Bear, meet Raptor. Raptor, meet Bear.

This has been going on for a long time. As long as I've been alive, so 70's onward.

They've been running them down with Phantoms, then F-15's. No news, just some commies want some higher res pix of our planes.

Still can't see Putin from any single pic, so yeah, whatever.

 

That external fuel tank sure looks stealthy.

 

I'm surprised the Russians still put the red stars on the tail.

 

Neat pics. I always thought the counter-rotating props on the Bears were neat looking. And what a contrast in aircraft. RAM grey, modern, stealthy jet vs. acres of polished aluminum, tail gun, and props.

FWIW, how do their Bears compare to our current B-52's?

 

This got me to googling other pictures of Bears being intercepted.

Looks like they have one promiscuous bear.....she sure gets around!
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Same situation in Canada last year.I apologize, I do not know how to properly link...

http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/08/25/cf-18s-russians-airspace.html

 

B-52; Fairly well, cruising speeds are fairly close (B-52 slightly faster). Bear has better range (that's why the used turboprops, their jets were incredibly thirsty).

Obviously the Bear is a lot smaller - look at pic above, so smaller payload.

Keep in mind that they are from the same era; designed and built within a few months of each other; both first flights were 1952, I think.

Like the B-52, I'd assume the Bear has updated engines, etc., etc.

 

Interestingly, the Bear is a direct descendent of the TU-4, which was a reverse-engineered copy of a B-29 which landed in the Soviet Union after a raid on Japan toward the end of WW2.

 

Wow, is that a Delta Dart in one of the photos above?

 

An early one before they were updated. Looks like Florida ANG.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

There was also the TU-114 airliner, which during its thirty years of service (1961-91) had a very impressive safety and reliability record.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Somwhere in the vast emptiness of my head I recall that that airplane is the result of the skills of German engineers "borrowed" from their homeland after the war. The counter rotating propellor gear boxes are a triumph in their reliability. The TU-114 is almost as fast as a B-52.

 

When they were developed, the turboprop engines on the Tu-95, Tu-114 (and An-22) were the most powerful in the world, capable of 15,000 shp but generally rated at 12,000 shp. Over fifty years later, they still are!

 

+1. Very interesting early history on those.

 

Aren't they supposed to be the loudest thing in the sky?

I seem to recall the crews need hearing protection in them because of the noise levels either from the props or the prop drives?


Anybody ever heard one?

 

I have never heard one.... but a friend of my fathers who flew F4s back in the 1970s and did several Bear interceptions said the noise was overwhelming in HIS cockpit, drowning out all the normal F4 in flight sounds. Not just loud... but horrible in tone.

He claimed to have buzzed one with burners lit just to piss off the Soviets. I never really believed that.


Terry

 

I haven't heard one but I read where it is the noisiest thing in the air due to the props. When the air force tried to put a turbo prop on the modified F-84 airframe it was cancelled due to the extreme prop noise.I DID hear the XB-47J that had turbo props on it and they were very loud. Short span, wide blades, and high revs made for a low freq. siren.

 

Were they trying to get them to waddle off the ground under their own power on a hot day?

 

I was told that at the time there was a general in the air force who insisted that there had to a turbo prop transition from the recips to jets. Hence the B-47, and F-84 turbo props. The B-47 was a frightening experiment. If the gear box failed on one side (which they frequently did) you had the equivalent of a barn door sitting there. The prop blades were over 3 feet in width. The outboard jets were left on the airplane for that reason. Early on the gear box designs were a seizure about to happen.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9S3h37GW2g&feature=related[/ame]


Quite loud, yes.

 

Great video, that!

Here is the Tu-85, the Bear's immediate predecessor, effectively a much-stretched Tu-4 (B-29 copy), still with straight wings and piston engines. The fuselage of this airplane is virtually identical with that of the early Tu-95.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Wonderful ! Thanks for that video.

 

Fantastic! What a marvelous machine!