Download pdf - Aerofax Tupolev Tu-16 Badger

TupolevTu-16 Badger

Versatile Soviet Long-Range Bomber

Yefim Gordon and Vladimir Rigmant

Monthly

TI.TE AV IATI O N

O Unbeatabte coverage of the comptete aviation scene -

mititary civil, both past and present by leading journatists

O Unrivatted coverage of the airshow scene - news' previews,

interviews, 'in cockpit' reports and much more

O Stunning images from the wortd's top aviation

photographers, inctuding many exctusives from John Dibbs

O Special supplements

O Major competitions and much more

MA EA.ZINE WITH EVERYTHINa !

Cambat

AIRCPIAFT Bi-monthrv

oo

Enjoy unmatched anatysis of the wortd's militaryaircraft and the forces that fly them

Over 100 fabutous action photographs every issue.

taken by some of the best photographers on the ptane'r

Magnificent cotour artwork, plus detaited cutawavs

Simpty the best coverage of men, the machines arc :ê

missions that make up today's wortd of mititary a"'a:':-

TI.IE WORI.,D'S I,EADIN6 MILITARY AVIATION MAEAZ'INE!

tK

TupolevTu-l 6 Badger

Versatile Soviet Long-Range Bomber

q-*

y:,rfff*!,i.'" ,,,'. r'

Yefim Gordon and Vladimir Rigmant

ffiAn impdnt of

lan Allan Publishing

Tupolev Tu-16:Versatile Soviet Long-Range Bomber@ 2004 Yefim Gordon and Vladimir Rigmant

tsBN 1 85780 1 77 6

Published by Midland Publishing4 Watling Drive, Hinckley, LE10 3EY, EnglandTel: 01455 254 490 Fax: 01455 254 495E-mail: [email protected]

Midland Publishing and Aerofax are imprints oflan Allan Publishing Ltd

W o rldw ide d i stri b uti o n (except North Ame ri ca) :

lvlidland Counties Publications4 Watling Drive, Hinckley, LE10 3EY, England

Telephone: 01 455 254 450 Fax: 01 455 233 737

E-mail: midlandbooks@compuserve,comwww. midlandcountiessuperstore.com

N orth American trade d i str i butt o n :

Specialty Press Publishers & Wholesalers lnc.

39966 Grand Avenue, North Branch, MN 55056Tel 651 277 1400 Fax: 651 277 1203Toll free telephone: 800 895 4585www.specialtypress.com

Title page: A pair of Tu-16K-10s is serviced inan earthen revetment at a Soviet Navy airbase,Note the concrete blast dellector behind theaircrafi in lhe background. Yefim Gordon archive

Below: Winter scene at a DA airbase as Tu-l6A'35 Red' (c/n 6203101) is prepared for a nightsortie on a floodlit hardstand.Yelim Gordon archive

Original translation by Alexander BoydEdited by Dmitriy KomissarovLine drawings by Vladimir Klimovand Andrey Sal'nikov

Design concept and layout@ 2004 l,4idland Publishing andSue Bushell

Printed in England bylan Allan Printing Ltd

Riverdene Business Park, Molesey Road

Hersham, Surrey, KT12 4RG

All rights reserved. No part of thispublication may be reproduced,stored in a retrieval system, transmittedin any form or by any means, electronic,mechanical or photo-copied, recordedor otherwise, without the writtenpermission of the publishers.

Contents

lntroduction ......3

Chapters

1 Projectsand Prototypes............ B

2 Tu- 1 6 Versions, DevelopmentandSeriesProduction ..... 18

3 Production & Experimental BombersSpecial PurposeVersions . . .. . . . . .23

4 TheMissileCarriers ........365 Reconnaissance and ECM Versions.58

6 OtherVersionsandTestbeds ......747 Structural Description .....898 TheTu-l6inService .....103

Appendix

ProductionList.... ...... ..125

Tu-l6FamilyDrawings ......... 136

The Tu-16 in Colour. . . . .145

MWs#

da - *s$€f.r -# d'

".' *, i".i'*"*'t'

The second half of the 1 940s found the aircraftindustries of the major world powers, the SovietUnion included, faced with the task of produc-ing long-range bombers powered by turbojetand turboprop engines able to fly at cruisingspeeds close to Mach 1 while retaining theload-carrying and range capabilities of aircraftIike the American Boeing B-29 Stratofortress orits Soviet analogue, the Tupolev Tu-4.

This necessity was dictated not only by thecverallthrust of progress in aviation technology

ilhe availability of gas{urbine engines andadvancements in aerodynamics), the increasedpotential of fighter aviation (the wide-scaleintroduction of jet fighters capable of speedsaround 1,000km/h) and air defence systems,,vith long-range detection radars, but also by anew weapon - the atom bomb - which enableda comparatively small number of bombers tornflict catastrophic damage on an enemy.

The United States was the Jirst to produce a

iong-range bomber powered by gasturbineengines. The Boeing B-47 Stratojet, on which,,vork was initiated in 1945, made its first flight in't947 and achieved initial operational capabilityIOC) with the US Strategic Air Command in the

early 1950s as a 'medium-range strategicccmber'. It was followed by Great Britain with,is trio of V-Bombers - the Vickers Valiant, Avro'./ulcan and Handley Page Victor - alsonedium-range strategic bombers, whichserved for many years as the basis for thetsritish nuclear deterrent.

For the USSR the production of a long-rangecomber with an operational radius up to3.000km was vitally important. Such an aircraft,vould form an effective counter, able to strike

The Boeing B-47 Stratojet (illustrated here bya 8-478 on take-off) was one of the aircraft thatsparked the Tu-16's development.,ane's All the World's Aircraft

lntroduction

at American military bases in Europe and Asia,

the political, economic and military centres ofAmerica's allies, and American and British

naval concentrations, particularly aircraft carri-

ers which presented a particular threat to the

USSR. lt would also be capable of attacking the

transatlantic supply routes, without which the

ability of America's European allies to fight aprotracted defensive war against the USSR

would be highly problematical.These naval and maritime considerations

were, it should be said, cruclal for the USSR in

developing its long-range bombers and then,from the late 1950s, equipping them to carryair-to-surface missiles. The need to counter the

West's enormous naval superiority, both in sizeand expertise, demanded the development of aclass of aircraft able to operate effectivelyagainst the surface vessels of a potentialenemy over the expanse of the world's oceans.It is for this reason that the USSR, and the Rus-

sia of today, has constantly produced and

developed this particular type of aircraft - aIong-range bomber equipped with air-to-sur-face missiles - while its potential enemies in theWest have not. From the 1950s through the'1980s the Soviet Long-Range Air Force andNaval Air Forces were equipped with a steadysuccession of such aircraft (Tu-.l6, fu-22,f u-22M), one of whose basic applications was

against naval targets, particularly aircraft carri-ers with their formidable anti-aircraft defences.

ln the West the category of medium-rangestrategic bombers and air-to-surface missilecarriers gradually died out: the B-47 was retired

in the 1960s, the handful of Convair B-58 Hus-

tler supersonic bombers were quickly with-drawn due to technical and design failings and

replaced by a Iimited number of GeneralDynamics FB-1 11As developed from the F-11 1

tactical fighter-bomber - but even these inade-quately fulfilled the role of the extinct medium-

range bomber, and currently all of them have

been reconverted back to their original role.

The British V-bombers were soon withdrawndue to design faults like the Valiant or reborn,until recently retired from service, as in-flightrefuelling tankers like the Victor and Vulcan.

The French Mirage lV nuclear bomber can, at a

stretch, be classified in this way due to its com-paratively small bomb load and relatively smallradius of operation.

Thus the USSR remained alone among theworld's major powers, designing and bulldingaircraft in the long-range bomber category with

a persistence born of its unique geopolitical and

techno-mjlitary situation, endowing them with

ever new roles, and making them a permanent,potent and continually updated response in theruthless military-political game with the Westnow known as the Cold War. For many years

one of the most prominent pieces in this gameof world chess was the Soviet Tu-16 long-rangebomber and its numerous modifications.

The Soviet Air Force Command began toformulate its requirements for a future long-range jet bomber immediately after the Tu-4

began to enter service. The category of long-range bomber powered by gas-turbine englneswith pressurised crew positions and the follow-ing preliminary specification appeared in itsplanning tor 1947-48:

Maximum speed at 1,000m 900km/h

Service ceiLing 15,000m

Range at optimum speed with

3,000k9 bomb load

Time to reach 10,000m

Take-off run

Landing run

Bomb load

normal

maximum

Crew

6,000km

10 minutes

1,200m

800m

3,000k9

20,000k9

8

Tupolev Tu1 6

Defensive armament was to consist of two

20mm or 23mm cannon with 200 rounds per

gun (rpg) in a remote-controlled turret firing

ahead; remote-controlled upper fuselage posi-

tlon with two 20mm or 23mm cannon (a0orpg);

ventral turret as for upper fuselage posiiion;

rear gun turret comprising three 20mm or

23mm cannon (400rPg).

The bomb load was io consist of all types of

bombs carried by the Tu-4, but, in addition'

provision was to be made for carrying four of

the new W-1 000 or TAV-1 000 special bombs in

the bomb bay and for delivering the forthcom-

ing Soviet atom bomb. A variant of the aircraft

was envisaged which would be able to carry a

7.000-kg air-to-surface mlssile.

The following essential radio navigation and

targeting equipment was to be installed: radar

sights for the gun positions; overall fire control

radar; OPB vector-synchronised optical bomb

sight (optiche skiy bombardi rovochnyy pritsel)

linked to the autopilot and to the bombardier's

panoramic radar; AP-S autopilot; astrocom-

pass; aircraft sextant; ARK automatic radio

compass; RV-2 low-altitude radio altimeter

(rahdiovysotomer); RV-10 high-altitude radio

altimeter; Meridian short-range radio naviga-

tion (SHORAN) system; long-range radio navi-

gation (LORAN) system; enemy radar

deteciion and counter-measures equipment;

identificaiion friend-or-foe (lFF) equipment;

radar warning receiver (RWR) aleding the crew

of enemy fighter attacks; an 'autonavigator'

(that is, navigation computer); RSB-D and

RSIU-3 communications and command radio

sets; SCR-578 emergency radio; recce cam-

At the time when the Tu'l6 came into being thepiston-engined Tu-4 (illustrated by a Kazan''builtexample, c/n 220605) made up the backbone ofthe Soviet long-range heavy bomber force' ltwas built at two ol the three factories which laterproduced the Tu-16. TuPolev JSC

Two views of the '82' (Tu-82), one of the Tupolev

Design Bureau's first attempts to create a viable

swept-wing iet bomber. Although the r82'never

progressed beyond prototype status and was

rather smaller than the Tu-'16, it provided design

experience which proved invaluable during thedevelopment of the latter aircraft. Tupolev JSC

eras comprising two AFA-33-50 or 75 cameras

(aerofotoapparaht) with plan and oblique

mountings; an auxiliary power unit based on a

generator driven by a petrol engine.

It is evident from these specifications for a

future long-range bomber that the Soviet Air

Force Command was calling for a high-speed

aircraft fitted with the very latest systems and

able to carry out missions in the teeth of strong

enemy air defences at any time of day or night,

in any weather condrtions, and in a variety of

theatres of operation. The early interest in the

aircraft's ability to carty a large air-to-surface

missile is also noteworthy.The new bomber was to replace the obsoles-

cent Tu-4 (the prototype B-29 had first flown in

fiaz) in Long-Range Aviatlon (the heavy

bomber arm of the Soviet Air Force) service in

the early 1950s. lt was already obvious, how-

ever, that the chances of breaking through the

ever-developing American air defence system

by the early 1950s were far smaller than they

would have been in 1944-45 This supposition

was soon confirmed when American B-29

bombers encountered Soviet MiG-15 fighters

over Korea in 1 951 -53, putting the further career

of piston-engined long-range and intercontinen-

tal bombers at an end. The future lay with the

turbojet and turboprop. ln both Easi and West

work on piston-engined bomber aircraft was

being wound up - development of the Tu-85 was

terminated in the USSR, and in America fudher

production of the Convair B-36 Peacemaker was

cui back - while the deployment of the American

B-47 evoked the crash programme to produce

the Tu-16, and accelerated work on the Boeing

B-52 Stratoforlress intercontlnental strategic

bomber in the USA and the Tu-95 and Mya-

sishchev M-4 in the USSR.

But before a long-range bomber able to fly at

transonic speeds could be created by Soviet

designers, a whole series of theoretical and

practical questions in the fields of aerodynam-

ics, construction and engines had to be

resolved. Without the answers, such an aircraft

could not come into being.

ln the second half of the 1940s the Soviet

Union was able to embark on the design of

sweptback wings for bomber aircraft by draw-

ing on the creation of the first swept-wing jet

fighters and the experience gained during their

testing, the results of aerodynamic tests in the

rj' l

;

Tupolev Tu-1 6

This model of the'86'project shows how thefuture Tu-16 ('88') began to take shape. The'86'combines the underwing engine installation ofits precursors with a stepped noseincorporating side-by-side seating lor the twopilots. Note the chin radome and the dorsal gunbarbette aft of the llightdeck. Andrey Yurgenson

A model of the proiected '486' tactical bomber(rhat is, 1948, project No6), showing the fighter-type cockpit lor the pilot - a common featurewith the '82' - and the lateral sighting blisters ,orthe gunner operating the ventral barbette whichare depressed to minimise drag. Tupolev JSC

wind tunnels at the Central Aero- & Hydro-dynamics lnstitute named after Nikolay YeZhukovskiy (TsAGl - Tsentrahl'nyy aero- ighidrodinamicheskiy institoot) and the studyof captured German material. ln the processthe aircraft designers had to solve a new seriesof problems in aerodynamlcs in calculating thestrength of high aspect ratio swept wings, andin studying stability and control characteristicsand the behaviour of swept wings at speedsnear the speed of sound.

One of the first experimental design bureauxto begin work on the design of bombers withswept wings and tail assemblies was theOKB-I56 design bureau (OKB = opytno-kon-strooktorskoye byuro) led by Andrey Niko-layevich Tupolev. The bureau, with the aidof colleagues from TsAGI and leading special-ists in the field of aircraft structural strength,designed, built and bench tested wing modelswith varying degrees of sweepback andrigidity. Research was undertaken into a wingwith 35'sweep and an aspect ratio of between6 and 1 1. The calculations for the root sectionof the sweptback wing posed particular prob-lems for the structural strength speclalistssince, in the preferred two-spar structure, theforward spar was longer than the rear spar andcarried the greater load. The distribution ofstress flows in the wing centre section boxand outer wing panels were studied in detailby structural speclalists at TsAGI under A M

Cheryomukhin, using paper models, thenmetal models. The test results were used toformulate an engineering methodology forsweptback wings and tail surfaces. S N Kan, I ASverdlov and V F Kiselyov, eminent TsAGIexpefts on structural strength, also contributedto this research work. As a result, when theTupolev OKB started work on designing its firstswept-wing bombers it already possessed anunderstanding of how the wing structure wouldbehave and a formulated methodology for itsdesign.

The 'aircraft 82' lu-82), which passedits factory flight tests, was the first Soviet tac-tical bomber with a swept wing. lt was fol-lowed by the '83', '486', '86', '87', and'491'designs which were projects only, but thecumulative experience gained enabled theOKB to go to produce the outstanding Tu-16long-range bomber.

ln the spring of 1948 the Tupolev OKB beganwork on an experimental swept-wing tacticalbomber, known at first merely as 'aircraft 82',powered by two RD-45F or VK-1 turbojets andable to fly at speeds close to the speed ofsound (Mach 0.9-0.95).

The initial project for 'aircraft 82' was a radi-cal modification of 'aircraft 73' (a prototype ver-sion of the Tu-14 tactical bomber) with sweptwings, two engines and a reduced crew ofthree. In this project the dorsal and ventral gunpositions were deleted and replaced by a sin-gle tail position with two cannon mounted oneabove the other. The dimensions and flyingweight were significantly reduced (wing span17.5m, length 17m, and normal takeoff weightabout 13,000k9).

On 12th June 1948 the Soviet Council of Min-isters issued directive No2052-804 concerning'aircraft 82' which was given the official desig-nation Tu-22. Work on the draft project, whichdiffered only slightly from the original version of'aircraft 82', was concluded on22nd June 1948.

ln early 1949 the '82' prototype powered byKlimov RD-45F engines was rolled out at the

OKB's experimental factory (plant No156) in

Moscow and handed over for factory tests. Theprototype differed from the draft project in hav-

ing four pairs of wing fences, and lacked theirreversible hydraulic actuators and the reargun position.

The '82' made its first flight on 24th March1949 with test pilot A D Perelyot at the controls.The report on the factory flight tests noted thatthe bomber was stable and could be flown bya pilot with average skills. The following datawas also obtained:

Normal all-up weight

l\ilaximum all-up weight

Empty weight

Maximum speed

at sea-level

at 4,000m


Range

Service ceiling

Take-off run

Landing run

1 4,91 gkg

1 B,339kg

11,226k9

B70km/h

931 km/h

5.8 minutes

2,395km

11,400m

1 ,1 00m

550m

I

Tupolev Tu-1 6

At the same time as the factory tests were tak-ing place, 'aircraft 82' was being prepared to

take part in the traditional flypast at Tushino.During the dress rehearsal in the summer of

1949, while the bomber was flylng low over the

Moskva River, it was caught in a series of ther-

mals of varying intensity causing so-called'recurrent turbulence' which broke the attach-ments of one of the engines to its nacelle. Testpilot A D Perelyot was injured when his face

struck the instrument panel but managed toshut down the damaged engine and make a

single-engine landing atthe airfield of the Flight

Research lnstitute named after Mikhail M Gro-

mov (Lll - Lyotno-issledovatel'skiy institoot) in

Zhukovskiy near Moscow. This incldent neces-

sitated the introduction of the new concept of'recurrent turbulence' - an effect arising when

an aircraft flies at low altitude over ierrain with a

complex relief (for example, plain - river - for-

est) - into the structural strength calculaiionnorms. After a series of tests, a method of allow-ing for 'recurrent turbulence' was introducedinto the practice of aircraft design.

The prototype 'aircraft 82' was really an

experimental machine for developing the con-

cept of swept-wing design and it was not pro-

duced in series This was because The SovietAir Force had at that time fully effected the ser-

vlce introduction of the ll'yushin lL-28 straight-wing tactical bomber which was already in

series production. For the same reason the

Tupolev Tul 6

lL-30 bomber, a machine similar to the Tupolev'82', also remained a purely experimental air-

craft.

The '82' enabled the research on large air-

craft with swept wings to be verified and was

the first practical step towards the creation of

the Tu-1 6 to be taken.After the 'aircraft 82', OKB-156 began work

on its f ully combat-capable version, designated'aircraft 83', which possessed a full comple-

ment of offensive and defensive armament.This differed from the prototype in having a

longer fuselage measuring 19.925m and a

crew of four, which included a gunner/radio-

operator seated behind the pilot and control-ling the dorsal gun position. The bomber was

equipped with a PSBN radar sight (pribor sle'povo bombometaniya i navigahtsii' - 'blind

bombing and navigation device'), with the

option of replacing this with a RYM-S precision

target guidance radar. The configuration of the

fuselage fuel tanks was also revised. An AFA-

BA/40 replaced the AFA-33/75 camera, and the

shape and size of the pilot's canopy were

altered. Construction of the '83' was begun atplant No 156, but all further work on it was ter-minated in 1949.

ln mid-1948 OKB-156 began work on swept-

wing medium and long-range bombers pow-

ered by two englnes providing a total thrust of

up to 10,000k9. The first in a series of projects

was 'aircraft 486' (denoting the sixth project

undertaken in 1948 ).The initial project for the '486' bomber was

based on a modification of the straight-winged'aircraft 73' with increased engine power. The

original three engines yielding a total staticthrust of 5,600k9 were to be replaced by two

Mikulin AM-TKRD-O2 (AM-02) engines provid-

ing a total thrust of 9,560k9, with the third

engine mounted in the rear fuselage replaced

by a rear gun position. Preliminary design cal-

culations showed, however, that the increased

thrust from the new engines would so increase

the aircraft's speed that ii would reach critical

Mach numbers. Under these conditions, retain-

ing the unswept wing was no longer viable. The

transition to a swept wing was unavoidable.Added to this, the considerably higher fuel con-

sumption of the new engines necessitated an

increase in the fuel load by up to 10 or 12 met-

ric tons.The resulting new project, 'aircraft 486' was

a high-speed medium-range bomber with a

bomb bay able to carry large bombs, including

bombs up to three metric tons in weight, The

defensive armament comprised a fixed, for-

ward-firing NR-23 cannon, and three other gun

positions with a total of six G-20 cannon. The

preliminary project for the '486' was assessed

as follows:

A three-view drawing of the projected '491'tactical bomber (that is, 1949, proiect No 1)

evolved from the'86'. Note how the mainwheelsturned through 90" during retraction to lie flatunder the engine ietpipes. Tupolev JSC

'. -l ::ar.. -; :'34,. -; :,leep

- - ::^:^t rrii^

- - ^,:^ht

L:'cadl---, ,: nht

','t. -;lm speed---^^r^.,^l:.::1'tsVEl

a:6 000m::-3e rvith 1,000k9 bomb load-i.3-of run

,'/ork on the '486' was halted at the initialresign stage but served as the basis for the.roject'86' long-range bomber.

