The Russian government has approved the final design for the PAK DA strategic bomber aircraft according to state media.

Speaking to state-owned media outlet RIA Novosti, a source in the Russian defense industry revealed that the Ministry of Defense has given the green-light to the PAK DA’s design. The source said that the construction of several prototype PAK DA bombers is currently underway.

Tupolev, the developer of the aircraft, is prioritising stealth characteristics and the employment of long-range weapons.

Image via Ministry of Defense of Russia

The TASS Russian News Agency, another state-owned media outlet, previously reported in May 2020 that the construction of the first prototype was ongoing and should conclude in 2021. According to RIA Novosti’s source, the PAK DA will receive internal weapons bays for its armaments, reducing its radar signature. Russia has carried out simulations and tests to assess the bomber’s expected level of visibility on enemy radar. The bomber’s arsenal will include cruise and hypersonic missiles, the source stated.

In addition to carrying out strike missions, the PAK DA’s crew will likely “be able to control groups of unmanned aerial vehicles and will be able to use the entire range of air-to-air missiles”, the source specified. Russia has several ongoing unmanned combat aerial vehicle programmes, such as the Okhotnik-B, which has been tested in conjunction with other combat aircraft.

Late last year, Okhotnik-B prototypes began carrying mock air-to-air missiles as part of training flights. The first operational PAK DAs are not expected to enter service until later in the 2020s. RIA Novosti reported that, under the current schedule, the first should be delivered in 2027.

Once combat-ready, the bombers will replace the aging Tu-95MS.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
93 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Damo
Damo
2 months ago

How useful would a bomber be with a suite of air to air missiles v a dedicated fighter? Can you imagine the cost of fitting the variants to a bomber? We squirm at the cost of fitting of brimstone to f35

captain p wash
captain p wash
2 months ago
Reply to  Damo

Probably more useful than the Rear gun on the existing Bombers !!!!

john melling
john melling
2 months ago
Reply to  Damo

According to Russian sites, I decided to look on there is talk of the PAK being also able to carry a wide range of air to air missles, with the very latest types in mind.
But at the same time, they are also the upgrading Tu-160M2 and Tu-22M3
The Russians seem to be a bit busy at the moment.

Will anything actually fly out of the hanger though!

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
2 months ago
Reply to  john melling

The Tu-22M3 upgrade is just a midlife refurbishment of the plane first entering service in 1989 to extend its life. They have had to replace the engine with one which cannot use afterburners because they no longer have the technology to produce the original engines.

Martin
Martin
2 months ago
Reply to  john melling

If power points could kill Russia would be a super power.

Bluemoonday
Bluemoonday
12 days ago
Reply to  Martin

Unlike the undoubted prospect of the Tempest program succeeding though right?

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
2 months ago
Reply to  Damo

This one probably not very useful in air to air combat, its got a very good range (12,000km/30 hours) but its slower than your average passenger airliner.

It is only capable of about a quarter of the speed of the Tu-22M “Backfire” it would be replacing.

Last edited 2 months ago by Watcherzero
Pete
Pete
2 months ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

Old site… but a really interesting debate about the future of air dominance and suggestions from a couple of people (who appear to be have sound understanding) that future air dominance could indeed rest with airliner size aircraft loaded up with BVR Missiles.

Fascinating read if nothing else

https://www.defencetalk.com/military/forums/t/aim-9x-vs-asraam.5123/

DaveyB
DaveyB
2 months ago
Reply to  Damo

Depends on the bomber. If we’re talking something along the lines of the Pak DA or B2. Then it could be a very useful platform against 4th gen aircraft, 5th would be a problem. A B52 or Tu22 because of its huge RCS wouldn’t be able to get close enough, even with long range missiles. If the stealth bomber is flying at 45,000ft+ And had some drones or stealth fighters acting as it’s eyes. Then with long range missiles it could be used as an arsenal aircraft. Hunting on its own would be a problem though, as it won’t have… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Damo

depends what AAM you were going to integrate into it. A BVRor off bore sight missile would have its uses. If your engaging an aircraft 30-50MNa away agility is not really the key to winning.

if you work through the whole impact of drone and BVRoff bore sight missile thing, and what is needed to really take advantage of these, then just maybe your small agile single seat fighter may be at a disadvantage to a larger airframe, that can cart along more human brains as well as computing power, EW and other capabilities.

