to bash America just because it's fashionable to, and your an idiot who believes anything you read and are told. That's what I think now. End of conversation.
The original B-1 should have outclassed this plane easily,especially in electronic countermeasures. But the simple truth was that by the time it was developed,we really didn't need it, the Air force didn't want it, and Carter saw it for the boondoggle it was fast becoming.
Regan pushed through the B-1B,which wasn't as well developed or as good as the B-1 should have been. It didn't matter,we would never get in a war with the soviets,it's too expensive.
This bomber is as much pride to the Russians as the B-2 is for America. Tu-160 is the world's largest while B-2 is the world's quietest. Both have ups and downs but neither outclasses the other. I would rather Tu-160 because simply of its speed and its massive size and higher ceiling but stealth on the side is also a good alternative :)
Tu-160 aircraft is a breakthrough of Defense, all the fighters the U.S. is slower than the Tu-160. Missile attack from the Tu-160 can be reflected only by accident or knowing where he will fly. An unexpected attack from the Tu-160 missiles with nuclear warheads is almost fatal to the enemy. But as a strategic bomber, it is worse than the B-1B.
You don't think an F22 traveling Mach 1 and shooting an AAMRAM missile that travles at Mach 3+ will take this thing out of the sky? Your math is a little off. This thing would be toast.
While IMO the B-1B is WAY better than this thing, no aircraft to this date has stole my attention more so than a Tu-95 Bear, such magnificent aircraft.
You got it wrong. The TU-160 is bigger and faster, but the B-1 (Believe it or not) has a longer range, more modern avionics, and a LARGER PAYLOAD (56,700KG compared to the TU-160's 40,000KG)
Спасибо за эту песню. Я русский, но никогда её не слышал. К счастью, я открыл её для себя с вашей помощью. Великолепная музыка на отличные стихи.
(Thank you for this song. I'm russian, but I never heard it. I discovered it for myself with your help, fortunately. Great music with excellent lyrics.)
The B-1b is better just kidding I am highly supportive of my country united states of Americas air force but honestly I like Russia's bombers better that our own
@XxIceCavexX They both perform the same role, and thus look very similar. Russia's Tu 160 is beautiful no doubt but I think it is a continuation of our existing technology. I do like the bomber though, and I think it was a huge mistake decommissioning all of our B1s.
love russia, am slaven like russian brothers and the are making the best weapons in the world, and to all Usa people, you are scared from russia, thats why you spit on it, shame you, :) , best planes ever in mother russia
Remenber first rocket with TVC (R-7)? Remenber R-73, first TVC IR-guided missile with high angle-of-view? Remember MiG-25, fastest fighter ever build and mass produced? Definetly, soviet tecnology, in some aspects, were WAY superior than american ones.
@jasper5554, Cool, have to say Soviet/Russian aircraft are truly formidable and very capable, cant wait to see just what this Tupolev Pak Da looks like!
The Tu-160 is not a copy of the Rockwell B-1 Lancer. The B-1 is a failed copy of the Tu-160. The Tu-160's first flight was in December 19, 1981. B-1's was October 18, 1984.
No, Tu-160 first official flight was in 1981 and B1's in 1974. And no offence, everyone knows that Russians copied western technology, cars, tanks, planes, and again no offence, americans never would copy the russian military projects, because they had poor electronics.
@migueldelodz Russia never coppied american tanks because they are shitty. Russia never copied american cars. Americans always copied russian military technologies. F-15 is copy of Mig-25, F-35 is copy of Yak-141. Russians never was behind americans in electronics. Americans copied russian rockets even now americans buy russian rocket engines for heavy leafting rockets.T-160 differs very much from B-1. Tu-160 is aicraft with largest number of microprocessors. Americans also steal helmet of Mig
@AlexanderTch, It is true Lockhead Martin bought technical data regarding the Yak 141 in the 1990's, i no this for a fact because i work for BAE systems, a partner company in the F35 project.but the F35 is not a copy of the Yak 141, it does however incorperate some of that aircrafts technical innovations.
@migueldelodz Your stupid polish tv madly translates stupid american tv shows about how superiour are americans to other world. I saw them too when I visited states but it was funny to watch. Even if Tu-160 and B1 look similar doesn't mean that they are copied. Tu-160 is completely different in tasks and abilities. By the way russian military processor Elbrus was always ahead of american Intel they simply are not used outside military tasks for security reasons.
@AlexanderTch I just laughed loudly, I hope my neighbors don't mind. How about confrontation of US and Soviet jets in Korea (50') and in Vietnam. Count how many Migs were destroyed by ISAF during wars between arab states and Israel. I understand you're a patriot, but the truth is always harsh. BTW - stupid polish media huh? Full of propaganda. Russia - 140th place in press freedom ranking, Poland - 32.
