Defence Expert Analyzes Costs and Benefits of Tu-160 "White Swan" Bombers for India, Highlights Potential in Countering China

The potential acquisition of long-range strategic bombers, such as the Russian Tu-160 "White Swan", has ignited a debate within India's defence circles.

Defence analyst VatsRohit recently weighed in on the advantages and disadvantages of such a move, highlighting the strategic flexibility offered by these aircraft, but also emphasizing the significant financial implications.

VatsRohit argues that the Tu-160, with its supersonic speed, intercontinental range, and massive payload capacity, would provide "tremendous capability and flexibility of employment" for India. The bomber could function as a "missile truck," capable of launching long-range cruise missiles at critical enemy targets from various locations within India's airspace. This would allow India to hold adversaries at risk across a vast geographical area, significantly enhancing its strategic deterrence.

A fleet of 10-12 Tu-160s, VatsRohit suggests, could enable India to strike targets deep within Chinese territory from multiple launch points. He emphasizes that the operational reach of these bombers is "limited only by the range of the missiles which it carries," potentially allowing them to operate from states like Himachal Pradesh, Bihar, Assam, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh.

However, the acquisition of such a fleet comes with a hefty price tag. Each Tu-160 is estimated to cost at least $250 million, bringing the total cost of a 12-bomber fleet to around $3 billion, excluding operational and maintenance expenses. This raises questions about cost-effectiveness and strategic priorities.

VatsRohit acknowledges that India could instead invest in a robust arsenal of land-based ballistic, quasi-ballistic, and cruise missiles for the same amount. While these missiles offer a cost-effective deterrent, they require significant supporting infrastructure and are vulnerable to preemptive strikes due to their fixed locations.

The Tu-160's key advantage lies in its mobility. Unlike fixed missile bases, which are known to adversaries, the Tu-160 could be based in locations like Nagpur and Thanjavur during peacetime and deployed across India in times of conflict. This mobility provides a significant strategic advantage, enabling a dispersed and unpredictable deterrent.

Beyond land-based missions, the Tu-160 could also contribute to maritime security. Its range and payload capacity would allow it to deter Chinese naval forces in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). Equipped with anti-ship missiles, the Tu-160 could target hostile fleets before they enter the IOR, a task that would require multiple refueling sorties for existing aircraft like the Su-30MKI.

Despite the Tu-160's strategic advantages, VatsRohit cautions that the decision must be weighed against India's other defence needs. He notes that a robust missile system can cover many of the same targets at a lower cost, especially with India's missile program developing systems with ranges exceeding 1,000 kilometers.

Ultimately, the acquisition of a Tu-160 fleet would represent a major shift in India's air power capabilities. While offering significant flexibility and firepower, the high cost necessitates careful consideration of long-term defence priorities.

 

[sanket]

100 times I have said Bharat should buy at least a dozen bombers, and these are affordable too. If this platform can be for multiple missions apart from air-launched missiles, such as maritime security with equipping anti-ship missiles, second, Bharat can buy MQ-9 Reaper. But don't have the budget for buying these bombers... Amazing. I think Bharat should go for one full squadron of these bombers. 6 are enough for Pakistan & a dozen for China.

 

[Radha Ramanan]

The days of manned bombers are gone, if some one has a fancy idea no problem. Bombers make sense when they are stealthy and are a part of a strike force with awacs, jammers, fighters etc. The will be simply shot out of the sky with long range SAMS.
These massive bombers are a piece of cake for modern radars as they have massive RCS, they would be picked up nearly a 1000km away our own netra awacs can easily detect airborne targets 400km away. Leave alone modern US aesa awacs.
They were all built to deliver nuclear weapons not conventional. Every body know the best fool proof way with a larger percentage of success is by a ballistic missile stirke.

 

[shivkumar sinha]

The days of manned bombers are gone, if some one has a fancy idea no problem. Bombers make sense when they are stealthy and are a part of a strike force with awacs, jammers, fighters etc. The will be simply shot out of the sky with long range SAMS.
These massive bombers are a piece of cake for modern radars as they have massive RCS, they would be picked up nearly a 1000km away our own netra awacs can easily detect airborne targets 400km away. Leave alone modern US aesa awacs.
They were all built to deliver nuclear weapons not conventional. Every body know the best fool proof way with a larger percentage of success is by a ballistic missile stirke.

Not at all. Strategic bombers like Tu-160 can jam long range SAMs. This can not only attack targets in western China with long range cruise and hypersonic missiles, they can threaten and destroy targets in Eastern China from East China sea and Western pacific also. Strategic bombers are critical requirements for Bharat.