Last edited 2 months ago by Jonathan
Steve
Steve
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

I was wondering about this. With beyond visual range missiles being the way forward along with swam drones, does it over time invalidate the small fighter jet, and push towards much larger platforms that can saturate the skies with missiles. I would guess the b52 etc could carry an insane number of air to air missiles.

DaveyB
DaveyB
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve

Even if the B52 was using Meteor missiles. The incredibly large RCS of the aircraft would mean it will be easily detected, especially by a ground based search radar, but more especially by a AEW platform. It would need an additional or larger booster stage to significantly increase the stand-off range of Meteor, to enable the B52 to operate safely. However, against the S400 or 500 system. It would have to operate a very long way back from the forward line of operations, which would negate its usefulness.

Steve
Steve
2 months ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Against the land based SAM the b52 would have cruise/glide missiles, for extreme stand off capability. I’m was more thinking to negate the air component.

The radar cross section is an issue, but only if the other side can launch its missiles before you can. So I guess it comes down to how far realistically can you detect a stealth fighter, a question we will never know the answer to. Additionally how stealthy can you make a long range bomb truck for whatever eventually replaces the b52.

Daveyb
Daveyb
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve

Unfortunately the B52 is a late 40s/50s design, so it was never designed for stealth in the first place, therefore retrofitting or modifying it for stealth is not really an option. The B52 has a frontal radar cross section (RCS) of 100m2 compared to a Typhoon that ranges from 0.25m2 to 0.75m2 depending on what it is carrying. The F22 has 1/1000th the RCS of a Typhoon. The F22’s An/APG-77 radar can detect a 1m2 target at a published range of 240km. Therefore, against a B52 the F22 could theoretically detect at the radar’s extreme range of 300km away. The… Read more »

john melling
john melling
2 months ago

So that’s the US, China and Russia building new long-range strategic bombers.

I guess Russia seeing the need to try and catch up with the USA

Those built by China will be capable of reaching many of the disputed islands which will again be provocative

And I’m wondering if Russia did actually manage to secure funding and expertise from China which I believe they had made a request

spyintheskyuk
spyintheskyuk
2 months ago
Reply to  john melling

My thinking entirely I am deeply concerned about whats happening and the sudden ability of Russia to finance high tech weapon systems. Could we be seeing something akin to the old Nazi/Japan pact developing here where your enemies make you more of a friend than you would normally be. Russia has long played that game what with Iran, and attempts with Turkey to draw them away from Nato. My big concern is that while Russia is playing ‘war-games’ against Ukraine the Chinese are picking fights against the likes of India, Indonesia and now the Philippines while threatening Taiwan but also… Read more »

Last edited 2 months ago by spyintheskyuk
Finney
Finney
2 months ago
Reply to  spyintheskyuk

PAK-FA and PAK-DA have both been repeatedly pushed back and delayed, partly due to an atrophied jet-turbine industry. Russia is trying to do the same as us, spread the butter too thin and have high end capabilities across the full-spectrum, although unlike us they are trying to do it all domestically and they clearly can’t afford it. I guarantee that by the time PAK DA goes into production it will already be outmoded and they will not be able to afford more than 2 or 3 dozen, which will make it a huge money-sponge for little result. Russia is being… Read more »

Last edited 2 months ago by Finney
Meirion X
Meirion X
2 months ago
Reply to  spyintheskyuk

Taiwan could defend it’s self by deploying over a thousand land based short range and cruise missiles, and ASM’s

David Flandry
David Flandry
2 months ago
Reply to  Meirion X

They would be outnumbered, and badly, sad to say. I expect a war within the year, started by the PRC.

