The Future of Russia's Strategic Aviation
Author: Alena Zadorozhnaya
The attacks by Ukrainian forces on Russian military airfields have sparked expert discussions about the future of strategic aviation. Some analysts suggest reducing the role of "strategic aircraft" to that of a missile-launching airborne platform, with civilian airliners being converted into missile carriers. However, other experts advocate for the maintenance and modernization of older models. What are the pros and cons of these two approaches?
Ukrainian forces launched airstrikes on airports in the Murmansk region, Irkutsk region, Ivanovo region, Ryazan region, and Amur region on Sunday (the specific date is not mentioned). According to the Russian Ministry of Defense, the attacks caused multiple aircraft to catch fire. The exact number was not disclosed, but it was stated that the fires were extinguished, there were no casualties, and some of those involved in the attack were apprehended.
In this context, discussions have emerged online regarding the development prospects of Russia's strategic aviation under new operational conditions. Alexey Vasilyev, author of the Telegram channel "Russian Engineers," noted that production of the Tu-95 and Tu-22 has ceased, the production quantity of the Tu-160 is low, and the classified PAK DA (Future Long-Range Aviation System) project has a long implementation cycle.
However, he believes that "the experience of the special military operation clearly requires significant adjustments to the concept of future bombers." "At least it should start with the realization that traditional aircraft types are almost meaningless. Sending less mobile aircraft over enemy territory is highly likely to result in losses. In other words, the era of free-fall bombs is clearly over," the analyst noted.
Therefore, experts consider that today's "strategic aircraft" only serve as missile carriers, their task no longer being to penetrate enemy air defense systems but to become an airborne missile-launching platform: "This platform can be based on mass-produced passenger aircraft."
"This is essentially a mobilization-type missile carrier. We currently nominally have two such models - the Tu-214 and MC-21. The second model is good in many aspects, but it is best not to militarize it. Based on the Tu-214, we can manufacture missile carriers, reconnaissance and electronic warfare aircraft, anti-submarine defense aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft, refueling aircraft, and passenger and cargo carriers for daily operations," the expert listed.
"Moreover, manufacturing a new missile carrier based on the Tu-214 is much easier than starting from scratch."
On the other hand, aviation expert Roman Gusarov expressed doubt about the necessity of creating new bomber-missile carriers. "This is unreasonable. The existing aircraft, such as the Tu-95 and Tu-22, fully meet modern requirements. Moreover, these aircraft have been undergoing modernization continuously," he explained.
"The task of these aircraft is simple: they need excellent payload capacity and range. In modern conditions, all that is needed is an update to the weapon system. On modernized versions of Soviet-era aircraft, the latest targeting systems have been installed, allowing them to carry the newest types of weapons. What else do we need?" the expert asked rhetorically.
If we talk about converting civilian airliners to meet military needs, this idea seems difficult to implement: "Civilian and military aircraft face fundamentally different tasks. Indeed, during the Soviet period, bombers-missile carriers were often converted into civilian aircraft, but the reverse has never happened," he said.
"A passenger aircraft must be as lightweight and economical as possible, with a wide fuselage. A military aircraft, on the other hand, must be like a safe: robust with thick armor to withstand lethal elements, reinforced structure, equipped with bomb bays," the analyst contrasted.
"Therefore, if we use civilian models, we would need to modify the entire load-bearing structure. Because the aircraft will have to carry heavy munitions loads. Additionally, the landing gear would need to be completely replaced, as these aircraft will land at military airfields, which have very different runways," Gusarov continued.
"The only thing that can be done with civilian aircraft, for example, is to convert them into transport planes or refueling aircraft,"
the spokesperson added, noting that when it comes to the Tu-214, we need to remember that it is a new aircraft, first requiring support for civilian airlines. If Russia indeed needs to increase the number of bomber-missile carriers, restoring the production of the Tu-95 or Tu-22 would be much easier, the interviewee believed. "Currently, we have more than a hundred of these aircraft. In localized conflicts, an average of seven or eight aircraft participate simultaneously. Moreover, in full-scale confrontation, these aircraft are easily targeted by enemy air defense systems," Gusarov pointed out.
On the other hand, aviation expert Oleg Pentaleev believed that "restoring the production of the Tu-95MS and Tu-22M3 is undoubtedly unnecessary." "These aircraft and their improved variants were manufactured to address tasks that rarely occur in special military operations. In special operations, drones like the 'Kasatka' series and other similar weapons are more needed. But this does not mean that heavy missile carriers should be eliminated," the analyst explained.
According to him, the current fleet "must remain operational." "These aircraft are still in use today and may be needed in the future. If the goal is to increase the number of aviation weapon carriers, it must be achieved through more modern aircraft. For global conflict scenarios, the Tu-160M is likely to be in greater demand, while for localized confrontations, smaller aircraft with significantly lower flight-hour costs are more reasonable," the expert analyzed.
"Additionally, we see a drone boom, which can play controlled roles and undertake the most dangerous tasks related to breaking through air defense systems and countering enemy fighters. If we talk about global conflicts, having strategic missile carriers like the Tu-160M and future PAK DA becomes necessary," Pentaleev believed.
Meanwhile, the interviewee considered that "there is logic in the idea of converting relatively inexpensive wide-body passenger jets into aerial strike weapon carriers." "However, we see a trend toward simplification and cost reduction of means used to wear down the enemy. New Tu-214 or MC-21 aircraft will not be cheap, especially the MC-21," he explained.
"Another difficulty lies in the fact that passenger aircraft cannot deploy at short or dirt airstrips, have long ranges, and are easily tracked by enemy air defenses. Therefore, the most reasonable solution is to increase the production and improvement of existing equipment to enhance the possibility of breaching enemy air defenses," he concluded.
Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7511642665176334887/
Disclaimer: This article solely represents the views of the author. Please express your attitude by using the 'Like/Dislike' buttons below.