Well your smart? if RUSSIANS piloted RUSSIAN aircrafts, which they were trained to use the outcome, I guarantee would be much different. You think the Arab and Korean pilots recieved the same training as their soviet brethren? Besides if history has taugh us anything, its dont mess with Russia -__-
So then USA would win cause they had better trained pilots. Remember the russian strategy? Quantity not quality. Mig 23 vs F-16 - check the parameters, speed, manuverabilty, max g-force etc. But wait you're from USA, I feel strange I hear dont mess with Russia from an American...oh you're 15.
Yeah im 15, and yeah i live in America. It doesnt mean i wont stop a guy from making a pretty stupid comment, your making it sound as if american pilots are the best in the world. Besides if war did take place i doubt there would be any major aerial engagments because of ICMB's and Strategic Bombers delivering nuclear weapons ^ the Tu-160 is a prime example of strategic bomber. GTFO MEXICAN
More money = better training.Simple but true.Russian pilots had and have passed less flight hours then american or EU pilots.Read about russian army and you'll see that it is in poor shape and started to fall apart in the middle 80'. USSR ceases to exist = less money is pumped for the army.Check the stats and you'll see. Money spent on army - USA - aprox 600 billion, Russia - around 70. I'm european kiddo, Poland, ask your geography teacher. Don't swear, mum will spank your ass.
Afraid to post it under the video? I hope someday USA will be invaded, your mother raped and you will get to know how terrible occupation is and won't insult other like that. Kid, because we were part of the Warsaw Pact I know the quality of the russian equipment. I was a draft solider in Polish Army. And now as the part of NATO we well know that russian equipment is shit comparing to american or european. Discussion over, go and wank over russian technology, you're a true patriot
I cant post it under the video, it says error douche bag. Maybe you cant read english? the article specificly says that russian export models were, in essance, down graded - thus being called "Monkey Models". I am a American/pakistani and i love both countries, i also admire Russia and many other countries ( Poland amongst them ) But you made such an unintelligent comment i sought to correct =/
Side note- Prior to WW1, Poland was part of Russia
Thank you captain obvious that you enlightened me and told me that my country was torn by partiotion! Monkey models - in case of aircraft - MiG-23MS. Mig-21 and other T-tanks standard models were exported without changing them. Mig-23 wasn't used during wars between Israel and arab states - Mig-15, Mig-17 and Mig-21. So don't tell me about my unintelligent comment cause I was thinking about Six-day war - Mig-23 didn't exist.
whats the name of the song?
TheUnionSovietica 29 minutes ago
Comment removed
Filipok1690 1 day ago
fajny film super maszyna jeśli Rosja będzie mieć taki sprzęt nikt jej nie ruszy
grzesiek9645 2 weeks ago
Здраствуй Брат! Дела такие че се самозабравят на какъвто език искаш. Отгоре на всичко се мислът за НЕВИДИМИ ТЪПЪНАРИ. Това огорчава човешкия род.
grozd102 2 weeks ago
The Tu-160 let's everyone know its coming.
The B-1B lets everyone know it was there.
Amar7605 3 weeks ago
@Amar7605 With advanced Radar , no such thing as Stealth, if its an object it will be detected.
brendonnz1964 2 days ago
From a technology standpoint the B-1 has the 160 beat. If you say that the Tu-160 is more advanced, it'll be untruth.
jmcb1b 3 weeks ago
@jmcb1b yeah I think the blackjack is a copy of the b-1, it even has the same swing-wing design.
creativeprojects720 1 week ago
@creativeprojects720 Blackjack is not copy of B-1 dummy. Tu-160 is based from older Tu-22.
realIBeliX 1 week ago
@realIBeliX the tupolev 22 has engines near the vertical tail. but the tu-160 has engines on the bottom of the main wings just like the b-1. They may have taken some of the design from the tu-22, but they also copied a lot directly from the b-1 bomber.
creativeprojects720 5 days ago
@creativeprojects720 Copied directly like what?
