… Continuation of virtues
No matter how good the plane was, the trial operation at first gave a generous crop of shortcomings. Almost from every flight the Tu-160 brought failures of a variety of systems and, first of all, complex and capricious electronics (the fact that the development of the B-1B by the Americans was accompanied by the same difficulties was not encouraging). The multiple degree of duplication and redundancy helped out (for example, the fly-by-wire control system of the bomber has four channels and emergency mechanical wiring).
Especially a lot of trouble was caused by the "raw" BKO, which, due to its extremely low reliability, earned a reputation as "ballast", two tons of which were taken with them in vain. After numerous improvements, in April 1990, the BKO managed to get it to work (on the occasion of which A. A. Tupolev came to the regiment), although refusals followed him in the future.
The NK-32 engines had problems with starting - the most unstable operating mode, which the automation could not cope with, there were also failures in flight (mainly due to the fault of a wayward electronic control system, once on Major Vasin's plane, two engines turned off in the air at once). Nevertheless, the thrust reserve allowed the aircraft to continue flying and even take off with one engine inoperative, which was what US Defense Secretary F. Carlucci had to use when showing the Tu-160 - both aircraft took off and performed a passage on three engines (of course, the minister was not informed about this). The service life of the NK-32 was gradually tripled and increased to 750 hours. The air intakes were weak points in the airframe, their imperfect gas dynamics caused itching and vibrations, due to which cracks formed and rivets flew out. This defect was eliminated by replacing the first sections of the air ducts (they had to be taken out from the front "through the throat") and strengthening the edging of the front edges of the air intake. The kinematics of the main landing gear was too complicated - when cleaning, the struts were shortened to fit into small niches, and when released, they moved apart, shifting to the outer sides and increasing the track by 1200 mm. The low reliability of the landing gear retraction-release mechanism forced several months in 1988 to fly without its retraction, but from the next series the kinematics was changed, removing the "extra" strut, and all previous aircraft were modified. The aircraft's hydraulic system was also improved.
At high flight speeds, the honeycomb glued panels of the stabilizer peeled and “flapped” (on one of the aircraft in the LII even a solid piece of plumage was torn off in the air, the same thing happened in the regiment with A. Medvedev). I had to reinforce the plumage, at the same time "cutting" by half a meter to reduce the load. The modified stabilizers, "oversized cargo" with a span of 13, 25 m, were delivered from the factory to the unit on the fuselage by a special version of the Il-76 - "triplane". During a demonstration in Ryazan, the Tu-160 lost one of the forkil's plastic fairings in the air (the plane definitely did not like shows).
These defects, as a rule, did not lead to serious consequences (the trial operation of the new aircraft was precisely aimed at "catching" them), and the most unpleasant thing was the unexpected blocking of the brakes on takeoff, once completely "blowing up" the plane. There were also several cases when, during landings, the pilots underestimated the inertia of a multi-ton vehicle, and after flying the runway, it rolled out onto the ground (no air arrestor could stop the Tu-160, and releasing a braking parachute in time was considered a "low class").
The identified failures and defects related to design and production defects (according to the "CIT" column, the developer - the OKB and the manufacturer - is responsible) were taken into account in the design of the aircraft of the new series. The number of engine feed flaps on the side walls of the air intakes to increase the compressor stability margin was increased to six, their control was simplified, along the airframe some honeycomb panels with a metal filler were replaced with composite ones (this gave a gain in weight and resource), the tail fairing of the BKO antennas was shortened by half, the descent the stream from which at high speeds caused dangerous vibrations that disabled the equipment. On the aircraft of the latest series, the navigator and operator's upper hatches were equipped with periscopes for examining the tail hemisphere (in addition to the rear-view radar). In the same way, the previously produced Tu-160s were modified by factory specialists directly to the regiment.
Multi-position ejection launcher MKU-6-5U in the Tu-160 cargo bay
The aircraft equipment has also undergone modernization. Improved RSDN, guided by ground-based radio beacons. The navigation complex was equipped with an autonomous astrocorrector, which determines with high accuracy the coordinates of the vehicle by the Sun and the stars, which was especially useful in flights over the ocean and in high latitudes. The navigators' approval was received by the PA-3 course plotter with a movable map indicating the current position of the aircraft. For the Tu-160, an on-board satellite navigation system was also prepared with an accuracy of determining the coordinates of 10-20 m. Its operation was provided by several orbital vehicles specially launched into space within the framework of the state program for the needs of the Air Force, Navy and ground forces. It was also possible to solve the problems associated with the software and systems engineering of the PRNC (earlier all four of its channels "spoke" different languages).