Andrew
Andrew
2 months ago

Really got to wonder how realistic a proposal this is….

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  Andrew

I do wonder too, if it really belongs in the model shop along with their aircraft carriers……..

That being said they may need a project so the skills don’t wither.

Meirion X
Meirion X
2 months ago

It looks like our former Vulcan Bomber!

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  Meirion X

Ah! Comrade you mean Vulkanski Project V?

Every Soviet Project better than Western degenerate project, No?

There FIFY!

David Flandry
David Flandry
2 months ago

Any Soviet project better than nonexistent UK project, comrade. RAF could have have maintained strategic bomber force but money needed to keep politicians in power, voters happy. No one care about defense, so corrupt British politicians cut and cut defense, all in keeping with glorious Marxist-Leninist prophecy.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  David Flandry

I don’t understand what utility a strategic bomber force would have for the UK?

other than to spend a huge % of the defence budget: for?

David Flandry
David Flandry
2 months ago

Well, of course, with a constantly decreasing defense budget, nothing is affordable, or useful. Until the war.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago
Reply to  David Flandry

Yes, but what is it for?

Who are we bombing that our present large pile of Storm Shadow wouldn’t deal with or F35/Typhoon with laser guided munitions.

I’m honestly asking what would it be for because I can’t see a scenario where it would be more useful than improved investment in other assets?

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago
Reply to  Andrew

Yes we often forget that Russia is not a rich nation and does not have the industrial mass of the Soviet Union.

When you actually look at Russian strategic aims, you much ask how exactly would a strategic bomber force support its near abroad policy ?

The Soviet Union had the strategic aim of the destruction of western democracy and capitalism, it needed a strategic bomber force for that. Russia just wants control of it near abroad..not sure how blowing all its defence budget on strategic bombers would really help.

John Hartley
John Hartley
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

There is a lot in Siberia, yet to be exploited. This new bomber will reach service, but it will take a long time & not be in huge numbers.

Pete
Pete
2 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Ability to offload significant volumes of ordinance over places such as Black Sea, Syria, chechniya, etc…and also potentially over Arctic as it opens up with a massive coastline beyond reach of most fighters? Not saying it’s a great idea but Putin may want the same theoretical capapabilities as US deployed over Afghanistan etc.

Barry Larking
Barry Larking
2 months ago
Reply to  Andrew

Depends. Putin has had a boost selling gas to Germany. But It looks like a white elephant to me.

Meirion X
Meirion X
2 months ago
Reply to  Barry Larking

The new pipe line is Not yet built, work on it stopped by the companies. It is being blocked by US sanctions. And sanctions on new drilling projects is having effects.

Barry Larking
Barry Larking
2 months ago
Reply to  Meirion X

Many thanks. I believe the deal is still in the pipeline as of March 2021. Germany has to do a deal with someone very soon; since Obama’s time Germany has been the U.S.’s favourite European partner so cordial relations are guranteed to continue.. President Biden is, when not ensuring Iran achieves nuclear weapon power status, taking an understanding attitude to this issue; in the event Russia invades somewhere, he wants the Germans to promise to turn off the supply. As for sanctions, Russian companies would be happy to build it I am sure.

Meirion X
Meirion X
2 months ago
Reply to  Barry Larking

The Russian companies would Not be able to operate either in Germany or Poland, because they would Not be able to buy services or anything there. Because of US sanctions applied though the banking system. Germany would Not want exclusively Russian companies working on the project, politically untenable!
The Greens are aganst imported energy!

The US is doing Germany a favour by the sanctions, by helping it to become less reliant on imported energy.