Yes I am.
realIBeliX 5 days ago
@realIBeliX well, like the overall shape of the plane, and the swing-wing design, and the engines mounted under the main wings. It is normal for militaries and a lot of industry to copy from one another, and often when one country copies another country's hardware, they make it even better in the process.
creativeprojects720 5 days ago
@realIBeliX well I am American. I think Russia and the USA have a lot in common, and they should be very good friends. They are both large and powerful countries, with great grain growing capacity, and have a lot of natural resources. The reason they should be friends is that they are similar in size and they should both work together to get rid of out-dated missile systems such as ICBM's.
creativeprojects720 5 days ago
@creativeprojects720 Agree on that. Military itself is similar, no other nation in world has such weapons as Russia and US, only, real copies (China, Britain).
realIBeliX 5 days ago
@creativeprojects720 I watched the documentary program about the Tu-160, it states that 70% of it is created from the passenger Tu-144
The remaining 30% probably Tu-22M
where you are b-1 saw don `t know, the shape of the fuselage or what?
greyderH2 4 days ago
@realIBeliX are you Russian?
creativeprojects720 5 days ago
Това ни донесе оня хитлер и мамка му
grozd102 3 weeks ago
Скоро новите американски мисли ще срещтнат бленуваните си НАДЕЖДИ
grozd102 3 weeks ago
Супер клип , песента е повече от ...
grozd102 3 weeks ago
@000sansan tu-160 and b-1b are dufferent aircrafts in nature, tu160 is desined to carry long range nuclera tipped cruise missiles meant for carrier battle groups thus making it a stretegic aircrafe, lancer is mabe for conventional bombings of individual targers, these aircrafts are different in role, size, and many other things
Madmax1945XXX 3 weeks ago
@Madmax1945XXX Funny, I always thought the B1 was a replacement for the B52 as a longrange Nuclear bomber ??? Anyway both are pretty cool jets...
drenajunkie 2 weeks ago
@drenajunkie it can carry nuclear bomds, and if modefied it can carru anything but primarily its a bomber, tu-160 is "raketonosets" missile carrier
Madmax1945XXX 2 weeks ago
@000sansan Copycatting? I suggest you check out the Tu22 and then see who is the real copycat here.
themightyjoseph 1 month ago
Може да мина и без скъпото нахалство Буш , ТРЯБВА ДА МЕ ХРАНИ ИНАЧЕ СЕ ПРЕДАВА И АЗ ГО ХРАНА ДА ИЗБИРА
grozd102 1 month ago
Good Design !!! Nice
DieZahnfeeIstDa 1 month ago
Продължението на творческото мислене е в клипа " Русская Акула", Добре дошли!
grozd102 1 month ago
Те и Американските политици , изглеждат , като че говорят сами , само къде са шимпанзета и при тоува первое качество. Тука сеа или сега ми се мръщи една ноува легенда , която ОЩЕ НЕ СЪМ ПРОЧЕЛ МОЛИТВИТЕ ИМ , моля простете
grozd102 1 month ago
@grozd102 Привет, как дела.
Qurator1 3 weeks ago
Кажете на ОНАЯ АМЕРИКАНСКА наука ,че съм проникнал до там , ЧЕ ДА Я , ,СЪЗДАВАМ ,барабар с недостатъците й. човек
grozd102 1 month ago
That looks like the most powerful plane on the planet.
Jesteria78 1 month ago
B-1B is better
lolmanj 1 month ago
Don't understand music but I like it
F3rgo666 1 month ago
Happy 30th birthday to this beautiful "flying swan!"
fs10inator 1 month ago
what is the song called?
VorbringAir 1 month ago
@VorbringAir Алиса - Небо Славян | Alisa - Nebo Slavyan
Simmons1812 1 month ago
to bad only a handfull are active.
GerogKutner 1 month ago
Where can i get one?
Doeoeod 1 month ago
Russian aircrafts are the no. 1.
HylingNorr 2 months ago
Comment removed
06G 2 months ago
Братушки , разбирам целия СССР - още не осъзнанавате какво направихте- ваче гражданина на некои страни е ЧОВЕК - работодателъ е само опит за летене!
grozd102 2 months ago
Света се смени ,не е онова време на хенри форд, който експлоатира населението, американското население стана мислещо, което е присъщо на човека и май не е правилно да казвам американско население, амъ като съвсем ги окупират ще се разбере кой лъже.
grozd102 2 months ago
Така Братушки, политиците идват и си отиват, ние оставаме , така че дръжте само и единствено на себе си.
grozd102 2 months ago
very nice music , i hope its not nazi !
spykerhond 2 months ago
Only it seemed to me that this plane is strongly similar on B1A?
Shturmtrooper 2 months ago
@Shturmtrooper Indeed, B1, even if less performing, looks very similar to this plane.
krbosak 2 months ago
Russian efforts to maintain its revived fleet of Tu-160 long-range bombers has come up short because the Russian Air Force cannot order enough Tu-160 engines to keep the engine factory going. The air force only wants about five NK-32 engines a year. Each Tu-160 is fitted with four of these 3.5 ton engines. Most of these engines were built 10-20 years ago, and have been overhauled many times.
MerlinOfTroy 3 months ago
Аз който съм накарал американците да се държът като ХОРА,буш мисли се за велик.
grozd102 3 months ago
1:03 Tomahawk?
pawel901229 3 months ago
Love the American bomb footage at 3:09!