In several stages, a set of measures was carried out to reduce the radar visibility of the Tu-160: they applied black radio-absorbing graphite coating to the air intakes and channels to the engines, covered the nose of the aircraft with special paint on an organic basis, shielded the guide vanes of the engines (and the secret of this development is still strictly hiding).
Mesh filters were introduced into the glazing of the cockpit, "locking" inside the electromagnetic background of the equipment, which could unmask the aircraft. The filters should also weaken the luminous flux in the event of a close nuclear explosion (for the same purpose, the glasses are equipped with curtains and shutters), and the light filter of the ZSH-7AS helmet can protect the eyes of the pilots from the blinding flash.
Nose landing gear
Presentations
On August 2, 1988, US Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci was the first foreigner to see the Tu-160. At the Kubinka airbase near Moscow, he was shown the plane of the 184th regiment with number 12, and the other two were in flight. At the same time, for the first time, some of the tactical and technical characteristics of the aircraft were publicly announced, including the flight range without refueling, equal to 14,000 km. On June 13, 1989, again in Kubinka, the chairman of the US Chiefs of Staff, Admiral W. Crow, was shown the Priluksky Tu-160 with number 21.
The first air encounter of the Tu-160 with Western aircraft took place in May 1991. over the Norwegian Sea. F-16A fighters of the 331st squadron of the Norwegian Air Force met and for some time accompanied a pair of Tupolev bombers.
The very first public display of the aircraft took place on August 20, 1989 during the celebration of Aviation Day, when the Tu-160 passed at low altitude over the Tushino airfield. In September 1994, journalists and professional aviators had the opportunity to familiarize themselves in detail with the bomber in Poltava during the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the shuttle raids on Germany, and in Priluki in February 1995.
Main landing gear
Airplane for pilots
The Tu-160 became almost the first Soviet combat aircraft, during the creation of which due attention was paid to ergonomics. Finally, the demands of the pilots, who had previously put up with the limited visibility from the cockpit of the Tu-22 (deservedly nicknamed "Blind Jack") and spent long hours in the "tight packing" of the Tu-22M, were heard. On long flights, the crew of the Tu-160, having left their workplaces, can warm up and rest, even on a foam mattress spread in the aisle between the navigators' chairs. Amenities include a wardrobe for warming up food and a toilet that replaced the "filthy bucket" that the Tu-95 was content with. A real battle broke out around the toilet: the Air Force refused to accept the aircraft for several months due to the inconsistency of its design with the TTZ (polyethylene bags were used in the toilet, which were melted after use: the claims were an insidious device that gave a leaky seam). The customer, feeling his rights, began to show unprecedented adherence to principles, and the Air Force Commander even threatened to turn to the military prosecutor's office if the indicated shortcomings were not eliminated.
On the first serial Tu-160s, complaints were made about the working conditions of the crew. Thus, the main and backup devices were of various types; the pressure in the cockpit was maintained corresponding to atmospheric pressure at an altitude of 5000 m (the crew had to be in oxygen masks all the time). Now, on almost all machines, these shortcomings have been eliminated.
The pilots quickly got used to such an unusual element for a heavy machine, as a handle, not a steering wheel. At first, this innovation did not cause much enthusiasm among the military. But it soon became clear that the new handle easily, without much physical effort, allows you to control the plane. The designers also created a version of the pilot's cockpit with new equipment, but the transition to it requires modernization of the fleet of cars, time, and most importantly - funds. Therefore, the Tu-160 continues to fly with the old cockpit.
Complaints were caused by the rapid failure of the mechanisms for adjusting the pilot's seats, which forced them to modify their electric drive. The K-36DM ejection seats themselves in the first months of operation had restrictions on their use (speed of at least 75 km / h). Then their developer, the Zvezda plant (general designer GI Severin), expanded the range, and ejection became possible even in the parking lot. The seats were equipped with a belt tightening system that triggers when overloaded. During the development work, the aircraft was tested in a situation simulating a flight with a partial escape by the crew: the pilot N. Sh. Sattarov went to supersonic on the aircraft with the upper cockpit hatches dismantled.
Crews' claims are caused by overalls, helmets, oxygen masks intended for fighters and not suitable for long-term flights. Several conferences on the "human factor" were held on the base of the regiment, at which samples of new equipment were presented: light and comfortable helmets, earmuffs, Baklan rescue overalls, even massagers and expanders that help relieve stress during a long flight. Alas, they all remained in prototypes. Only on the aircraft of the last series did a built-in ladder appear, without which, at a foreign airfield, the crew could literally find themselves in a desperate situation.
