India likely to acquire Tu-22M3 Supersonic Bombers

porky_kicker

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
6,024
Likes
44,577
Country flag
many dont know this fact,
soviets had offered to start a production line of TU22 in india , if india bought / inducted it in considerable nos in the 80s.

just imagine if we had a production line of TU22 in india , then we would have a updated MKI version with israeli french indian tech.

this would had been a potent deterent to china we could have held chinese factories in mainland at risk.

but indian airfoce is not forward looking and very orthodox in mindset.
that is one reason why it was found wanting during kargil.

unfortunately their attitude is chal raha hai chalne do , extra step lenega ka jorurat nahi.

only indian navy is forward looking , army even worse .

forgive me but a patriot first sees faults in ones own defense forces.
 

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
Prasun Sengupta(a defense blogger) on being asked whether India is buying the bombers or not he replied.
"Of course not. Tu-22M3 assembly-line at Kazan closed down years ago. "
China is also buying 36 new Tu022's they will be called the H-10 in Chinese Service!
 

manutdfan

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2015
Messages
108
Likes
106
S-400 check
Akula check
T-90 check
Tu-22m3 serious?

In today's scenario bombers are just sitting ducks. They are best used as cruise missile carriers. But what's the point when we don't even have a single cruise missile with range above +300kms. I'm appalled by the fact that Pakistan has a longer range cruise missile than us- Babur with +700km range more than twice that of Brahmos but it's subsonic, has been in service since 2005. Nirbhaya is still a good decade away from being inducted. Considering our defensive offensive posture I'm not sure how useful in any regime of ground attack would it be considering how saturated & high intensity our future air battles would be with UAVs, cruise missiles, mobile SAMs, electronic warfare and what not.

Next issue is where is it supposed to serve. It might come in very handy over the Indian ocean for checking Chinese fleets with anti-ship cruise missiles but the most immediate threat is the Chinese SSN & SSBN class subs slipping freely through the Navy's detection net and popping all over the Indian ocean. I would rather lease 8 Akulas from Russia for the same price.

I still cannot understand why the Navy is still so obsessed with surface ships which are being cranked off the assembly line by the dozens. Even sub-1500 ton diesel-electric submarines with AIP are heads and shoulders above surface ships in naval combat. Not to forget the fact that the shallow waters of Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal have the perfect conditions for submarine operators. A brand new AIP equipped SSK costs costs anywhere between $100-300 million depending upon scaling of the production line. Now compare that to a Tu-22M3 that will come for a billion apiece or all those stealth frigates that cost upwards of $400 million each.

Tu-22M3 aren't gonna come cheap either. Considering that it's American equivalent B-1B has lifecycle costs running into $2 billion plus per unit and also the fact that Russians nowadays are quoting western level prices without the western level of sophistication it's seems like a confused idea to me.

Which brings me to an issue which I've been trying to raise for quite some time. We have zero CAS capability. Tu-22M3 cannot do Close Air Support (CAS). If IAF is trying to pass this off as a move to augment our ground attack fleet then bollocks. Our only CAS aircraft the MiG-27 which even barely qualifies for the role will be phased out by 2020. No matter how many Apache attack choppers are bought they will never match the firepower, the reaction time or the intimidation factor of a true CAS aircraft like the Su-25 or A-10.

We get so excited by the idea of Cold Start doctrine which is basically blitzkrieg along the entire Indo-Pak border but what good is it when you don't have those heavily armed and armored flying tanks flying at tree-top altitudes above your troops. No...multi-role fighters such as Su-30MKI, Rafale or Tejas are never going to be the answer. They can provide precision strikes but never CAS.

Case in point- Kargil where IAF lost 1 Mi-17 gunship, 1 MiG-21, 1 MiG-27. The IAF's saving grace Mirage 2000 undertook stand-off precision strikes on static targets mainly fuel/ammo dumps or field bases/camps. All peaks were captured in tedious, violent & gruesome hand-to-hand combat. In conditions of 3000m altitudes, poor visibility due to thick fog cover; infantry assaults took place mostly under the cover of darkness. Add to it the fact that engagement distance between our troops who were already fighting an uphill battle and the Paki infiltrators was barely 50-100m the IAF couldn't do anything but watch from a safe distance.

