Russian Tu-160 "White Swan" Bomber Deemed Too Costly and Impractical for India's Current Defence Needs

Russian Tu-160 White Swan Bomber Deemed Too Costly and Impractical for India's Current Defence Needs


A high-ranking Indian Air Force (IAF) official has revealed that India has little interest in acquiring the Russian Tu-160 strategic bomber. Despite the aircraft being indirectly offered, the IAF appears to be deterred by the anticipated high operational costs and the lack of suitable infrastructure within India to support such a fleet.

The Tu-160, known as the "White Swan" or "Blackjack" by NATO, is one of the world's largest and most powerful strategic bombers. While its advanced capabilities, including its ability to carry a range of nuclear and conventional munitions over long distances, are impressive, they come with a hefty price tag.

The IAF official indicated that the significant investment required for the maintenance, operation, and lifecycle management of these sophisticated aircraft might not be justifiable given India's current budgetary constraints and strategic priorities.

Beyond the initial acquisition cost, estimated at $163 million per unit, the expenses associated with operating the Tu-160 are substantial. Specialized training would be needed for pilots and crew to handle the aircraft's unique features, including its variable-sweep wings and complex avionics.

Furthermore, the cost of spare parts and ongoing maintenance would place a considerable burden on the defence budget.

Another major obstacle is the lack of adequate infrastructure in India to support a fleet of Tu-160 bombers. These aircraft require specialized facilities, including large hangars, extended runways, and secure locations.

India's current airbases are primarily designed for lighter, tactical aircraft, not heavy bombers like the Tu-160. Adapting existing bases or constructing new ones would entail a significant infrastructural overhaul, adding to the costs and logistical challenges.

The IAF's current focus appears to be on modernizing its existing fleet with multirole combat aircraft, enhancing its missile defence capabilities, and investing in drones and other asymmetric warfare tools that offer greater versatility and align better with contemporary warfare strategies.

The strategic need for heavy bombers like the Tu-160 does not seem to be a priority within India's current military doctrine, which emphasizes regional defence and deterrence rather than intercontinental strategic bombing capabilities.

While the Tu-160 is undoubtedly a formidable aircraft, its acquisition appears to be impractical for India at this time. The high costs, logistical challenges, and lack of suitable infrastructure, combined with the IAF's current strategic priorities, make it an unsuitable choice for India's defence needs.
 
Click to expand...
Again the more expensive rafale they find vital. Then Airforce should invest in making and developing hypersonic of aircraft.
 
Rafale is 36 for 8 billion usd. 200 usd per plane, but it is a multi role aircraft. TU160 is only a strategic bomber with long range and heavy payload capability.
 
IF IAF not interested in TU-160 then how we will respond to Chinese H-6 and H-20 bombers ? We should buy B-1B now and B-21 in future !
 
I think it is more suitable for Navy for long range maritime strike role. IAF won't need it as all enemies of ours are near our border. We won't need a plane to strike in Africa or Europe
 
Tu 160 can carry 12 missiles and can be fired from safe distance. Need al least 6 Tu-160 for special operations. IAF should consider this bomber.
 
Rajesh said:
IF IAF not interested in TU-160 then how we will respond to Chinese H-6 and H-20 bombers ? We should buy B-1B now and B-21 in future !
Click to expand...
You will never get B21. B21 is nuclear capable and not even the Nato allies will be able to buy it. The range of the aircraft is too much and US wouldn't trust its stealth in anyone's hands. Maybe, just maybe UK might be able to buy it but I don't even think they are interested to buy such an expensive plane.

B-1B on the other is very much possible to acquire for cheap too since its old.
 
With some negotiations, B1 bomber might get offered to India. B1 is vastly superior to Tu160. But B1 is old, and I am not sure how much life is left in them. B1 are being retired soon and its the only NON nuclear capable bomber in US arsenal which could be exported as the tech is quite old.
 
Sumon Roy said:
Tu 160 can carry 12 missiles and can be fired from safe distance. Need al least 6 Tu-160 for special operations. IAF should consider this bomber.
Click to expand...
This is not a great option for bomber. I would rather buy B1 instead. B1's engines are much better and its equipped with much better sensors and weapons(non hypersonic). Tu-160 has better arsenal of missiles but B1 has better variety of weapons including glide bombs and anti ship and anti radiation missiles.
 
