Tupelov Tu-160 "blackjack"

[Zukhov1945]

Russians have created a new level of badassery surpassing the americans.

[Lenangreal]

is that guy putin?

[PS2djX]

FOAB dust - burst all things

[IWANAROCKYEEEAAAA]

actually u r right is the best strategical bomber in the world.

i've heard they sold a phew to venesuela or was it another plane?

[Adragil]

@IWANAROCKYEEEAAAA no, this one is not for sale ;)

[bhartha2007]

Tu-160 has better aerodynamically and compared to its large size, it gives lower signature on teh radar than b-1 lancer, just amazing design. Going Mach 2+ is no joke for a bomber!

[armored5510]

Amazing aircraft and yes probably would make an air craft carrier simpley becasue of the amount of ordinance that could be sent there way. But best strategic bomber in the world. B2 and the argument that because some one shot down a 117 does mean anything, this isnt a nighthawk, so why would the fact that some one shot down a night hawk mean that some one could shoot down a B2. they are different planes, and while 117 were amazingly effective when used the B2 is a billion dollar plus plane.

[SAGEthewisedragon]

Russian Rave music? LOL cool video, that bomber looks a lot like the B1B , correct me if I'm wrong.

[77755roxx]

@SAGEthewisedragon exactly... by the way which one is before TU160 or B1?

[SuperDave619]

@SAGEthewisedragon Actually, the B1B looks a lot like Tu-160. The Tu-160 were the first to come into service and the Americans didn't have anything like it in their arsenal so they proceeded to manufacture B1B.

[Boggoranthius]

Awesome plane, absolutely. But no-one should have to put up with such crap music>

[95predator]

fresh meat for meteor.

[52111centrumcz]

@95predator

1) meteor requires radar lock on and has relatively short range if used against a mach 2 aircraft going at speed

2) meteor requires a calm ECM environment - this thing carries the most powerful jammers the Russkies can mount on an aircraft, much better than the F-111.

[95predator]

@52111centrumcz meteor does at over mach4 over 100km

blackjack is much older than meteor!

[52111centrumcz]

@95predator

The fact that is older is irrelevant. A bullet made in 1899 if fired from a rifle can kill as well today as it did when it was made unless it misfires.

Meteor requires inflight updates and final approach is active radar - you think jammers won't be used on the tiny and low fidelity warhead guidance system? Not to mention you fail to adress the issue that at Mach 2 if fired from astern the Meteor has a cruise speed of Mach 4 it will travel its 100 mile range very soon; end kinematic

[52111centrumcz]

@95predator

properties would be very poor, not to mention the jamming of the datalink to the missile during the inertial navigation phase of the missile would reduce accuracy against even a semi-maneuverable target, not to mention a full aerobatic target like the Blackjack.

[95predator]

@52111centrumcz i give a fuck

[95predator]

@52111centrumcz is it the same like white swan? it looks cool.

but its old stuff

[hornborgdk]

Russian propaganda, becouse you are weak in power !

[silvermitriy]

Тупые пиндосы! С каких пор он тупеловым стал?

[kyransdad1]

Awesome plane however can be hit a 100 miles away by surface to air missile; radar siganture is as big as a blimp. I'm also sure with those massive jet engines the heat signature can be seen from space.

[bittemeinrammstein]

@kyransdad1

Funny because these have been able to buzz US carrier and pass straight through Canada and US airspace 2x without being spotted by radar... hmm... looks like you are wrong. And yes, it is capable to do this.

[p331083]

@bittemeinrammstein bro, so when did this act of war occur?

[SubZero1703]

@bittemeinrammstein rgr

[vladbetter]

@kyransdad1 Russian nuclear bomber managed invisibly to radar to fly up to the British coast at a distance, where it remained until just 90 seconds, the British newspaper Daily Mail .....