At the end of 1948 OKB-156 began work on:'re 86' design - a long-range bomber with twoAM-02 gas turbines, each providing 4,7g0kgsratic thrust. The designers took the layout ofaircraft 486' as a starting point, but the '86' dif-

'ered in having a larger bomb bay accommo-oating a normal load of 2,000k9 and amaximum load of 6,000k9, afuel load increasedio between 5.2 and 17.2 melric tons, a greateriiying weight, and a wider fuselage. A secondpilot was included in the increased crew of six.

The forward pressurised cabin was com-pletely reconfigured to feature a stepped nosewithout the predecessor's fighter-type canopycovering the pilots' cockpit, and thegunner/radio-operator was repositioned to aseparate station under a blister dome. Thenose undercarriage leg was lengthened, themain undercarriage legs given twin wheels andspeed-brake flaps were installed on the rearfuselage. Defensive armament was augmentedby a single NR-23 cannon and a PSBN radarmounted in the nose.

The project for 'aircraft 86' was subsequentlyrevised. The fuselage was lengthened, the

wing span and wing area were increased andgreater fuel tankage provided. The nosebecame sharper, and the fuselage was recon-figured to house additional fuel tanks. The for-ward undercarriage leg was fitted with twinwheels, a single NR-23 cannon installed in thetail position, and the PSBN radar replaced bythe improved PSBN-M. Figures for the revised'86' are as follows:

A cutaway drawing of the'491', showing theposition of the bomb bay aft ot the wing torsionbox carry-through structure, with luel tankagefore and aft ol it. Note that there were threeseparate pressurised cabins; a reconnaissancecamera was to be located ahead of the centrecabin. Tupolev JSC

their stafting point and made the followingchanges:- increase of the wing sweepback to 45"

- increase of the wing dihedral to 4"

- a complete revision of the wing centre section- addjtion ol new wingtip fairings

- lengthening of the centre fuselage section

- increased fuel tankage

- increasing the sweepback ofthe vertical and

horizontal tail from 40" to 50";

- lengthening ofthe nose undercarriage leg

- radical changes to the main undercarriage legs

(which had single wheels of a new type)

To improve the aerodynamic shape of theengine nacelles, the cross-section of theAM-02's exhaust pipe was altered. The new

cross-section (in the form of a figure-8) allowedthe nacelles' cross-section area to be reducedand their aerodynamic qualities enhanced.

The project for the '491' bomber did not gobeyond the stage of technical consideration.Preliminary calculations for the aircraft appearbelow:

Length

Height

Wing span

Wing area

Wing sweepback

Wing aspect ratio

All-up weight

Normal

0verload

Empty weight

l\ilaximum speed at 6,500m

Service ceiling

Range with 2,000k9 bomb load

Crew

26.39m

7,50m

2250n81.7m'

45,0"

6.2

30,000k9

42,700k9

21,920k9

1,0B5km/h

1 3,500m

5,000km

6

22.75m

7.20n

26,00m

83,00m'

34.5"

8.15

2.00

26,000k9

31,500k9

1 B,500kg

990km/h

1,020km/h

3,500-4,000km

1,700m

5

27.4Bm

8,25m

27.49m

1 00m'

30,000k9

42,000k9

950-1,000km/h

13,000m

4,000km

1,000-1,200m

500-600m

6

Height

Wing span

Wing area

All-up weight

Normal

Overload

Maximum speed at 4,000m

Service ceiling

Range with 2,000k9 bomb Ioad

Take-off run

Landing run

Crew

The research undertaken by OKB-156 in the

course of work on the '86' showed that a viablelong-range bomber could be created just byincreasing the weight and dimensions of theaircraft and by increasing the engine thrust by150-200%, Work on the '86' bomber was dis-

continued at the preliminary design stage, butthe configuration of the fuselage was subse-quently used on the '88' (Tu-16) design towhich the OKB now turned lts attention. Theunavailability of the AM-02 engines made theOKB turn to the 4,500k9p TR-3 turbojetdesigned by Arkhip M Lyul'ka's OKB-165. Thenew bomber project was known as the '87' andhardly differed from the '86'.

ln April 1949 OKB-156 produced the project'aircraft 491' (denoting the first project for1949), a faster version of 'aircraft 86'. With awing sweep of 35' the reserve of power pro-

vided by the two AM-02 engines could not beused to the fuli; it was therefore decided to usewings sweptback at an angle of 45'. Thedesigners took the first version of the '86' as

Tupolev Tu-16

Chapter One

The'494' Jet Bomber (project)The simultaneous quest by TsAGI andTupolev's OKB-156 ended in a rational solutionto the many problems involved in the aerody-namic form of a heavy swept-wing aircraft. The

most rapid progress was made in research on

the '88' (Tu-16) long-range bomber project

with, as its basis, the preliminary studies car-

ried out by TsAGI on the chosen layout with a

wing possessing an aspect ratio of 7-9 andsweptback at an angle of 35". The prototypewas designated E-4 at TsAGl, and windtunneltests with a model were made between 1947

and 1950. The swept-wing chosen was in manyways identical to that used by German design-ers on the Junkers EF 132.

When SergeyV ll'yushin's OKB-240was com-missioned to design a high-speed long-range jet

bomber (subsequently designated lL-46),

OKB-156 did not abandon its work on its com-peting design and work continued with the aim

of producing an aircraft with a higher pedor-mance than the lL-46. The initial research was

carried out by B M Kondorskiy's team, in whichyoung graduates of the Moscow Aviation lnsti-

tute, such as Andrey A Tupolev, G A Chery-

omukhin, Yu Yu Yudin, I V Babin, and VA Sterlin,

began their careers and went on to become theOKB's leading experts and specialists. The firstdraughting of the layout and the first calculationswere done under the close scrutiny of Tupolevwho gave this project his particular attention.

Subsequently, when the aircraft's layout, dimen-sions and correlations had been decided,

Projects and Prototypes

Sergey M Yeger's team joined in the work fol-lowed by the remaining sections of the OKB.

While the layout of the aircraft and the pro-portions of its assemblies were being resolved,Tupolev visiied S M Yeger's team each day andstudied the progress in detail, he then went tohis office or to the mock-up shop where a

wooden mock-up of the aircraft was being made.

Kondorskiy's team had the task of setting theaircraft's basic parameters (wing area, weights,and power of the engines) with which, and acrew of six, the following data were calculated:

The research incorporated all the resultsderived from 'aircraft 86', but increased them in

the light of the new requirements. The aircraft'spower unit was based on the Lyul'ka TR-3A(AL-S) engine with a static thrust of 5,000k9,and on OKB-165's projected turbofan engine(given the provisional designation TR-5) also

with a static thrust of 5,000k9. Some prelimi-nary revisions to 'project 494' were also madeto accommodate the AMRD-03 engine with an

estimated thrust of B,200kg on which Mikulin'sOKB-300 was then working.

The aerodynamic characteristics of the new

aircraft were identical to those of the '86'bomber, and some versions of the '494'

bomber were geometrically similar to the '86'.

The length of the bomb bay corresponded inlength to that of the rear bomb bay on the '85' -which held 6,000-12,000k9 of bombs - and theweights of the structural elements for variousversions of the project were provisionallybased on their'86' equivalents.

Work on the '494' bomber within the B M

Kondorskiy team was the responsibility of I BBabin, G A Cheryomukhin and VA Sterlin. Theteam completed work on the project materialsin June 1950, when the analysis and researchresulted in a wing sweep of 36" and the follow-ing alternative engine types:

- two AMRD-o3 engines;- four TR-3A (AL-5) engines;- four TR-5 engines.

Various provisional layouts for the aircraft wereprepared depending on the choice of engines.

lf the AMRD-03 engines were used with a wingarea of 160-200m'?, two layouts were proposed:

1, ln the first version the engines were housed in

fairings which also contained the main landing

gear. For this the following data were calculated:

Fuselage length 37.1m

Wing span 34.8m

Wing area 160m'?

Take-offweight 96,000k9

Landing weight 41 ,000k9Fuel load 48,000k9

Weight of engines B,300kg

The delinitive'88'was preceded by severalpreliminary development proiects. This is the'49411' - basically a scaled-up '491', the mainlanding gear retracting into the engine nacellesadhering directly to the wing undersurface.Tupolev JSC

Maximum speed

at sea level

at 10,000m


Service ceiling

Bange with normal bomb load

Normal bomb load

Maximum bomb load

Unassisted take-off run

Landing run

Armament

950km/h

950-1,000km/h

23 minutes

1 2,000-1 3,000m

7,500km

6,000k9

1 2,000k9

1,800m

900m

as Jor 'alrcraft 86'

These figures (apart from range and bombload) were essentially in line with those for theearlier '86' proiect, and the dimensions ofbomber'494' (the fourth project undertaken bythe Kondorskiy team in 1949) and were basedon data for the '86' project and on the papers

entitled Research into the Flight Characteristicsof Heavy Swept-wing Jet Aircralt carried out byOKB-156 in early 1948.

Tupolev Tu-16

-ne 49412'featured podded engines and redesigned main gear units with':ur-wheel bogies retracting aft into fairings protruding beyond the wingTailing edge - a trademark feature ol Tupolev aircraft designed in the'350s and 1960s. Tupolev JSC

-:e 49414' was even more hair-raising - basically the'49413' with two:.gines moved from the wings to a position atop the rear fuselage. This isnrere the unusual engine placement of the later Tu-22 ('105') comes trom,_,::

:,,,JSC

- --e second version had podded engines with

:-: main landing gear in separate wing fairings.--rs. for the first time, OKB-156 came up with

:- s method of housing the main undercarriage

::s which became the 'trademark' of Tupolev

:.signs in the 1 950s and 1 960s. lt was based on

3::man research derived from Gottingen in- 947 which incorporated the results of various.', qd-tunnel tests of various ways of locating

:-cine nacelles relative to the wing: in front,

::neath, above and behind. Placing the engine

':. : ngs behind gave the minimum drag for the

,', ng{airing combination. For this second

. ersron, the following data were calculated:

:.selage length 37.0m

,',' ng span 34.8m

,'irng area 160m'-ake-off weight 95,300k9

-anding weight 40,000k9

=uel load 48,500k9

,'/eight of engines 7,200k9

The rather bizarre'49413'combined the main landing gear ol lhe'49412'with two engines adhering to the torward luselage underside and twomore mounted on the wings, B-47 style. Tupolev JSC

The ultimate cartoon - the'49415'had two engines under the nose and twoat the wingtips. Tupolev JSC

For the TR-3A and TR-5 engines, the followinglayouts were proposed:

1. With a wing area of up to 130-160m', twoengines would be located in the forward

fuselage and two on the wings between the flaps

and the ailerons, with the undercarriage legs in

separate wing fairings.

2, With a wing area greater than 130-1 60m', all four

engines would be iocated either in the fuselage,

or two on the fuselage and two at the wingtips,

or all four on wing pylons. All four layouts had

the main undercarriage legs housed in separate

wing fairings. The following data relates to the

last version mentioned:

Wing area 200m


Landing weight 49,500k9

Fuel load 71,000k9

Weight of engines 16,300k9

3. This version had all the engines housed in

pairs in wing fairings, one above the other,

with the maln undercarriage legs retracting

forwards into them. Depending on the type of

engines installed, the following date were

calculated:

TR-34 TR-s

Length 40.2m 40.2m

Wing span 38.8m 38.8m

Wing area 200m' 200m'

Take-offweight 130,000k9 129,000k9

Landing weight 56,200k9 55,300k9

Fuel load 67,000k9 67,O0Okg

Weight of engines 13,700k9 12,700k9

For the TR-3A engines, a layout in which theywere housed in wing fairings in side-by-side

pairs was proposed. The maln undercarriage

legs retracted into the engine fairings (special

rear fuselage fairings). ln this form, the followingdata applied:

Tupolev Tu-1 6

Length 32.7m

Wing span 31 .3m

Wing area 130m'


Landing weight 35,700k9

Fuel ioad 36,000k9

Weight of engines 10,330k9

The '495'Jet Bomber Proiectln addition to the layouts described above, therewas a version of the '494' with two AL-5 enginesinstalled in fairings beside the fuselage (the wingarea was to be 140m'). ln this variant the aircrafthad a highly stressed bicycle undercarriage with

wing outrigger struts and auxiliary fuselagestruts. Both TsAGI and the Tupolev OKB cameup with this method of positioning the engines.

ln OKB-156 this layout, as well as the projectfor the 'BB' bomber, were proposed by A ATupolev. Wind-tunnel tests of a model with thisconfiguration yielded very good aerodynamicresults. The right choice of layout contributeda lot to the future success of the Tu-1 6.

The following conditions governed the prelim-

inary layouts developed from the '498' project:

- the crew, armament and equipment were to

be the same as for the '86'

- the wing planlorm was to be similar to that of

the'86' bomber- the stability coefficients derived from the'86'

project (the rear fuselage length/wing span ratio

was taken from the '498' project but was close to

the ratio accepted for the '86')

- the layout of the bomb bay was to be similar to the

rear bomb bay on the'85' bomber, which fixed the

minimum diameter of the fuselage at 2.5m

- the maximum fuselage fineness ratio was to be

of the same order as for the '85'

- the maximum permitted tyre pressure was to

be 9-10k9/cm'

The basic data for the aircraft derived from pre-

liminary layouts for the '494' were as follows:

Wing area, m' 100 130

Take-offweighi* 57-60 75-80

Fuel load* 24 36-39

160 200 240

93-96 126-132 152-158

48.s 71 85,6-87.5

* weight expressed in tonnes

The essential differences between the layoutsdevolved mainly on the type of engines andtheir positioning, while, at the same time, the

configurations for the fuselage were basicallyanalogous to that of the '86'.

An analysis of the layouts provided a numberof practical conclusions. As the dimensions ofthe aircraft increased, the layout in which theengines were housed in the same fairing as theundercarriage became less workable due iothe greater cross-section and surface area ofthe fairing and the loss of ihrust due to thegreater length of the jetpipe.

The layout in which the undercarriage and

engines were housed in separate fairings offered

less overall drag, primarily shock-wave drag.

This was because the interference of the under-

carriage fairings and ihe pylon-mounted engine

fairings with the wing was minimal and could noisubstantially increase the degree of shock-wave

drag as the angle of attack increased:

- engines in pylon-mounted nacelles greatly

facilitated maintenance since the engines were

easily accessible from the ground

- locating the engines in a wing with an area of up

to 300m'?without any corresponding increase in

the wing root chord and related thicknesses in

comparison with the'86' wing was inefficient

- locating the engines in the fuselage was difficult

due to the inevitable heating of the fuselage

structure and interference by exhaust gases with

the bomb bay doors (if the engines were forward

of the wing) or with the tailplane and glazing of

the tail gun posltion (if the engines were

mounted behind the wing)

As was evident from this analysis, the most effi-

cient layout for a medium-sized bomber (and

that chosen by B M Kondorskiy's team) was theone in which the engines were mounted onpylons and the main undercarriage legs

retracted into wing fairings. But TsAGI was, atthat time, very cautious about the idea of pylon-

mounted engines and it was, therefore, notwidely used on Soviet aircraft at this time.

Engines mounted on pylons (or, to use theSovietterminology of thetime, on'knives') were

used only on the Soviet-German '150' bomberdesigned under the direction of Brunolf Baade,

and later on ihe lL-54, although pylon-mounted

engines were also considered during designwork on such aircraft as the M-4 and Tu-95.

The performance data for seven differentlypowered variants of the bomber were exam-

ined within the confines of the 'wing area/take-off weight' ratio (with a bomb load of 6,000k9):

- two AMRD-03 engines with and without

afterburning- four TR-3A engines with and without afterburning- four TR-5 engines with and without afterburning

- four non-afterburning AMRD-03 engines

The results of this analysis showed that if themaximum range was to be achieved with thesame expenditure of fuel, the twin-engined lay-

out using two AMRD-O3 engines was prefer-

able to the four-engined layout with TR-3A orTR-5 engines (on account of the reduced dragand weight of the power plants). The rest of theperformance data for a set range and take-offrun could be deduced, given the following min-

imum conditions:

- take-off weight, 60,000-70,000k9

- wing area, 150-1 70m'- total take-off thrust, 14,000-16,000k9

Given a minimum thrust of 12,000-14,000k9,the set range and take-off run could be

achieved by increasing the dimensions of theaircraft: the take-off weight had to be 70,000-

80,000k9 and the wing area 190-210m'.

The research precisely defined the parame-ters for the optimum number and type ofengines for the subsequent design of a long-range jet bomber (given the specified perfor-

mance). The following conclusions were drawn:

- the limits within which the specified performance

could be achieved were significantly extended if

the overall power of the engines was increased

- the limits for a twin-engine layout (AMRD-03)

were wider than for a four-engine layout (TR-3A)

and wider for turbofan engines (TR-S) than forpure turbojets (TR-3A)

- given the specified performance for a long-range

bomber, the take-off weight should be within the

range of 60,000 to 1 00,000k9, the wing area 1 50

to 250m', and the total thrust available greater

than 1 2,000-1 4,000k9

This work defined the design, and subsequentdevelopment, of a long-range subsonic jet

bomber. These precepts were essentially vin-dicated with the creation of the Tu-16 and otheraircraft of its class.

ln the summer of 1950 the results of the dif-ferent versions of the future long-range bomberwere discussed at a conference held atOKB-156. The material on the variants of the'494' project was presented by I B Babin and GA Cheryomukhin, while A A Tupolev presentedhis own project. After lengthy considerationChief Designer A N Tupolev decided to go

ahead with the bomber which received the in-

house code 'aircraft BB'. The bomber was tocombine all the best features of the mostadvanced versions of the '494' and A A

Tupolev's project (the fuselage layout and thewing with undercarriage fairings were to be

based on the '494', while the location of theengines was to follow A A Tupolev's project).Thus, in this first approximation, the Tu-16 tookshape - an aircraft whlch, for a number ofyears, evoked the admiration of the world's avi-

ation community.

The'88' Jet Bomber PrototypeOKB-156's pursuit of the optimum version ofthe new long-range bomber with a higher per-

formance than that promised by the lL-54 waswelcomed not only by the Soviet Air Force butby the Soviei government as well, and it wasdecided to commission the new aircraft fromthe Tupolev OKB. This decision followed thepattern of scientific and technological policy setby the country's leadership in the poslwarperiod when new types of weaponry, aircraftincluded, were to be created. For Tupolev it

was an opportunity to redress his failure in theundeclared contest with OKB-240 for theUSSR's first taciical jet bomber.