Anything it can do can be done with long range missiles anyways such bombers are difficult to maintain and defend in a contended airspace

Even Americans use their bombers only after they have achieved complete Air superiority. Something that would be difficult in an Indo-china or Indo-Pak conflict
 
The TU 160 strategic bomber - or for that matter the B21 or any such platform, which in any case is highly unlikely to be offered - would be a misfit for India. These are platforms suited to cold-war style deterrence, and being rapidly overtaken by advances in ground based air defence systems and unmanned aircraft technology. The US and China do persist with the notion of long range manned strategic bombers but it is crazy to think in terms of the sort of all out Armageddon type war for which such platforms are intended, when clearly no one in any country wants such an eventuality to arise. It is also notable that their platforms (the B21 and the H20) emphasize stealth rather than speed and are of an entirely new generation compared to the TU 160.

In any case it is difficult to envisage a scenario where India will send a manned heavy bomber thousands of kilometres into heavily defended enemy airspace. If at all a strike mission at those ranges (that cannot be accomplished by missiles) is required then unmanned stealth aircraft such as the Ghatak might be a much more suitable option. Above all, given the dismal performance of India’s aircraft procurement system, it is best to focus on really important needs such as fighter aircraft, tankers, AWACS and the like.
 
Last edited:
The Tupolev Tu-160 is a highly respected combat aircraft, known for its supersonic capabilities and ability to carry a heavy payload of nuclear and conventional missiles. Acquiring a fleet of 24 Tu-160s would boost India's military capabilities, especially considering the ongoing border tensions with China.
The Tu-160's ability to carry 25+ BrahMos-2K hypersonic nuke warhead carrying missiles, which can reach speeds of mach 9+ and increase kinetic energy by six times, would be a game-changer in terms of deterrence and strike capabilities. However, the feasibility of India acquiring the Tu-160 from Russia remains unclear, and the cost of acquiring and maintaining such a fleet would be substantial.
 
India needs bombers just for China (eastern regions) as most of Pakistan is within strike range using air superiority aircrafts such as Su30mki. However buying these long range bombers might spook US and Europe added with sanctions for buying russian stuff. Worse part if IAF shows even a little interest then HAL and ADA will jump in pitching in to build bombers indigenously and then never delivering for decades.
 
Rajesh said:
IF IAF not interested in TU-160 then how we will respond to Chinese H-6 and H-20 bombers ? We should buy B-1B now and B-21 in future !
Click to expand...
Bombers don't fight against bombers. It isn't immediate need such a fighter aircrafts.
 
This is such a big mistake. This bomber is cheaper than a Rafale jet and it can carry out more strikes and destroy more targets in one sortie than a Rafale jet can.

India needs the capability to conduct more heavy strikes which only a bomber can do. China is a large country and in a war we need the capability to fly longer ranges and hit military bases, infrastructure, communications, military production facilities, ammunition storage facilities, key production facilities, economic facilities, transportation infrastructure etc.

India should also learn how to operate a bomber, know the technology requirements, different type of weapons capability as well. In future this means that we can then learn how to 100% indigenously design, develop and manufacture our own bombers in the near future.

Even if the bomber is too expensive to buy then we can always lease around 6-12 bombers for a long term which will allow us to learn, operate and then develop our own bomber. Leasing them would be more affordable without having to make a large and expensive acquisition.
 
Sandeep said:
This is such a big mistake. This bomber is cheaper than a Rafale jet and it can carry out more strikes and destroy more targets in one sortie than a Rafale jet can.
Click to expand...
Why not build 1000 more missiles ? Why do you need manned missions in this missile world ?
 
bonito said:
Why not build 1000 more missiles ? Why do you need manned missions in this missile world ?
Click to expand...
Missiles can’t change positions or manoeuvre in different directions if it was going to be intercepted by a SAM but a bomber or a jet can certainly do that to avoid getting intercepted by a SAM missile.
 
Rajesh said:
IF IAF not interested in TU-160 then how we will respond to Chinese H-6 and H-20 bombers ? We should buy B-1B now and B-21 in future !
Click to expand...
We can buy 2nd hand b21bomber from USA, I THINK OFFER IS ON TABLE BUT IT WILL BE COSTLIER THAN RUSSIAN
 
Similar threads Most view View more

Featured News

Latest Replies

Trending Content

Forum statistics

Threads
3,629
Messages
38,485
Members
2,468
Latest member
kp435
Back
Top