DontEvenTryItSucka 3 months ago 2
Good thing they got rid of the f-14s
dvr123us 3 months ago
what a beautiful aircraft! thanks for sharing amazing vid.
i hope this awesome bird does not come to my counrty on it's proper mission. :)
thanks again.
foudgeta 4 months ago
I agree we are unlikely to see more advanced technology bombers in significant numbers. Not only are the cold-war era missions they were designed for largely absent from modern conflict, but also that drones and helicopters are both cheap and expendable. You can loose a hundred drones and half a dozen helos for every B2, and still be in pocket.
LoveMeLoveMyDog80 4 months ago
Those discussions about who would win if[..] are just pointless. In a war involving the US and Russia there could not possibly be a winner. Even though the Americans would most likely come out ahead since they have been able to invest way more money into their research and to produce the weapons they have developed in greater numbers through a favorable economy,it really wouldn't count as a victory.Both sides would suffer immense losses and start going down a path of mutually assured destruction
childrenofbodomfan74 4 months ago
Those discussions about who would win if[..] are just pointless. In a war involving the US and Russia there could not possibly be a winner. Even though the Americans would most likely come out ahead since they have been able to invest way more money into their research and to produce the weapons they have developed in greater numbers through a favorable economy,it really wouldn't count as a victory.Both sides would suffer immense losses and start going down a path of mutually assured destruction
childrenofbodomfan74 4 months ago
Comment removed
childrenofbodomfan74 4 months ago
Не ми смей солдат, като си ебе майката ,други хора са ваште управници.Моля за извинение човека ,не го "смятам"-мисля за изпълнител.
grozd102 4 months ago
what's the call sign of the pilot? "pokerface" ? :-)
Jesteria78 4 months ago
This plane a mix from Tu-22m and Tu-144, both have flied up for five years earlier B-1.
Tail and engines from Tu-144, and a nose and wings from Tu-22m.
Americans the first had time to unite these two magnificent planes, we do not speak about copying.
Sorry for Google translation
greyderH2 4 months ago
@AlphaRadeon couldnt agree with u more man
andrius2274 4 months ago
Truly impressive bird; however, almost pointless in today's world. Without stealth, that thing will get taken out very quickly if they try to use it for what it was made for.
CTSV4MEE 5 months ago
@CTSV4MEE Not true. We still have plenty of uses for the B1 and this things is a larger, superior version of the B1. Loaded with standoff cruise missiles, this bird still represents a credible threat to anyone.
Elthenar 4 months ago
@CTSV4MEE : I disagree with the notion that all future aerial warfare will be based on stealth. Apart from being ridiculously expensive, the true capabilities of stealth planes are yet to be fully tested in combat. F-117 and B-2 saw combat vs enemies with either no air force or with limited air force/air defense capabilities, and still lost one to the Serbs in the balkans. Nobody knows what to expect from such planes if deployed vs nations with modern air defense systems and air force.
vonkaunaz 4 months ago
@vonkaunaz The Serbs got lucky with that one. They used a mobile phone network and still had to filter out all the low level signatures that got picked up to find the F-117. If a whole group has been attacking I imagine it would have been much harder to shoot down.
theredraven 4 months ago
@theredraven: Didn´t know details on how the Serbs managed to put an F-117 on the dirt. What the Serbs put to use to smoke it was millions of times cheaper (mobile phone network!!) than what the Americans invested on those planes. Send them against Russia where advanced radar and air-defense systems are in place...The USA tradition of insane spending and charging mind-blowing fees will come to an end sooner than we thought, and stealth planes will never become the workhorses of any airforce.
vonkaunaz 4 months ago
@vonkaunaz That'd be why virtually every new fighter jet being designed by the US, Russia and China is stealthy in one way or another then?
And when you consider that the all the other wars the F-117 was in involved enemies using Russian AA systems, I'd say one loss out of the whole operational history was quite good yes?
theredraven 4 months ago
@theredraven: Yes,Russian AA system used but not the latest stuff, which the Russians keep only for themselves.You either sell old stuff or downgraded export packages. Today it ain´t WW2 when small, cheap, disposable P-51s or P-47s were shot down by the thousands by the Germans to be replaced in thousands. Stealth is ridiculously expensive! How many B-2s are in use? Around 20? Send them all against an enemy with advanced AA, lose 3 and you lost more than 10% of your "stealth fleet". Unbearable.
vonkaunaz 4 months ago
@vonkaunaz The reason there are so few B-2 aircraft is because the Cold War ended and stealth bombers don't buy votes. If the Cold War had still been ongoing, I imagine they would have gone ahead with the fleet of 100 that they originally planned.
theredraven 4 months ago
@theredraven : And given the present-day economic situation of the US, you can forget any new B-2s in a good while (maybe never again). Stealth planes will always be produced in limited numbers and used for ultra-specific reconnaissance missions, pinpoint attacks or bombing runs. Current operational fighters (Mig-31s, F.15s, F-16s, F/A-18s,Mig-29s, Su-30s,etc) are already TOO DAMN expensive to be lost in large numbers in any major war. They will never risk their stealth planes on such scenarios.
vonkaunaz 4 months ago
@vonkaunaz Some of those planes have been designed to have small radar signatures too.