On 1Oth June 1950 the Soviet Council of Min-

isters issued directive No2474-974, followedon 14th June by order No 444 from the Ministryof Aircraft lndustry (MAP - Ministerstvo aviat-

sionnoy promyshlennosti) in which A N

Tupolev's OKB-l56 was tasked with designingand building a long-range jet bomber powered

Tupolev Tu-1 6

{ Fr*-r,1€fl drawing of the Tu-16 bearing this:E5€rria:on, --:3leV JSC

r -: - - 3 TR-3F (previously designated- :-: s-osequently AL-s) engines with

-:- :- ::-e 5.000k9. The performance of-: : -:'ai v/as to approximate to that

: : : :::: : i ine OKB in the course of its pre-

:- ::s :^ (PD) studies. Two prototypes: -: '. ::-ber were to be built, with the:- .-::: -.acy for State acceptance trials

': ::-::- '951. The commissioning docu-: ': ::: :: ihe design of a bomber with- ::-:: :ngines, each with a take-off, :- : --l:rg. However, due to the work-

-::::: on the OKB by work on the: :- 2::^ \cvember 1950 the deadlines::'. .. .--. cie) BB' were postponed by: *:---:: . .-:= a:o,,,e. the choice of the final lay-

.. - -: -:,', comber was preceded by a- . :=-. :'':s:arch work, which was contin-" - = .- :-:aier detail even after the final

:*:-:: a.oui had been decided upon-" = ::-= -{ iask of determining the air- : : -:-: :rs and final aerodynamic and-'--: :.:,: ,','as resolved by intense para-

: - -::fr-r^ anc numerous experiments- : : - --:: ard full-size forms. lt became: : - - -: ::..;rse of thls work that the total: :- -- = :,,, : AL-5 engines would be clearly

. :: : -:-: :: a3hreve the specified perfor-- -. - ..:s ::erefore decided to use two:- :: :'3.uction designation AM-3)

, -=. : .:-s on with four AL-5 engines was::::: :: : cack-up configuration, but in

- - -- =::,:e-cff weight would be greater.

- -,:-:. cecided in February 1951 that

- - : ::-aentrate on theversion with two

- =-: -:s resigned by OKB-300, but the-: :: ^:: finally resolved until several' -: :::- ,',-er OKB-300 built and tested a: 1-: = :':re AM-3. On 24th August 1951

: : '.:: . : ,vas issued by the Soviet Coun-, - :::'s iollowed on 30th August by

- : : --= - '. : 332. according to which 'aircraft

: : -: :: o cr.rered by AM-3 engines with a: :- ---s: cf B.700kg and a specific fuel

" : - -:- : ^ SFC) of 1 .0kg/kgp'h. The static. :' :- -: - rai rating was to be 7,000k9, and

- :: -:---: 6.400k9 (with a conesponding: - :- - ::-l xgp h and 0.93k9/kgp h respec-

--. .'! weight of the AM-3 engine was-:-='::-.. oe no morethan 3,100k9.

-": -:,,, :rgine was to be submitted for;- :- ::sts in December 1951. Hence, to

-: :..,elopment work, the MAP order: ..-: :' :2ô September called for the adap-

'. - :' =

-,-4 to serve as an engine testbed": :'.'-3 The Tu-4LL testbed was to be

::'- :. ',:,,ember. As early as August 1951

4 :-r:er=I drawing of the Tu.l6, showing the:6t:cr. Cf the bomb bay, fuel tanks andrrr!-s,a€ armament. Tupolev JSC

COB. CEXPEMHO

the first two examples of the AM-3 were to be

delivered to OKB-156: one for bench trials and

the second for flight testing on the Tu-4LL (con-

struction number 2301 13). They were to be fol-

lowed by two more intended for the first '88'prototype which were scheduled for delivery in

November 1951 - with a third example in Janu-ary 1952 intended as a reserve. At this point the

bomber's future depended to a considerabledegree on the successful conclusion of testson the world's most powerful turbojet engine.

Design work on the AMRD-O3 had begun in

1949 in Aleksandr A Mikulin's OKB-300. ln 1952

the engine successfully passed its State benchtests and was placed in large-scale productionas the AM-3. lt was the first Soviet turbojetwith a powerful thrust, and it remained formany years the standard power plant for largemilitary and civil aircraft. The engine had an

eight-stage axial compressor, a cannular com-bustion chamber, a two-stage turbine and afixed-area nozzle. Swirl vanes were fitted at the

entry to the combustion chamber. The enginewas also fitted with combustion tube coolingusing ribbed plates, a jet fuel starter for auto-matic self-contained starting, an adjustable de-

Capro,rDT fi-16'c 2-ur asrrnmusnr FM-5

icing system, and an oilifuel heat exchanger forcooling the oil, using the engine fuel. The AM-3possessed a compressor with subsonic high-pressure stages which provided a pressureratio of 6.2, and for the frrst time compressoradjustment could be effected by air bleedvalves after the first compressor stages. Pin-

hole disc connection in the drumtype rotorfacilitated blade alignment. ln OKB-300 thework on this engine was headed by Prokofiy F

Zoobets.The active design work on 'aircraft BB' got

under way immediately after a Soviet Council ofMinisters directive issued in June 1950. The

Soviet Air Force issued a specific operationalrequirement for the new bomber on 1Oth July,which was slightly amended on 11th Septem-ber after the decision to use the AM-3 enginehad been taken. The general design work was

finished on 20th April 1951 with the completionof the advanced development project (ADP)

and its submission to the Soviet Air Forces' Avi-

ation-Technical Committee, which signed itsconfirmation on 29th May. The draft projectwith AM-03 engines was finally confirmed on

Sth July.

c0B. cEr{pEnn0 Canro,nbr ffv-tdeKopocnn0i prcxmrsitrru EtMEspAupoBEux c 2-ur AaurnrrnnMu nM-J

shryr c2 xr tgBfiu! ll{6_195q (f,rulm t|truilF tq[uor&rq!0rhr025t nm orcttEr! $adu nonrc@- @!M,ltror'EtfiocitDqud{08 urrtu *nqrouu 250clq' clrtror

-tqtroB.iradq-550 c{FpQA0g h! nruxv

11Tupolev Tu-1 6

Fuselage length

Wing span

Height from runway

Wing sweep at quarter-chord

Wing area (excluding centre section)

Wing area (including centre section)

Empty weight

Normal take-off weight

Payload (normal)

Payload (overload)

Maximum speed

at sea level *

at 5,000m

at 10,000m

Time to height (normal / max AUW)

to 5,000m

to 10,000m

Service ceiling

with normal weight

with maximum weight

Range / endurance twith a luel load ol 28,500k9

with a luel load ol 27,500k9

wjth a luel load ol 25,500k9

with a luel load ol 21,500k9

Take-of{ runitake-olf distance

lu th maximum all-up weight

Landrng run wrth a

landing weight of 37,000k9

33,6m

33,0m

B.9m

J3

1 59m'

164.59m'

32,760k9

64,500k9

14,190k9

31,740k9

840km/h

988km/h

918km/h

3.6 / 5,5 mins

9,0 / 14,5 mins

1 2,800m

1 2,000m

6,000km i 7,5 hours

5,750km / 7,3 hours

5,300km i 6,7 hours

4,380km / 5,5 hours

1,500 / 3,650m

670-750m

The following data refer to the draft projectbomber'88' with twin AM-03 engines (take-offthrust B,700kg and nominal thrust 7,000k9):

The defensive armament to be fitted was:

ForwardJiring

Rear dorsal position

Rear ventral position

Tail gun position

1 x Nudelman/Fikhter NR-23

(with 100 rounds)

2 x NR-23 (with 250rpg)



The crew positions were armour-protectedfrom behind, from below and from the sides.The overall weight of the armour on the aircraftwas to be 545k9.

An original form of undercarriage wasdesigned for the aircraft. The main undercar-riage legs with four-wheel bogies (1 ,000 x300mm wheels with a tyre pressure of 8.5-9kg/cm') retracted into fairings on the wings,while the nose unit had twin wheels measuring900 x 275mm. Additional retractable outriggerlegs were fitted to the wingtips, each with a sin-gle wheel measuring 265 x BOmm.

According to the ADP documents, the aircraftwas to carry the following basic equipment:

- electrical equipment: 4 x GSR-1800 generators,

2 x 1254-65 DC batteries- communications equipment: 2x lRSB-70

command link radios, RSIU-3 communicationsradio, AVRA-45 emergency radio, SPU-10

intercom- navigation equipment: 2 x ARK-5 automatic

direction finders, Materik instrument landing

system, Meridian SHORAN, RV-2 and RV-10

radio altimeters- radar: Rubidiy-MM bomb-aiming radar with a

FARM photographic adapter, Argon gun-laying

radar in the tail, Bariy-M and Magniy-M2 IFF

transponders- photographic equipment for opportunity and

planned reconnaissance: AFA-33i50, AFA-33/75

and AFA/33/1 00 day cameras or NAFA-3s night

cameras for verlical photography; AFA-33/75

and AFA-33i55 for oblique photography- oxygen equipment: 6xKP-24 breathing

apparatus, SMhU-50 Iiquid oxygen converter- autopilot: AP-5M

Work on the full-scale mock-up was begun inJune 1950 and completed on 20th April the fol-lowing year. lts first inspection by Soviet AirForce representatives on 16th Februaryresulted in a list of 101 items to be corrected,and the second inspection on Bth March pro-duced a further 25. All these were taken intoaccount during subsequent work on the air-

craft. Officially the mock-up, together with theADP, was shown to Air Force representativeson 20th March 1951 . The mock-up review com-mission chaired by Soviet Air Force Comman-der-in-Chief S I Rudenko worked between 2ndJune and 7th July, approving the mock-up on

the latter date. The installation of additionalequipment in the aircraft and work on the sec-ond protoiype (called dooblyor, lit. 'under-

study', in Soviei terminology of the time) led toanother mock-up review commission which sat

between l Bth and 26th March when mattersrelating to equipmeni and armament werefinally agreed with the Air Force, and the earliercriticisms taken into account.

This prolonged period until agreement wasreached resulted from the large number of orig-inal technical features incorporated in 'aircraft

BB', which made it rather different from its pre-

decessors.The central podion of the airframe (compris-

ing the fuselage/wings/air intakes/engines/undercarriage), which gave the aircraft its highaerodynamic qualities, corresponded in fact tothe concept of 'area ruling'first introduced intothe world aircraft design practice in 1954. Onthe 'aircraft 88' bomber this was expressed in

the form of 'squeezing' the engine fairings in

the area of the wing/fuselage joint, and theslender wing fairings housing the main gearunits. These and other aerodynamic measuressubsequently contributed to the aircraft'sspeed of 1,040km/h (Mach 0.92) when the RD-

3M engines were fitted.The engines were located in the wing roots

aft of the second spar, with lateral air intakesahead of the wings. Air was fed to each enginealong two ducts, one passing through the wingtorsion box and the other passing beneath it.

This placement of the engines solved the prob-lem of interference at the point where the wingmet the fuselage - the most difficult junction inaerodynamic terms. This particular problemwas solved by introducing an 'active fillet': thejet exhaust sucked away the air flowing roundthe wing and fuselage, at the same time direct-ing the air flow in that zone. Those who tookpart in the design work recalled that, at the out-set, there was an inherent desire to minimise byall means possible the cross-section at thepoint where the fuselage, fairing and wing met(for that reason the engines were located asdeeply as possible). Tupolev himself insistentlyadvocated and monitored this solution. Heconstantly inspected the proposed layout forthe bomber and demanded that the designers'compress, compress, and compress again'.When the model of the aircraft was tested in theTsAGI wind{unnel after allthese compressionsits specialists could not understand how thedrag had been so drastically reduced, and ittook them a long time to report the conclusionof their findings to the OKB.

As the bomber was designed to fly at highsubsonic speeds, its tail surfaces had a greaterdegree of sweepback than the wings. Thanksto this, the phenomena associated with 'shock

stall' affected the tail later than the wing. ln

practical terms, this allowed the machine toretain its stability and handling at high speeds.

The bomber was further distinguished by anumber of other special features. A high wingaspect ratio (about 7) was chosen. The sparwebs of the two spars and the upper and lowerwing panels between the spars formed its basicstructural element - the torsion box. Thestrong, rigid box made the wing of the '88' quitedifferent from those of the long-range American

. lirnrted to an altitude of 3,600m by a dynamic pressure

limit of 3,400kg/m':,1rom 3,600m upwards - maximum

permissible |\Iach 0.86; t with a take-off weight o1

64,500k9, flying at 1 1 ,200-1 4,400m and a cruising speed

of 780-840km/h.

The aircrew was to consist of six. The followingordnance combinations could be carried:

Type/quantity Total weight

Bombs

24 x FAB-250 lt/-46 HE bombs

1B x FAB-500 M-46

6 x FAB-1 500 [/-46

2 x FAB-3000 M-46

1 x FAB-5000 M-46

1 x 0GAB-6000

1 x FAB-9000 M-46

Mines

1 2 x AMD-500

4 x A[/D-1 000

4 x A[/D-M

4 x Desna

4 x Serpei

4 x Lira

Torpedoes

3 x 45-36-AVA

3xTAV

3 x A-2 (RAT)

6,000k9

9,000k9

9,000k9

6,000k9

5,000k9

6,000k9

9,000k9

6,000k9

4,000k9

4,800k9

3,000k9

5,000k9

4,000k9

3,000k9

3,800k9

1,830k9

ln some cases a bomb load of up to 1 2,000k9 could be canied.

12 Tupolev Tu-16

::-.:rs. the B-47 and B-52. These machines-:: '

=xible wings, which facilitated the damp-

-"- :' .,ertical gusts due to their considerable::-:'-arion. The more rigid wing of 'aircraft BB'

:: :ss subject to deformation in flight due to. -::-ced stress. The wealth of operational::-:.ce later amassed with the Tu-16, the

-'- l: arrliner in the USSR and the American-.': 707. Douglas DC-8 and Convair 880

' :': -aro airliners proved that the more rigid-

-- ::^struction was more robust, especially, - :^: coint of view of structural fatigue. The-:- ::.s had to overcome many operational-: :-s involving the wings of the B-47 and:: ':: rue cracks and, as a result, repeated

= . : - ard reinforcement of the structure).- -:: ^c the engines in the wing roots close: '-: ',selage required an unusual design

' -: .-: ne are intake ducts, which had spe-: -:-.s (at first made up from a number of. -:: :-a iater comprising a single stamped:- ':-'.^= main air flow fitted in the root area-: -'s: and second spars, with auxiliary air:.:: ,-ier the wing. This arrangement: .: :ê necessary alrflow for the AM-3

- - -: :: ,,,crk normally at the cost of a rela-: :-: rcrease in weight in the wing root- : .- a '.- a wing centre section structure.| -

= =-:.' sJie of the bomber was its extensive.. ,:: ::rb bay located behind the centre,:-.:- ! -:af spar. Thanks to this the bomb:. - =_. :a.r.ed close to the centre of gravity- : --: :a.. :self did not intrude into the wing's:: - .:z- ^r siructure. The strength and rigidity-- --:: a3e in the area of the bomb baywere: ,':: :. . ery strong longitudinal beams.--; :':,', ,',,as accommodated in two pres-

. ::: :=3 :ts with e.jector seats for all. ---::'s The rear (tail) pressure cabin_:=: :,',: gunners - unlike earlier heavy-::": -:croving their combat co-ordina-

. - .-: :::sling morale (the tail gunner was- - - l=- a :re out there').

-- : : : -:3 r- s defensive armament consisted"-'- ':-::3-controlled turrets with twin can-- : '.;: 'onvardJiring cannon, four optical

- -- -,- ::::: ard an automatic rear sight. This.:- :- -croved the bomber's defensive: : :: . ^ :.:l fiight, and was greatly superior'-: ::':-:: systems of comparable contem-:- ::-::'s. it was intended to use either

: - -:--:--:: Topaz (which has only ceased: : : : -:-: -e:ently) or the shorler-range

. - - --:- ::,rg readied for series manufac-: :: : :: :;n ranging radar.--= :'l -:. rndercarriage design with two- -:a:: ccg;es, whrch rotated through

: - =. :-:_, '::.acted. enabled the aircraftto be-: :-:: '':- Jcncrete. earth or snow sur-:: --a':-,,,ard unoercarriage leg had. for

: ":- - -i :- a Scviet aircraft, a pairof wheels- : =

-: a ::-Tcn axle to reouce vibration

--E "s: :rototype Tu.16 (the '88 1') at the Flight;;-:':: :nstilute's airfield in Zhukovskiy, The'.::: ':mard.firing cannon on the starboard:,':€ :'::€ nose is clearly visible. --:: =, -31

and reduce the risk of shimmy oscillations. Themethod of retracting the main undercarrjageIegs backwards into the wing fairings was laterpatented (somewhat later and completely inde-pendently of the Tupolev OKB, this method wasused on the British Vickers Valiant B.Mk.2). Abrake parachute was provided for emergencylandings.

ln the course of design work on the aircraft.a number of disagreements arose betweenleading specialists in OKB-156 and TsAGIabout the use of irreversible power-assistedcontrols, and their use on large high-speed air-

craft was insistently recommended by the spe-ciailsts at TsAGl. But the poor reliability of thefirst Soviet hydraulic actuators for aircraft madethem unsuitable for the new machine in theopinion of the OKB's specialists (A N Tupolev'sdictum that 'the best hydraulic actuator is theone on the ground' is well-known). The design-ers had therefore to frnd some way of providingacceptable loading for the controls, which, onan aircraft of this size flying at high speed, hadto have very small hinge moments. The difficultproblem was solved after numerous model andfull-size tests had been carried out in TsAGI'swind tunnels.

As 'aircraft 88'was to become the first Sovietnuclear weapons carrier to become opera-tional in large numbers (the ten examples builtof the Tu-4A could not provide a relrable 'deter-

rent shield'), the Tupolev OKB, as well as otherorganisations working to provide the 'nuclearshield', were faced with the task of ensuring thedelivery aircraft's safety once its nuclearweapon had exploded. Such new phenomenaas the spread of the powerful nuclear shockwave in a heterogeneous atmosphere, takinginto account the effect of wind and its altitudevariations, and the flash, either diffused orrefiected, as it passed through an atmospherecharged with various particles, had to beexplored. The parameters of the effect of anuclear explosion on the aircraft had to bedetermined. This essentially involved issues ofaerodynamics and structural strength. Wouldthe shock wave destroy the bomber? Wouldthe aircraft be crushed by the pressure differ-ential following the shock wave? Would the

crew have to take over control of the aircraft?Particular attention had to be paid to the effectof the heat generated by the flash on therelatively weak duralumin alloy. (Later, thosewho took part in dropping nuclear testweapons from the Tu-16 affirmed that after-wards you couid push your finger through theduralumin skin covering the aircraft's belly.)These questions necessitated co-operationwith specialists lrom TsAGl, from other organi-sations and from the Soviet Air Force Researchlnstitute named after Valeriy P Chkalov (GK NllWS - Gosoodarstvennw krasnoznamyonnyyn aooch n o- i ssl ed ov ate I'skiy i n stitoot Voye n n o -

vozdooshnykh see/). An experimental basewas built to simulate the complex effects pro-duced on the aircraft during a nuclear explo-sion, and by the second half of the 1950s a

range of effective measures to protect the newnuclear weapons carriers in the air and on theairfields where they were based had beendevised and introduced.

The structural design of the bomber, thematerials used, its equipment and systems aswell as the manufacturing technology involved,were chosen and developed with due regard tothe actual capabilities of the Soviet aircraftindustry. This enabled an airborne strike sys-tem, which was to become one of the funda-mental aspects of the Soviet deterrent, to becreated within the shortest possible time.

The blueprints for the first prototype desig-nated 'BB/1 ' (and referred to in internal corre-spondence as zakaz 881, 'order BB1') wereprepared and delivered to the experimentalconstruction facility at plant No156 betweenFebruary 1951 and January 1952 - actually inparallel with the machine's construction; workwent on in 'live update' mode, so to say, withreciprocal onthe-spot correction of both theactual airframe and the drawings. Work onsetting up the jigs began in April 1951, andin May the front part of the fuselage wasalready assembled. By the end of 1951 the firstprototype was completed and a static test air-frame was built in parallel. On 26th DecemberA N Tupolev signed order No 27 for themachine's transfer to the flight test centre in

Zhukovskiy.