The operational suitability of the Tu-160 also did not go unnoticed by the designers. To facilitate access, the units and the piping of the hydraulic systems were taken out to the walls of the cargo compartment, and the electrical panels - in the chassis niches. Good access to the engines ensured that they were almost completely “bored out”. Conveniently arranged whatnots with equipment in the cockpit and technical compartment. Nevertheless, the plane turned out to be quite laborious to maintain, becoming a record holder by this criterion - for every hour of Tu-160 flight, it was required to spend 64 man-hours of work on the ground. Preparing it for departure requires 15-20 special vehicles with working systems, including: installations for fuel nitriding; KAMAZ air conditioners, cooling equipment; various tankers, including three huge "Hurricanes" TZ-60 (Tu-160 tanks hold 171,000 kg of fuel); a minibus for the crew,equipped with a ventilation system for high-altitude suits. At the same time, the noise in the aircraft service area many times exceeds all permissible standards, reaching 130 dB (when starting the APU, it exceeds the pain threshold by 45 dB). The situation is aggravated by the lack of headphones, safety shoes and anti-vibration belts for technicians. The use of caustic working fluid 7-50C-3 in the hydraulic system adds to the problems.
To reduce noise on the ground, the Design Bureau proposed the same measures that were taken by the Americans for the V-1V - the construction of special sites with service complexes built into the concrete, power supply and refueling sources. However, the Air Force rejected this option as not meeting the conditions of mobility when relocating and only partially accepted it: in the caponiers surrounding the parking lot, they equipped shelters where the ground crew is located, weapons, tools and equipment for servicing the aircraft.
Continuous work on the refinement of the Tu-160 yielded good results. In terms of reliability, the aircraft bypassed even the Tu-16 and significantly outstripped the Tu-22M2 / M3.
Cockpit Tu-160 "Valery Chkalov" at Engels airbase, early November 2012 (photo - RostovSpotter,
Ahead of the pilots were flights at extremely low altitudes, air refueling, which were supposed to provide the bomber with an intercontinental range (Kozlov, by that time Lieutenant General, was going to fly this machine around the globe). It was necessary to modernize the PrNK, master the X-15 missile system and bomber weapons. However, political cataclysms have made their own adjustments to the fate of the aircraft.
Tu-160 and B-1: similarities and differences
It has already become a tradition, speaking of the Tu-160, to compare it with the American "opponent" - the B-1 strategic bomber. Indeed, the similarity of these machines of the same purpose and class, noticeable even to a non-professional, at one time led to the fact that the Tu-160 (without knowing its true name) was called the "Soviet B-1". The fact that the creators of both aircraft agreed on the "aviation fashion" for aircraft of this class, which included elements of an integral layout and a variable sweep wing, is not surprising. After all, "similar thoughts come to good heads," and the similarity of the requirements of technical specifications for new bombers at a close scientific and industrial level should inevitably lead to similar design decisions.
But the realization of the conceived, accompanied by an innumerable set of evaluated options, leaves only the proximity of the outer contours of the former similarity. The creators of the aircraft have to rely not only on the uniform laws of aerodynamics and strength, but also, to an increasing extent, on the existing production base, the level of technology, their own experience and, finally, the traditions of the company. The political problems on which the financing of the work depends (and often the fate of the project) also affect the "internal content" and the possibilities of the future aircraft.
As a quick reference, let us remind you: B-1 appeared earlier and made its first flight on December 23, 1974. On June 30, 1977, President J. Carter ordered to freeze work on the aircraft, and use the freed funds to direct the development of cruise missiles. It soon turned out that the interconnection of these types of weapons was optimal. In November 1979, the conversion of the B-1 into the carrier of the B-1 B cruise missiles began, with a simultaneous decrease in its radar visibility when the funds for the program were cut. The military and "senators from industry" were unable to defend a lot of expensive "excesses", and in the design of the bomber it was necessary to reduce the proportion of titanium alloys and abandon adjustable air intakes, which reduced the maximum speed to M = 1.25., SRAM short-range missiles and nuclear bombs. On March 23, 1983, the first B-1 B prototype was launched (a converted second B-1 prototype), and the first production aircraft flew over on October 18, 1984. The B-1B production ended in 1988 with the release of the 100th bomber.