Last edited 2 months ago by Meirion X
Pete
Pete
2 months ago
Reply to  Meirion X

Either end of such cross land construction project would be built by respective industries with fiscal metering taking place at the borders or branch points. I’m sure the US is also doing itself a favour by driving up the cost of German and European manufacturing by limiting energy supply competitiveness.

captain p wash
captain p wash
2 months ago

Lots of big ticket projects being worked on at present, including building new base’s in the Arctic. Poseidon is looking likely too plus the hypersonics…. I can sort of see why the UK has decided to increase the Nuclear Stockpile. Time for a new Stealth Vulcan anyone ?

John Hartley
John Hartley
2 months ago
Reply to  captain p wash

Part of me wishes we still had the Valiant. We should have gone for the low level B2 version. Then we would not have wasted resources on TSR2, F111K, Tornado…. A late 60s new Valiant would have changed the Avons for Speys. A late 80s version would have change to Tays. A new semi stealth version would use RR Pearls, a V tail & a pointy diamond shape nose.

Finney
Finney
2 months ago
Reply to  John Hartley

The Valiant was the worst of the V-Bombers, do you mean the Vulcan or Victor? The Victor certainly had some unusual shapes in the crescent wing and nose, I wonder if some of them may have been (inadvertently) stealthier than your average 50’s/60’s bomber.

John Hartley
John Hartley
2 months ago
Reply to  Finney

We only built one low level “pathfinder” Valiant B2 then scrapped it. Shame as it could have been the basis for a long serving line. The Valiants the RAF got were high level only & lacked the robustness to cope with low level work. When switched to low level because of the SAM threat, they soon became overstressed & were retired. The Valiant had a 32 ft long bomb bay, 6ft wide, 5ft 6 in deep. It could take a 10,000lb conventional bomb, or 21x 1000lb bombs or the Blue Danube 10,000lb nuclear bomb.

Finney
Finney
2 months ago
Reply to  John Hartley

Oh I hadn’t heard of that B2 variant, I’ll have to look that up, thanks. For low level what we should have done was develop a “Super-Buccaneer” !

James Fennell
James Fennell
2 months ago

Riussian govenrment approves a lot of designs, primarily so the internet thinks they are big and tough. In reality – like the numerous tanks and carriers and whatvever else it never built or only made a prototype – its destiny is to become an internet meme – which is also a cheap form of power projection.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell
2 months ago

Dont believe Russia will get any of these aircraft into serial squadron sized production. Look at T14 Aramata programme. 2500 initially forecast, delayed until 2025 with only low rate initial production and some 20 or so in service with a single guards armoured regiment. Sukhoi su57 Pak FA. Due to costs a single squadron of 12 aircraft with 2 training and 10 test aircraft. . Sukhoi su35 128 only in service with further 12 naval versions. Hardly a polyvalent unit vs F15 or F22 or Eurofighter typhoon. Mig 35. 14 in service including 6 test and 8 training aircraft. As… Read more »

captain p wash
captain p wash
2 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

could Putin not just sell a few Palace’s ?

Airborne
Airborne
2 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Spot on, let’s give Russia credit where it’s due, it has some excellent platforms, especially in the air defence spectrum and able to come up with modern, capable systems. However, as you said, they cannot afford, and organise, production of the these assets in numbers which will make a difference. Which to be fair is lucky for us.

David Flandry
David Flandry
2 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

The Russian GNP is probably not the equal of the UK or France. Even that of the USSR was much smaller than most people imagined or estimated, thus the collapse in 1991.

Patrick
Patrick
2 months ago

It’s a golden age for the Russian model industry.

captain p wash
captain p wash
2 months ago
Reply to  Patrick

Aeroflotfix !!!!

James Fennell
James Fennell
2 months ago
Reply to  captain p wash

Nailed it!

En69UUuWMAAFnoo.jpg
spyintheskyuk
spyintheskyuk
2 months ago
Reply to  Patrick

I am expecting at least a further 5 Aircraft Carrier models by years end. They will have a sort of new model navy at this rate by then to threaten the modellers on their boating lakes..