On 25th January 1952 izdeliye '88/1 ' was

transported to Zhukovskiy for further develop-

ment work and f light tests, and on 30th January

the bomber was parked on the apron reserved

for Tupolev's machines. From then on the indi-

vidual testing and checking of every piece of

equipment began, the engines were ground-

run, and new items of equipment delivered by

various suppliers were installed. Final installa-

iion of all systems was completed three days

before the first flight - on 24th April. Even while

all this work was under way, on 25th February

1952, the prototype was submitted for factory

flight testing.The 'aircraft 88' static test article (izdeliye

'88/0' or 'order 880') was also completed by the

end of 1951 and delivered to TsAGI on 26th

December. Static tests at TsAGI were held

between 1Sth January and 28th November

1952. At the end of March that year OKB-156

completed the structural strength calculations.

The static tests and strength calculations pro-

duced the following initial planning data:

Bombs

24 x SAB-100-55 flare bombs

1B x FAB-500 M-46 HE bombs

1B x BRAB-500 armour-piercing

6 x FAB-1 500 M-46

6 x FAB-3000 M-46

2 x BRAB-3000

1 x FAB-5000

1 x BRAB-6000

1 x FAB-9000

16xFAB-250M-43

12 x FAB-500 M-43

4 x FAB-1 000 M-43

4 x FAB-2000 lV-43

Mines

12 x AMD-500

4 x AMD-I 000

4xAMD-2M&6xAMD-500

B x AMD-2M

8 x IGD-|\.4

6 x Serpei

8 x Desna

B x Llra

4x A-2

Torpedoes

6 x 45-36 AIVV

4 x RAT-52

Factory tests continued until 29th October

1952. ln all, 46 flights were made, the aircraft

logging a total of 72 hours and 1 2 minutes. Dur-

ing the tests a top speed of 1,020km/h was

attained, which exceeded the specified figures.

The bomber turned out to be overweight, with

a TOW of 77,350k9 and an empty weight of

41 ,Os0kg (versus the estimated 64,000k9 and

35,750k9 respectively), which could not but

affect perJormance, particularly range and fieldperformance. A reduction in weight of at least

5-6 tons was required - and consider that the

first prototype did not carry the full complement

of equipment.Pedormance data derived from the factory

tests of the '88/1 ' are given below:

Type/quantity Total weight

2,400k9

9,000k9

9,000k9

9,000k9

6,000k9

6,000k9

5,000k9

6,000k9

9,000k9

4,000k9

6,000k9

4,000k9

B,000kg

6,600k9

4,500k9

7,560k9

8,560k9

B,560kg

B,700kg

6,000k9

7,600k9

2,440k9

6,984k9,)

lVaximum speed *

at sealevel

at 5,000m

at 7,000m

at 1 0,000m

at 1 2,000m

Range tRange fService ceiling over the targel

Time to height:

10 6,000m

to 10,000m

690km/h

1,020km/h

1,002km/h

962km/h

930km/h

6,050km

6,050km

12,300m

6.4 mins

13,0 mins

Fuselage length

Wing span

Wing area

Maximum take-off weight

Normal all-up weight

Landing weight

with four AL-5 engines

with two AM-3 engines

Estimated Mach number

l\/ax dynamic pressure ior 64,000-kg AUW

with a G load of 6

withaGloadol4.3

The flight crew for the first prototype was

headed by test pilot N S Rybko and included

co-pilot M L Mel'nikov, chief engineer for the

flight tests B N Grozdov and chief engineer

from OKB-156 I A Starkov. Chief designer

Dmitriy S Markov was permanently in charge of

all work on the bomber from the f irst prototypes

to the last production aircraft.

The data below refer to the 'BB/1 ' bomber

with two AM-3 engines recorded at the start of

the manufacturer's flight tests.

It was planned to install the following experi-

mental, still not fully developed, defensive

armament on ' aircraft 88/1 ':

- an NU fixed forwardJiring gun mount with the

experimental Afanas'yev/Makarov TKB-495A

(with a lengthened barrel, given the designation

AM-23 in service) with 100 rounds

- a DT-V7 dorsal turret with two TKB-495A cannon

and 250rpg

- a DT-N7 ventral tunet with two TKB-495A cannon

and 350rpg- a DK-7 tail turret with two TKB-495A cannon and

500rpg

This armament was not ready when factory

tests began, and the machine was tested in

unarmed configuration.The undercarriage layout of the PD project

was revised: the first prototype lacked the

wingtip outrigger struts, the main units had

bogies f itted with 1 ,1 00 x 330mm KT-1 6 brake

wheels and the nose unit was fitted with

900 x 275mm l<2-7012 non-braking wheels.

The basic equipment fit essentially corre-

sponded to that for the draft project, but as the

Rubidiy-MM and Argon radars and the Merid-

ian SHORAN were still not ready for flight test-

ing they were not fitted. lt was decided to install

them when they became available during the

course of test and development work.

The '88/1 ' underwent its first taxying trials for

an hour on 24th April 1952. A second taxying

test took place the next day, and on 27th April

the aircraft made its 12-minute maiden flight.

Take-off run/take-off distance

with an AUW ol 76,000-77,000k9 1 ,980 / 3,750m

Landing run/landing distance

with a landing weight of 50,200k9 1 ,5'10 / 2,354m

* at a weight of 57,500k9 (limited by dynamic pressure ol

2,300k9/m'? up to 7,000m); t with a 77,128-kg TOW, a 3,000-

kg bomb load and a 32,1 00-kg tuel load; t with a 75,848-kg

TOW, a 9,000-kg bomb load and a 25,740-kg fuel load

Building on the results of the factory tests it was

decided to submit the machine for State accep-

tance trials, despite the fact that it was over-

weight. The primary task was to evaluate the

bomber as a strike system while simultane-

ously trying to reduce its weight and achieve

the specified pedormance figures. The aircraft

was accepted for state trials by GK Nll WS on

13th November 1952, the trials commencing

two days later at the Lll airfield in Zhukovskiy.

They were interrupted on 30th March 1953 by a

heavy landing after a routine test flight. Over a

comparatively short space of time the GK Nll

WS test-pilots made 79 flights in the '88/1'

totalling 167 hours and 28 minutes.The data below was derived from the state

trials:

0perating empty weight

Take-off weight

normal

maximum

Payload

normal

maximum

Fuel load

normal

maximum

40,940k9

61,500k9

77,430k9

20,560k9

36,490k9

1 6,070k9

32,000k9

33.5m

33,0m

166.0m'

64,000k9

48,000k9

51,200k9

42,500k9

0,86

3,450k9/m'

2,700kgln'

Fuselage length

Height on ground

Wing span

Wing area

Wing sweep at quanerchord

0perating empty weight

Take-off weight:

normal

maximum

Payload

normal

maximum

Fuel load

normal

maxlmum

34.6m

9.85m

32.977n

164,59m'

41,050k9

57,720k9

77,350k9

1 6,670k9

37,300k9

12,470k9

32,1 00kg

The crew consisted of six. The first prototype was

designed to carry the following ordnance loads:

14 Tupolev Tu'16

The '88' static test airframe undergoingdestructive testing at TSAGl. The blocks gluedto the wings' upper surface are designed to popqfl as the stress increases, indicating criticald€{ormation. Tupolev JSC

'ra' num speed

:: sea level*

,r:i soeed at full power

:: 7.500m

:: i0,000m

::12,000m

.r:i sceed at nominal power

::7.500m

:: 1 0,000m

:: 1 2.000m:::;e i endurance t

::10 000-13,100m::::e ' endurance t

.: a constanl height of 1 0,000m

::'0 000-12,900m:-- .^^^^ +- -- d ruv+

:: : constant height of 1 0,000m

-:e'a: cnal range t::'0 000-13,100m

,r :n 595 fuel reserves)

,r:: :rdurance t::'0,000m

--, :e ceiling--: :c height:

: -'l0m'- ii00m

-i. :-cil run/take-off distance

,r: a 77,430-kg TOW

-=-: :g run/landing dislance

a: a 50,200-kg landing weighl

690km/h

1,005km/h

962km/h

916km/h

980km/h

941 km/h

BBlkm/h

5,61Okm/7hrs10min

5,260km / 6 hrs 48 min

4,390km

5 hours 44 minutes

5,200km

8 hours 15 minutes

1 2,200-1 3,1 00m

5.7 mins

16,2 mins

2,320/4,000m

1,540/2,480m

' ., --^ a 57,500-kg AUW limited by a dynamic pressure of

- i i!<g/rn'? up to 7,000m; t with a 77,430-kg TOW, a 3,000-. : :,:mb load and a 32,000-kg luel load; + with a 77,430-kg-l,i

a 9,000-kg bomb load and a 26,000k9 luel load

- spite of the reasonably good performance';ures, thefirst prototypefailed its State accep-

=rce trials for the following fundamental rea-:lns:

- :he mission equlpment did not functionsatisfactorily

- ihe lull complement of defensive armament

was not fitted- the radar equipment was missing

As well as this, the aircraft had to be repaired.fhe State commission decided to continue therials with the lightened second prototype -,zdeliye 88/2', built at an accelerated tempo atexperimental plant No 156. The repaired '88/1 '

,,ras subsequently used for testing and refining:he special equipment and the engines.

Series production of the'88'was decided on:ven while the State trials were in progress.3ouncil of Ministers directive No3193-1214ri 10th July 1952 and MAP order No804:structed that:

- preparations for series production be launched

at plant No 22 in Kazan' without waiting for the

completion of the State trials

- aircraft 'BB' be allocated the service designationTu-1 6

- series production of theTu-16 commence in July

1953 according to the following schedule: one

example in July, one in August, two in

September, three in October, three in November

and five in December- before 1 st August 1 952 the first prototype was to

perform an additional maximum-range test flight- a new gun ranging radar capable of detectlng

fighter-type targets at no less than 1 5-1 7km

range be developed for the Tu-16 (this project

bore the codename Topaz)- MAP and the Tupolev OKB were to submit for

State trials in September 1952 a Tu-1 6 with a

take-otf weight of 48,000-55,000k9, a bomb load

of 3,000-9,000k9, a technical range of 6,000-

7,000km, a service ceiling of 13,000m, a take-ofi

run of 1,500-1 ,800m and a defensive armament

of seven 23mm cannon (in accordance with the

amendments to Council of Ministers directive

No 31 25-1 469 of 24th August 1 951 )- production of theTu-4 at plant No22 be

terminated- series production of the AM-3 turbojet be

organised at aero engine factory No 16 in

Kazan', with 70 engines to be supplied in 1953- state trials of the Tu-1 6 be concluded in

December 1 953- service evaluation be carried out with the first 15

examples built at plant No 22

The'BB'gained its excess weight in the courseof the first prototype's design and construction.The primary reason for this had been the con-stant over-cautiousness of the structuralstrength department and the designers' con-cern both for the aircraft and their own fates. (lt

should be borne in mind that the Tu-16 cameinto being during the ultimate years of the Stalinregime when any kind of mistake could result in

imprisonment - or worse.) Everyone wanted tobe on the safe side. Designers at the 'grassroots' level added an extra 10% - just in case,

and their bosses added a bit more for the samereason, and so on. As a result the take-offweight exceeded the target figure by more than1 0 tons! Add to this the fact that, at the outset,the choice of powerplant was not yet finalised -aircraft had to be designed for either four AL-Ss

or two AM-3s, - which also added unnecessaryweight. As a consequence, there was morethan enough excess weight that could be shed -and this was done on the second prototype ofthe'88'.

The second prototype, designated '88/2'('order BB2'), was built in accordance with thesame Council of Ministers directive by and MAP

order but without any set deadlines. Originallyit was regarded merely as a 'duplicate' of thefirst prototype; however, by the late summer of'1951, when the '88/1 ' was almost completed, it

became obvious that the machine was over-weight. Tupolev charged his OKB with the taskof reducing the aircraft's empty weight as muchas possible. This in itself involved redesigningmuch of the structure and OKB-156 organiseda 'weight-trimming diet' in the course of whichit was planned to 'slim down 'the machine.

This work focused on three major areas.

Firstly, the non-stressed structural elementshad to be lightened. Secondly, it was neces-sary to reduce the weight of the load-bearingelements as much as possible without com-promising their structural strength by reducingthe number of manufacturing joints and fasten-ers (for example, the multi-part duct frameswere replaced by integral units made of AK-8

aluminium alloy, and the D-16 duralumin usedin several parts of the aidrame was replaced byV95 high-strength aluminium alloy). ln addition,single-piece pressed profiles with variablecross-sections were incorporated together withlarge pressed parts, large sheets and the like.

Thirdly, it was agreed with the Soviet AirForce that the flight manual would impose aspeed limit up to an altitude of 6,250m, at whichaltitude the aircraft would not normally beinvolved in combat operations. The calculateddynamic head pressure below this height wasreduced lrom 2,7 00k91m'? to 2,200k9/m'?.

Tupolev Tu-16 15

These measures reduced the aircraft'sempty weight from 41 ,050k9 to 36,490k9.Design of the new lighter aircraft was com-pleted in November 1952. By this time the blue-prints for the 'heavy' version had already been

supplied to plant No22 and preparations forproduction were going full steam ahead.Replacing these blueprints with the ones for the'lightened' version and resetting the jigs wasfraught with a delay ln the start of series pro-

duction, with predictable consequences forthose responsible. At this difficult momentTupolev, supported by the MAP top executives,took the courageous and vital decision to put

the lightened version of the Tu-16 into produc-

tion. At the same every measure was taken toshorten the delay until the first bombers had

been produced. All blueprints and correcteddrawings had been supplied to plant No22 bythe end of 1952, and the realistic deadline forthe first production Tu-16 delivery postponed

from July to October 1953.

Design work on the dooblyor began in

August 1951 , with construction of the aircraft at

OKB-156's prototype factory taking place

simultaneously. The blueprints which includedall the corrections aimed at lightening the air-

craft were prepared by the OKB between May

and December 1952. The second prototype('BB/2') was finished in early 1953 and truckedto the test and development centre atZhukovskiy on 13th February.

On 2nd March MAP issued order No272'legalising' the lightened prototype. This docu-ment contained provisos about the take-off

weight (70,000k9) and the maximum dynamicpressures at medium and low altitudes(2,20Okglm'below 6,250m). The aircraft was tobe ready for renewed State acceptance trials inJune 1953. The production plant (plant No22)was to provide TsAGI with a lightened version ofthe production Tu-16 for renewed static tests.

The epic story of the bomber's lightening pro-

gramme culminated in the following episode.Since the heads of OKB-156 had deviated fromthe generally accepted rules, a scapegoat had

to be found. The formal pretext was the secondprototype's inadequate top speed during State

trials (992kmih instead of the specified 1,000-

1,020km/h), which led the Minister of Aircraftlndustry to issue a formal rebuke to Dmitriy S

Markov who was in charge (which remained on

his record for a long time until finally cancelled

- and which he rightly and perversely could takepride in). He was 'rewarded' for the improved,and, as it turned out highly successful aircraft,

by a formal note in his employment certificateand personal record.

Apart from the revisions mentioned above,

Ihe dooblyor was also refined in the course olits design and construction. A number of criti-cisms made during the first tests flights of the'BB/1 ' were taken into account, and somechanges made when equipment not availableearlier was eventually fitted. ln particular:

- the fuselage nose was lengthened by 0.2m to

increase crew comfod and accommodate

equipment more easily

- the fuel capacity was increased from 38,200

The second prototype ( '88/2') at Zhukovskiyduring trials, with several Tu-4s in thebackground. The old control tower visiblejust aft of the tail in the three-quarters trontview is still in existence, as are the hugehangar and olfice building to the left.Tupolev JSC

litres to 43,900 litres (limited at first to 36,200

litres due to concerns about structural strength)

by installing fuel tanks in the outer wing panels;

the tailplane was reinforced and given a torsion

box structure like the wingsthe engine housings were slightly widened to

facilitate engine installation and maintenance

the airlair heat exchanger in the air conditioningsystem (ACS) was replaced by a cooling turbine

and the air intake for the ACS was altered

critical comments made by the State commission

on the first prototype's test results were acted

upon (in parlicular, this concerned the fitting and

operation of the mission equipment)

DT-V7, DT-N7S and DK-7 turrets with TKB-495A

cannon were fitted (later replaced by updated

TKB-4954M (AM-23) cannon)

a PS'48M optical sighling station, a PRS-1 Argon

gun-laying radar, an experimental model of the

Rubidiy MM-2 ground mapping radar and an

OPB-1 1R vector-synchronised bombsight (in place

of the OPB-10S optical bombslght) were fitted

KP-24 oxygen masks replaced the KP-1 6 masks

a modernised AP-5-2M autopilot was fitted

PO-4500 single-phase AC converters were

installed to power the radars

By March 1953 all the refinement work on thedooblyor was done, and on 14th March it wascleared for flight tests. These were carried outby a crew under test pilot N S Rybko, with co-pilot M L Mel'nikov (who had been co-pilot on

the 'BB/1 ') and test engineer M M Yegorov whohad done excellent investigative and develop-ment work on the Tu-4 and Tu-70 engines, as

well as during the testing of the first Tupolevjets.

fhe'8812' moved under its own power forfirst time on 28th March, and the 30-minute firstflight followed on 6th April. The manufacturer'stests were completed on 12th September. The

basic data relating to the factory tests appearbelow:

Length overall

Fuselage Iength

Height (theoretical)

Height (practical)

Wrng span

Wing area

Wing aspect ratio

Wing taper

Wing sweep at quader-chord

Landing gear track

Landing gear wheelbase

Empty weight

All-up weight

normal (in max-range llight)

maximum

35.2m

34.8m

1 0.355m

9.85m

32,989m

164,65m'?

6.627

2.6416

JJ

9,775m

10,913m

36,81 0kg

52,500k9

71 ,040k9

16 TupolevTu-16

r€d-on view of the second prototype, showing'Fe 3rr intakes and the original design of ther.an gear doors with one.piece quasi.triangulari*Enents at the lront of the oleos. The hangarils,o",le beneath the starboard wingtip is the rivalFr?sishchev OKB's experimental shop andt!€rl test facility. Tupolev JSC

: rg v/ th 56,000-kg AUW

,::I"--n-ilm:: :rde wilh 56,000-kg AUW

-,:m::crn

i '- :: :: 'ng Over the target

:;':': ccmb release

:-:'::1b release

: '::'1 Cal range-- a 71,040-kg AUW *

- a 72,000-kg TOW f-...-:' run/take-ofl distance +

- a 56,200-kg TOW

- a 71,000-kg TOW

'-: -j run/landing distance S

:-: :g weight 43,600k9

:-: rg weight 47,000k9

'-: -j r,in/ianding distance ti

:-: ng weight 48,470-kg

- -- a 3,000-kg bomb load (flying a hi-hl-hi' mission prof 1e)

.-: a 30,030-kgfuel load; i (flying a'hi-hi-hi mission prof le)

=-: : 3.000-kg bomb load; + to 25m at take"off power and

--' 'ap: S with brake parachute deployed and 35" flapt

' , :-iut brake parachute with 35' flap

l: 16th September 1953 'aircraft BB/2' was: :ared for renewed State trials and was::cepted by GK Nll WS two days later. The tri-

=s. held between 26th September 1953 and' 3th April 1954, were heid almost exactly a yearaler the dooblyof s first flight. Sixty{ive test',ghts with a total flying time of 154 hours and33 minutes were made in the course of the trials3y a test crew captained by A K Starikov (who

ater pedormed the greater part of the Tu-104arrliner's test programme) Apart from the testscf the aircraft itself, its systems underwent trials3oncurrently - in particular, the AM-3 engines,:he experimental Rubidiy MM-2 bombing radar,:he PS-4BM optical sighting stations and theexperimental Argon gun ranging radar.