The Seventy, which was created in a planned economy and did not know problems with financing, went into production and was put into service in its intended form (of course, with adjustments to the technological level of the aviation industry) - as a multi-mode aircraft capable of delivering intercontinental strikes in a wide range of altitudes and speeds.
The opportunity to really compare both aircraft presented itself on September 23-25, 1994 in Poltava, where the Tu-160 and B-1V, first met "face to face", arrived to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Operation Frentik - shuttle flights of American bombers to the target in Germany, which were carried out with a landing at Soviet airfields. The pilots and technicians of both aircraft were able to inspect the aircraft, go inside and evaluate in the air, and get an idea of their practical capabilities.
The Americans (the group included, in addition to the B-1B, the B-52H bomber and the KS-10A tanker from the 2nd Bomber Wing from the Barksdale base in Louisiana) "showed themselves" immediately after crossing the border - if this turnover is appropriate here, since the group is here it disappeared from the screens of ground-based radars (although this incident should be attributed not to the achievements of stealth technology, but rather to the current state of the air defense of Ukraine). The B-1V that appeared over Poltava, without wasting time on the usual "box" around the airfield, immediately after a sharp turn dived down vigorously (already on the ground, its crew talked about practicing maneuvers with rolls up to 45 degrees) - this approach is used to save money fuel and is categorically unacceptable for our pilots, restrained by a multitude of instructions, manuals and prescriptions for flight safety.
Upon closer acquaintance, it turned out that the level of reliability and the number of failures in operation of the Tu-160 and V-1 V are practically the same. The problems turned out to be similar - frequent engine failures (at the exhibition in Le Bourget, the B-1 B crew, having failed to start them, had to abandon the demonstration flight) and the vagaries of complex electronics, especially the BKO (the Americans did not hide their special interest in Baikal ":" Does it really work for you ?! "). It was the lack of reliability of the power plant and on-board electronic warfare equipment AN / ALQ-161 and ALQ-153 that prevented the use of the B-1 B in Operation Desert Storm, and the laurels went to the veterans of the B-52.
With regard to offensive weapons, the Tu-160 turned out to be "on a horse" - its main weapon, cruise missiles, was well mastered, while the Americans, for financial reasons, were not able to re-equip their aircraft with them (the expensive ALCM strike complex required not only modifications to the cargo compartments, but also a significant change in on-board electronics). SRAM's short-range missiles, adopted as a "temporary measure," had reached shelf life by 1994 (solid fuel from their engines began to decompose, losing their properties) and were removed from service, and their replacement remains a matter of the future. Only the B61 and B83 nuclear bombs remained in service with the B-1B; the Americans remembered the possibility of equipping the aircraft with conventional bomb armament only on the eve of the war with Iraq, having carried out tests to drop them in 1991, but they did not have time to re-equip the aircraft.
I must say that such a revision only seems simple: it is necessary to calculate the most effective methods of bombing, develop and install bomb racks, winches for lifting loads, install wiring to the fuse cocking devices and bomb releasers, alter sighting equipment, train crews in the intricacies of aiming and tactics, and, finally, to test new weapons in different flight modes.
The design of the Tu-160 was originally designed to expand the range of weapons, including the use of conventional bombs, for which the aircraft was equipped with a high-precision optoelectronic bombsight OPB-15T. They also developed a "batch" suspension of bombs using a loader, which reduces the time of aircraft equipment. In contrast to the B-1V, to reduce the radar signature and greater flight range on the Tu-160, the placement of all types of ammunition was provided on the internal sling, in two cargo compartments, with larger dimensions than that of the "American" (which affected somewhat larger dimensions aircraft). However, the planned implementation of these works was prevented by the occurrence of known problems, and the result was the "under-equipping" of the aircraft - again common to both machines and preventing their use in multiplying local conflicts.
The instrumentation and design of the B-1B cockpit, which, by the way, was also equipped with control sticks, were unanimously assessed by our pilots as excellent. Monochrome displays, on which information is displayed to the crew, are very convenient in work and allow you to concentrate on piloting, without being distracted by searches among the "scattering" of pointer indicators. We saw a lot of B-1B equipment only in computer games, and the American veterans who were present at the meeting were moved to meet in the Tu-160 cockpit devices similar to those they used during the war. The level of comfort and convenience of the aircraft workplaces turned out to be close, although the B-1B cockpit itself is somewhat closer - from below it is "supported" by the nose landing gear compartment.