People probably said the same about jet aircraft when they were first invented. You're right, they won't build new B-2's, they'll build something more capable. No stealth plane is truly invisible, but the radars required to spot them (especially new ones like the F-22 and T-50) need to be so powerful that for the forseeable future, stealth planes are in.
theredraven 4 months ago
@theredraven :Tend to agree with you, but I am convinced that "conventional" jet fighters and bombers, and even props, will continue to be the workhorses of all major air forces in the world. I doubt the capabilities of the F-22, T-50 and whatever is it that the Chinese are allegedly developing. The compatibility of stealth & supersonic speed as claimed by the contractor that produced the F-22 is also yet to be tested in full combat. Both F-117 and B-2 are subsonic and nearly non-maneuverable.
vonkaunaz 4 months ago
As a former B-1B avionics systems tech, I do find the Tu-160 is a beautiful aircraft in it's own right, but...you can't tell me that its not based on the B-1.
B-1 first flight - December 23, 1974
Tu-160 first flight - December 18, 1981
solidlift 5 months ago
EPIC MUSIC
Ascendancy1992 5 months ago
Range 13950/10500 km
speed 2230 km
The general draught of engines (4) 1000000 N
Zuev4anin 5 months ago
@Zuev4anin I read many times that Vmax is 2.3M and it is 2440km/h. (variations variations :).......
Thrust with afterburner: 245 kN (55,115 lbf) each
Mtk711s 5 months ago
Russia makes artcrafts out of airplanes...
andresrodrigoescobar 5 months ago
Can anyone tell me where the music comes from? Artist? Band? Any names?
Jesteria78 5 months ago
@Jesteria78 this is russian group Алиса
lexxg22 5 months ago
@lexxg22Cool, checked things out, it's Alice, from Alice in Wonderland, I'll sure but a cd.
Jesteria78 5 months ago
@lexxg22 great band..!!!
haifisch69 4 months ago
@Jesteria78 youtube . com / AlisAChannel
noisySR 5 months ago
So what is the story on this and why does it look like the B1.
BTW the B1 was a total fking flop and it well known in the aviation industry to be one of the biggest FAILS ever. There is a reason we still fly the B52 =)
Love these old Russian Planes. Wish the US was still operating some of our older bombers from the 50's.
sultros 5 months ago
B1 - U.S. Propoganda
old ussr c-30 kill steals in bosnia
coldmaster777 6 months ago
TU-160 > B-1B
JoshTehVideoMaker 6 months ago
Tu 160 , The white SWAN is undoubtably is the best supersonic bomber in wrold.. B1 is a stealth they say but it is a piece of crap,, during yugoslav War b1 was detected using mobile phone rays and was shot down. But TU 160 flew in American waters undetected because of its speed.
vijaymanand143 6 months ago
мы РОССИЯ и я все сделаю любого прибью \\кто против РОССИИ..янка шманка англичан и в француз мне ни кто \\я сам с Карелии и финнов мы тут долбим\\\ппц чухонца как и весь запад ..как пословится нет страшнее Карела хужхуже танка
MsAllegator 6 months ago
The greatest strategic bomber of all time
mrkringlan 7 months ago
The Tu-160s are constantly flying along the coast of the UK. The RAF scrambled to incept 20 of them making surprise visits last year :D
lexichronicle2 7 months ago
Concorde slept with a B-1 and this is their child
ToonandBBfan 7 months ago
The White Swan, not a blackjack. Fucking NATO's code names...
Strannik191 7 months ago
Did the soviets copy the B-1A bomber through KGB intelligences? Wow 100% identical and bigger than B-1A
pakurangaguy 7 months ago
@pakurangaguy i dont believe we did but its entirely possible althought we didnt like copying america very much
killman369547 7 months ago
@pakurangaguy and MUCH faster))
coll565 7 months ago
If I were in Russian place I would place 6 rails for Air to Air missiles and Irbis E radar so this plane go alone in some missions. Anyway this is great plane with amazing speed for bomber, also great range!
Putin34000 7 months ago
Can it supercruise?