Data derived from these trials of 'BB/2', whichserved as the yardstick for the first productionTu-16 bombers and were used as standards in

their manuals, are given beiow:

Length overall

Fuselage length

Height of aircraft (theoretica )

Height of a rcraft (practical)

Wing span

Wrng area

Wrng aspect ratio

Wing taper

Wrng sweepback at qi.rarter-chord

Landing gear track

Landing gear wheelbase

Dry weight

Empty weight

(wlth trapped fuel, starter fuel and oi )

A 1-up weight

normal for technical range

maximum

maximum for exceptrona occasions

Perm jtted landrng weight

Pay oad

normal

overload

Fuel ioad

normal

overload

maximum for exceptronal occasjons

Crew weight

Bomb load

Weight of ammunrtron for cannon

lVax speed at take"off power *

at sea level

at 6,250m

at 10,000m

[/ax speed at nominal power *

a1 sea level

al 6,250m

at 1 0,000m

Maximum L4ach number

Unslick speed

with a 57,000-kg take-off weight


Landing speed

with a 44,000-kg landing weight

Service cei rng, at nom nal power

w th 57,000-kg take-off weight

w th 71 ,560-kg take-off weight

Time to reach service cerling


with a 71 ,560-kg take-off weight

[/aximum technical range ( hi-hi-hi'):

wirh a 57.000-kg take'of{ we gntT

wrth a 71 ,560-kg take-otf we,gntt

Combat radius

Take-off run t2,41 skm

wlth a 57,000-kg take-off weight 1 ,140-1 ,BBsm

with a 71 ,560-kg take-off weight 1 ,900-3,165m

Time from brake release to unstuck

with a 57,000-kg take-0fi weight 28.7 secs

with a 71,560-kg take-off weight 45,0 secs

Landing run $

without brake parachute

with brake parachute

1,655-2,785m

1 ,050-2,1 B0m

* with a 55,000k9 a1l-up weight; t with a 3,000-kg bomb

load; t (take-off distance to 25m) at take-off power with

20' flap; S with a 44,000-kg landing weight and 35' f ap:

The 'BB/2' prototype passed its trials with GKNll WS purely in its bomber form. Tests of themine and torpedo armament were deferred tobe carried out on a specially modified produc-tion machine which would serve as the 'stan-

dard' for the Tu-16 torpedo bomber/minelayer.During the trials the Tu-16 was loaded with thefollowing types of bombs:

- Normal bomb load (3,000k9) 24 x FAB-100

- Maximum bomb load (9 000k9) 24xFAB-250

or 18 x FAB-500

or 6 x FAB-1500

or 2 x FAB-3000

or 1 x FAB-9000

During the course of the trials 12 TSOSAB-10

coloured flare bombs were carried.After receiving approval Jrom the State com-

mission 'aircraft 8B/2' was recommended forseries production and operational service withthe Soviet Air Force.

Subsequent production machines differedoutwardly from the two prototypes ('BB/1 ' and'BBi2') as follows, A different type of aerial wasinstalled atop the extreme nose (above the nav-igator's station forward of the flightdeck); two'towel rail' aerials were added on the upperfuselage sides aft of the flightdeck. The shapeof the dorsal antenna ahead of the navigator/dorsal gunner's observation/sighiing blister(serving the SPI-1 radio) was also different, andthe pitot tubes were repositioned. Finally, thesmall one-piece doors of quasi{riangularshape hinged at the front of the majn under-carriage oleos gave place to rectangularclamshell doors.

1 5,690k9

35,230k9

1 1 ,490k9

30,030k9

1,002kmi h

944km/h

905kmi h

16.3m/sec

1 1,6m/sec

7.2mlsec

6.7 m ns

13.8 mins

12,900m

13,200m

6,01 5km

5,760km

1,220 12,215n

1,700m / n.a.

1 ,200 / 1,840m

1,360m

1,760-2,553m

35.2m

34.8m

1 0.355m

9,85m

32,9Bgm

164.65m'

6.627

2.6416oE)

9,775m

10,913m

36,600k9

37.040k9

55,000k9

71 ,560k9

72,000k9

48,000k9

1 7,960k9

34,520k9

1 3,660k9

30,220k9

30,660k9

600k9

3,000k9

700k9

675km/h

992km/h

93Bkm/h

675km/h

95Bkm/h

91 5km/h

0.876

250km/h

280km/h

223knlh

12,800m

1 1,300m

31 mins

38 mins

5,640km

5,760km

Tupolev Tu-16 17

Chapter Two

The Tu-16's production history and many yearsof operational service involved numerous andvaried versions (production series, prototypes,experimental adaptations and testbeds). Someof these were purpose-built, others were refits.The overall number of versions exceeded 80,and there were many projects which werenever realised.

The first line of development concerned thebomber version and its modifications. TheTu-16 carried a conventional bomb load; theTu-164 could carry nuclear weapons as well.They were followed in production by the Tu-16(ZA) and the Tu-16 (ZA), both of which wereequipped for wing{o-wing in-flight refuelling(lFR). After this, the IFR capability became analmost standard feature and later models had

no special suffix to denote it. The prototypeTu-168 was fitted with more powedul and fuel-efficient engines.

The Tu-1 6T torpedo-bomber (forpedonosets)was vifiually identical to the bomber version,but with a revised weapons bay. Later, the tor-pedo-bombers were refitted as Tu-16PLO anti-submarine warfare aircratt (protivolodochnayaoborona - ASW) and as Tu-1 65 maritime searchand rescue aircraft (polskovo-spasahtel'nw *SAR, used attributively), the later carrying a

lifeboat.Some bombers were adapted to carry

guided bombs - the UB-2F Chaika (Seagull)

and Condor munitions - on external hardpoints.A projected version carried these weaponsinternally.

The refuelling tanker versions were similarto the bombers. The Tu-16(2) used the wing-to-wing system, while the Tu-16N and Tu-16NNutilised the probe-and-drogue system. Addi-tional fuel tanks were housed in the bomb bay,and hose drum units were installed in thestarboard wing (in the case of the Tu-162) orthe bomb bay. When these were removed,the aircraft could operate as conventionalbombers.

The second line of development lay in theadaptation of the Tu-16 as a missile carrier ableto strike at both land and naval targets withequal success. The first of these was theTu-16KS armed with Kometa (Comet) air-to-surface missiles (ASMs) which was producedin series. With the development of the moresophisticated K-16 and K-1 1 ASMs, theTu-16KS aircraft were upgraded to carry them,the Tu-16KSR-2 being armed with the K-16 andthe Tu-16K-11-16 with either the K-16 or theK-11.

Tu-1 6 Versions, Developmentand Series Production

The Tu-16KS and its derivatives had onemajor drawback; they could not be used asconventional bombers. At the same time, thenumber of Tu-16KSs buili could not satisfy iheexisting demand for missile strike aircraft, andbomber versions had to be converted. This ledto the advent of the Tu-16KSR-2A andTu-16KSR-2-11 versions able to carry the K-16or K-11 ASMs while retaining their capability asbombers.

With the arrival of the more sophisticatedK-26 ASM, earlier versions of the Tu-16 wererefitted to carry it: 'straight' Tu-16 bombers andTu-16KSR-2A bomber/missile carriers wereupgraded to Tu-16KSR-2-5 standard, theTu-16KSR-2-11 was converted into theTu-16KSR-2-5-11, and the Tu-16KSR-2 andTu-16K-11-16 into the Tu-16K-26. The all-pur-pose Tu-16KSR-2-5 and Tu-16KSR-2-5-11

strike aircraft were produced in larger numbersthan any other missile-toting version of theTu-1 6.

The Tu-1 6K-26 generated the more advancedTu-16K-26P and Tu-16K-26-07 versions. A lim-ited number of Tu-1 6K-26s and Tu- 1 6KSR-2-5swas equipped with the new Rubin-1M (Ruby,pronounced roobin) radar. Two examples ofthe Tu-16KSR-2-5 with this radar were con-verted into Tu-16 Islklon-N (Cyclone N)

weather research aircraft. A small number ofTu-16KSR-2As was refitted as Tu-16KSR-|Saircraft.

Some Tu-16KSR-2-5s, Tu-16K-11-16s andTu-16K-26s were equipped to carry bombs; afew of these could take an increased bombload. New types of ASMs were tested, using thefu-16K-22 as a delivery vehicle.

Versions adapted to carry target droneswere similar to the ASM carriers. These versions(the Tu-16KRM, Tu-16NKRM, Tu-16KRME andTu-16NM) were produced for the Air DefenceForce (PVO - Protivovozdooshnaya oborona)and were able to launch rockelpowered targetdrones.

The third line of development was the cre-ation of special naval versions - both ASM car-riers and reconnaissance aircraft. Thesediffered significantly in configuration from theTu-16 and Tu-1 6KS with reconfigured weaponsbays and a new YeN radar installed in the nose.The first of these aircraft was the Tu-1 6K withnew engines and the K-10 ASM. lt was placedin production as the Tu-1 6K-1 0 but the produc-tion version was powered by the same oldAM-3s. lt was followed by the upgradedTu-16K-10D, Tu-16K-10N and Tu-16K-10P.

When the K-26 and K-26P ASMs became avail-able, these naval ASM carriers were refittedas the Tu-16K-10-26, Tu-16K-10-26N andTu-16K-10-26P. The Tu-16K-10-268 versioncould also be used as a bomber, as the B suf-Iix ('for bombardirovshchi k) reveals.

When the Tu-16K-10 and Tu-16K-10Dbecame obsolescent, they were converted intoTu-16RM-1 and Tu-16RM-2 maritime recon-naissance aircraft. The variant forfilming had its

cannon armament replaced by special cin6cameras.

The fourth line of development lay in spe-cialised reconnaissance and electronic coun-termeasures (ECM) versions. The Tu-16Rdiffered considerably from the original bomber,carrying dedicated equipment and an addi-tional crew member as operator The Tu-16RMwas an upgraded version, and the Tu-16RRradiation reconnaissance aircraft collected airsamples and analysed them for nuclear fallout,chemical and bacteriological contamination.The Tu-16RE version carried an ECM set in

addition to its normal reconnaissance equip-ment, while the Tu-16RTs provided mid-courseguidance for submarine-launched missiles.

The first ECM versions were highly spe-cialised machines. The Tu-16 Yolka (Spruce)was equipped for passive ECM and theTu- 1 6SPS for active ECM. The Tu-1 6 Yolka waslater fitted with active ECM as well, and theTu-16SPS had automated ASO-16 equipmentwhich led to the ECM versions being com-bined. The resulting Tu-16E had a bigger crewthan the Tu-1 65PS.

The most sophisticated ECM version was theTu-16P, on which the bomb bay was replacedby a special compartment to house lhe Buket(Bouquet) ECM suite. A small number ofTu-16Ps carried rockets to provide passive

ECM, and some had the Ficus ECM systemwith directional antennas. The last version car-ried the very powerful Cactus ECM set.

The fifth line involved prototype and experi-mental machines, as well as testbeds. Someversions remained in prototype form for the fol-

lowing three reasons. Firstly, the prototype was

built to achieve some technical end, whichmight prove successful but production statuswould be frustrated by a variety of reasons -political, economic and so on. Mention hasbeen made of the Tu-168 and Tu-16K proto-types. They were successful in term of theirspecifications, but the late 1950s and early1960s saw a drastic cutback in aircraft devel-opment work. Both machines had new

18 Tupolev Tu-16

r :r of Tu.16 variants was often operated by:'E same unit. Here, Kazan'-built Tu-l6K-11.16

- ied' (c/n 5202009) with the characteristicnrsried-T antenna array on the nose shares the{iE:: Iine with a Kuibyshev-built basic bomber

=€,Ed 09 Blue' (c/n 1880904), a Tu-l6E 'Azaliya'3ltrl aircraft with the characteristic boattailBr:g housing an active iammer ('29 Blue') andn: rther aircraft in bomber and EGM

=rigurations coded'30 Blue','26 Blue',

= 3;ue'.'24 Blue','22 Blue' and'34 Blue'. A---22M3 bomber/missile strike aircraft is visiblesFrEnd. along with two seemingly non-airworthy-,-:5s banished to the grass verge to avoidEupying apron space. Note the open entry'fi:r]es. Yefim Gordon archive

: -: --s. but in the prevailing climate of thought-: --:: aircraft nor their intended engines went-- - croduction. An |FR-capable version:: - :3ed with a refuelling probe did not reach-::-aiional status, as it was not considered:: . io convert the existing fleet of Tu-16s.: second reason was that the prototype

: :: :o meet the specified technical or perfor--:- le target. A case in point was the Tu-16 fit-:: ,',,:h RD-3MR engines equipped with thrust:.:'sers; the aircraft did not see series pro-:_::3n.

: :hird reason involved the prototype's cre-.- :- for a specific purpose only. Some Tu-16:-: converted into airborne command posts

: , - ^g tests of a certain cruise missile, but were-=::rfigured back into their original guise once'-: iests were over. This, however, did not: .', ays happen: the Tu-16 Tsiklon-Ns served in'- -i form until the end of their service lives.=,:errmental versions were used for important:::3cts of technical research. They were usu-: ., custom-built at production factories but a':," were converted from 'second-hand' exam-: :s requisitioned from the Air Force. Some---es the research involved another type of:'oraft. For example, tests of the 'jump strut'::',/eloped for the nose gear unit of Mya-: shchev's M-50 bomber were carried out on a---16. Testbeds were used for verifying and:=veloping new systems, assemblies, equip--:ent and engines, as well as for multifarious:<perimental and research purposes. For-stance, the Tu-16 was used for testing thefK-20 cannon-equipped tail turret, Ihe K-22

-SM system, the PN navigation/attack radar:reated forthe Tu-22K missile strike aircraft and:re like, as well as for aerodynamic research.'.lost prominently, the Tu-16LL was used as a:eslbed for many Soviet jet engines.

The sixth course of development concerned:he adaptation of the Tu-1 6 for the Civil Air FleetIGVF - Grazhdahnskiy vozdooshnyy flot), orAeroflot (the sole Soviet airline). There wereonly a few of these adaptations: for aerial pho-iography, weather research and for carryingthe matrices of national newspapers. Theywere also used to train GVF aircrews duringtheir conversion to the Soviet Union's first jetairliner, the Tu-104. These adaptations werespecially fitted out and lacked armament.

ffiM?ii'-J'

Many Tu-16s ended their days as remote-controiled target drones. A limited numberwere built in China which developed a few ver-sions of its own.

The Tu-16 was built in quantity between 1953

and late 1963. Early production exampleslacked IFR equipment. Only eleven versions ofthe Tu-16 (the Tu-16, Tu-164, Tu-16KS,Tu-16K-10, Tu-16T, Tu-16R with SRS-1 orSRS-3 communications intelligence (COMINT)sets, the Tu-16 Romb (Rhombus) with theSRS-3 COMINT suite in the bomb bay, theTu-16E and Tu-16 Yolka with the ASO-16 auto-matic chaff dispenser, the Tu-16P and theTu-165PS with SPS- 1 or SPS-2 active jammers)were built as such at three factories. Thenumerous other versions were refits of earlierproduction models. Thus the Tu-16R andTu-16P were built only at plant No 1 in Kuiby-shev (now renamed back to Samara), althoughKazan'-built examples of these versions (iden-tifiable by their construction numbers) can beencountered. The exception is the single exam-ple built with the Sl/lkat (Silicate) experimentalECM system; while not officially listed as a pro-duction machine, this aircraft was not a refit(subsequently this Tu-16 had the Srlkat systemreplaced by aFonar'(Lantern) ECM set.

Over its entire manufacturing period theTu-1 6 was built at three factories in 1 05 batchescovering all versions (apart from theTu-16K-10). Production rates varied over theyears when the Tu-16 was in production. Mostexamples were built in 1955-1957; more than athousand were produced in the course of thesethree years.

Between 1953 and 1959 plant No22 namedafter S P Gorbunov at Kazan'-Borisoglebskoyeproduced the following versions: the baselineTu-1 6 bomber, the Tu- 1 64 nuclear weapon car-rier, the Tu-16KS missile strike aircraft and the

Tu-16E ECM version. ln 1958 the factory initi-ated series production of the Tu-104B airliner;a year later it launched production of the Tu-22supersonic bomber - at which point Tu- 1 6 pro-duction was temporarily suspended. ln 1957-59 several experimental and pre-productionexamples of missile strike versions (earlier pro-

duction machines refitted as Tu-16K-10s) wereproduced for the Soviet Naval Air Arm (AVMF -Aviahtsiya voyenno-morskovo flota). ln 1959plant No 1 completed the first productionTu-16K-10; however, in 1961 , when the Kuiby-shev factory switched to missile production,series production of this version was reinstatedat plant No 22, with the last example leaving thefactory in December 1963.

Until the late 1980s, Tu-l6s had the con-struction numbers stencilled on the forwardfuselage and on the fin in large digits; later,however, they were not carried visibly for secu-rity reasons. The c/ns of Kazan'-built examplesare deciphered as follows. For instance, aTu-1 6KS with the tactical code '25 Blue'was c/n6203125 - that is, year of manufacture 1956,plant No 22 (the first digit is omitted to confusewould-be spies), batch 03 1 , the 25th aircraft inthe batch. Batches 1 through 10 consisted offive aircraft each; the number was increased toten per batch from Batch 1 1 onwards, then to20 from per batch from Batch 26 onwards andfinally to 30 per batch from Batch 31 onwards.

OKB-156, Lll or GK Nll WS documentssometimes quote abbreviated c/ns. For exam-ple, 'Tu- 1 6 No 1 01 ' was a reference to the aircraft whose c/n was 32001 01 (unfortunately theabbreviated form cannot be used to recon-struct the complete c/n unless you know whenand where the aircraft was built). Additionally,some Kazan'-built Tu-16s carried a four-digitnumber on the tail below the c/n, the first digitlikewise matching the year of production; forinstance, Tu-16KS'49 Red'(c/n 7203608) wasmarked 7124,whilefu-16K-1 1-16'54 Red' (c/n

Tupolev Tu-1 6

8204022) was marked 8191 . However, whilethese numbers accrue continuously, they donot match the c/n sequence and the meaningis unknown.

The Tu-16K-10 was built in 30 batches, each

comprising five aircraft; oddly, these did not

continue the sequence of the previous Kazan'-built batches (Nos 1 through 42), being allo-cated the numbers 51 through 80. With theexception of the two prototypes, Kazan'-builtTu-16K-10 missile carriers used a different con-struction number system - the one introducedfor the Tu-22. For instance, an example coded'15 Red'was c/n 1793014 - that is, batch 79,

Tu-16 Production at Plant No22

year of manufacture 1963, the first aircraft in thebatch; the first and the last digits do not signifyanything at all and were chosen arbitrarily tocomplicate c/n deciphering for the outsider.Again, unlike the prototypes, production

Tu- 16K-10s did not carry the cin visibly.Figures for Tu-16 production at plant No22

are given in the table below:

The first production examples from Plant No 22

became the prototypes for various versions orwere used as test-beds. Examples Nos 102

(c/n 32001 02) and 1 03 (c/n 42001 03) were con-veried to Tu-164 prototypes; example No305

The experimental Tu-16P 'Rezeda' ECM aircraft('17 rcd' cln 52O2SO7) heads a long line of sisterships at Vladimirovka AB, Akhtoobinsk,including a missile strike aircraft coded'14 Red'(c/n 6401208). All of these aircraft wereeventually converted into M-16 target drones byGK Nll WS. Yefim Gordon

Five naval Tu-16s fly in echelon starboardformation over a Soviet Navy destroyer duringan exercise. Yefim Gordon archive

(c/n 4200305) was the Tu-16KS prototype;

Tu-16 No401 (cln 4200401) was used fordefensive armament trials, and Tu-16 No 105

(c/n 4200105) was used for testing the resis-

tance of long-range radio communications tojamming. No302 (c/n 42OO3O2) was used fortesting the interlocking of the undercarriagewheels with the wheel well doors; No501 (c/n

4200501 ) became the Tu-1 6T torpedo bomberprototype, No303 (c/n 4200303) was used fortesting the SNAB-3000 homing bomb (see

Chapter3), No504 (c1n4200504) was used by

OKB-'I56 for experimental work and No505(c/n 4200505) was supplied to Plant No 1 in the

form of separate assemblies as a 'starter kit' toassist in launching production.

On 1gth September 1953 the Soviet Councilof Ministers issued directive No 2460-1017

ordering a stepping up of Tu-1 6 production, fol-

lowed by a Ministry of Aircraft lndustry order tothe same effect on 25th September. Amongother things, Plant No 1 at Kuibyshev-Bezymyanka was ordered to master the type.The first production bombers rolled off the

Kuibyshev assembly line in the summer oj1954. Production there was greatly assisted

both by the OKB and the by principal manufac-turer of the type, Plant No 22. Of lhe ten exam-ples assembled in Kuibyshev in 1954, threewere built from completely knocked-down(CKD) kits supplied by Kazan'. Thus the firstpre-production Tu-16 built by Plant No1 (c/n

1880001, the first example in Batch Zero) was

assembled entirely from the components of aKazan'-built aircraft that would have been c/n

4200505 (as were c/ns 1 880402 and 1 880403).

and the first seven examples built in early 1955

were similarly assembled from CKD kits sup-plied by Plant No 22.

