[PEB]

Ether way scary stuff going on lately with Russia and I soon bet China after the Olympics. Play nice till the end of the Olympics then start pushing the wrong buttons again. With the US tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan I think Russia and China are going to start flexing their collective muscle. Russia specifically has stated that they want to soon start showing the world that they are one of the worlds superpowers and that they are to be respected as such.

They are not planning on going to war with anyone they just want the rest of the world to understand they are not going to be floor mats to anyone in the west. I kinda got that feeling in I think 2005 when China and Russia started doing joint training missions. Bombers have always been flying targets in the sky unless they are B-1 or B-2 bombers. The TU-95 first went into testing in 1952 so it is an old design. It is a very limited design for load capacity and flight range but it is likely much like the B-52 a reliable and usable design for Russia.


Aviapedia Tu-95 Bear strategic bomber and missile carrier

[Fanu]

Originally Posted by Xenu

They have great acceleration and have been known to momentarily pull away from fighters.

yeah right

Performance
Maximum speed: 725 km/h (402 knots, 453 mph)

unless those fighters were WW2 mustangs, i dont see how they could get outrun by TU-95

shitloads of info on those russian planes on:

Tupolev Tu-95 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (as you can see there have been a number of cases where these planes had to be escorted by NATO planes)

what i found interesting:

Introduced 1956 (MS — 1981)
The Tu-95 is still in service, as of 2008, and is expected to remain in service with the Russian Air Force until at least 2040.

[SMillard]

actually the Tu-95 began when Stalin got ahold of some American B-29's that had to make emergency landings in the Soviet Union. They originally reverse engineered the B-29 and have improved on the design ever since.

As far as Russia flexing muscle militarily I really doubt it. They see the climate and I doubt they really want to get involved in the micromanagement politics the US is currently entangled in. They are going to start flexing more muscle as an economic player especially with military arms sales. They will eventually be in direct competition with the Chinese since they both specialize in relatively cheap weapons systems as opposed to the US which much like the French systems are relatively expensive.

In other words not much will change.

[SMillard]

Originally Posted by Xenu

They have great acceleration and have been known to momentarily pull away from fighters.

sorry but if I'm on a bike and a car is matching my speed as brief as it might be, I can momentarily pull away too, Until the car decides to catch up; but that isn't something I'd go around bragging about. Almost every interceptor/fighter in the NATO inventory can to mach 2 or better.

As can most Russian jets as well. The Russians actually have some very impressive bombers that are comparable to the B-1 but they are very expensive to fly and they don't have many at this time.

[Xenu]

Originally Posted by Fanu

yeah right

unless those fighters were WW2 mustangs, i dont see how they could get outrun by TU-95
...
Tupolev Tu-95 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Really?

Well if you had read the wiki page you just posted...

Concerning the performance of the aircraft, it has been reported by many fighter pilots that the Tu-95 was able to out-accelerate them for a short distance, especially with the SEPECAT Jaguar.

And this:
Tu-20/95/142 Bear

It is rumored that Bear is known to be able to out accelerate contemporary western interceptors. This hard to believe fact can be accounted by use of variable-pitch propellers of NK-12M turboprops. Modern jets need to use afterburners to keep up with accelerating Bear. In fact, one of the photo showing Panavia Toronado using reheat on one of the engines while pursuing this remarkable bomber.

Which happens to be exactly what I said:

Originally Posted by Xenu

They have great acceleration and have been known to momentarily pull away from fighters.

So I was right.

[Xenu]

Originally Posted by SMillard

sorry but if I'm on a bike and a car is matching my speed as brief as it might be, I can momentarily pull away too, Until the car decides to catch up; but that isn't something I'd go around bragging about. Almost every interceptor/fighter in the NATO inventory can to mach 2 or better.

For how long can a jet keep up?

[dkickboxer]

Originally Posted by Xenu

For how long can a jet keep up?

What do you mean? A TU-95 can pull away at lower speeds for a short time but will quickly hit it's tops speed and the fighter will still be accelerating. 453 mph is nothing for a jet fighter like the f18 which has a top speed of over 1100 mph so keeping up with it would be no problem. Well, as long as it's fuel lasts, or roughly 2000 miles.

[Xenu]

Originally Posted by dkickboxer

What do you mean? A TU-95 can pull away at lower speeds for a short time but will quickly hit it's tops speed and the fighter will still be accelerating. 453 mph is nothing for a jet fighter like the f18 which has a top speed of over 1100 mph so keeping up with it would be no problem. Well, as long as it's fuel lasts, or roughly 2000 miles.

At what speed to jets (aside from the F-22) have to use afterburners?

What is the range with afterburners?

[dkickboxer]

from a quick search it looks like the cruise speed of an f18 is around 660 mph.

[Sauron]

Originally Posted by SMillard

In this day and age the fastest turbo prop is the equivalent of being the smartest person with Down Syndrome doesn't quite cut it.

In this day and age the turbo-propr is increasingly in demand because of its fuel efficiency in respect to spiralling oil prices. That's why planes like the C-130 and new a400m are turbo-prop planes.

The real problem is you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Nice try, though.