N330AA 7 months ago
@N330AA yes
killman369547 7 months ago
1:05 Tu 95 watching its successor with pride :)
zx169 7 months ago
These are awesome looking Russian bombers, but I need to agree that American and European bombers are better.
IslandThunder84 7 months ago
I am making this one for a free flight sim, flightgear, it's a great aircraft
ZowyTheRottweiler 7 months ago
cool!
granskare 7 months ago
yeah but russias economy is in the toliet so they cant even afford to put gas in the tank. just an expensive lawn ornament at the rusting, rotted down russian airfields.
Erik0072 7 months ago
@Erik0072 Ur wrong, if russia's economy was "bad" then there would have been no rearmament program since 2008 nor PAK-FA project, my theory is that by when PAK-FA enters in service by then russian economy will be way better than now, considering that russia aswell wants to do produce a stealth bomber, called PAK-DA which i think will be first flown in 2017.
RockRebel1998 7 months ago
Name of song?
mrkringlan 7 months ago
@mrkringlan Алиса - Небо славян (Alisa - Nebo slavyan)
Simmons1812 7 months ago
This plane looks so much like a B1 Lancer!
106640guy 8 months ago
I think that these guys often come to the borders of America on these aircraft.
Imprudentman 8 months ago
What do I think now? Well, just let me tell you what I think now. I think your an amature who knows nothing, likes to bash America just because it's fashionable to, and your an idiot who believes anything you read and are told. That's what I think now. End of conversation.
HEADBANGBALLER 8 months ago
in mother russia ve copy your design and make bigger
CBlackjr 8 months ago
nice bomber, wasn't exactly produced in a number that would be feared thought. Total of 35 built.
CBlackjr 8 months ago
B-1 B is Better!
AlexBoss903 8 months ago
AWESOME PLANE but it has the nose of michael jackson.... XD
soverato3 8 months ago
some bad b1 copy... but a nice plane though
MrMcDschingis 8 months ago
Someone tell me which version of the Tu-160 the russians have? Is it the tu-160m?
royalstarfish17 8 months ago
The original B-1 should have outclassed this plane easily,especially in electronic countermeasures. But the simple truth was that by the time it was developed,we really didn't need it, the Air force didn't want it, and Carter saw it for the boondoggle it was fast becoming.
Regan pushed through the B-1B,which wasn't as well developed or as good as the B-1 should have been. It didn't matter,we would never get in a war with the soviets,it's too expensive.
Oldbmwr100rs 8 months ago
This bomber is as much pride to the Russians as the B-2 is for America. Tu-160 is the world's largest while B-2 is the world's quietest. Both have ups and downs but neither outclasses the other. I would rather Tu-160 because simply of its speed and its massive size and higher ceiling but stealth on the side is also a good alternative :)
strizhi 8 months ago
Tu-160 aircraft is a breakthrough of Defense, all the fighters the U.S. is slower than the Tu-160. Missile attack from the Tu-160 can be reflected only by accident or knowing where he will fly. An unexpected attack from the Tu-160 missiles with nuclear warheads is almost fatal to the enemy. But as a strategic bomber, it is worse than the B-1B.
Wedafl 8 months ago
You don't think an F22 traveling Mach 1 and shooting an AAMRAM missile that travles at Mach 3+ will take this thing out of the sky? Your math is a little off. This thing would be toast.
smacman68 8 months ago
@smacman68 firstly this plane is invincible your radars did not got it when it passed the alskan borders .
secondlu this plane has got countermasures flares and such thinks
thirldy if it goes on a mission it will be escorted by a russian plane for sure !!
so what do you think now ??
TheKifinas 8 months ago
B-1B is better
tatarjj2007 8 months ago
it's...it's ...So BIG! DAMN!
rps5299 9 months ago
While IMO the B-1B is WAY better than this thing, no aircraft to this date has stole my attention more so than a Tu-95 Bear, such magnificent aircraft.
GreatWhite85 9 months ago
indeed awsome video
onlymusicism 9 months ago
i like the raw look
onlymusicism 9 months ago
It is way better than the B-1. Faster. Bigger. ALL of the above
Major8492 9 months ago
@Major8492
You got it wrong. The TU-160 is bigger and faster, but the B-1 (Believe it or not) has a longer range, more modern avionics, and a LARGER PAYLOAD (56,700KG compared to the TU-160's 40,000KG)
MegaK2z 9 months ago
the white swan. the fear. the death carrier. maybe the angel of death. the greatest creation of the great architect Andrei Tupolev.
royalstarfish17 9 months ago 3
Where can I get / download this song?
andresrodrigoescobar 9 months ago
XxIceCavexX
Actually, US Strategic Bombers are more advanced than Russia's bombers. However, that does not make them any less awesome.
xXScotty1993Xx 10 months ago
@xXScotty1993Xx Yes andsimplicity over complicated things have numerous benefits. The US even described the Tu-160 as the "Dream Bomber".