Having familiarized themselves with the equipment and systems of the "American", our pilots and navigators agreed that both in terms of potential and tactical and technical characteristics - range, speed and weight of the carried load, the Tu-160 surpasses the B-1V, but on the side The strategic command of the United States remains the advantages of the practical mastery of the bomber. Using the capabilities of the B-1B "one hundred percent", American crews have gone far ahead, while many Tu-160 systems are not fully used, and some of the flight modes remain prohibited.
Due to the more intensive use of technology, US pilots maintain a high class (the average flight time on the B-1B is 150-200 hours per year), including in flights at extremely low altitudes and when refueling in the air. The delegation of the Russian Air Force, which visited the United States in May 1992, could be convinced of this. In the course of one flight, a pair of aircraft of the same 2nd Air Wing carried out a demonstration docking and undocking in the air 12 times.
At the meeting in Poltava, the sleek appearance of the B-1B decorated with emblems (although it flew in order, as indicated by the worn steps of the built-in ladder) next to the somewhat neglected and hastily crowned with "tridents" Tu-160 spoke in favor of the Americans. It was hard to believe that even the B-1B chassis was washed with special shampoos. The greatest interest of practical Americans was aroused by the earnings of the commander of the Ukrainian Tu-160: “20 dollars? A day? … A month !! NS!!!"
Tu-160 Ukrainian Air Force, Poltava, 24.09.1994.
Stars and tridents
The initial Air Force application for the Tu-160 was 100 aircraft - the same as the Americans received the B-1B. With the collapse of the USSR, the production of the Tu-160, which required the cooperation of hundreds of enterprises, found itself in a difficult situation. The release of aircraft slowed down and was practically reduced to assembly from the existing reserve. The modernization of these machines, provided for by the program of work until 1996, was also suspended.
The problem of "big politics" was not spared by the air regiment in Priluki. On August 24, 1991, the parliament of Ukraine transferred all military formations on the territory of the state under its control, on the same day the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine was formed. However, at first these events did not have a significant impact on the service of the 184th regiment. However, in the spring of 1992, the military units of Ukraine began to swear allegiance to the republic. On May 8, 1992, the 184th Aviation Regiment was brought to it (about 25% of the flight personnel and up to 60% of the technical personnel). The first to swear allegiance was the regiment commander Valery Gorgol. The 409th regiment of Il-78 tanker aircraft at the Uzin airbase also came under the jurisdiction of Ukraine.
Tu-160 board number 342 blue at one of the MAKS-93 air shows (https://militaryphotos.net)
In February 1992 g. Boris Yeltsin announced a decree on the completion of the production of Tu-95MS bombers and the possibility of stopping the assembly of the Tu-160, provided that the United States stops producing B-2 bombers (it was planned to build 100 of them). However, this proposal did not meet with an adequate response. In addition, with the collapse of the USSR, Russia was virtually left without new strategic bombers. This forced it to continue the production of such expensive aircraft, which began to enter service with the 1096th heavy bomber regiment in Engels. Officers from Priluki began to be transferred there (in total, in 1992-93, the Russian Air Force added 720 pilots from Ukraine).
It should be noted that it was originally planned to transfer the first aircraft to Engels, the 184th Aviation Regiment was considered as a reserve, but life decided otherwise. Previously, the 1096th TBAP was armed with bombers designed by V. M. Myasishchev M-4 and 3M. Next to it was the 1230th regiment of tanker aircraft 3MS-2. On February 16, 1992, the first Tu-160 landed in Engels, which had to be mothballed for six months - there was no one to fly. By May, the 1096th TBAP already had three Tu-160s, but the first flight took place only on July 29.
The car was lifted into the air by YES inspector Lieutenant Colonel Medvedev. At the same time, the airfield was being re-equipped - all ground equipment, simulators and aircraft preparation facilities remained in Priluki, and now it was necessary to equip everything anew.
The fourth aircraft entered Engels at the beginning of 1993. To strengthen the veto regiment, the "asset" was supposed to transfer six bombers from the Tupolev company and the flight research institute, even if they had managed to use up their service life in test flights, but this did not happen. The first launch of the Kh-55 cruise missile was performed on October 22, 1992 by the crew of the regiment commander, Lieutenant Colonel A. Zhikharev. The next day, the same training firing was conducted by the crew of Lieutenant Colonel A. Malyshev.