The following versions of the Tu-16 were pro-

duced at Kuibyshev: the Tu-16 bomber, the

Tu-16K-10, the Tu-165PS, the Tu-16R, the

Tu-l 6 Romb, the Tu-1 6E and the Tu- 1 6 Yolka.

ln all, Plant No 1 produced 40 batches coveringall versions of the Tu-16. Until 1955 each batch

consisted of five aircraft; the number was

increased to ten from batch 1 1 onwards and to20 from batch 21 onwards. The c/ns of Kuiby-

shev-built examples are deciphered as follows:for instance, Tu-16R'12 Red'is c/n 1BB1B09 -that is, Plant No 1 , aircraft 'BB' (the Tu-16's des-

ignation at the OKB), batch 18, the ninth aircraft

in the batch.Tu-16 production at Plant No 1 in Kuibyshev

is summarised in the table on the opposite page:

ilil'ijiflii*l

1 953 1 954 1955 1 956 1 957 1 958 1 959 1 9631 9621 9611 960

Tu-1 6

Tu-1 64

Tu-1 6KS

Tu"1 6K-1 0

Tu-1 6E

19*

57+46*

23+23'

2

19

45

6

1

189

10

103

29

3*1Q*

16*

3* 2*

3B*

30

t examples equipped with a wing{o-wing IFR system

&. -P

ri1l'ril"!t,,lqtl

Tupolev Tu-1 6

-.::re machines produced in Kazan', some of-= "st Tu-16s produced at Plant No1 were

-::: as prototypes for later versions. The wing-

--.. :g IFR system was tested on Nos 001 (c/n

:::101), 101 (c/n 1880101) and 301 (c/n

:::3C1); Tu-16 No202 (c/n 1880202) was

-::: rn developing the RBP-6 Lyustra (Chan-

:: :' radar and the SRS-3 Romb-1 (Rhom-

: -:-- r electronic intelligence (ELINT) system,-

= Tu-1 6 No 302 (c/n 1 880302) served as the:':-:rype for the Tu-1 6R reconnaissance ver-

. :- initially the experimental Tu-16R-1 and-:- :ie experimental Tu-16R-2).

I ^ 2nd February 1955 the Council of Minis-:--. ssued directive No 163-97 followed on 1st

:-:r by MAP order No 1 27. These documents.::-:C Plant No 64 at Voronezh-Pridacha was

:'::-ed to begin series production of the---- -T torpedo-bomber for the Naval Air Arm,:,-: :re process of establishing series produc-:- :nere likewise proceeded with the active

:::::ance and support of OKB-156 and the

Tu-15 Production at Plant No 1

Version 1 954 1 956 1 957 1 959 1 9601958

Tu-1 6

Tu-1 6 SPS (with SPS-1)

Ty-16 SPS (with SPS-2)

Tu-16 Romb

Tu"16 Silikat (Fonar')

Tu-16R (with SRS-1 and SRS-3)

Tu-16 Yolka (wlth AS0-16)

Tu-1 6E

Tu-1 6K-1 0

10 BO

22

35

20

28

5

1

26r

34*

46*

70

4* 13*

17*

* equipped with wing-to wing IFR system. Three Kuibyshev-built examples were experimentally iitted with the wing{o-wing

system as early as in 1956

Kazan' factory. Apart from the Tu-]6 and

Tu-1 6T, Plant No 64 built a small batch of Tu-16

Yolka (wilh ASO-16 automatic systems). Pro-

duction at Voronezh lasted until December1957. Twentylwo batches (five aircraft each in

the first 11 batches and ten aircraft each from

batch 12 onwards) were built in Voronezh. The

c/ns are deciphered as follows: for example,

Tu-16L1 '41 Red' is c/n 6401410 - that is, year

of manufacture 1956, Plant No64 (again thefirst digit is omitted for security reasons), batch014. the tenth aircraft in the batch.

i€ 3lue' (cln7203415) was a Soviet Navy/:?cific Fleet Tu-16KSR.2.5. lt is seen here atr:zdvizhenka AB, its home base, in companyr':i a pair of Tu-22M3s hidden in earthen-','elments and a pair of the mighty Tu-95BTs'?:onnaissance/over-the-horizon targeting:r-craft. YeJim Gordon archive

-:-16KS'62 Red' (cln72O373O), the last aircraftr Kazan'-built batch 37, is pictured in the static:ark at the grand airshow which took place atLcscow-Domodedovo airport on gth July 1967.1e retracted radome ol the Kobal't-M 360'

-arch/target illumination radar is visible under:€ belly, The meaning of the additional number-:33 painted on the tail beneath the c/n is

-nknown, Yefim Gordon archive

",&&+ dtu -

14d.",&

;*.{ii- tu n

'd- q.*r='t -srlr& if#s*

TW i,f;,'f;irilr,;*n:lt+i;.

Tupolev Tu-1 6 21

Tu-16 Production in Voronezh Tu-16 Versions Production Totals

Version

Tu-1 6

Tu-1 6T

Tu-16 Yolka (with ASO-16)

B

17

* examples equrpped for wing-to-\,ving reluelling

All three production factories were also

involved in various refit and upgrades pro-

grammes and in producing spares for the

Soviet Air Force's operational and mainte-

nance units. An immense amount was donethrough the combined efforts of the Soviet Air

Force and OKB-156 since, in addition to the 1 1

versions produced in series, there were several

dozen types of modifications carried out on

Tu-16 machines while in service.

A total of 1,507 Tu-16s (excluding the two

Moscow-built prototypes and the static test air-

frame) were built at the three production facto-

ries: 799 at Plant No22, 543 at Plant No 1 and

165 at Plant No 64. The tables list the quantities

of the major versions and annual production of

the Tu- 16 at the three factories.Some specialised versions were converted

by operational Soviet Air Force and Soviet Navy

units. For example, production Tu-16K-10 mis-

sile carriers were converted into Tu-16RM

reconnaissance versions by Naval Air Arm

units, Testbed examples were often converted

by the organisations wishing to use them, either

with the parlicipation of OKB-156 or under itssupervision. It would be impossible to give aprecise list of all the versions and modificationssince some aircraft were subject to more than

one refit or upgrade. The following chapters,

drawing on existing documents and archive

material, contain more detailed information on

the various versions of the Tu-16 as well as on a

series of projects which never materialised.

Tu-1 6

Tu-1 6A

Tu-1 6KS

Tu-1 6K-1 0

Tu-1 6T

Tu-l6R (with SRS-1 and SRS-3)

Tu-1 6 Rornb

Tu-1 6E

Tu-1 6 Yolka (with ASO-16)

Tu-16SPS (wlth SPS 1)

Tu-16SPS (wlth SPS-2)

Tu-1 6SPS Sil kat/Fonar'

1 956 1957 Version Plant No22

Kazan

Plant No 1

Kuibyshev

Plant No64

Voronezh

Total

49 22*

29 30*

10*

44

453

107

157

79171

76

59

70

5

5t

42

42

102

1

294

453

107

216

76

70

5

B9

52

42

102

1

3B

Totals 165543

Tu-16 Production Totals

Year Plant No 22

Kazan

Plant No 1

Kuibyshev

Plant No 64

Voronezh

Total

i oEe

1 954

1 955

1 956

1 957

1 958

1 959

1 960'1961

1 962

1 963

2

70

200

tJz

170

73

2

30

70

50

25

7B

62

2

BO

327

299

438

137

32

42

30

70

50

10

102

B9

206

b4

30

42

Totals I 507

A Tu-l6KSR-2-5 coded'18 Red'photographed from an escorting NATO fighter, Note the slits in thewing flaps to accommodate the lins of the KSR-s missiles and the camera window immediately aftof the bomb bay. Yefim Gordon archive

r;i"

165543

I

s,.;$"

..---,ff.ffi'

{,"'**

Tupolev Tu-1 6

,o- ,' *. , ij

Chapter Three

Production and Experimental BombersSpecial Purpose Versions

-.-1 5 Long-Range Bomberr rcraft '88', 'order 882', izdeliye N)

--: :'cduction Tu-16 bomber was based on'-. ::cond prototype (the 'BB/2'), and new- :--:rogical methods and structural materials-:::: De used in its construction The integral, ::-'-ames, essential to reduce the machine's.'--::;ral weight, were produced at Kamensk-

-'. s.iry. using large hydraulic presses:-:-:rr from the Soviet occupation zone in:=.-any in 1948 together with their German: ::'::rves. The three Schliemann presses (two

:- :ai presses delivering pressures of 30,000.-: '5,000 tons and a horizontal press of

- - : I ions) had been assembled and brought:'--- :c full power by 1952, butwere still almost: : :Je to lack of any orders from the aircraft-:-::ry. Designers were still thinking in out-:=::: technological terms. The Tu-16 was,-.':icre, the first Soviet aircraft built in series: -s= large pressed parls. Soon afterthis, sim-:- ,,,'lng spars were pressed at Kamensk-

-': sKiy for the M-4 built at plant No23 in

':s3cw; later orders included wings for the:-:tr surfaceto-air missile (SAM) system. By-: :nd of the 1950s a hydraulic press of com-:;':cle power, but now built in the USSR, was- -.:a,led at plant 1 in Kuibyshev and later used-: lroduce parts for the R-7 intercontinental:: slic missile (ICBM). These advances put

- = iSSR among the world's leading aero and.:a:e technologies.

as already mentioned, plant No 22 in Kazan'

-:rame the pilot production factory for the---:6 in accordance with Council of Ministers: '3ctive No3193-1214 of 1Oth July 1952. lts

=,lerience in the large-scale production of---4 bombers enabled it to implement produc-

tion of an essentially new type of aircraft with-out undue problems - although some of theolder parts of the factory had to be rebuilt. The

launch of Tu-16 production was closely moni-tored byA N Tupolev, D S Markov and I F Nez-

val', head of OKB-156's Kazan' branch, and

was based on the principles tried and testedwith the Tu-4. While the two aircraft differedmarkedly, Ihere were structural similarities.

There were still many new problems to be

overcome. The swept-wing configuration with

the jet engines tucked into the fuselage and fed

by ducts through the wing spars demanded a

special degree of care and accuracy from the

assembly workers. The use of numerous large

assemblies and integral parts meant the needfor meticulous attention in their manufacture and

assembly. A pafiicular problem was caused bythe delivery of imperfect wing sparframes. Closeinspection was needed before these could bepassed for assembly, and in some instances

frames with deep incisions had to be scrapped.There were also many teething problems in fit-

ting equipment, in pafiicular the defensive arma-ment and the PRS-1 Argon gun laying radar.

The first Kazan'-built production bomber (c/n

3200101) was rolled out on 29th October 1953,

with production being extended to Kuibyshev in

1954 and to Voronezh the following year. The

empty weight of the production bomber variedfrom 37,200 to 37,520k9 (due to the variationsin the bomb racks to suit different bomb loads).The Tu-16 was officially authorised for Soviet Air

Force service by Council of Ministers directiveNo1034-43 of 28th May 1954 amd MAP orderNo355 of 4th June, with the Ministry of Aircraftlndustry stipulating that a production machineshould be available for checkout trials by GK Nll

WS in September-October of that year. Check-out tests of the defensive armament system'scomponents (the PS-35 sighting station with theVB-53 Argon radar) were carried out in July1 954, using Tu-1 6 c/n 4200401 .

The Soviet Council of Ministers confirmedthe following performance data for the Tu-16:

Crew

lVax speed*

at 6,250m

at 10,000m

Service ceiling / time to reach it tlVaxlmum range {Take-off run with a 71,560-kg TOW

Landlng run with a

landing weight of 44,000k9

Bomb load

normal

maximum

Cannon armament

0ne fixed lorwardiiring 23mm cannon with 100 rounds

Dorsal turret with 2 x 23mm cannon (250rpg)

Ventral turret with 2 x 23mm cannon

(normally 250rpg, but up to 350rpg possible)

Tail turret with 2 x 23mm cannon

(normally 350rpg, but 500rpg posslble)

* in level flight at max power and a normal AUW of 55,000k9

t at nominal power and normal a1l-up weight

t at optimum cruising speed with a 72,000-kg TOW (hi-hi-hi

mission profile) and a 3,000-kg bomb load

MAP ordered a production aircraft (cln 4201002)

to be modified to increase its range. lts maxi-

mum overload weight of 75,800k9 includedgreater fuel tankage. Monitored trials by Nll WSof the aircraft's take-off and landing characteris-

tics and range with the overload weight given

above yielded the following results:

- With the AM-3 engines at take-off thrust and

flaps at 20', lift-off speed increased to 288km/h,

the take-off run to 2,180m, and the take-off

distance to 3,375m- With a bomb load of 300k9, ammunition 700k9

and fuel load 34,263k9 a range of 6,430km was

attained. The service range (with 5% fuel

reserves) was 5,970km

An uncoded Tu.16 (c/n 42OO4O1) representativeol the baseline bomber version sits parked atthe lrkutsk Military Aviation Technical Schoolunder dreary skies in the early spring. Note theconcrete blast dellector behind the aircraft.Viktor Kudryavtsev archive

6

992km/h

93Bkm/h

12,900m / 31 mins

5,760km

1,900m;

1 ,655k9

3,000k9

9,000k9

srl

fi;

Tupolev Tu-16 23

I

l

l

I

llliiirii',lr&

xl;l

#^fu*\"*t -:__. " ffiffiffi'"

rit,ilili:rif

-k"$Ai,tlt:.'j ,rr;ri ;.1r,,,r,j;l':ll

'r 'atrriil,"tii{lFs,!ur,q c;',: r rrtlu, r

After these trials, Tu-1 6 cln 4201002 was usedas the 'standard-setter' for production exam-ples for 1955.

ln .1954 production was initiated at Plant No 1

at Kuibyshev. Tests of the first productionexample (c/n 1880001) demonstrated that a

large aircraft like the Tu-16 did require power-assisted controls, and that, despite its weightreduction, the Tu-16 was of robust construc-tion. These conclusions resulted from a testflight on 28th September 1954 in whichfactory teslpilot Molchanov was instructed todetermine the machine's G limits. At an altitudeof 9,000m the machine was put into a dive,pulling of 3.2 Gs when recovering from thedive; however, the mission objective was toachieve a G load of 3.47. When the pilotsreached a critical angle of attack, the aircraftbegan to vibrate, then stalled and went into atight spiral. The captain ordered the crew to

eject, and was the first to do so. However, theyoung co-pilot A I Kazakov stayed with the air-craft and trjed to recover from the spin, butcould not do so due to the high control forcesas speed increased. A G load of 4.2 wasreached and the destruction of the aircraft andits crew seemed imminent. But fortune was onKazakov's side: the G force wrenched theundercarriage legs loose, forcing them intoextended position, and the extra drag slightlyreduced the speed. By pulling the control col-umn back with a force of no less than 100k9Kazakov recovered from the spin just beforereaching the ground. The aircraft remained, toall intents and purposes, undamaged and amonth later Kazakov was awarded the Hero ofthe Soviet Union title. The strength of the air-craft evoked real interest, since it had signifi-cantly exceeded its G limit and still stayed in

one piece.

'65 Red' (c/n 5201308), another example of the'conventional'Tu-16 bomber (as distinct fromthe nuclear-capable Tu.16A). The use of suchlarge tactical codes on the forward tuselage waslater discontinued. Note the early.model 'towelrail'aerial on the forward fuselage, This aircraftwas later transferred lo another unit andrecoded'17 Red'. Yefim Gordon archive

One more early-model Tu-16 bomber,'70 Red'(c/n 5201406), taxies out lor take.off past a trioof Lisunov Li-2 transports. Yefim Gordon archive

From the second aircraft of the third Kuiby-shev-built batch (c/n 1880302) onwards theforward-hinged quasitriangular forward seg-ments of the mainwheel well doors werereplaced by twin lateral doors. This eliminatedvibration in the undercarriage fairing caused bythe stalled airflow from the door when the legswere lowered.

{41+fu

twej'

;*r.fr*#*trfl*-.. -,.

Tupolev Tu-1 6

"l jl;,ifi#llffimffifl#u+#,,hr @ry.= 1

-" , '::" , ;h oi Tu-16'32 Blue'(c/n 5201510)rii;ir" -/: 1:-3ss a wintry airfield shows the.ilr':.:',:,- ':cs and the tail guns in the lullyr,p, :" :: :csrtion. Note that the rear fuselage is:i i,: r u -: s3ot: the AM.3 was a smoky engine.

: ::' r' :-ree production factories, Plant- : -: -3:h. rolled out its first production: - :-::JOi) in May 1955.

: ':- :':3i.iction bombers entered ser-- --= Long-Range Aviation (DA -. : :. ahisiya) and the Naval Air Arm

: - 3h:s favoyenno-morskovoflota)in::-: -ê Air Force and the Navy

. . " =

2?: combers built at the three fac-, :- :-: ccurse of six years in roughly-

- -::-s In the mid-1950s 1 14 Tu-16s, - ::.1 rtc inllight refuelling tankers at: i,:::^ iactories, and from 1957 90: : - : : =: to receive inf light refuelling,::::-e'rtlv some Tu-16s were con--': :-::e-and-drogue tankers to refuel.': -- :1u-22. A number were also con---:.arious testbeds from 1954

, :. :-e early 1980s only a small num-:: ::::3 comber versions of the Tu-16: - sa1'rce.': -:^)/ years of service, the basic air-: : :: :noroved and modernised with

=:: - :s take-off weight to 77,150k9

=-::. ,,,'eight of 37,200k9). The RD-3M:- r :ê,r advanced versions replaced-: :'.i-3s. the mission equipment was

:- :^: ai ASO-16 passive ECM system-: -'-.=t enemy radar. Many other sys-

:': : S3 Changed,- . --.=, version remained the basis for::::-3^: versions of the Tu-16. From

:-:s i yras supplied to China, where:-: :,ciion was later inaugurated.

-: :' :-e Tu-16s remaining in service at. - : :' :^: 1970s were equipped the latest

: :-:-s in particular the Siren' (Lilac,

- --::: seeren'), SPS-4M and the like.

=' .:-: and order 691'). (SPS = stah-, ::nekhovykh signahlov lit. 'interfer-

:-: 3i-.itter'.) Machines were modified'-: lcgovitsa' [Cornea] flight system.

-:-^ .les which began life as dedicated':-ained in this form throughouttheir

. :s Several remained at the DA's 43rd- . lcnversion Training Centre at Dyag--: as3 near Ryazan' and with the training

: -:- : :'ihe Chelyabinsk Military Navigator-, =:-

-- : :::aafance of the new jet bomber in the: - =- - - l. did not go unnoticed in the West.--l : :' Standards Co-ordinating Commit-

-313 allocated it the reporting namej , : --=' a^c subsequenlly Badger-A as the first: : :-:: :- model.

---' 6A Nuclear-Capable Bomber: .:raft '88A', 'order 19'l', izdeliye NAI

--: ---' 3A carrying a free{all atomic bomb

=. --: '.st Soviet nuclear weapons delivery

;-'***l!*-:

system to see service in large numbers. ln pro-

duction it was referred to as 'order 191', and inoperational service as 'aircraft BBA' or izdeliyeNA (for ahtomnyy - nuclear; in this case,nuclear-capable). Unlike the Tu- 1 6, the Tu-1 64had a bomb bay with electrical heating, insula-tion and a temperature-regulation system toenable it to carry nuclear weapons, and the air-craft was provided with special protection fromthe flash and shock wave of a nuclear explo-sion. A special system for preparing and releas-ing the nuclear weapon was also fitted.