999cheetos999 10 months ago
White swan carrying really black death...
EminidisMike 10 months ago
No one fucks with Матери России
royalstarfish17 10 months ago
nice plane,Greeting from Greece
demisbossalexiadis 10 months ago
Спасибо за эту песню. Я русский, но никогда её не слышал. К счастью, я открыл её для себя с вашей помощью. Великолепная музыка на отличные стихи.
(Thank you for this song. I'm russian, but I never heard it. I discovered it for myself with your help, fortunately. Great music with excellent lyrics.)
Example626 10 months ago
I fucking love this song. And I propably love Tu-160 too.....
huhtikuu 10 months ago
always hoped to get an Intercept in Iceland of one of thse back in the early 90's but only saw tu-95's and IL-38
bryjb10 10 months ago
The B-1b is better just kidding I am highly supportive of my country united states of Americas air force but honestly I like Russia's bombers better that our own
XxIceCavexX 10 months ago 38
@XxIceCavexX the us copyied the b1 after this plane
MultiOppai 10 months ago
@MultiOppai B1 is older, how you think they copied it?
t6uni 9 months ago
@XxIceCavexX Sir I respectfully salute you!
PumpBreaker007 8 months ago
@XxIceCavexX They both perform the same role, and thus look very similar. Russia's Tu 160 is beautiful no doubt but I think it is a continuation of our existing technology. I do like the bomber though, and I think it was a huge mistake decommissioning all of our B1s.
1337wafflezz 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
hell with the TU-160.... i'll take the B1-B any day against it;;;
shazbot2u 10 months ago
hell with the TU-160.... i'll take the B1-B ant day against it;;;
shazbot2u 10 months ago
@shazbot2u Different mission entirely. Similarities are superficial.
Camerameister 10 months ago
@Camerameister that is so true
shazbot2u 10 months ago
I live 8 miles from the base in Engles, Russia where many are based
gigobait 11 months ago
I wonder, why all soviet planes look so unrefined and raw?
moothemoostudios 11 months ago
super pjesma.pozdrav iz Hrvatske .)
Meshuggah5 11 months ago
love russia, am slaven like russian brothers and the are making the best weapons in the world, and to all Usa people, you are scared from russia, thats why you spit on it, shame you, :) , best planes ever in mother russia
tincofr 11 months ago
Remenber first rocket with TVC (R-7)? Remenber R-73, first TVC IR-guided missile with high angle-of-view? Remember MiG-25, fastest fighter ever build and mass produced? Definetly, soviet tecnology, in some aspects, were WAY superior than american ones.
RdClZn 11 months ago
B-2 Spirit ftw
CHVNPatriot 11 months ago
I'd like to be a pilot of this fine lady...And test run her to New York... :)
Duke0Forever 11 months ago
@Duke0Forever I need glasses to drive so I can't be a pilot :( However I'm good enough with computers that I can be a WSO or DSO
Sergcanes98 11 months ago
the thumbnail was deceiving. awesome plane. reminds me of the concord
megaflyer99 11 months ago
B-52 ftw
123omnia123 1 year ago
@123omnia123 y i hate americans they dont give any country its due because of there massive ego
killman369547 1 year ago
@killman369547 i'm not american anyway....still it is better :)
123omnia123 1 year ago
@123omnia123 Tu-95 RULEZ
TheGogr 11 months ago
@TheGogr errr nope.
123omnia123 11 months ago
if only the french made concorde look like this :)
giantheadphone 1 year ago
What an awesome video! What an awesome plane! What an awesome song!
Greetings from Germany...
RammsteinXFan 1 year ago 39
tu-160 the most beautiful plane in the world...
Diman357 1 year ago
@jasper5554, Cool, have to say Soviet/Russian aircraft are truly formidable and very capable, cant wait to see just what this Tupolev Pak Da looks like!
TheCharlie359 1 year ago
Ah, so this is where the old Concordes went to after their decommission.
Krommak 1 year ago
This is one of many reasons why I miss the old Russia during the Soviet era..
mamatslack 1 year ago
@condorher dude I'm curious what does that mean?
willtipton100 1 year ago
The Tu-160 is not a copy of the Rockwell B-1 Lancer. The B-1 is a failed copy of the Tu-160. The Tu-160's first flight was in December 19, 1981. B-1's was October 18, 1984.