The crew of the 1096th TBAP of the Russian Air Force, which first lifted the Tu-160 from the Engels airbase. From left to right: navigator of p / p-k Adamov, pom. com. ship Mr. Kolesnikov, navigator p / p-k Karpov, com. ship p / p-k Medvedev
Despite all the difficulties, YES Russia managed to maintain a semblance of combat effectiveness. Even in the most difficult 1992, the Russian "long-range aircraft" maintained their class, having a flight time of 80-90 hours a year - twice as high as in front-line aviation. As for the Tu-160, they took part in the large-scale Voskhod-93 exercise in May 1993, during which they practiced the maneuver of aviation forces while quickly responding to a threat. The long range of the Tu-160 allowed them to strengthen one of the strategic directions and support the group of Su-24 and Su-27, which were being transferred to the Far East (although the launch of the missiles had only to be designated - there were no suitable ranges for them in Transbaikalia). The real launch, moreover, of the upgraded Kh-55M with an increased range, was carried out during the exercises of the Strategic Nuclear Forces on June 21-22, 1994, which were inspected by President Yeltsin. In addition to the Tu-160 group, the Topol land-based complex and the Typhoon-class submarine cruiser of the Northern Fleet have successfully launched at the Kura test site in Kamchatka.
The position of the Tu-160 in the Russian Air Force is not cloudy. The production of these machines in Kazan, after the transfer of five aircraft to the Angel Regiment, stalled (in total, there were eight machines at the plant in varying degrees of readiness). The financial difficulties of the Ministry of Defense were added to the economic troubles, the budget of which presupposes, first of all, the maintenance of the combat capability of the army in the field and the financing of promising developments. It seems more reasonable to direct the colossal costs absorbed by the serial production of the Tu-160 to work that meets the requirements of the future and allows you to preserve the potential of the defense industry. One of the possible variants of the "seventy" could be a heavy escort fighter Tu-160P, armed with long and medium-range air-to-air missiles. At the air show in Paris in 1991, the Tu-160SK was presented - a version of the civilian use of the aircraft. In this version, it can be used as the first stage of the Burlak aerospace complex, developed by NPO Raduga (originally, this military space program was aimed at replenishing the orbital grouping during the decommissioning of the cosmodromes in Plesetsk and Baikonur). The launch vehicle is suspended under the fuselage and launched at an altitude of about 12 km, which makes it lighter. The system will be able to launch cargo weighing from 300 to 700 kg into low-earth orbit and is a response to the American Pegasus system.
In the Ukrainian army, the aviators found themselves in an even more difficult situation, and in the first place, the problems affected the most difficult and expensive to maintain DA planes. Immediately it was necessary to abandon flights for combat use (Ukraine did not have training grounds, and the equipment of the DA combat training center in the Dnieper-Buzh floodplains remained only on paper). The design bureau's supervision and support by the manufacturer, which had to carry out warranty service for 10 years, ceased. A shortage of fuel, spare parts and the departure of qualified flight and technical personnel quickly put some of the aircraft on hold. After all, special motor oil IP-50 for Tu-160 was produced in Azerbaijan, wheels were received from Yaroslavl, and engines - from Samara. The development of the resource by the units and the lack of new ones forced to resort to "cannibalism", removing the required from other aircraft. However, in recent years, the need for such measures has almost disappeared - in the 184th TBAP by the summer of 1994, there were only a few pilots who were able to lift the Tu-160 into the air. Unfortunately, they are given this opportunity only 4-5 times a year. In full accordance with reliability theory, the reduced flight time led to an increase in the number of failures, and the most difficult of them went to Gorgol: in May 1993, he had to land the plane with an incompletely extended landing gear. As a result, 5 Russian Tu-160s may represent a greater combat force than the 21 in Priluki.
The Kh-55SM cruise missile is ready for suspension on the Tu-160, Priluki, February 1995.
Commander of the 184th Guards. TBAP Colonel V. I. Gorgol takes the oath of allegiance to Ukraine, Priluki, 08.05.1992
As a result of a series of hasty decisions taken in the first days after the collapse of the USSR, the right to possess strategic forces was envisaged only for Russia. The deplorable situation in which the Ukrainian Tu-160s find themselves is a direct result of this policy. In March 1993, V. Zakharchenko, then adviser to the Ukrainian military attaché in Russia, said: "The Ukrainian armed forces are not faced with tasks that require such aircraft to complete." This opinion was confirmed by the commander of the Ukrainian Air Force V. Antonets, saying in his speech to reporters in Priluki on February 15, 1995 that the critical situation in the Ukrainian economy makes it impossible to maintain its Tu-160s in good condition, therefore she is interested in selling bombers to Russia. However, there were problems with the evaluation of the machines. The Ukrainian side offered to write off energy debts at their expense (which surprised Gazprom a lot) or to exchange them for Il-76 at a rate of 1: 2 (but Illy are produced in Uzbekistan …). Until now, the parties have not agreed. Today the fate of the Tu-160 completely depends on the political situation. But if there is good will, an agreement can be reached: for example, the Dnepropetrovsk plant "Yuzhmash" since 1994 has resumed routine maintenance on its missiles on alert in Russia.
