PAK DA - Russian Fifth Generation Stealth Bomber

[Yusuf]

125 tons is consistent with previous Soviet bombers including the Backfire. I think the idea is to have speed as well unlike the B2 which can carry more ordnance but sacrifices speed.

 

[plugwater]

125 tons is consistent with previous Soviet bombers including the Backfire. I think the idea is to have speed as well unlike the B2 which can carry more ordnance but sacrifices speed.

Check Tu-160 please. Max takeoff weight 275 tonnes and speed 2000+ km/hr.

 

[nrj]

Tu-160's take-off weight is ~275 tons.

However the fuel consumption shoots to 1.8kg/km in supersonic flight.

With 117S engine, su35 is able to achieve ingestion of 1.25kg/km.

The aerodynamic shape & advanced aerodynamic will allow PAFDA to cut down this consumption close to 1kg/km. Hence with fuel capacity 50 tons, it'll be able to attain similar efficiency without increasing unnecessary weight.

Comparing only takeoff weight of Blackjack with PAKDA is not fair imo as long as payload is not compromised.

 

[plugwater]

T-160 fuel capacity is 130 tonnes, the armaments Tu carries is 275 - (110(Empty weight) +130(fuel)) which is approximately 35 tonnes.
Lets assume pakda needs 50 tonnes lesser fuel than Tu to achieve its efficiency, fuel capacity would be 80 tonnes and i bet its empty eight wont be lesser than 45 tonnes . will it carry any weapons at all ?

I know its just a rough calculation but 125 tonnes is just too low.

 

[nrj]

@PG

You are looking at it all wrong. Tu-160's empty weight is 110 tons. Whereas PAKDA made from advanced composite materials will have empty weight of 50 tons. Its fuel capacity will be 50 tons not 80.

Payload will account to maximum 24tons. These weapons will be freshly developed or will be reduced in weight from existing nascent programs be it X-555 or Kh-101.

 

[p2prada]

Takeoff weight of 125 tonnes for a heavy bomber is too low IMO.

It should be more than 200 tonnes.

Take off weight of this bomber is fine. It is in a similar class as the B-52 or B-1 when it comes to it.

Other specs matter, namely engine power, range and payload. The rest don't really matter.

 

[Zebra]

Batter buy it as a buyer only .

No need to join as a partner in this project .

If it does not suits our requirnments , we are free to say , " No Thanks " .

 

[debasree]

it not proven machine ,lets russians built it and test it then we should consider,in my opinion pak da will be more suitable .

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Medvedev confirms fifth-generation bomber

Medvedev confirms fifth-generation bomber

Russia will move ahead with the development of a fifth-generation strategic bomber, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said over the weekend.

Medvedev, while visiting aviation manufacturing facilities Kazan, Russia, Saturday confirmed the government's plan of developing the new bomber as well as a fifth-generation fighter, RIA Novosti reported.

The need for building a new generation of strategic bomber has been hotly debated within the Kremlin's top echelons and in the country's defense industry since plans for it were announced in 2009, with some believing modern air defense and missile defense systems could make it redundant.

Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin - whose portfolio includes the Russian defense industry -- questioned the need to develop it last week but Medvedev gave the plans a boost Saturday, asserting it wasn't enough to maintain and revamp the existing strategic bombers.

"Alongside a fifth-generation fighter there are also plans to develop an advanced long-range aviation complex. I am talking about a new strategic bomber," Medvedev said.

Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov added Saturday the prime minister has ordered the construction of an aircraft manufacturing plant in Kazan that could in the future be used for the production of a new generation strategic bombers.

In the meantime, it will be employed to build Antonov An-70 propfan tactical transport aircraft, Serdyukov said.

A new Russian strategic bomber is expected to replace the Tu-95MC Bear, Tu-160 Blackjack and the Tu-22M3 Backfire long-range bombers currently in service with Russia's strategic aviation.

Earlier reports had indicated production of a new strategic bomber using radar-evading stealth technology wouldn't begin until 2025.

The clash between the Kremlin and the military over the new bombers was thrust into the spotlight last week Rogozin called its usefulness into question.

"Look at the current level of air defense and anti-missile defense -- these aircraft will not get anywhere. Not ours, not theirs," Rogozin told the Izvestia daily Wednesday.

But Chief of the Russian General Staff Gen. Nikolai Makarov countered that the new bomber project was under way as planned.

"We have made some progress in the development of the new bomber," he said. "If we reach production phase, this plane will outperform any modern aircraft of the same class, including those built by the Americans."

Russian Deputy Defense Minister Vladimir Popovkin said last year that Russia wasn't going to ramp up plans for new long-range bomber until at least 2015, instead modernizing Tu-95MC and Tu-160 bombers until 2025 or 2030.

A commentary by RIA Novosti military analyst Ilya Kramnik carried Sunday by Voice of Russia contended the country "risks having no long range bombers at all by 2040-2050" if it stops working on developing a new aircraft now, due to the long gestation time of such massive bombers.