Therefore if we face another such situation along the nightmarish terrain in LoC or the LAC in Sikkim or Arunachal Pradesh our brave jawans would find the reassuring shadow of a Su-25 lumbering above his company comforting before charging headlong into the enemy. Needless to say so many more lives could have been saved in Kargil had there been better synergy between the different branches of our armed forces regarding clarity of objectives rather than the infighting that goes on most of the times. Moreover once we cross the Himalayas into Tibet we need something like the relatively inexpensive Su-25 which can be fielded in large numbers to knock off the vast columns of PLA infantry and armour until the nuclear option is used.
 
Last edited:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
C-17 and tu 22 are 2 different class of pee-lane
pls study them on google




That is not the Tupolev-22M3. That is the Tupolev-160. It is Russia's jewel in the crown, They will not give that to anyone.

Both are swing-wing aircrafts and have a similar looking cockpit and tail.

Tupolev-22M3:


Tupolev-160:
 

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
Tupolev-22 and Tupolev-22M are different aircraft. Note the location of the jet turbines and air intakes.

Tupolev-22:


Tupolev-22M:
It's simply the evolution of design. there are at least 5 known TU-22 Variants
1) Base TU-22 Blinder bomber

2)The TU-22 M0

3) The Tu-22M Back fire B

4)The Tu 22M2

5)The Tu 22M3(The one we're reportedly trying to get four more of)
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
It's simply the evolution of design. there are at least 5 known TU-22 Variants
1) Base TU-22 Blinder bomber

2)The TU-22 M0

3) The Tu-22M Back fire B

4)The Tu 22M2

5)The Tu 22M3(The one we're reportedly trying to get four more of)
Tupolev-22 was designed and was very difficult to operate.

Tupolev-22M was redesigned from scratch. Tupolev kept the number 22 only to convince the government that it was just an iteration of the existing Tupolev-22, but in reality, it was not.

Now, Tupolev-22M(1/2/3) were minor modifications of the existing aircraft.

My point is, Tupolev-22M is not a variant of Tupolev-22.
 

Yumdoot

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
778
Likes
688
Next issue is where is it supposed to serve. It might come in very handy over the Indian ocean for checking Chinese fleets with anti-ship cruise missiles but the most immediate threat is the Chinese SSN & SSBN class subs slipping freely through the Navy's detection net and popping all over the Indian ocean.


That is the whole point, you will never be able to counter Chinese subs unless you hook up a TAS to every naval resource that can provide chase and persistence. Only way that is going to happen is when you free up your resources from surface search and surface attacks.

Similar predicament is faced by the PLAAN vis a vis US+Jap+South Korean subs and that is why they got so many bombers to take on the surface challenge.

Currently we are progressing well towards messing up the submarine challenge. The P8I are good for surface search only and giving the big picture of a big Indian Ocean. The limitations of P8I can be mitigated and its improved features better leveraged if the bombers are thrown into the mix.

It is really sad that the Tu-142M will be retired instead of being upgraded for Brahmos launch. Soon we will have a big gap in this area. Su-30MKI will take only 1 Brahmos and will have very little persistence. IAF has conducted long range long endurance trainings on Su-30MKI but these will still leave you huffing and puffing to properly cover the long stretches of oceans. Something that the bombers are able to do with internal resources only and on a regular basis.

To top that these bombers can shift from sub-strategic to strategic to supra-strategic roles in the blink of an eye. There is no other asset that can do that - not the destroyers, not the subs, nothing. Su-30MKI will be able to do that but Su-30MKI is good only with the use of precious as gold Refuelers. In very near future the IAF will need all its refuelers just to keep tabs on the Chinese activities in Tibet and Karakoram. These refuelers will not be made available to Indian Navy on demand. Indian Navy will need to run on its own two propellors.

Look at it like this. An effective bomber force cannot do only one thing. That is go and fight underwater. And actually the bombers may actually end up doing that too in near future with the rocket powered wing-rigged torpedoes and radio-sonobouys and ultra high resolution ISAR becoming available at cheaper rates.


I would rather lease 8 Akulas from Russia for the same price.

Now compare that to a Tu-22M3 that will come for a billion apiece or all those stealth frigates that cost upwards of $400 million each.

Tu-22M3 aren't gonna come cheap either. Considering that it's American equivalent B-1B has lifecycle costs running into $2 billion plus per unit and also the fact that Russians nowadays are quoting western level prices without the western level of sophistication it's seems like a confused idea to me.
If you can really get 8 Akulas for the price of 1 Tu-22-M3, then by god, that is what we should be doing. But mostly it is the exact opposite. You will get 8 Tu-22-M3 for the price of one Akula-2, reckoned on capital cost basis only. And running costs are not limited to Tu-22-M3 or B-1B only. Even Akula-2 have running costs. You can do the math after that.