Brief technical description of Tu-160
Tu-160 is made according to the normal aerodynamic configuration with a variable sweep wing. The layout of the central part of the airframe is integral. The airframe is made mainly of aluminum alloys (V-95, heat-treated to increase the resource, as well as AK-4). The share of titanium alloys in the airframe mass is 20%, composite materials are also widely used, glued three-layer structures are used.
The crew of four is located in the forward fuselage in a common pressurized cabin. Ahead - to the left - the commander of the ship, to the right - the co-pilot. Behind them are the seats of the navigator (navigation and offensive weapons) and the navigator-operator (BKO systems, communications and power engineering). All crew members have K-36DM ejection seats, which are fired upward after the hatches are dropped. The cabin is equipped with a small kitchenette and a toilet. Boarding is carried out via a ground ladder through the niche of the front leg of the landing gear (on the aircraft of the seventh series there is a built-in ladder).
Fuselage. In the forward fuselage of a semi-monocoque structure, there are: an onboard radar, an equipment compartment with avionics units and a pressurized crew cabin, including technical compartments, as well as a niche for the front leg of the chassis. Behind the cockpit are sequentially placed two unified weapons compartments 11, 28 m long and 1, 92 m wide. Each of them contains one multiply charged revolving ejection device MKU-6-5U, which can carry 6 X-55 missiles. The mass of the MKU is 1550 kg, the drive is hydraulic (on the V-1V - from a stepper motor). In addition, locks can be installed in the weapon compartments for suspension of the entire range of aviation weapons, weapon lifting systems, and electrical switching equipment is also mounted. Hydraulic units are located on the end and side walls of the compartment. The center section beam is located between the compartments. Fuel caisson tanks are located in the upstream and downstream parts of the aircraft. In the forward unpressurized part of the influx there are life support system units.
The wing is swept with a root inflow and swivel consoles - has a large elongation. Console pivot points are located at 25% of the wingspan with a minimum sweep. Structurally, the wing is divided into the following units:
- all-welded titanium beam of the center section 12.4 m long and 2.1 m wide with a transverse set of ribs made of aluminum alloy. The center section beam is built into the central part of the airframe and ensures the absorption of the loads coming from the wing consoles;
- double-shear titanium turning units, ensuring the transfer of loads from the wing to the center section;
- wing consoles made of high-strength aluminum and titanium alloys, turning in the range of 20 ° - 65 °. During takeoff, the sweep angle of the consoles is 20 °, in cruise flight mode -35 °, and during supersonic flight - 65 °.
The power base of the consoles is a caisson formed by seven milled 20-meter panels, five prefabricated spars and six ribs. The caisson serves as a container for fuel. Directly attached to it are four-section slats, three-section two-slotted flaps, six-section spoilers and flaperons, aerodynamic tips.
With an increase in the sweep angle of the wing, the root parts of the flaps do not retract into the fuselage, but turn synchronously with the change in sweep, forming a kind of aerodynamic ridges.
The tail unit is made according to the normal scheme with an all-turning stabilizer located at 1/3 of the vertical tail height (to remove it from the zone of influence of jet engines). Structurally, it consists of a caisson with turning units and honeycomb panels made of aluminum or composite materials. The upper part of the keel is all-turning.
The chassis has a steerable two-wheeled nose and two six-wheeled main struts. The chassis track is 5400 mm, the base is 17800 mm. The size of the main wheels is 1260x485 mm, the nose wheels are 1080x400 mm. The nose pillar is located under the technical compartment in a leaky niche and has a deflector that prevents foreign objects from entering the engine air intakes from under the wheels. The rack is retracted by turning backward in flight.