In the meantime, he said, if new technology emerges "that will enable it to do without a traditional heavy bomber, the work on its development can be suspended but only after a new viable alternative is found."

 

[trackwhack]

Why Why Why are we not a part of this????

 

[Yusuf]

Why Why Why are we not a part of this????

Because we don't need it.

 

[trackwhack]

Because we don't need it.

Yeah, just like we dont need to nuke Pakistan if they take out Delhi and Bombay. Right, very insightful strategic thinking.

 

[Yusuf]

Yeah, just like we dont need to nuke Pakistan if they take out Delhi and Bombay. Right, very insightful strategic thinking.

Indian strategic arsenal is going to be mounted increasingly on missiles. We don't need bombers to target Pakistan when even Prithvis are good enough.

With China we need more missiles reach Beijing and Shanghai. I'd use missiles than send a pilot over hostile territory over himalaya, Tibet and other Chinese areas under a barrage of Air defence to reach Beijing and Shanghai.

 

[trackwhack]

Indian strategic arsenal is going to be mounted increasingly on missiles. We don't need bombers to target Pakistan when even Prithvis are good enough.

With China we need more missiles reach Beijing and Shanghai. I'd use missiles than send a pilot over hostile territory over himalaya, Tibet and other Chinese areas under a barrage of Air defence to reach Beijing and Shanghai.

Yusuf, you need to grow out of Asia, thats all I can say. Please stop limiting yourself to the region. It is that type of thinking by a lot of people that make decisions that is holding our country back, strategically and economically. Every single opinion piece I have read from you on India's strategic is fatally flawed.

When you have countries like the US who are not happy with having a base in Diego Garcia and are doing everything to setup a base right outside your doorstep, the alarm bells should not just start ringing, the sirens should be going off in South Block.

The PAKDA is going to be inducted between 2025-2030. The perfect time when we need to induct a stealth strategic bomber.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

A possible PAK-DA configuration

PAK DA - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The PAK DA (or PAK-DA), is a Russian next generation strategic bomber design, developed by the Tupolev Design Bureau.[1] The PAK DA acronym stands for Перспективный авиационный комплекс дальней авиации in Russian (Perspektivnyi Aviatsionnyi Kompleks Dalney Aviatsyi) meaning Prospective Air Complex for Long Range Aviation. The PAK DA was planned to be a new, stealthy, strategic bomber and is expected to enter service in the 2025–30 timeframe.[1]

 

[Yusuf]

I am not limiting myself to Asia.

Even the Russian Army or some in there are against the bomber.

US base in Diego Garcia if at all can again be targeted with missiles. We don't have to risk our boys. Strategic bomber is anyways not going to be used in Deigo. we are not going to nuke that tiny island.

My analysis is not fatally flawed. You talked about not bombing Pakis back even if they did. But you missed out the reasons for it. It was not as if I was offering the second cheek.

US and Soviets kept a bomber fleet over arctic and Atlantic on 24x7 readiness. They were talking about MAD.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

russia india relation since soviet times have been all about money.so i think india can just buy some of these bombers from russia like it brought tu-142 maritime bombers and il-38 when their production begin rather than invest in r&d like we have in pak-fa.another option is to have a manned bigger version of our stealth ucav-aura.

 

[trackwhack]

I am not limiting myself to Asia.

Even the Russian Army or some in there are against the bomber.

US base in Diego Garcia if at all can again be targeted with missiles. We don't have to risk our boys. Strategic bomber is anyways not going to be used in Deigo. we are not going to nuke that tiny island.

My analysis is not fatally flawed. You talked about not bombing Pakis back even if they did. But you missed out the reasons for it. It was not as if I was offering the second cheek.

US and Soviets kept a bomber fleet over arctic and Atlantic on 24x7 readiness. They were talking about MAD.

We dont need a bomber to take out Diego Garcia. We need a strategic bomber so we have global reach. Of course we will have global reach through missiles and subs too. But there is a reason why the US and Russians have always had bombers. You or I are not smarter than their strategic planners.

Even with all that the US is pursuing a base in Bangladesh. Think! Why would they want that?? By you rationale as long as we have missiles we dont need anything else. Dude!

If you want to be a global power, think like one.

And talking about MAD, what makes you think that we wont be threatened by the USA or Russia 20 years from now?

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Because we don't need it.

Neither does Ivan?

Rogozin Doubts Need to Develop New Strategic Bomber | Defense | RIA Novosti

A long-running dispute between the Russian military and defense industry over procurement of new weaponry may enter a new phase as Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin has questioned the need to develop a new strategic bomber, the Izvestia daily said on Wednesday.

 

[Yusuf]

Neither does Ivan?

Rogozin Doubts Need to Develop New Strategic Bomber | Defense | RIA Novosti

Russia may or may not need it. It has to afford it in the first place.