loading...
19 TU-95 “Bear”

TU-95 “Bear”

Posted on November 20, 2006 by team


This is the video of one of the biggest Russian bombers TU-95.

It can fly from Moscow to Cuba in Carribean and back without refueling, though in this video there is a scene of it being refueled right in the air.

It was the only bomber deployed by any country to use turbo-prop engines, which provided extraordinarily long endurance at speeds only slightly less than comparable turbojet-powered heavy bombers.

Advertisement



Exchange traffic with English Russia, click here

19 Responses to “TU-95 “Bear””

  1. Acts_of_Atrocity says:

    I think those things are in the past. There is no need to carry A-bomb to US by plane anymore, and it can`t be used for massive carpet bombings like B52`s. Their only pupose, even after refitting in mid 90`s, is to be air-based ICBM and cruise missile launch pad.

  2. Doug says:

    A couple of things of note that I remember reading about the Tu-95, maybe some one can confirm this:
    The fuselage is mostly the same as the Tu-4, which in turn was a reverse engineered American B-29. The turbo-prop engines were designed by captured German engineers, specifically personnel from the Jumo engine division of the Junkers aircraft company. It is said that the engines are extremely loud.

  3. Robert says:

    Pappa, you missed out on another story.

    Each Friday the RAF (British Air Force) would publish a magazine. Each Thursday a bear would fly over British airspace.

    The RAF fighters took off to intercept the bear and escort it out of British airspace. One of the Bear crewmembers held up the next day’s eddition of the RAF magazine.

    Now that’s class.

  4. Robert says:

    Acts_of_Atrocity,
    Refuelling and communications.
    Transport flights (equipment and troops).
    Looooads of things.

  5. Acts_of_Atrocity says:

    It can`t be effectively used as cargo plane because of its` relatively small cross-section, same reason as for fuel tanker. For all those purposes there are more advanced aircraft at service. A-50 for communications and surveillance, IL-78 for refueling, and Antonov family aircraft for cargolifting – AN-70 for example.

    Beside heavy rocket platform it probably could be used as spyplane, but there is no such need anymore.

  6. grundes says:

    Doug,

    well the Tu-95 is almost twice as long as the Tu-4 (50m vs 30).

    So I doubt it’s the “fuselage is mostly the same” ;)

  7. Peresvet says:

    Doug, your information is wrong.

  8. Henrik says:

    It is absolutely astonishingly loud. It’s pretty rubbish as a spyplane for that reason, back in the day the americans could hear it on their underwater sonar devices out in the atlantic. For this reason the Bear is in a leage of it’s own when it comes to coolness. Also note that the flight engineer is using a plain old slide ruler, not a electric calculator. That’s good old russian army sense. Why fix it if it isnt broken?

  9. BK says:

    Maybe the planes are being used for teaching new pilots during peace time? Or it could be possable for such a small plane to bring in a small recon team who could parashute in?

  10. Vrag says:

    I think those things are in the past. There is no need to carry A-bomb to US by plane anymore, and it can`t be used for massive carpet bombings like B52`s. Their only pupose, even after refitting in mid 90`s, is to be air-based ICBM and cruise missile launch pad. — SS-18 SATANA =) kill USA

  11. Macaca says:

    Big and slow as they might be.. you dont want to be suprised by a flight of those big Bears suddenly turning up on the edge of your defended airspace and start to launch 24 bigass multi-headed nuclear missiles straigt into your heartlands.

    And those old Bear intercepts are quite usefull for the russians; to check out alertness, intercept range, patrol patterns, type of interceptors etc etc: NATO wont shoot you down very soon (and start an incident or maybe even war), and you get loads of info. If you use old aircraft for recon, and fast new for actual attack (if ever), then you have a nasty information (and thus suprise) advantage.

  12. David Webb says:

    The reason the DA continues to use the TU-95 as a strategic bomber is because all current nuclear-capable nations keep a small readiness force active as a deterrent. The TU-95 is ideal because it can stay aloft the longest of any strategic bomber in the world, and therefore has tremendous range no matter what payload it may carry.

    The reason AVMF uses the TU-95 is because as with any other naval force in the world it needs to be ready for war (which renders many complaints about its service here null). It is used by them because it can still stay aloft for a tremendous time at very low altitude and also at high altitude, making it an ideal aircraft for Search And Rescue, Anti-Submarine Warfare, and Anti-Ship Warfare- this was an original design of the aircraft: it is not at all meant to be only a strategic bomber.

    The reason GRU utilizes the TU-95 is also the same. Since this aircraft can sustain the longest flight time of any in the world, it is perfect for gathering loiter-intelligence- both over a battlefield and over strategic civil and military areas.

    Just another helpful hint from the All-Seeing Pie-In-The-Sky. Hope you don’t mind.

  13. Bill USA says:

    Yea, long flight, but thrust from turbo jets like the B-52 allow more payload.

    By the time you make two trips with big fuel economy, a B-52 already dropped as much in less time to its frist trip than the turbo-prop on its first sortie, so there may not be anything left to refuel it, or re-arm it for a second sortie anyhow. Besides, the B-1, and the Soviet Tupolev Tu-160 obsoleted both the B-52, and the Bear.

    Let’s just be glad they never wound up using all of them to their full potentials or we wouldn’t be here chatting away on this site, we’d all been dead.

  14. Rich says:

    lol, navigating antiquated airplanes with slide rules ….
    Note to Russian friends ….. best not to brag about Russia’s superior technology when these sort of vids still exist, makes you look foolish.

  15. Anirut says:

    Just passed by and watched vdo.Thank you.

  16. metha says:

    Interesting VDO like in the movie but I doubted that it’s still working right now.

  17. What a blogpost!! Very informative and also easy to understand. Looking for more such posts!! Do you have a twitter?
    I recommended it on digg. The only thing that it’s missing is a bit of speed, the pictures are appearing slowly. However thank you for this information.

  18. Leora Kamm says:

    Is their any one still have interest in the G.I. Bill? I recall we seemed to hear of it regularly, years ago.. these days it would appear that you may not even hear it commercialized on the tv and radio like it once was. Is it forgotten for now, and not viewed as an inducement to participate the armed service?

Leave a Reply