Besides using American cost structure to understand Russian costing systems is not going to help much if you really want to understand the operating costs involved. Americans don't chafe at just throwing the problem back at the suppliers. Americans get to maintain high tempo for long durations by doing that. Unfortunately it costs a ship load of cash to do that. You want to do that you have to be willing to rob and rape a few small countries every few decades. Can you a vegetarian Indian do that? Russian systems are OTOH are made for upkeep on the battlefield. They design things in a simpler manner. Only idiots and thieves can go wrong with their products.


We have zero CAS capability. Tu-22M3 cannot do Close Air Support (CAS).
Now that is a genuine criticism but nothing much can be done about that. Nobody ever designed a CAS capable bomber.
 

Yumdoot

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
778
Likes
688
@pmaitra Russian won't supply even the Yak-130 if we keep threatening them with CISMOA.

And if they were willing to work on Arihant and seed SCBs then a Tu-160 or PAKDA is not undoable either. The challenges are merely a mental block and not any real ones.

Off course hitting ones own foot with a hammer is always an option and any reasonable person would avoid somebody keen on that.
 

HariPrasad-1

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Messages
9,573
Likes
21,017
Country flag
I am a fan of Russian weapon. They are master piece of engineering but legs behind in electronics. They come at a very cheap rate and comes with real TOT which others do not offer. Believe me FAGFA is going to be an A$$ kicker to which others shall not be able to match for decades.
 

kstriya

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2015
Messages
488
Likes
507
Country flag
Will the Tu 22 M3 be able to carry Bhramos A & Nirbhay, if yes how many will it able to carry. In comparison to SU30 MKI what will be the advantages?
 

kstriya

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2015
Messages
488
Likes
507
Country flag
@pmaitra Russian won't supply even the Yak-130 if we keep threatening them with CISMOA.

And if they were willing to work on Arihant and seed SCBs then a Tu-160 or PAKDA is not undoable either. The challenges are merely a mental block and not any real ones.

Off course hitting ones own foot with a hammer is always an option and any reasonable person would avoid somebody keen on that.
We are in a precarious situation diplomatically with USA and Russia But this is an opportunity too. We can be the bridge to lower tensions between the Russians and Nato. The real enemy is the communist party of China with a expansionist ideology. The Russians know the Chinese will draw their guns on them when the time comes to snatch the claimed Russian Territory. There should more collaboration with the Russians as we are being doing from past decade and also seek more cooperation with Americans where ever it suits us.

In contrary the Chinese aggression will boost Indian and Russian defense industry as all the other pasrty in the dispute will try to upgrade their defenses and will try to do that in a shoe string budget. The best example is Vietnam with SU 30 being manufactured in Russia and trained & serviced in India.
 

manutdfan

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2015
Messages
108
Likes
106
Look at it like this. An effective bomber force cannot do only one thing. That is go and fight underwater. And actually the bombers may actually end up doing that too in near future with the rocket powered wing-rigged torpedoes and radio-sonobouys and ultra high resolution ISAR becoming available at cheaper rates.
@Yumdoot very well written analysis though I think you misunderstood the cost part.
The quoted para is very effective and has made me reconsider my thought process. Although you have to agree that Indian Navy is ignoring the submarine fleet at its own peril. If India can afford 4 Tu-22M3s then definitely we should press ahead. If not anything then just to mess with the Pakistanis' minds.

If you can really get 8 Akulas for the price of 1 Tu-22-M3, then by god, that is what we should be doing. But mostly it is the exact opposite. You will get 8 Tu-22-M3 for the price of one Akula-2, reckoned on capital cost basis only. And running costs are not limited to Tu-22-M3 or B-1B only. Even Akula-2 have running costs. You can do the math after that.
I think you have misunderstood. I meant 8 Akulas for the price of 4 Tu-22M3 which does look like a very good deal in my book. Please note that both platforms would be on lease basis rather than outright purchases. My notion is that in terms of total life-cycle costs 1 Tu-22M3 is equivalent to 2 or 1.5 Akulas. But I might be wrong too.
My ultimate point is- even if the per unit cost is the same for both platforms I would rather have a nuclear sub than a nuclear capable bomber finances permitting.