Production of the Tu-164 began in 1954 atplant No 22. Before production ceased in 1958,

453 had been built, of which 59 were equippedwith an IFR receptacle under the pod wingtip in

1957-58 as the Tu-164 (ZA). This modificationaccounted for almost a third of all Tu- 1 6s built,and was the largest version to see series pro-

duction. Like the Tu-16, the Tu-164 served in

approximately equal numbers with the DA andthe AVMF. During the 1960s, 155 Tu-164bombers were converted to carry KSR-2 andKSR-1 1 ASMs. Several dozen Tu-164 were stillin squadron service in the early 1980s.

Work on producing a version capable ofdelivering nuclear weapons began in mid-1953. Two conventional Tu-16 bombers weremodified after the completion of design work in

November 1953 and submitted for testing by aspecial organisation based at Bagherovo air-field near Kerch on the Crimea Peninsula. Thisunit exercised overall responsibility for equip-ping the Soviet Army with nuclear weaponsunder its head, General Chernorez, who was a

highly informed specialist in the field of nuclearand thermonuclear weaponry. The first twoTu-16 bombers to be converted to'order 191'standards were the second and third Kazan'-built production examples (c/ns 3200102 and42001 03). The adaptation work was completedin 1953, and series production of the Tu-164began with cln 4200502 (although somesources indicate that the first productionTu-164 was c/n 4201301).

R,-#*.$i

-i

ln squadron service the Tu-164 served bothas a nuclear weapon carrier and a conventionalbomber, and was equipped with an RBP-4radar, an OPB-1 1R or OPB-1 l RM opticalbombsight, a PKI reflector sight, PS-53VK,PS-s381, PS-538P and PS-53K optical sightingstations, a PRS-1 gun ranging radar, a Sirena-2 radar warning receiver, an SPS-SM activeECM system, an A-711 (with 4-713) LORANsystem, a Kl-12lGPK-52iDlK-46M flux-gatecompass, an Nl-508 navigational display, anRSBN-2S Svod (Dome) SHORAN, a DISS-1

Doppler speed and drift angle indicator, anARK-S automatic direction finder, an RV-17Mhigh-altitude altimeter, an RV-2 low-altitudealtimeter, an IAS-1M/AK-53M/ DAK-2 stellar-solar orientation device, an AP-5-2M or AP-6Eautopilot, an SP-50 blind landing system, an4-326 formation flight system, RSIU-SB andR-832M command radios, a 1-RSB-7OM com-munications radio with a US-g receiver and aR-851 crash (survival) radio. Three auxiliarypower panels were provided in the navigator's,second pilot's and navigator/radio operator'screw positions.

The Tu-164 could carry the same bomb,mine or torpedo weapon load as the Tu-16, butwas also able to carry the MVD6-16 (or MVD6-16M), one of the five types of atom bomb at thedisposal of the DA. The version of the Tu-164capable of carrying mines was produced as'order 699'.

Atomic bombs were dropped using anOPB-I 1R or OPB-l 1PM bombsight linked tothe RBP-4 bomb-aiming radar and the AP-5-2Mor AP-6E autopilot. As already mentioned, tokeep the delicate control system of the nuclearmunition operatlonal the bomb bay tempera-ture was maintained at +20"C, using fourizdeliye 107 electric heaters, four air tempera-ture regulators, four powered fans and a tem-perature control system.

The aircraft, crew and equipment were pro-

tected from the heat and flash of the nuclearexplosion in the following ways:

.i

Tupolev Tu-16 25

by sealing or narrowing the gaps on the aircraft's

exterior (hatch covers, doors and the like), using

overlapping tape

by fitting blinds to glazed areas which could be

closed or put in place before the bomb was

droppedby encasing some equipment and wiring in

insulating materials

by applying special white reflective paint to the

underside of the aircraft (this was known as the

'atomic' colour scheme)

When the Tu-164 entered service iis emptyweight of 37,700k9 was 1 85kg greater than thebasic bomber's. ln the late 1950s all opera-tional Tu-164 bombers were modified toensure greater resistance to the nuclear flash,

with those areas of the metal skinning mosiexposed to the flash made as resistant as pos-

sible. From 1962 onwards the aircraft was fittedwith the ASO-16 chaff dispenser. Since theTu-164 had no external differences from thebaseline bomber (apart from the white under-

sides), it was likewise referred to by NATO as

lhe Badger-[.The data below refer to the Tu-1 64 with two

RD-3M-500 engines (each providing a maxi-

mum thrust of 9,500k9) in the closing days olits service career:

Empty weight

All-up weight

normal

maximum

lVlaximum bomb load

lVaximum speed *

up to 500m

at 6,250m

at 10,000m

Maximum permissible lVlach number

Service ceiling with a TOW of 62,000k9

Service range f

39,720k9

75,800k9

79,000k9

9,000k9

670km/h

B90km/h

960km/h

0,9

1 2,800m

5,800km

* at lull power and an all-up weight of 55,000-70,000k9

t at optimum altitude, releasing bomb load at the midway point

Tu-1 6A Nuclear-Capable Bomber(aircraft '88A','order 68411'lExperience gained in local conflicts at the end

of the 1960s stimulated a widening of the

bomber's tactical capabilities. A special variant

able to carry a large number of small bombsweighing between 5 and 500k9 was produced

as 'order 684/1 '. The internal bomb load

remained at 9 tons, but the number of externally carried bombs was increased (between

16 and 24 FAB-100s and FAB-250s; between

12 and 1B FAB-500s). The first example to be

modified in this way was Tu-164 cln 7203829.

Tu-1 6A Nuclear-Capable Bomber(aircraft '88A','order 2624'lln the late 1960s and early 1970s a small num-

ber of Tu-164 bombers had the DK-7 tail turret

and PRS-1 gun-laying radar replaced by an

SPS-100 Rezeda (Mignonette, pronouncecrezedah) jammer in a characteristic conical fair-

ing with flattened sides. This ECM fairing, whichwas also used on some other Tupolev typeswas known as UKhO (oonifitseerovanngkhvostovoy ofsek - standardised tail compart-ment). Additionally, an SPS-S jammer was

installed in the avionics bay. Such aircraft were

referred to as'order 2624'.fhe first such air-

craft was '34 Red' (cln7203514).

In the latter days of the Tu-l 6's service careerthe construction number was no longer carriedvisibly, as demonstrated by'26 Blue'. Note thatall trim tabs are painted red.

A Tu-l6 seen from the dorsal observation/sighting blister of a sister ship flying in echelonstarboard formation,

Tu-l6A'34 Red' (c/n 72035141 was not aspecialised ECM variant; it was equipped for ECM

protection during group operations, featuringSPS-100 Fezeda and SPS-S jammers in a UKhOtail tairing supplanting the tail turret. lt is seenhere during trials. This variety of the 'A wasknown as'ordet 2624'. All Yefim Gordon archive

.E

Tupolev Tu-1 6

03

*

- A magnificent view of Tu-16A'03 Red': - -':3812). The aircraft shows off the white

--c'i-s;des and rudder characteristic of most'.-c,!€r not all) examples of this nuclear-:r;- e bomber; the rellective white paint wasun-::o minimise the effects of the nuclear'ai,- c:1 the aircralt, Note the'Excellent aircraft':a6€€ a maintenance award, on the nose gear:E[r ':'- GOrdon archive

---aA N uclear-Capable Bomberir r?r3ft '88A', 'order 557')

- - . ---i 6A was again upgraded in the 1 970s-:- ::der 657' brought revisions to the elec--: ,',:,ng forthe nuclear bomb release sys-

. - :-: enhanced protection for the crew.

---1 5A Nuclear-Capable Bomber:-.craft '88A', 'order 260')--:-. olher versions with slightly revised.:-:-13nt and armament were a number of--":- bombers fitted with a 'Rubin' radar: : -: led with an OPB-1 12 optical bombsight.: -

-:er 260'.

---1 5A Experimental Versions (Tu-16V)trder 212', 'order 468')

- - =-allel with development of the Tu-95V as a

::-'=r for the 1OO-megaton hydrogen bomb--:,',n as izdeliye 'V', or 'Vanya', or 'lvan'),---'6 c/n 4200503 was similarly adapted in' ::a pursuant to CofM directive No357-228 of- -:- l,4arch 1956 and MAP order No 184 of 29th''-:n. ln production this varianl was known as

-':=r 212'. Later two furlher production exam-: :s cf the Tu-16 were modified to 'V' standard:-:er 468'). These machines are sometimes

"='::red to as the Tu-16V by analogy with the---35V; the V in all these cases was probably::- ved from vodotodnaya bomba - hydrogen::irb. They were used for testing Soviet- -:iear and thermonuclear weapons.

ffi.{lrFff'Wiwr *," 1-""1#*9 tr

I

Above: Tu-l6A c/n 4200503 was modified in 1956 as the sole Tu-16V capable ol carrying a hydrogenbomb. Yefim Gordon archive

Below: Close.up of the heavy curtain erected around the Tu.16V's bomb bay when the hydrogenbomb was being loaded. This was probably meant to conceal the bomb lrom those whowere not supposed to see it, but may be a heat insulation curtain as well. Yelim Gordon archive

Tupolev Tu-l 6

Tu-1 6B Experimental Long-Range BomberOn 28th March 1956 the Council of Ministersissued directive No 424-261 followed by MAOP

order No194 on 6th April. These documentsordered OKB-156 to develop a version of theTu-16 powered by Zoobets M16-15 (RD16-15)

turbojets developed by the Rybinsk EngineDesign Bureau (RKBM), each with a take-offthrust of 11,000k9. These were to give the air-

craft a range ot7,200km and a maximum speed

of 1,03Q-1,050km/h. Two examples were to be

ready for State acceptance trials in the firstquarter of 1 957. 28th May 1 956 saw the appear-ance of MAP order No 295 instructing OKB-156

to supply the necessary conversion documen-tation to plant No 22 in Kazan' in preparation for

series production before 1st July. Plant No22itself was ordered to produce two prototypes

with the new engines, one to be ready for man-

ufacturer's tests in October and the second inNovember 1956, while OKB-16 was to supplyfour RD16-15 engines with a life of 200 hours in

September. Two versions of the resultingTu-168 were proposed, one with additionalexternal fuel tanks and one without. The esti-

mated data for the two versions are given

below:

no external with external

fuel tanks luel tanks

Take-oi lrergh'i

llaximum range

0perat onal range

no in{light refuell ng

1 in-flight refuelling

2 in-flight refuellings

The Tu-168 prototype was modified from a pro-

duction machine (c/n 6203330) built in Kazan',

Testing at Lll got under way in March 1957,

initially with M-16-15 and then with RD16-15

engines which had a longer service life. The

second prototype Tu-168 underwent trials at

GK Nll WS until 1961. Outwardly the Tu-168

differed only in the shape of the engine fairings.Unlike the AM-3, which was started by a so-

called turbostarter (a small gas turbine enginespinning up the main engine's spool), theM-16-15 (RD16-15) had electric starting; hence

additional DC batteries had to be carried andthe engine fairings lacked the usual exhaustports for the turbostarters. The Tu-168 was to

offer vastly improved performance - especiallyrange - thanks to its more powerful and fuel-efficient engines and greater fuel load. lt was

planned to use it as an intercontinental bomberbut, although the basic objectives wereachieved and the engines proved reliable andtroublejree, the cutbacks in the Sovlet bomberforce meant that neither the Tu-168 nor its

engines entered series production.Along with the Tu-168 project, OKB-156

worked on a number of others relating to the

bomber's engines; these included an attemptto equip the RD-3M with thrust reversers (on

both the Tu-16 and the Tu-104) and the use ofjet-assisted take-off (JATO) boosters to reducethe take-off run when the bomber was fullyloaded. None of these were adopted for pro-

duction machines. Later projects in 1965

included replacing the RD-3M-500 with more

fuel-efficient Kuznetsov NK-8-2 or NK-B-4 tur-

bofan engines, but these were frustrated byproblems with modifying the engine housings.

ln the mid-1970s the issue of installing

Solov'yov D-30P turbofans was raised butreceived no backing from the Soviet Air Force

Command.The 'inflexible' character of the bomber's

engine installations had been a matter of con-cern for the aircraft's designers for some time.As early as the beginning of the 1950s an alter-

native configuration Jor the bomber includednew wings featuring leading-edge root exten-

sions (LERXes) with 45" leading-edge sweep at

the roots; the leading edges incorporated slotair intakes similar to those of the British V-

bombers. The engine fairings were to be underthe wing trailing edge close to the fuselage.

Such a layout would have provided far more

options on the type of engines fitted as the

bomber was upgraded.

Long-Range Bomber with TR-3F Engines(aircraft'90/88' project)During the design work on the '88', project

work on an alternative configuration continuedas an insurance policy in case of problems with

AM-3 engine. This project, the '90/88', had four5,000-kg thrust Lyul'ka TR-3F engines, but with

a different configuration. Two engines werelocated in the same positions as on the 'BB',

while the other two were carried under thewings between the flaps and ailerons. Two ver-

sions were prepared: one had main gear fair-

ings like the 'BB' while on the second versionthe main gear units retracted into fairingsblended smoothly with the wing enginenacelles. ln both cases the main undercarriageleg had twin wheels, and single-wheel outrig-gers were fitted to the wingtips (in a similar way

to that originally proposed for the 'BB'). The

fuselage was virtually identical to the Tu-16.

Further development was terminated once thesuccess of the Tu-1 6 was assured.

Long-Range Bomber with TV-12Turboprop Engines (aircraft'90' proiect)ln 1954 OKB-156 engineer Sergey M Yegerproposed a version of the Tu-l6 powered bytwo 12,000-ehp Kuznetsov TV-12 turboprops(known as the NK-12 in production form and

already fitted to the four-engined Tu-95

bomber). The turboprop derivative of the Tu-1 6

was designated 'aircraft 90'. Yeger's project

called for the wing of the '88'to be modified, the

air intakes eliminated, and the new enginesmounted on the wings between the flaps and

ailerons in fairings which also housed the main

undercarriage legs. The more fuel-efficlent tur-

boprop engines were seen as a means ofextending the bomber's range, but the associ-ated redesign of the wings, undercarriage and

fuselage looked set to be protracted; also, theSoviet Air Force was satisfied with the perfor-

mance of the Tu-16 with AM-3 engines. The

project was therefore shelved, although a ver-

sion of the Tu-104 airliner fitted with either NK-B

turbofans or Kuznetsov TV-2F turboprops was

later considered as project '1 1B'.

Long-Range Bomber with VD-5 Engines(aircraft'97' proiect)ln the mid-1950s OKB-156 explored the idea of

converting the Tu-16 into a supersonic bomber(izde liye'97'). Two Dobrynin VD-S afterburningturbojets designed by OKB-36 were to be fitted,

together with a new wing swept back 45' at

quarter-chord. These measures were designedto increase the bomber's top speed by at least

150-200km/h. Work on designing entirely new

supersonic long-range aircraft made the pro-

ject unviable.

An artist's impression of the proiected'103'bomber of the Tu-l6. The greatly enlargedengine nacelles housing vertically pairedturboiets are clearly visible. Tupolev JSC

1 65rn'

38,1 00kg

76 B00kg

7,200-7,500km

1 0,000-1 0,500km

1 3,200krn

I 84m'

39,440k9

90,200k9

9,780km

B,950km

1 1,900km

1 5,200km

t28 Tupolev Tu-1 6

-.--i 3€ Black'(c/n 4200303) was modilied forErr€ the SNAB-3000 Krab homing bomb; two*rcr lombs were carried on special underwingsms-s- -,colev JSC

-.vE-Bange Supersonic Bomber with VD-7u' A.Ll-13 Engines (aircraft'103' proiect)- -= :' the last endeavours to exploit the- : :- success of the Tu-1 6 was the projected-: :1g-range supersonic bomber. The wing

'=:: ,'/as to be increased to 45" and four

- :: -,, ^ n VD-7 or Mikulin AM-13 afterburning- :: ::s fitted; the engines were to be pairedi-:2 y a /a English Electric Lightning and

' :--:: in enlarged fairings. Further investiga-: - :' ihe project, however, indicated that the

-:: - -e would not be able to reach supersonic:-: ;n its existing configuration even with:: :'le engine power. However, the '103' did

.;- : :s the precursor to the work on the '105'supersonic bomber which ultimately

' -:':=d as the Tu-22 (in 1954 the possibility of-: -: :re Tu-16 for a first essay in this direction:: =iamined).

irperiments with Guided Bombs-r€ Tu-16 Chaika:: =: development work on guided bombs,- - = ,i based on World WarTwo German types- - : - as the Fritz X, for tactical and long-range: :-3ers began in the early 1950s. The Tu-16:s seen as a suitable delivery vehicle for the'::-kg UB-s Condor (aka UB-5000F; UB =

: -'atlyayemaya bomba - guided bomb) with:200-kg warhead or the 2,24j-kg UB-2F

-:-2000F) Chaika (Seagull) with a 1,795-kg:--:ad. Radio control or television guidance:::ms were used. The Tu-16 equipped to

: =--.' a guided bomb was fitted with a KRU-UB:: l control transmitter, ihe operator eitherfol-: ', 19 the course of the marker flare attached': :ê bomb through an OPB-2UP optical sight:- ;sing images transmitted to a monitor. :':en from a TV camera (a 'bomb's eye view')-: -rake course corrections through the linked-:: o control system. The latter method proved- :'e accurate and less reliant on weather con-:: rns. The bombs were carried under the-, -:lage or under the wings.

- small number of Tu-16 bombers were::-ipped with the 4A-22 Chaika system which::rirolled the UB-2F guided bomb against:-all but impodant targets such as railway:-oges, storage depots and administrative:, idings from high altitude. Two UB-2F bombs',:re carried under the wings on special pylons--i the bomber was fitted with an electric sys-::r for arming and guiding the bomb. The sys-:::r could only be used in good visibility::nditions when both the bomb and the target::uld be observed through the speciall"B-2UP periscopic synchronised sight used':: dropping free{all and guided bombs in levei

' Eht. This automatically signalled proximity to:cmb release, the time when the bomb bay:gors were to be opened, and the moment of

release. Guidance was effected through thesight by a juxtaposition of the bomb's imagewith an indicator registering the angles of diver-gence derived from calculating the bomb's tra-jectory and generated by a special computer.

lnJlight control by the bombardier waseffected by a 4A-Nl data link system transmit-ting on three wavebands simultaneously tofrustrate jamming. The bomb's receiver passedthe signals to the AP-59 autopilot which acti-vated the bomb's guidance mechanism andmade the necessary corrections to keep thebomb level. The bomber's height dictated therequired speeds for releasing the bomb, andthese varied between 550km/h at 5,000m andover 900km/h above 6,500m. As the bomb'sspeed was lower than that of the bomber, thepilot was obliged to pull his machine up andlose speed so that both the bomb and its targetremained visible. The UB-2F (UB-2000F) had a

high-explosive warhead (F = foogahsnaya -high-explosive), but the use of the U8-20008armour-piercing version (B = broneboynaya -armour-piercing) was also envisaged.

During the latter years of the 1950s theimproved Chaika-2 (with infra-red homing) andthe Chaika-3 (with passive radar homing for useagainst enemy radar and ECM sites) weredeveloped, although only Ihe 4A-22 Chaika wasactually tested and accepted for operationaluse in December 1955. The UB-2F was the firstSoviei guided bomb. Tests results showed thatonly two or three such bombs were needed tohit a target measuring 30 x 70m as against 168

FAB-1 500 conventional freejall bombs.

Tu-16 Condor Guided Bomb Carrier('order 251')Preliminary tests of the UB-s (UB-5000F) Con-dor guided bomb were carried out using theTu-4. The Condor was intended for use againstlarge surface ships and was essentially anenlarged Chaika with a high-explosive war-head. Two versions were developed, one usingline-of-sight radio command guidance (like theChaika) and the other TV guidance. The radiocommand system was used during tests withthe Tu-4, but its accuracy proved significantlypoorer than the Chaika's since the heavier Con-dor reached speeds in the order of Mach 1.1

and in{light control proved more difficult. Theseproblems were eventually overcome and satjs-factory results obtained through he range of

speeds. ln August 1955 experimental Condorbombs were again tested from the Tu-4 usingTV guidance and with the navigator using a con-trol joystick. Not only could this system be usedin less favourable weather conditions, it alsoobviated the need for the bomber to fly over thetarget. Tests using an adapted Tu-16 (as 'order

251' began in March 1956, but although suc-cessful the system was not accepted lor opera-tional service. The large bomb carried externallyincreased drag to the detriment of both speedand range. Work on guided bombs carriedexternally was therefore terminated.