[Madmax1945XXX]

@kyransdad1 this craft has weapon range up to 3000-5000 km

[PuScXD]

You forgot the B1 "Lancer" , he can carry 56000kg of bombs at 1200km/h. The tu160 is a copy of b1. The b2 can carry only 18145kg. I prefer the tu160 and b1 design. i think they're more beautiful ^^

[WWTLF109b]

"The tu160 is a copy of b1" WTF?????

Look! another shape of wings, different front! different position of engines. Tu-160 is bigger! and faster! All aircrafts of same classes has a similar appearance. the laws of aerodynamics are the same for all.

[95predator]

wow the aerosol bomb was cool.

but it was invented by the nazis, means in germany.

[KiLLeR12007SerJo]

@95predator b2 - trash!

[95predator]

but the tu160 is way more beautiful ^^

[starknight97]

yeah only 2 out how many we had all their almost.

[starknight97]

Yeah though the b1 carriers more then the tu 160

[NigelGriff]

But no stealth capability, you fail.

[wyrdmagyk4]

I like the Tu-160...

but in my opinion...

B-2 is far better strategic bomber...

[WWTLF109b]

Tu-160 is three times faster and twice the load-lifting...

[wyrdmagyk4]

Faster...yes...

Load lifting maybe...

But B-2's are stealthy and their guidance package is unmatched...

I'd still take the B-2...

[Nazgul001]

And two hundred times the size on a radar sweep. Has the Tu-160 ever been in combat except versus Chechnya rebels?

[WWTLF109b]

1 In Chechnya, it is not used. 2 thay are not rebels, thay are terrorists who wanted only money and power. 3 Tu-160 is not need 100% invisibility, its nuclear cruise missiles could reach any target before plain will be discovered of the aircraft radar.

4 B-2 is not stealth for new russian antiaircraft weapon. like as f-117 was not stealth for last soviet antiaircraft systems.

[starknight97]

Not true both our radars see into the other country. the fact is you don't see the b2 till on rout already we see the tu 160 when it takes off.

[WWTLF109b]

say that to British AF in a panic raised two F16, where the Tu-160 was already close to their border. two years ago with the resumption of patrol Northern Ocean

[starknight97]

ok the brits and the alot of Eu members run off bears bomber all the time. is the question can the f-16 catch the tu 160 answer head on yes if the tu-160 runs away. Then no more fuel and speed for the tu 160 is Mach 2.05. can the tu 160 attack the UK before you could do anything. Maybe or maybe not a 1 alone might but a fleet would be tracked and warned about if not by your radar then ours or some EU country.

[WWTLF109b]

if evrything with you radilocations stations were ok, US would not so with to build new radar in east europe...

[WWTLF109b]

so *wish

[starknight97]

ahh the closer the better though russia has pause though new station from being built. besides thier thinking of the pak fa now too.

[WWTLF109b]

and it is amazing, everybody knows that station will be used for Russia, but USA still lies that it will be for IRAN....

[starknight97]

you mean your new defensive missile the s 400 system?

[WWTLF109b]

i mean new radar in east europe, wich usa are going to build to control russian airterrotory....

[starknight97]

Ah yes as bad as this looks for Russia. It really all these 3rd and second world country's getting nukes , medium or long range missiles. This is a reason why i hope Russia gets their s-400 placed and s-500 off the drawing board. As the Russians will soon have a edge over radar with as the u.s. does when the pak fa comes out. Russia has proven that they will not start any big wars just small one like the u.s. has done from boarders that are treats and terror attacks.

[starknight97]

Also Russian has such a Hugh air force and ICBM that this will do little more then give a warning that Russia coming if they choose too. No radar system could hold Russia back. Now i admit Russia and china can trust Iran but NATO and u.n. can't as he attacked their views often. Though Russia can't trust north Korea or other middle east power so i see no reason not too put new radar for Russia too.

[josh0983]

Awesome video and plane. What is the name and artist of the song?

