TU-22 Blinder/Backfire

BLUEJACKET sez;

What is to prevent China to send a submarine with divers to the Indian Ocean
and bring samples/pictures of the crashed B-1B bomber back for reverse engineering?

Click to expand...

When ditching an aircraft like that one or any one with classified material/equipment onboard certian proceedures are followed by the crew prior to ditching to disable or destroy classified material/equipment.

If the PLAN did send a sub out to find the aircraft first off they would have to find it. Then recover what ever they could if indeed they did find it. Therein lyes the problem. Finding it. And if they did find it what would hey discover? What sort of condition would it be in after 5 years? The US knows where the aircraft is located. Don't you think the US would have disabled it or destroyed the aircraft by now?

bd popeye said:

If the PLAN did send a sub out to find the aircraft first off they would have to find it. Then recover what ever they could if indeed they did find it. Therein lyes the problem. Finding it. And if they did find it what would they discover? What sort of condition would it be in after 5 years? The US knows where the aircraft is located. Don't you think the US would have disabled it or destroyed the aircraft by now?

Click to expand...

If they want it bad enough, eventually they'll find it- the Chinese are famous for their patience! The Titanic and other famous wrecks were found in even more remote places.
They may have blown it up on the bottom, but even that would leave some pieces/fragments for exploitation. Something is better than nothing! The US recovered a Soviet bomber from a swamp in Africa some years ago- granted that wasn't from the Ocean's bottom but still- it wasn't in pristine condition then either!

The USN will probably blow it up by depth charges or demolition teams long before any PLAN sub could come and retrieve it.

crobato said:

The USN will probably blow it up by depth charges or demolition teams long before any PLAN sub could come and retrieve it.

Click to expand...

My point exactly. thank you crobato for that response. If any of the wreckage is still intact it would be more than likely of little use to anyone.

Aaahhhh The USN quit using depth charges a real long time ago.

The US recovered a Soviet bomber from a swamp in Africa some years ago- granted that wasn't from the Ocean's bottom but still- it wasn't in pristine condition then either!

Click to expand...

Coulda, shoulda, woulda..ain't gonna happen. Not in this demension. Maybe in yours Bluejacket.. Trust me on this..the crew had time to bailout. That also means they had time to render useless any technology that could fall into a potential enemies hands...that's how those things work in this demension. If the aircrew did not destroy anything an EOD was soon dispacthed to the area and destroyed the aircraft.

The H-6 is a good platform, but I think currently it consumes too much fuel all too quickly. As much ECM as you put on that thing, it will still be highly vulnerable to other fighters and SAM.

H-6 can't really outrun missiles or intercepting aircraft after expending its missiles.

A supersonic bomber can reach its target quicker, have more chances at penetrating outer air defenses of an enemy vessel, fire its missiles, and speed back to base before more missiles/aircraft can intercept it.

China does not need Tu-22M3s though.

What China needs is either a B-2 stealth bomber variant, something based on Tu-160 Blackjack technology (yes a huge plane, but long range, designed to be comparable to B-1B, and surprisingly more stealthy than the Tu-22), and if China ever could...a B-1B copy!

Something that can carry missiles in quantity (say, 4 rounds, rather than just 2), over longer range (at least be able to attack incoming CVBGs well outside the Taiwan Strait), and faster than H-6 of course.

Another suggestion is a long range UAV...at this rate, with WZ-2000 and CAC's long range UAV development projects, we could see a subsonic long range recon UAV by 2020 that could perform MPA missions as far as Japan, and perhaps be easily convertable to fire one or two AShMs. Such a UAV, though large (like the Global Hawk), it is undoubtedly stealthy.

bd popeye said:

My point exactly. thank you crobato for that response. If any of the wreckage is still intact it would be more than likely of little use to anyone. .. If the aircrew did not destroy anything an EOD was soon dispacthed to the area and destroyed the aircraft.

Click to expand...

I saw an article in the Navy Times after that crash that said "the Navy may salvage it,... [even though] normaly such aircraft are written off'. Since then, I haven't heard either way. Even microscopic fragments may give clues of the manufacturing process, materials used, etc. I admit that it would be impossible to reverse engineer anything out of littlle pieces, but nonetheless some valuable/usable info. could be extracted from them. After the Serbs shot down F-117 the wreckage was shipped to Russia for analysis.

Senior Russian aerospace officials admitted that they are testing new SAM missiles against the F-117 that was shot down by Serb forces in 1999. The Russians admitted that the F-117 was being used to test new anti-stealth technology and advanced missiles designed to shoot down U.S. aircraft. Russian researchers are testing components of a new air defense system against the F-117 remains.
The Russian anti-stealth tests include radio frequency seekers from surface-to-air missiles and proximity fuses for missile warheads. Russian missile makers Antey Industrial Corp. and the Almaz Central Design Bureau are using the F-117 and modified Russian-made stealth aircraft to test components for the next generation of Russian Surface to Air Missiles (SAMs).
Almaz engineers claim its S-300PMU-2 system can locate and destroy stealth targets up to 60 miles away. Almaz is currently trying to sell the S-300PMU-2 to China.

Click to expand...

If SU-34 is as good as advertized, it could take on some (if not all) of TU-22M missions. PLAAF doesn't need an intercontinental strategic bomber- they've got ICBMs, IRBMs & AL/SLCMs. What is the cost-benefit ratio here? For all intents and purposes, missiles are cheaper than airplanes, their crews & bases!
In addition to trains/truck launchers, PLAAF could probably adopt cargo airlifters to carry/launch ICBMs like the USAF had done in trials-





Among the possible cadidates are IL-76 variants and AN-124 that China may buy later.





http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/showthread.php?t=197

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/showthread.php?t=2499

After the Serbs shot down F-117 the wreckage was shipped to Russia for analysis.

Click to expand...

And where is that Russian steath "reversed engineered" fighter? You said it yourself... it would be virtually impossibble to do.

The USAF is retiring the entire fleet of F-117's.



The F-22 is in service. .All the testing the Russians have done with these now obsolete componets may well be a waste of time.

As a remote possibility, the USAF's decision to retire the F-117 might be based on intelligence data that shows the aircraft's stealth capability has been compromised. The F-117 is a stealth bomber that relies on its ability to remain unseen. Once that ability is lost, the aircraft's value in future battlefield is greatly reduced.

As far as I know the Tu-22 is no longer in production. The PLAAF is not likely to import used/refurb aircraft from Russia. If China were to ever import bombers or fighter-bombers from Russia, it'd have to be "new". I think the Su-34 is far more likely than the Tu-22, while Russia is not likely to export its best long-range bombers like the Tu-160 to China.

BLUEJACKET said:

What is to prevent China to send a submarine with divers to the Indian Ocean
and bring samples/pictures of the crashed B-1B bomber back for reverse engineering?

Click to expand...

I'll give you three very good things that will prevent it:

1)US Military recovery efforts. The US indicated it would try and recover it and then things went very quiet after that...what might that tell us?

2) US military EOD efforts, meaning if it wasn't recovered then it's been completely demolished.

3) and finally, there's the US Navy.

Thanks in advance.

The US did recover a crash F-14 from the ocean floor to prevent the Russians from getting it in the mid 1970's.

The US also recovered a sunken Russian SSN on the Pacific floor.

These happen 30 years ago. The US will have no problem getting a B-1