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
2 months ago

We still on the April fools gags 😄

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
2 months ago

Not too bad for an Airfix Model?

Thankfully, we have nothing to worry about as many on here will tell you, it’s never going to happen, so don’t panic, don’t panic

After all, Jonesy is never wrong!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVpB_jwelOc

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
2 months ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

Any news on china’s H-20 Next-Generation Stealth Bomber? I thought it was due to make an appearance sometime this year?

Last edited 2 months ago by Nigel Collins
Levi Goldsteinberg
Levi Goldsteinberg
2 months ago

It looks fantastic, just from a purely neutral point of view. Whether it actually makes it into serial production is another matter, but time will tell.

I do wish we didn’t have such a fractious relationship with the Russians though, they are a lovely people and an extremely innovative bunch as a whole

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
2 months ago

If they ever make one that is fully functional I will be very surprised.

There is something very odd about the amount of R&D they do and how few functional units they actually produce. Normally getting from #1 -> #5 production is the expensive bit as at that point you have figured out most of the production problems and can start cranking things up. They do this and then stop at low single digit numbers.

I mean the Russians are not dummies……more to do with trying to keep skills alive in the hope that one day….?

spyintheskyuk
spyintheskyuk
2 months ago

Yes I think you are right they can produce great tech in small numbers that goes back to the Space Race era. That said I am totally amazed at just how many US projects get cancelled just prior or during the prototype phase. Yo can pretty much discover a new spaceplane project a month if you go looking with billions put into them and then scrapped just as a prototype is about to leave the factory but I guess the what was learnt does head into the next project so abilities are kept alive. The X37 certainly has roots in… Read more »

captain p wash
captain p wash
2 months ago

I share your wish mate. There was a brief glimmer of hope but unfortunately someone came along with Ideas of Granduer and a desire to become super mega rich.

Stand Off Rocket Man
Stand Off Rocket Man
2 months ago
Reply to  captain p wash

When was the glimmer of hope?

Captain P Wash
Captain P Wash
2 months ago

Gorbachev and a period shortly after when the West began to offer aid and help.

Stand Off Rocket Man
Stand Off Rocket Man
2 months ago
Reply to  Captain P Wash

Except many Russians see Gorbachev as a traitor, at least today. For them, he was the instigator of the downfall of their empire and their fall from being a superpower.

Captain P Wash
Captain P Wash
2 months ago

I was referring to the West’s point of view….. Personally I have no problem with people, just their so called leaders…. It’s the Leaders that cause all the problems for their people in life. We should be trying to help the Russian People not thinking of them as enemies.

Stand Off Rocket Man
Stand Off Rocket Man
2 months ago
Reply to  Captain P Wash

I live here (Russia). Many great people, but lots of poverty. Yesterday I went into a block flats and had never seen poverty so bad in all my time here (and i’ve seen a lot). Even my wife, who is Russian, said the same.

One thing that i’ve learned whilst being here is that Russians need to help themselves first and foremost. I’ve had some Russians themselves come upto me and actually say, “It’s not Putin’s fault, the people don’t want to change for the better. The whole nation is drunk and lazy”.

spyintheskyuk
spyintheskyuk
2 months ago

aah now that is the sort of take only someone living in the given society can truly see. The people as an entity are rarely totally blameless for events at least in most modern societies. As individuals most are not, but actions enough of them take do often enable the power base that controls their lives. To many wanted a new czar after th inevitable chaos that the fall of communism brought and they willingly gave power to one and many still think he is making Russia great again, its no surprise that that effect filtered even into the US… Read more »

Stand Off Rocket Man
Stand Off Rocket Man
2 months ago
Reply to  spyintheskyuk

Yep, got to agree with a lot of that. The difference with the Russia situation and Myanmar is that people are getting killed rioting there, but they are still rioting. People in Russia tend to stay at home and just accept it or just quietly protest. Yes, there have been some riots lately, but nothing on the scale of what could be. Here, people are either so deeply patriotic or have long come to the point that it’s every man for himself. They are generally a scared and easily controlled population. I can understand it to a degree, as there… Read more »

Last edited 2 months ago by Stand Off Rocket Man
Stand Off Rocket Man
Stand Off Rocket Man
2 months ago

One married me, so obviously some of them are clever and make good decisions.