Equipment. The Obzor-K radar station in the nose of the fuselage is used for navigation and target detection both on the ground and in the air. Optical sighting system "Groza" is located at the bottom in the bow under the fairing. There is an astronavigation system for long-range navigation. The instrumentation is classic analogue. The onboard defense complex includes enemy detection systems and active radar countermeasures. Control system - fly-by-wire along the pitch, roll and yaw channels with fourfold redundancy and emergency mechanical wiring. The aircraft is statically unstable, so flying with the fly-by-wire system turned off is difficult and has a number of mode restrictions. The aircraft's hydraulic system is four-channel, with a working pressure of 280 kg / cm 2. All of the aircraft's systems are controlled by about 100 computers, of which 12 operate the weapons control system.
The power plant consists of four bypass turbojet engines NK-32, created at NPO Trud under the direction of ND Kuznetsov. The engine bypass ratio is 1, 4, the pressure increase ratio is 28.4, and the maximum thrust is 137.3 kN (14000 kgf) without afterburner and 245.15 kN (25000 kgf) with afterburner. The mass of the engine is 3650 kg, length - 6.5 m, inlet diameter - 1455 mm. The engine has a three-stage low pressure compressor, a five-stage medium pressure compressor and a seven-stage high pressure compressor. Low and medium pressure turbines are single-stage, and high-pressure turbines are two-stage. The turbine blades are cooled monocrystalline. The gas temperature in front of the turbine is 1375 ° C. The engine is equipped with an adjustable self-similar nozzle. The combustion chamber is annular with evaporative nozzles, which provides smokeless combustion and a stable temperature regime. NK-32 is one of the first aircraft engines in the world, in the development of which technologies were widely used aimed at reducing the levels of radar and infrared signature. On the aircraft, the engines are located in the engine nacelles in pairs, separated by firewalls and operate completely independently of each other.
The engine control system is electric, with hydromechanical redundancy. Currently, work is underway to create a digital control system with full responsibility. To ensure autonomous power supply, a gas turbine APU is installed on the aircraft behind the niche of the left main landing gear strut.
The fuel is stored in 13 tanks in the fuselage and wing pivots. The fuel system includes an automatic fuel transfer device to maintain the specified alignment in all flight modes. The aircraft has an in-air refueling system - the fuel rod extends from the nose.
Armament. The main armament option is 12 Kh-55 or Kh-55M / SM cruise missiles, 6 each on two MKU-6-5U devices.
The Kh-55 missile ("product 125", or RKV-500B, according to the NATO code AS-15b Kent, the M / CM index depends on the type of warhead) was developed at NPO Raduga under the leadership of I. Seleznev. It has a length of 6040 mm and a diameter of 556 mm. To increase the flight range up to 3000 km, the rocket can be equipped with disposable conformal fuel tanks. The launch mass of the rocket is 1210 kg (without tanks) / 1500 kg (with tanks). The Kh-55SM is equipped with a 200 kT nuclear warhead.
An alternative weapon is the X-15 short-range missile (with inertial homing) and its variants: the anti-ship X-15S and the anti-radar X-15P. In total, the Tu-160 can take on board 24 missiles, six for four MKU-6-1 (two devices in each weapon compartment).
The Kh-15 missile ("product 115", NATO code AS-16 Kickback) was also created at NPO Raduga. Its length is 4780 mm, diameter is 455 mm, wingspan is 920 mm, weight is 1100 kg (warhead is 150 kg). The rocket flight speed is M = 5. Range -150 km. With 24 missiles suspended, the mass of weapons is 28,800 kg.
With the appropriate conversion, the aircraft can carry free-fall nuclear bombs and all types of conventional bombs or sea mines.
Aircraft coloring. The prototype Tu-160, which was tested at the LII, was not painted. It had a rather motley appearance due to the different colors and shades of the sheathing sheets and radio-transparent elements.
The aircraft transferred to the units were painted in a white color typical for the USSR Long-Range Aviation, which, due to its reflectivity, is designed to protect the aircraft from the effects of light radiation in a nuclear explosion. Certain elements, in particular the upper nacelle hoods and fairings along the aft fuselage, are in the color of unpainted metal.
Two-digit tactical numbers are stamped on the nose landing gear doors and on the top of the keel. Moreover, the planes based in Priluki have red numbers, and in Engels - blue.
Red stars were applied to the top and bottom of the wings and keel. In 1993, they were painted over on Ukrainian Tu-160s, and for some time the cars had no signs of state ownership at all. Later, in late 1993 - early 1994. the planes were marked with the identification marks of the Ukrainian Air Force: yellow-blue circles on the wings and a yellow trident against the background of a blue shield on the keel. Russian Tu-160s bear identification marks inherited from the USSR Air Force.
