Pakistan Strategic Bombers planes

[Luffy 500]

Strategic bombers are worthless in today's age. Ballatic missiles and hypersonic cruise missiles are the way to go. Bombers have
lost their strategic significance with increasing advancement of air defence system and multirole stealth fighters.

 

[Safriz]

Strategic bombers are worthless in today's age. Ballatic missiles and hypersonic cruise missiles are the way to go. Bombers have
lost their strategic significance with increasing advancement of air defence system and multirole stealth fighters.

Strategic bombers are for long range and carpet bombing.
Missiles cant do that.

 

[Dr. NooB NinjA]

Some people are of the opinion that multi role fighters can also do the role of a strategic bomber.. But I dont think the fire power they pack will be equal,, Can some1 shed light on this aspect please?? As in firepower of a multi-role aircraft vs a strategic bomber??

 

[graphican]

I guess PAF never need them and they don't even wanna go for them, instead we are going for the Missile developments.......cuz they are our real asets......

A nuclear tipped missile would do several times more damage than a bomber. They don't suite our doctrine or need of wars. If you have go to, go for Air Superiority Fighters to balance India more but bomber is a no need no use article.

 

[DV RULES]

I love this Tu-95 Bear Bomber type, man. This plane continue routinely almost every weeks near US borders/Alaska in order to scare enemies. Even US can't do anything to shoot down, only intercept it. We need to have this asset seriously.

Come into real world, but everybody is free to dream Like thinking to get B-52, Tu-95.

 

[Wright]

That TU bear has pics of being intercepted by US phantoms, F14, F15, and older ones throughout different decades.

 

[GR!FF!N]

Some people are of the opinion that multi role fighters can also do the role of a strategic bomber.. But I dont think the fire power they pack will be equal,, Can some1 shed light on this aspect please?? As in firepower of a multi-role aircraft vs a strategic bomber??

Multirole fighter doesn't have the range or the payload comparable to a strategic bomber..though its funny,but still.....lets compare few very capable Strategic Bomber operational with some advanced Multirole Fighter..



..................B2..............B 52..............Tu-95................B1...............Tu-160........ Tu-22M

Range(km)..11112..........19300.............8000(un-refueled)..10460.........12,300........5,100-6,800 (they are in various payload)

Payload.....23,000 kg......31,500 kg.......15,000 kg........34,000 kg..........40,000 kg.....24,000 kg


now some multi role fighters......

...............F-18..............EF...........Rafale............Su-30 mkk

Range......2,346 km.......3,790km.....3,700+ km.......3000 km

Payload....8000kg..........7500 kg.....9,500 kg........app. 10000 kg


multirole fighter is not designed to do strategic bomber's job..and they simply can't perform their job.but in certain scenario,multirole fighter is better a2g option than strategic bomber.

 

[pakfoj]

I think PAF is focusing on missiles for such missions. The purpose of bombers is to go into enemy territory and destroy a specific location, or area. looking at the missile tests of babur, raad, and nasar recently I think PAF wants to use missiles for these king of missions. plus using stealth missiles is much more cheaper and effective than buying a whole fleet of bomber aircraft.

 

[MilSpec]

IN TU 142 don't carry KH 55 (due to MTCR)

sorry meant KH 59

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

The strategic bomber has more flexibility to intimidate your opponents, while in a real nuclear exchange, the ICBM and the SSBN are the only way to go.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

PAF should have bought the bombers that the british retired a few years ago----. Smart missiles are good when you have a sh-it load of them---but in the end---you still need the bombers---.

You want to drop some heavy load that the missiles cannot take---like the daisy cutters and the likes---or just simply carpet bombings---.

 

[Zarvan]

It will be complete waste of money first we need to complete number of JF-17 which we have decided and also J-10 B and also we need third Multi Role Fighter Planes and we need these planes in larger numbers so we need to get them before spending money on something else

 

[Super Falcon]

I think we should have small fleet of bombers around 20 to 25 will do whole let better because we have more options in war than nothing JH 7 A is best for pakistan airforce carry heavy bombs with speed around 15 of these and 10 regular bombers like Tu 160 blackjack will do wonders for pakistan and russia china USA are nor mad keeping them and india to why not pakistan

 

[MastanKhan]

Heavy bombers would have done wonders in fata----.

I believe that most of us are taken aback by smart bombs and pin point hits---but sometimes the shear number of blasts one after the other breaks the psyche of the man on the ground---you can have babur cruise missile launched from air which may double its range---or more than double----.

There is nothing like the strike run of a heavy bomber--it gives diversity to the cruise missile program and gives you a serious knock out punch---a sqdrn of heavy bombers is technically of more strength than 50 JF17's.

But not to be mixed---both aircraft have their place---a bomber cannot be taken out of the picture.

 

[Zabaniyah]

mmm...very tricky. Countries don't normally export strategic bombers these days. Not even to their allies.

Best course is to develop one in-house. Don't assume it'd be easy! But yes, bombers can send cold feet to the enemy and those around you.

india operating 4 of these since 2001..

Tupolev Tu-22M - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Russia offered them in 2005,though no confirm news on that later..
http://www.defence talk/russia-offers-tu-22m3-strategic-bombers-to-india-4373/

(please erase the space between defence and talk to go to the site)

also india navy is operating tu-142(derived from a tu-95 strategic bomber) and will carry brahmos..
Indian Naval Air Arm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Those are mainly for maritime recon purposes.