In general, there are many great people here, but lots of idiots too… like anywhere really!

spyintheskyuk
spyintheskyuk
2 months ago

Exactly and thats the depressing part and something we and in particular the US are far from immune from especially as economic balance turns against us towards seriously less open societies and we spend time fighting over the deckchairs while we concentrate on who’s to blame for the history of neglect, canvas or wood. The people rarely see the bigger picture of whats happening outside of their little circles of grievance.

spyintheskyuk
spyintheskyuk
2 months ago

Me too. Though yes while a lot of them are a lovely people but its the ones you don’t tend to find chatting to Westerners that you will find are anything but and that can give you a misleading view of any country. I remember a very similar situation in Turkey all the very nice friendly young guys wanting to interact while the ominous older guys giving poisonous looks in the background that you might never notice until you start chatting to a woman.

Stand Off Rocket Man
Stand Off Rocket Man
2 months ago
Reply to  spyintheskyuk

LOL, this sums up my life. I won’t go any further.

dan
dan
2 months ago

At least the Russians can come up with their own designs instead of just copying US designs like the Chicoms do.

David Flandry
David Flandry
2 months ago
Reply to  dan

A decent copy in decent numbers can still do damage. “They wiped out our forces, but they just used copies of our weapons” would not be a satisfying critique.

Paul T
Paul T
2 months ago
Reply to  David Flandry

Very true, just because a bit of equipment is Russian or Chinese doesn’t mean that when it goes ‘Bang’ it won’t Kill or Maim any less effectively than any other Nations Equipment does.

Captain P Wash
Captain P Wash
2 months ago
Reply to  dan

It’s a Flying Wing. Take a look at the past, virtually everything they came up with was a copy of something from the West. There is a massive list. Concorde, Harrier, F15, F111, F86, B1, F22, It’s not just the Chinese that do it. They even have a twin Island design for an Aircraft Carrier.

Andrew D
2 months ago

Still be nice not to cut 24 Typhoons guys just in case.

Meirion X
Meirion X
2 months ago
Reply to  Andrew D

Those 24 Tr.1 Typhoon’s, would have use up most of airframe lifetime by 2025.

Particularly as they take-off very quick, if on QRA, will certainly put a lot of stress on the airframe.

Almost vertical!

Last edited 2 months ago by Meirion X
Andrew D
2 months ago
Reply to  Meirion X

True mate but there again there kept Lighting and Phantoms on QRA ,long enough 🍺🇬🇧

Meirion X
Meirion X
2 months ago
Reply to  Andrew D

We built 337 EEL(Lightnings), in service with 2 Squ’s left by 1987, and last in 1988.
Most were replaced by Phantoms by mid 1970’s.

The UK procured and assembled 180 Phantoms, brought from the US.
The RAF Phantoms lasted until 1992.

Last edited 2 months ago by Meirion X
The Big Man
The Big Man
2 months ago
Reply to  Meirion X

My favourite plane of all time the F4. But we did well and truly stuff it up by insisting on a Rolls Royce engine which didn’t fit. So once again we paid well over the odds getting it to work giving employment to our people by not buying off the shelf. No wonder the MOD spend so much.
Have we learnt? Hope so.

Meirion X
Meirion X
2 months ago
Reply to  Meirion X

The F4 Phantom, the name should be.

Jonathan
Jonathan
2 months ago

Let’s be far around the who air-fix model thing, we have produced a goodly number of strait to air-fix models ourselves, including a lovely aircraft carrier and a number in interesting aircraft.