 

[Hey]

100 times I have said Bharat should buy at least a dozen bombers, and these are affordable too. If this platform can be for multiple missions apart from air-launched missiles, such as maritime security with equipping anti-ship missiles, second, Bharat can buy MQ-9 Reaper. But don't have the budget for buying these bombers... Amazing. I think Bharat should go for one full squadron of these bombers. 6 are enough for Pakistan & a dozen for China.

Why we need Bombers for Pakistan rather invest that money on making missiles, For China we need bombers for the NAVY to tackle enemy vessels entering in Indian Ocean....

Modern Radars can track these 5 decades old technology, also it is also not in the priority list of the 3 forces..

 

[Sandeep]

India should get about 8-12 bombers because they are very important.

1) They can hit more targets than what jets can on one mission
2) They can quickly change positions across the country and can be deployed flexibly
3) We get to learn how to operate a bomber, learn how to use them effectively, learn different tactics in using them among jets
4) Learn about the technology involved, learn how to operate the technology
5) Learn about it’s weapons capabilities, what type of weapons can be used, limitations of the weapons
6) We can learn about all these requirements and technology which will help us on how to design, develop and manufacture our own indigenous bombers in future which will be essential to increase our fire power.

While it’s equally important to develop our own ballistic, cruise, subsonic and hypersonic missiles and MIRV missiles there are limitations on relying just on them.

1) They can be intercepted by SAM
2) Not as flexible or quick to deploy if we need to change positions across India
3) Should mainly be used with nuclear warheads only to destroy an entire city
4) If we use it without nuclear warheads then the missile might not be accurate enough to hit key targets
5) Can’t change its trajectory or positions during its flight if we need to avoid it being intercepted by a SAM so far although we are trying to develop that technology

Looking at these main points it makes sense to operate some bombers as we need to increase our fire power and offensive missions. If the purchase, maintenance and operating expenses are too high then we should lease the bombers which is a more affordable solution. This gives us the capabilities and fire power without the huge expense.

The only problem now is that the war in Ukraine will delay any deliveries or they might refuse it as they might want to keep it for their own use. There’s also the possibility of facing sanctions from the USA for buying the bombers as it might seem like it’s a significant defence deal.

 

[Akshat]

Not at all. Strategic bombers like Tu-160 can jam long range SAMs. This can not only attack targets in western China with long range cruise and hypersonic missiles, they can threaten and destroy targets in Eastern China from East China sea and Western pacific also. Strategic bombers are critical requirements for Bharat.

To threaten China, you need to have usable bombers. If we have something like B21, then sure. But the bombers on offer are practically useless for us as they can’t penetrate the contested airspace. Their effectiveness is not close to what the ballistic missiles can offer already. Plus we first need our bomber fleet in place before we look for other stuff.

And this is not my thinking, this is IAF’s official stance as of now.

 

[shivkumar sinha]

To threaten China, you need to have usable bombers. If we have something like B21, then sure. But the bombers on offer are practically useless for us as they can’t penetrate the contested airspace. Their effectiveness is not close to what the ballistic missiles can offer already. Plus we first need our bomber fleet in place before we look for other stuff.

And this is not my thinking, this is IAF’s official stance as of now.

I agree with some of your points like vulnerability of non stealthy bombers. But mere presence of a few dozen bombers will have a great deterrent effect on our northern adversary. With new administration in US, it can be expected that B-21 and F-35 may find its way to IAF.

 

[Akshat]

I agree with some of your points like vulnerability of non stealthy bombers. But mere presence of a few dozen bombers will have a great deterrent effect on our northern adversary. With new administration in US, it can be expected that B-21 and F-35 may find its way to IAF.

Well if we are getting something like B21, yes it can be a good deterrent. But that’s not gonna be on offer.

Secondly, you evaluate options for the total work done. As of now, what the bombers can do can be achieved by missiles. Maybe not 100%, but to a significant enough level to create uncertainty in the mind of the northern enemy. I mean, has China reached a level where they can be sure that our nukes can be intercepted by them with 100% certainty? No. Now for the acquisition cost of 20 such bombers alone (bombers, infra, training and stuff), you can probably get some 1000 Agni 5 level missiles (warheads excluded). Add in the fact that you will buy cruise missiles, maintain the platforms and train the pilots, you can probably get 2000-3000 missiles. Can China intercept even 90%? Doubtful. So right now the bang for the buck would be with buying more missiles, maybe more submarines and even more fighters. We haven’t reached the stage yet where the return on these items gets lower than the return on bombers.