[bittemeinrammstein]

Avanto - The flute

[japhater]

some u.s citizens are jealous that they dont have a jet that can carry 134,000 pounds of ordinance

[anthonyo4]

apart from completely destroying a city what other uses are there for such an aircraft?

[japhater]

dropping supplies n vehicles

[anthonyo4]

they have other aircraft to carry out that role

[japhater]

yes but these one can carry a whole lot more so either a 20,000 carrying capacity or a 134,000 carrying cappacity oh which one is better i wonder its such a hard choice

[aleclitvinov]

"apart from completely destroying a city what other uses are there for such an aircraft?"

Any city completely destroyed by Russian bombers?

I mean, cities are not good targets unless you're Harry Truman or Osama bin Laden.

The most obvious objective is sinking an aircraft carrier with a cruise missile.

"dropping supplies n vehicles"

this is not a cargo plane. It's built primarily for bombs and missiles.

[anthonyo4]

true but surely arent their smaller more agile aircraft that can carry out the same task.

[aleclitvinov]

I think for this task you must be fast and able to go far with heavy load. Agility is useless if you don't come close, besides, I doubt that any aircraft is agile enough to withstand the boat's anti-air defence if it comes closer than say 500-600 miles. When at war, an aircraft carrier will attempt to destroy every enemy airfield within its range, and you will probably have to act from a large distance and fire several missiles to guarantee the result.

[anthonyo4]

true plus the air craft carrier will have anti missile systems such as goal keeper etc., decoys, chaff plus a support fleet armed with exactly the same weapons...an unmanned long range torpedo that goes to quite a depth then submerges directly beneath the AC would be a good alternative lets just hope such a devastating weapon isnt developed otherwise surface fleets may become obsolete.

[aleclitvinov]

Just like any strategic bomber, the Swan (as we call the Blackjack) is able to use nuclear munitions and destroy cities (or military bases), but a good old ICBM can do it better. It only needs the target to stand still. As far as I know, nuclear munitions are never loaded on board now. They use dummy warheads for tests and practice flights. I live near an air force base. Tu-95 planes fly right over my head every day (you can check the vid at my profile page)

[minanightghost]

thats sucks power usaf forever

[TonyFirelli]

Your just mad that America doesn't have a great plane like this!

[ete0]

Не хуесось украинцев, но их правительство.

[fibonaci75]

great ussr

[Bumper227]

Только Туполев а не Tupelov

[jeddah58]

i love tu-160 its amazing.

[jattdadanda]

was that putin at 3:00. truly a genius. i admire this guy for his swiftness and toughness.

[bittemeinrammstein]

yes it was ^_^

[CHETNIC88]

Кстати, мы этих птичек спасли от метелалома, то есть от хохлов))

[22Lobster]

да но 3 хохлы в угоду своим хозяевам успели-таки распилить

[reHgoJIbff]

Да, хохлы, предатели, все на запад сплавили и на металлолом, что смогли...

[kibabiba]

Хахлы пидарасы за американское бабло из 19 распилили 11. Отдали токо 8 Ту-160 и 3 Ту-95 за списание пизженого газа.

Дебилы блядь! Их продать можно было....нахуя пилить-то?!

[380800]

Pause at 3:33, beautiful sunset. :D

[CHETNIC88]

5/5, СЛАВА РУСИ!

[hakker2002]

wow that's some Sci-Fi shit right there man :)

[F22RaptorSquadron]

Heaviest, and probably fastest bomber in the world. I like the Tu-160 better than the B-2 just because of sheer badassness. The B-2 could definately get away with more though. its almost impossible to miss the Tu-160 on a radar screen, look at that giant motherfucker!

[380800]

Part 2:09 - 2:40, is that from a movie? The colour looks rather different.

[bittemeinrammstein]

yes

[380800]

Great plane!!!! What is the top speed and the maximum range?

[bittemeinrammstein]

speed: mach 2.05 (1,380mph) range: 10,800mi (without mid-air refueling)

[kashgurkha]

wow thats really impressive