Geoffrey Roach
Geoffrey Roach
2 months ago

As long as the Russians are spending billions that they haven’t got why interrupt them? Another 100 fighters would be more worrying.

Mark B
Mark B
2 months ago

I’m not sure what a stealth bomber tells us about Russian strategic thinking?

Daveyb
Daveyb
2 months ago
Reply to  Mark B

Its a continuation of their strategic thinking that forms their nuclear triad, i.e. sub launched ICMB, land based ICBMs and aircraft carried nuclear cruise missiles. The PAK-DA will give the Russia Air Force a greater chance of reaching the launch point than the T22 or Tu160s.

Liam
Liam
2 months ago

Looking at the design makes me realize how radical the Vulcan was.

Captain P Wash
Captain P Wash
2 months ago
Reply to  Liam

Komet 163, had a big influence mate.

spyintheskyuk
spyintheskyuk
2 months ago
Reply to  Captain P Wash

Well yes both the Victor and the Vulcan had a lot of German input by designers who moved here post war. Yes the Vulcan wing form was greatly helped by that mathematical work carried out during the war, though the Komet as an influence is new to me so can’t comment.The swept Victor’s wing was also from a similar German input and possibly its tail (may be wrong on that). But then the Triumph motorcycle was started by a German so such influence its not new. Haven’t heard anything about the Valiant which may or may not speak volumes. But… Read more »

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
2 months ago

Ok you aircraft types….So…are winglets a good thing on a stealth aircraft this big?

Deep32
Deep32
2 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Im not an aircraft type, but neither the B-2 or B-21 have them!!! It is my understanding that they aid fuel consumption, however, don’t really know. Only thing I can assume, is that they will not aid its stealth features!!!!!

captain p wash
captain p wash
2 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

I have absolutely no idea whatsoever mate !!!! I do know that some Race Rep Road bikes ( motorbikes ) have them, quite why with 70mph limits I’ll never know !

Daveyb
Daveyb
2 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Yes and no. For aerodynamics they are very good for two reasons, reducing lift induced drag and increasing yaw authority. All true flying wings (no fin) are naturally unstable around the fore-aft axis. This is because there is nothing to counteract a disturbance in this axis. It leads to a rolling oscillation around this axis, which in aircraft speak is known as “Dutch Rolling”. A flying wing aircraft with a highly swept wing can use small winglets to counteract this oscillation, as they are placed at the extreme ends of the wings so are placed further away from the centre… Read more »

Ron
Ron
2 months ago

Nice model, not sure but the nose seems to remind me of a dolphin, Ah well. I do wonder how Russia can afford the development and build of this aircraft and for that matter the rest of the new kit they seem to be getting. Road infrastructure in Russia is poor to axle breaking poor, telecom infrastructure is bad, hospitals are poor etc. I now I worked in that part of the world for 10 years, in the cities things are ok, the moment you go 20 miles outside its like being in a diffrent time period. Maybe Putin should… Read more »

TrevorH
TrevorH
2 months ago

This just looks like a toytown propaganda plane.

Ian
Ian
2 months ago

We haven’t seen any of these prototypes of course. The Russians seem rather good at presenting models of platform concepts that never actually materialise.

Daveyb
Daveyb
2 months ago

I have studied this model and produced a thorough report on the aircraft for another organisation. I will summarize, but it basically boils down to, if Russia do produce this aircraft, it will be quite a capable bomber, but not in the same league as the B2 let alone the B21. The assumption is that Russia and China for that matter, are still a very long way behind in radar absorbent materials (RAM) compared to the US. For a strategic bomber RAM has a massive influence not only on the overall design but the bomber’s mission capabilities. However, aerodynamically, they… Read more »

captain p wash
captain p wash
2 months ago
Reply to  Daveyb

Thanks Daveyb, that has to be the best reply to an article I’ve ever read on this site.