Cheers dude!
 

bose

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
4,921
Likes
5,961
Country flag
Not a Tu-22 this is a Tu-160 strategic nuclear bomber!
These Tu-22m3 are big in size and can easily be detected and can be shot down ...

do they have any special radar evading systems on them ?
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
@pmaitra Russian won't supply even the Yak-130 if we keep threatening them with CISMOA.

And if they were willing to work on Arihant and seed SCBs then a Tu-160 or PAKDA is not undoable either. The challenges are merely a mental block and not any real ones.

Off course hitting ones own foot with a hammer is always an option and any reasonable person would avoid somebody keen on that.
I suppose you meant Tupolev-22M3? Russia will not sell their Tupolev-160.

Coming to CISMOA, I am am not at all in favour of being too cosy with the US.
 

spikey360

Crusader
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
3,453
Likes
6,377
Country flag
T-22M will be an interesting purchase. But a MKI with mid air refueling can very much do same job.
No sir, that is an incorrect assessment. An MKI can carry a finite number of bombs which is much less than the finite number of bombs and cruise missiles the Tu22M3 can carry. Also, refuelling requires to have your tankers up in the air at mid-way between you and your enemy. That would require offshore bases. I did not know that we operate any offshore bases.
Which brings me to an issue which I've been trying to raise for quite some time. We have zero CAS capability. Tu-22M3 cannot do Close Air Support (CAS).
It is a long range strategic bomber. It was not designed for Close Air Support.
 

spikey360

Crusader
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
3,453
Likes
6,377
Country flag
I suppose you meant Tupolev-22M3? Russia will not sell their Tupolev-160.

Coming to CISMOA, I am am not at all in favour of being too cosy with the US.
The GoI will have to pay a price for signing the CISMOA someday. Modi did all of this for what? UNSC seat? NSG membership? Both of these ploys failed miserably.
Therefore it has been proved that the USA has gained out of CISMOA, and India has not gained anything at all.

About the ТУ-160, while it is true that White Swans are the crown jewels of Russia, it is not true that they are unwilling to sell them. Provided we side with the cause of Russia, they are willing to sell even their precious jewels. For them, winning friends is more important, is what I gather.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
The GoI will have to pay a price for signing the CISMOA someday. Modi did all of this for what? UNSC seat? NSG membership? Both of these ploys failed miserably.
Therefore it has been proved that the USA has gained out of CISMOA, and India has not gained anything at all.

About the ТУ-160, while it is true that White Swans are the crown jewels of Russia, it is not true that they are unwilling to sell them. Provided we side with the cause of Russia, they are willing to sell even their precious jewels. For them, winning friends is more important, is what I gather.
No man, I don't think they will ever give out the cream of their crop.

Remember how two Russian pilots were killed when their Mil-24/35 crashed or was shot down? They were testing an export version when they were called to aid with air-strikes. If it was the Russian version, it would have had the electronic counter measures and the MANPAD would have failed. Not a single Mil-24/35 of the Russian forces were lost in Syria. Only those that were lost were the export versions.

P.S.: Regarding countermeasures, recall I had posted a video of how the "moderates" fired an ATGM towards a Russian tank and the ATGM went sideways? Then they fired another one, and that too went sideways? Russian countermeasures are indeed very potent.
 

spikey360

Crusader
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
3,453
Likes
6,377
Country flag
No man, I don't think they will ever give out the cream of their crop.

Remember how two Russian pilots were killed when their Mil-24/35 crashed or was shot down? They were testing an export version when they were called to aid with air-strikes. If it was the Russian version, it would have had the electronic counter measures and the MANPAD would have failed. Not a single Mil-24/35 of the Russian forces were lost in Syria. Only those that were lost were the export versions.

P.S.: Regarding countermeasures, recall I had posted a video of how the "moderates" fired an ATGM towards a Russian tank and the ATGM went sideways? Then they fired another one, and that too went sideways? Russian countermeasures are indeed very potent.
I didn't know that it was an export version which crashed. If this indeed is the case, it is both bad and good publicity.
Bad publicity because buyers will now ask why they should shell out millions for something which can be downed by an arm costing thousands. Good publicity in favour of the ECM suite though.

Wow, that sounds like a nice video, which thread?
Russian stuffs are the best value for money. Also, Russians are great at tech. Too bad their advertising is not as potent as their countermeasures. :D
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top