Here is a response by Sergei Ivanov, from Defense Talk.Com:

http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/airforce/Russia_to_West_bomber_flights_are_not_return_to_Cold_War100013071.php

“MOSCOW (AFP): Russia said on Thursday that its return to the Soviet-era practice of sending strategic bombers on long-range flights was not a return to the Cold War.

“This isn’t connected with thinking in terms of blocs or conflicts, let along a return to the Cold War,” first deputy prime minister Sergei Ivanov said during a visit to Kemerovo in southern Siberia, news agency ITAR-TASS reported.

“This is an ordinary working situation. There are no conflicts. We are flying by the same transparent, understandable rules as our American partners.”

Russia President Vladimir Putin announced last week that Russia was resuming regular bomber flights far beyond its borders, a practice that had stopped in 1992 as Russia’s military crumbled following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Russian bombers had been making increasingly frequent flights toward US territory in the lead-up to Putin’s announcement, while Britain and Norway had repeatedly scrambled jets to intercept Russian planes near their airspace.

Ivanov said Russia had resumed the bomber flights “so Russian pilots can acquire professional experience…. There is nothing at all to worry about.”

I suspect what we are really seeing are aerodynamic research vehicles for gaining real-world experience in the actual design and manufacture of supersonic aircraft. This in turn could lead to an Iranian “Hornet” or somesuch……….but I think we are then talking at least a few years or more. Even if the avionics and engines are not going to be domestic, then integration of the various techs will take time (just like the Chinese aerospace industry). Foreign help could speed things up, but there is no substitute for actual experience.

In the final analysis, the aircraft are interesting but not militarily significant,
IMO. :diablo:

Cheers…….

I suspect it had to do with money and that it terms of nuclear strike,
the subs with their missiles were more survivable. The conventional
bombing and strike roles were handed-off to cheaper platforms, so
the Vulcans were retired.

Now, whether this was the ‘right’ decision or not………that is
another question. :rolleyes:

##No idea.. I am not even interested in exact type or exact aircraft/submarine(?) which could have fired it as I won’t chave a chance to figure it out, anyway.##

If one knows the type of missile, one can deduce the launching
platform. An ASM of the size needed (Have Nap? ALCM? Harpoon?
etc.) would require a launch aircraft configured to handle such
missiles, which leads one to conclude a launch aircraft such as F-15E,
B-2, B-1, B-52, P-3, or F-18. Ships launching cruise missiles would
have certainly been detected, though subs less so. Only certain ships
and subs carry SLCM or Harpoon, so these could also be accounted
for, just like the aircraft.

Additionally, cruise missiles would have certainly been heard/seen by
the civilian population because of their low altitude/speed and the
high probability of overflying populated areas.

Rational critique must be applied to BOTH pro-governmental/military
conspiracy theories AND those more commonly received, if we are
to communicate our positions without just relying upon belief. If one
is going to posit a missile conspiracy, one must give some sort of
evidence.

Negating someone else´s evidence is not offering supporting
evidence for one´s own theories. :diablo:

Any input from military people on the actual systems required to
actually attack the Pentagon under such circumstances and HOW
this could be done would be greatly appreciated. 🙂

happy trails,

Shivering

Leaving aside the fact that my father works in the Pentagon, saw
the plane as he was leaving (my mother warned him by cellphone
of the attack in NY and demanded he come home asap), and saw
a cab behind his car (there was a line of cars trying to leave the
Pentagon, pre-impact) get hit by shrapnel from the explosion……
leaving all that aside……..Let us try a different approach to this
question of conspiracy. IF the Pentagon was hit by a missile…….
WHO launched it? WHERE did it come from? Exactly what MODEL of
of missile was it? The missile would have to have been a fairly large
one (going by the amount of damage/penetration), which means
an aircraft with an ability to lift a large weapon OR it was a cruise
missile launched from a ship/sub. Which could mean the delivery
craft was detected by someone who was not in on the conspiracy,
unless the conspiracy is HUGE and very pervasive.

Looking forward to your responses.

Shivering

“And dont forget the F-102 and perhaps the F-106 too.”

Did the F-102 ever have a gun? I know that in its later days the F-106 could be fitted with the Vulcan 20mm rotary cannon, but I’ve never run across any info about the Delta Dagger being a ‘gunfighter’. Got any pics?

Shivering

Bear vs. Buff

I remember seeing in an old aircraft book (from the 60’s, IIRC)
that had B-52 design studies. One was a very Bear-ish looking
four turboprop version, supposedly in case the new turbojet
technology did not mature swiftly enough. Have not been able to
find pics or drawings yet. Can anyone help?

Shivering