At last, the Air Forces received the Tu-160 bomber that was undergoing overhaul at the Kazan Aviation Plant (this plane was expected to be back in 2005, but this was delayed several times ). The aircraft was christened "Valentin Bliznyuk", after the Chief Designer of the plane.
As it was reported earlier, the overhaul did not seem to include upgrade of avionics. However, the aircraft was reportedly given the capability to use conventional weapons.
The book
Comments
In reference to the "sorting out bomber numbers" entry, As I understand it, this old aircraft that's been upgraded is not part of the 14 current bombers. An article I read reported that this aircraft had been used by Tupolev at Zhukovsky- i.e. not one of 14 aircraft at Engels. That's where the confusion appears to arise in the media reports I've seen about this particular "small" upgrade bomber (as opposed to the "deep" upgrade new bomber).
That would make this aircraft the 15th, and the new aircraft to be delivered later this year the 16th bomber.
A link to the (translated) article:
"Tu-160 Airplanes to Reach Russia's Air Force from OAO Tupolev"
http://www.royfc.com/news/may/1506may01.html
It seems the bomber modernization trend in both Russia and the United States is to develop and enhance conventional capabilities. To develop weapon systems that might actually be used in general combat. I suspect this trend will continue and conventional land (ICBM) and sea (SLBM) development will follow. How that evolution will affect arms control between our two countries remains to be seen.
Pavel, in a Thursday, June 29, 2006 story posted by Walter Pincus, The Washington Post reported on the status of the American Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) project. An interesting paragraph at the conclusion of the article noted Senator Pete Domenici (R NM) and his Appropriations subcommittee, tasked with funding RRW and providing Congressional oversight of our nuclear weapons program, had removed some $82 million from the '07 Defense Budget request because the Defense Department had decided it would not continue an existing program to extend the life of the W-80 nuclear warheads. This warhead is carried by the B-52 bomber in the form of the ALCM and ACM and the Navy's submarine launched nuclear tomahawk cruise missile, a weapon currently held in strategic reserve. I found this interesting. Has the Pentagon made the decision to drop nuclear cruise missiles from its future arsenal? Did the extension-life project validate the existing W-80 as "reliable" for the foreseeable future? Or, has the United States already funded enough of the refurbished W-80s to support, say, only the ACM system? What is the future of the W-80 and cruise missiles in the nuclear mix? How would this affect Russian military policy? Would Russia be willing to give up nuclear cruise missiles if the United States so decided? Thoughts?
Frank Shuler
USA
One of the tests bombers? It's a possibility. I'll need to check the START data.
As for the RRW, I'm not sure what the situation with W-80 is, but I think it is unlikely that Russia will "give up" its nuclear cruise missiles. It may phase them out - more or less in the way the United States does.
While I keep hearing the term "new" when discussing additional Tu-160s to the Russian Air Force, it always seems to be only refurbished or the odd remanufactured test aircraft that are being rebuilt. Do we anticipate any new manufacturing of this unique aircraft? Is sixteen (16) the final number of these airplanes that will be placed into operational service?
Frank Shuler
USA
START data are inconclusive - they show 5 test aircraft in Zhukovsky and 14 in Engels. We'll see what the next MOU will say.