CurareHakira 1 year ago
@CurareHakira
No, Tu-160 first official flight was in 1981 and B1's in 1974. And no offence, everyone knows that Russians copied western technology, cars, tanks, planes, and again no offence, americans never would copy the russian military projects, because they had poor electronics.
migueldelodz 1 year ago
@migueldelodz Russia never coppied american tanks because they are shitty. Russia never copied american cars. Americans always copied russian military technologies. F-15 is copy of Mig-25, F-35 is copy of Yak-141. Russians never was behind americans in electronics. Americans copied russian rockets even now americans buy russian rocket engines for heavy leafting rockets.T-160 differs very much from B-1. Tu-160 is aicraft with largest number of microprocessors. Americans also steal helmet of Mig
AlexanderTch 1 year ago
@AlexanderTch, It is true Lockhead Martin bought technical data regarding the Yak 141 in the 1990's, i no this for a fact because i work for BAE systems, a partner company in the F35 project.but the F35 is not a copy of the Yak 141, it does however incorperate some of that aircrafts technical innovations.
TheCharlie359 1 year ago
@migueldelodz Your stupid polish tv madly translates stupid american tv shows about how superiour are americans to other world. I saw them too when I visited states but it was funny to watch. Even if Tu-160 and B1 look similar doesn't mean that they are copied. Tu-160 is completely different in tasks and abilities. By the way russian military processor Elbrus was always ahead of american Intel they simply are not used outside military tasks for security reasons.
AlexanderTch 1 year ago
@AlexanderTch I just laughed loudly, I hope my neighbors don't mind. How about confrontation of US and Soviet jets in Korea (50') and in Vietnam. Count how many Migs were destroyed by ISAF during wars between arab states and Israel. I understand you're a patriot, but the truth is always harsh. BTW - stupid polish media huh? Full of propaganda. Russia - 140th place in press freedom ranking, Poland - 32.
migueldelodz 1 year ago
Well your smart? if RUSSIANS piloted RUSSIAN aircrafts, which they were trained to use the outcome, I guarantee would be much different. You think the Arab and Korean pilots recieved the same training as their soviet brethren? Besides if history has taugh us anything, its dont mess with Russia -__-
MrDesiballer 1 year ago
@MrDesiballer
So then USA would win cause they had better trained pilots. Remember the russian strategy? Quantity not quality. Mig 23 vs F-16 - check the parameters, speed, manuverabilty, max g-force etc. But wait you're from USA, I feel strange I hear dont mess with Russia from an American...oh you're 15.
migueldelodz 1 year ago
Yeah im 15, and yeah i live in America. It doesnt mean i wont stop a guy from making a pretty stupid comment, your making it sound as if american pilots are the best in the world. Besides if war did take place i doubt there would be any major aerial engagments because of ICMB's and Strategic Bombers delivering nuclear weapons ^ the Tu-160 is a prime example of strategic bomber. GTFO MEXICAN
MrDesiballer 1 year ago
@MrDesiballer
More money = better training.Simple but true.Russian pilots had and have passed less flight hours then american or EU pilots.Read about russian army and you'll see that it is in poor shape and started to fall apart in the middle 80'. USSR ceases to exist = less money is pumped for the army.Check the stats and you'll see. Money spent on army - USA - aprox 600 billion, Russia - around 70. I'm european kiddo, Poland, ask your geography teacher. Don't swear, mum will spank your ass.
migueldelodz 1 year ago
@MrDesiballer
Afraid to post it under the video? I hope someday USA will be invaded, your mother raped and you will get to know how terrible occupation is and won't insult other like that. Kid, because we were part of the Warsaw Pact I know the quality of the russian equipment. I was a draft solider in Polish Army. And now as the part of NATO we well know that russian equipment is shit comparing to american or european. Discussion over, go and wank over russian technology, you're a true patriot
migueldelodz 1 year ago
I cant post it under the video, it says error douche bag. Maybe you cant read english? the article specificly says that russian export models were, in essance, down graded - thus being called "Monkey Models". I am a American/pakistani and i love both countries, i also admire Russia and many other countries ( Poland amongst them ) But you made such an unintelligent comment i sought to correct =/
Side note- Prior to WW1, Poland was part of Russia
MrDesiballer 1 year ago
@MrDesiballer
Thank you captain obvious that you enlightened me and told me that my country was torn by partiotion! Monkey models - in case of aircraft - MiG-23MS. Mig-21 and other T-tanks standard models were exported without changing them. Mig-23 wasn't used during wars between Israel and arab states - Mig-15, Mig-17 and Mig-21. So don't tell me about my unintelligent comment cause I was thinking about Six-day war - Mig-23 didn't exist.
migueldelodz 1 year ago
Damn, no wonder no one likes poland -__-
MrDesiballer 1 year ago