Tu-16 with the UBV-5 Guided BombWork on a more sophisticated guided bomb,the 5,150-kg UBV-S fitted with a 4,200-kg war-head, began in the summer of 1956. The bombwas to have a high-explosive or an armour-piercing warhead with either TV guidance (like

the Condor) or an autonomous heat-seekingsystem (like the Chaika-2). Two variants weredesigned: one to be carried internally and theother semi-recessed (the latter was rejected bythe Soviet Air Force). The drawback to all theSoviet guided bombs was that the carrier air-craft was obliged to release the bomb only a fewkilometres from the target, increasing the risk ofenemy interdiction. This problem could be overcome by the use of solidJuel rocket motors onthe bombs, so that they resembled ASMs, butthe advantages of guided bombs in their sim-plicity and low production costs as comparedwith ASMs began to wane. The emphasisshifted to air-launched cruise missiles able tostrike enemy warships while the launch aircraftwas still some distance away. This brought anend to work on the 7,500-kg UPB rocket-pow-ered guided bomb which was to be released ata range of 300-350km from its target.

Tu-16 with the SNAB-3000 KrabHoming BombOn 14th April 1957 the Council of Ministerspassed directive No1175-440 giving guide-lines for guided weapons development untilthemid-l950s. Among other things, the All-UnionState Research lnstitute No642 (GSNll-642)

was tasked with developing a 3,000-kg homingbomb designated SNAB-3000 (samon-

avodyashchayasya aviabomba - homingbomb) which was also known under the code-name Krab (Crab).

Tupolev Tu-16 29

Development of the SNAB-3000 proceededunder the leadership of D V Svecharnik. Thedesign was strongly infiuenced by the GermanFritz X, featuring the same four large fins in asquashed-X arrangement and cruciform tailf inswithin a rhomboid-shaped rudder arrange-ment. Unlike the German prototype, however,the SNAB-3000 had swept wings. The bombfeatured an AP-55 autopilot for initial guidanceand an infra-red seeker head for terminal guid-ance. The lR seeker was activated by a timer,allowing the bomb to zero in on large targetswith a high heat signature, such as factories.The warhead weighed 1,285k9.

Trials began in 1951 , initially using Tu-4 car-rier aircraft and 'dumb' versions of the bombwithout the homing system. The fully equipped'smart' version entered test at the GK Nll wsfacility in Akhtoobinsk in late 1952. The bombshowed promising results at first, accuratelyhoming in on pans with burning kerosene usedas simulated targets; out of the 1 2 inert and livebombs dropped in 1953-54, eight fell within47m of the target.

However, the piston-engined Tu-4 was slowand hopelessly outdated, so the decision wastaken to use the state-of-the-art Tu-16 as thedelivery vehicle. Hence a Kazan'-bullt Tu-16serialled '36 Black' (c/n 4200303) was fittedwith special pylons under the wings for carry-ing two SNAB-3000 bombs. lt was then thatproblems began; the jet-powered Tu-16 turnedout to be too fast for the bomb which becameunstable when dropped at high speeds, theaccuracy dropping dramatically. The strongdrag generated by the bombs reduced the air-craft's range to 3,620km with two SNAB-3000sand 4,500km with one bomb versus 5,430kmwith a 9,000-kg freeJall bomb carried internally,To top it all, the reliability of the guidance sys-tem was all too low; of the 32 test missionsflown by Tu-16 '36 Black', 16 ended in failuredue to various malfunctions of the bombs.Hence on 26th August 1956 the Council of Min-isters' Scientific & Technical Board convenedto assess the results of the trials, cancelling allfurther work on the SNAB-3000.

Tu-1 6V High-Altitude BomberWork on the Tu-16V high-altitude bomberproject (V = vysotnyy - high-altitude) with twoVD-7 engines was carried out by OKB-156 inthe late 1950s. The VD-7 engine rated at1 1,000k9 thrust for take-off and 8,600k9 thrustat nominal power was more fuel-efficient,lighter and smaller than the RD-3M and it wasestimated that the bomber's range could beincreased by about 15% with the same fuelload. The project drawings show revisedengine fairings to accommodate extra batter-ies, as the VD-7 used electrical starting. Projectwork took place at the same time as V M Mya-sishchev's OKB-23 was working on the 3Mfour-engined bomber powered by the sameengines, but was terminated with the cutbacksin the bomber development programmes at theend of the 1960s. Another factor was that the

30 Tupolev Tu-16

service introduction of the 3M revealed seriousproblems with the VD-7 which were notresolved until series production of the Tu-16was drawing to a close.

Tu-16 with Unguided Rocket DefensiveArmament ('otder 227')Trials of this tail defence system using TRSunguided rockets housed in a launcher thatcould be elevated vertically through 30" werescheduled for the autumn of 1956. The systemwas developed in accordance with Councilof Ministers order No 2253-1069 of 3rd Novem-ber 1954 and MAP order No693 of 13thNovember. A production Tu-16 was madeavailable for trials but development was appar-ently then terminated.

Tu-16T Torpedo.Bomber('order 21O', izdeliye NTIThe use of the Tu-16 as a torpedo-bomber bythe Naval Air Arm (AVMF) was an inherent fac-tor in the aircraft's design, and all Tu-16bombers were to be capable of carrying minesor torpedoes. CofM instruction No7501 to thiseffect was issued on 12th July 1954, followedby MAP order No 432 on 1Sth July. The relevantmanufacturer's tests and staie trials were madein 1954 on Kazan'-built Tu-l6 c/n 4200501which thus became the torpedo-bomber proto-type produced as 'order 210' and designatedTu-16T or izdeliye NT in naval service. The air-craft was ordered into production by CofMdirective No 163-97 of 2nd February 1955 andMAP order No 127 of 1st March.

Possible weapons loads to be carried con-sisted of four RAT-52 torpedoes, or six 45-52 Wtorpedoes, or eightAMD-500M (orAPM), tGDMor AGDM-2M Lira (Lyre, pronounced /eera)mines.

Production of the Tu-16T (based on the pro-totype) began at plant No 64 in 1955, with ordersfor 25 new-build examples in that year and forthe conversion of 20 bombers. Production con-tinued until 1957, by which time 76 examples ofthe Tu-16T had been built at Voronezh, apartfrom the conversion of Tu- 1 6 bombers operatedby the AVMF. The Tu-16T was refitted to carrymines and torpedoes with a revised electricweapons release system and additional controlpanels in the navigator's station. Special secur-ing chains were also fitted to prevent the torpedobeing inadvertently released.

Production examples of the Tu-16T hadrevised weapons bays to carry two RAT-52rocket-powered torpedoes, six high-altitude45-54W or low-altitude 45-56NT torpedoes.two BV-20 depth charges, 12 AMD-4-500 bot-tom mines or four AMD-4-1000 mines. Rocket-propelled RM-1 and RM-2 surface mines, UDMuniversal bottom mines, IVDM-3, MDM-4 andMDM-S bottom mines, the Serpei and Liraanchored mines, AMD-2M, IGD-M and Desnamines, UPAMB-100/80 practice mines and 45-36MAV torpedoes could also be carried. Theoverallweapons load was 8.7 tons. The Tu-167could also carry a full 9,000k9 bomb load.

Some aircratt were equipped with ECM gear,including the Buket jammer. Externally theTu-16T differed little from the bomber versionexcept in the weapons bay doors.

lntended for low- and high-altitude torpedoattack and mine-laying, the Tu-16T had a topspeed of 992km/h at 6,250m wlth an all-upweight of 55,000k9. With the same flyingweight, the top speed was 938km/h at'10,000m. lts range at optimum altitude with atake-off weight of 72.000k9 and a 3,000k9 loadof torpedoes or mines was 5.760km. lts serviceceiling with the engines at nominal power was12,800m, an aititude the Tu-16T reached in 31minutes. lts take-off run with a 71 ,560-kg AUWwas 1,900m. and the landing run with a44,000-kg landing weight was 1.655m. Like thebomber version of the Tu-1 6. the Tu-16T wasknown to NATO as the Badger-A. By the early1960s the more formidable anti-aircraftdefences employed by naval vessels made theuse of torpedo-bombers impractical, and theTu-1 6T f leet was converted into Tu- 1 6PLO ASWaircraft or Tu-16S SAR aircraft. Six examples ofthe Tu-16T were supplied to Egypt.

Tu-16 Mine-LayerSome versions of the Tu-16, particularly theTu-16P (SPS). the Tu-16 Yolka and the Tu-16R(these versions are described later) in AVMFservice were refitted as mine-layers in accor-dance with 'order 699'with the option of revert-ing to the bomber version if required. SomeTu-16s in service with the Red Banner BalticFleet Air Arm were thus modified in the early'1970s. Superfluous equipment was removedand cassette{ype racks for mines fitted in theweapons bay.

Tu-16PLO (Tu-16PL)Anti-Submarine Warfare AircraftStafting in 1962, a number of Tu-16T torpedo-bombers were convefted for anti-submarinewarfare (ASW) as the Tu-16PLO (or Tu-16P1).These were intended for ASW operations usingthe Baku sonobuoy system within a range of1,00Okm (without in{light refuelling) from theirbases. The system comprised the SPARU-SSairborne automatic detection set (samolyot-noye preeyomnoye avtomaticheskoyerahdioustroysfvo), sonobuoys (each one trans-mitting on its own frequency), an ANP-18 auto-matic navigation instrument, a RPB-4 radarbombsight and a PP-1 panoramic receiver/djs-play. The sonobuoys were dropped in a patternaround the submarine's presumed location,picked up its sound and relayed informationon its position and characteristics to the aircraft.A decision as to an attack method could thenbe taken, or the information received relayed to other aircraft. The search version carriedeither 36 RGB-NM or 24 RGB-N buoys, thesearch/attack version either 18 buoys andtwo AT-1 torpedoes or 12 buoys and onenuclear depth charge, and the attack versionwas armed with either two AT-1 torpedoes, 25PLAB-S0 depth charges or six RM-1 rocket-

*TE *i I from the late 1980s Soviet motionilt=:r-e i-he Incident in Grid Square 36-80rritl'Ers :he Tu.165 SAR aircraft taking off withllrllf i.eglat liteboat suspended under therureiD.aE!€. -:oolev JSC

urer:.er still from the same movie showingriE ii,s6oat falling away from the Tu-l6S aslir 3rr!€t Navy tries to extend aid to a US Navyura-arine in distress. Shortly after the lifeboats,e$'€d down the submarine's computer wentnrmna/ty haywire, executing an uncommandedms6rl€ launch against a group of SovietsrNr!.ri os, whereupon the sub was scutiled byir =€w. Tupolev JSC

::- :l mines. The AT-1 torpedoes had: r-i--r homing and were dropped by para-

" --: .-3m an altitude of 2,000m. On striking the

:-i- :ie torpedo travelled in 60-70m circles'.. :- submarine was detected - making its'r i:ack run at a speed of 48-52km/h. The

-- -:= O had a take-off weight of 79,000k9,r -.. -3 a 3,000-kg weapon and equipment' i- aî patrolled at a speed of 420-430km/h lts:.-:: ,vas 5,400km and its service ceiling_ -,:::n.l:-;ersion ofthe Tu-16T into the Tu-16PLO

,: ::- order 64' was carried out from 1962- :'rs in the North Fleet and from 1963- ='ls in the Pacific Fleet.

-"-165 Maritime Search and Rescue* er.sion ('order 454', izdeliye NS)

:-r cn a search and rescue version for thei : . =: Navy designated Tu-1 65 (spasahtel'nyy -:>:-e. used attributively) began in 1955 pur-.,=-: io Council of Ministers directive No 1952---- cf 26th December. The aircraft carried a

: =gaht (Frigate) radio-controlled powered

-:: rat designed by I F Nezval' at the Tomilino:-:-oh of OKB-156. After locating the area-:'e a vessel or aircraft was in distress by

-::.s of its onboard radar and spotting sur-. :'s (or cosmonauts, in the event the re-entry

-::rle splashed down instead of landing in:: sieppes of Kazakhstan, as was customary):: l-u-l65 paradropped its lifeboat and started':: Iatter's engine by radio. The boat was:-::!'ed towards the rescue area by TV control.--: system was successfully tested by thel'-:rc Fleet and passed for service with the::.,iet Naval Air Arm. ln 1965 the Tu-16 pro-:-3tion factories began conversion of some of-: Tu-16 torpedo-bombers remaining in ser-. :e as 'order 454'. Most saw service with the',lrthern Fleet untilthe late 1980s. Regrettably,:-: last examples were withdrawn just before

CCCP-'15411 (that is, SSSR-L5411, c/n 1881301),one of several Tu.16s temporarily demilitarisedfor carrying newspaper matrices and for crewtlaining duties during the Tu-104 airliner,sservice introduction period. Visible beyondis Tu.1 6A'72 Red' (c/n 4200401).':iim Gordon archive

the loss of the Soviet nuclear-powered subma-rine SNS Komsomolets (K-278); had they beenactive, the number of survivors might well havebeen much higher.

Tu-16SP ASW Search VersionThe Tu-16SP carried a powerful search radar(similar to that used on the Tu-1 42 ASW aircraft)in its weapons bay able to detect submarineseither on the surface or at periscope depth.ASW torpedoes or sonobuoys couid also becarried. A number of these conversions wascarried out in the 1970s. Compared to the

Tu-142, the Tu-1 6SP had far shorter range andendurance; the service introduction of the ded-icated long-range Tu-142 meant that theTu-16SP was phased out.

Tu-16G (Tu.104G) Special Delivery AircraftBefore the Tu-104 entered service, three pro-duction Tu-16 bombers were transferred toAeroflot and used to deliver the matrices ofnational newspapers to regional capitals wherethe papers would be printed. (lf the paperswere delivered to the eastern regions of theSoviet Union all the way from Moscow, they

r -':i,i

* lffifu1plJ*"' ':

Tupolev Tu-16 31

Close-up of the starboard wingtip ol a

decommissioned Tu-15(Z) tanker ('30 Black', c/n1882801), showing the conduit through whichthe fuel transler hose exits and the horizontal'winglet'whose purpose is to minimise thedestabilizing eflect of the wingtip vortex on thehose; red and white stripes are applied to this'winglet'to make it more conspicuous' The slitsimmediately ahead are the de-icing system hotair outlet, Yefim Gordon archive

Tu.16(2)'26 Red'(c/n 1882108) comes in to land,showing the hose conduit protruding aft tromthe starboard wingtip. Yefim Gordon archive

Another Tu-16(Z) passing overhead showsthat it has the famous'winglets'on both wings,suggesting that it has a reluelling receptacleas well. Yelim Gordon archive

would be one day old by the time they were on

the street, and who wants yesterday's news?)

All armament was removed and the weaponsbay used for containers. Designated Tu-16G

or, rather misleadingly, Tu-104G (groozovoy -cargo, used attributively), the aircraft saw lim-

ited service with Aeroflot before its function was

taken over by new methods of data transmis-sion. A small number of ll'yushin lL-28 bomberswas similarly used under the designation lL-20,

starting in 1954.

Tu-104G Civil Aircrew Conversion TrainerA small number of lL-28 and Tu-16 bomberswith all armament and military equipmentremoved were transferred to Aeroflot to facilitateaircrew conversion training in anticipation of the

Tu-104 jet airliner's service introduction. Again

designated Tu-104G, the demilitarised Tu-16s

received civil registrations, carrying Aeroflottitles and winged logo on the forward fuselage

sides. Only one aircraft regisiered CCCP-I5415(that is, SSSR-L5415; c/n 1881301) has beenpositively identified; however, c/ns 1881302

through 1881304 have also been reported as

Tu- 1 04Gs. When sufficient numbers of the 'true'

Tu-104 became available, allowing the airliners

to be used for crew training between scheduledf Iights, the Tu-1 04Gs were returned to the Soviet

Air Force and 'remilitarised'.

Tu-16 In-flight Refuelling Tanker -fu-16Z,, Tu-16Yu ('order 198', izdeliye NZ)Ways of exiending the Tu-16's range were

explored even during the project stage. One of

these was the wingtip{o-wingtip inJlight refu-

elling method developed at Lll by lgor' Shelest

and Viktor Vasyanin in 1948; first used opera-

tionally on the Tu-4 in the early 1950s, it was

practiced on a very limited scale by the SovietAir Force. ln all, no more than ten machines

were involved either as tankers or receivers.

However, the experience gained with the Tu-4

convinced OKB-156 that the technique was

applicable for jet bombers as well. On 17th

September 1953 MAP issued order No44 giv-

ing specific instructions for the development of

the IFR system; in particular, all new bombers

Tupolev Tu-1 6

- - 'a(Z) tanker coded '34 Red' (background)-: s a Tu-16K-11-16'radar killer' aircratt:;: 8s Blue' (c/n 6203310/3060?) flying over

- : ( : rercast. Note the stabilising drogue. , : : r ute at the end of the hose iust visible* - : :ih lhe receiver aircraft's wingtip.

: -':cn archive

. : ::sic action shot showing another'-.':(.1'l-16,'28 Red', taking on fuel from a" --' a Z). Note the reference marks on the hose.'::': from the unusual white-painted fin tip

-3. the receiver aircraft is interesting in thatr :: converted from a very early Kuibyshev-- - :rrcralt with one-piece mainwheel well door" ,::d segments. Unusually, the tail bumper.: -ct retracled after gear retraction. The white-:-:rgle on lhe tanker's rear fuselage is a: -:tion keeping reterence point for the. ::,er aircralt's pilots. Yefim Gordon archrve

3ht refuelling was vital during overwater:.':tions in which the Tu-16 was actively- : ;ed. The tanker is a Batch 29 Kuibyshev-; - : :ircratt. Yeiim Gordon archive

- loed henceforth were to have provisions--'ight refuelling., .:n the co-operation of OKB-918 under.' Designer Semyon M Alekseyev which:.:c in bringing the system up to scratch.':si pilots involved in the Tu-4's IFR tests,1.d the Soviet Air Force. two Tu-16

- l:"s adapted at the Kazan factory as the:' and the receiver aircraft could be ready::a:e acceptance trials by January 1955.

- --oi of Ministers issued directive No 1013- - : :r this effect on 26th May 1954. giving more-:-'aie specifications for the system, fol-

' :r by MAP order No 354 of 3rd June.--3 tanker prototypes were, in fact, not.:ir'-built aircraft but the first production

^rples from Kuibyshev (c/ns 1BB00O1 and:::101). Later, Tu'16 c/n 1880301 was also

-:: iied as a tanker to investigate IFR tech-r,:s for the Mikoyan/Gurevich MiG-19 tacti-: 'ghter,-ê first Tu-1 6 (Z) (the Z stood for for

..crahvshchik tanker) began an almost 18-- -::h test programme in 1 955. Taking due note' .:e criticisms made, OKB-156 made the nec-

.:-ary corrections and revisions and prepared-= :echnical documentation for the production:::3ries. Thirty Tu-16 were then modified in

.::crdance with CoJM directive No247-159 of'i:r February 1956 and l\/lAP order No 11 1 of

-:'r February, ten as tankers and 20 as

::3ivers, for Air Force trials which were held

'-:cessfully in late 1956. From early 1957 all'--:e production factories were required to-:crporate IFR capability on the Tu-l 6 while::'rying out modification and refit work. Tanker:-sions in productron were referred to as 'order

' l3 . and in service as the Tu-'16 (Z) (later simply- --162), Tu-1 6Yu or izdeliye NZ. Receiver air-

:-:,rt had the ZA sufiix at first (standing for for

-:cravlyayemyy samolyot), but this lapsed with' -3 as almost all examples remaining in service',:|e IFR-capable. During production the'3:eiver aircraft was referrea! to as 'order 229'. %--*'* ]

***

Tupolev Tu-1 6 JJ

i : :3nker coded'34 Red'(background): --.16K-l 1-16'radar killer' aircralt

: :: 3iue' (c/n 6203310/3060?) llying over: :'::st. Note the stabilising drogue' --: :t the end of the hose iust visible- - --: receiver aircraft's wingtip.

j -:':alVe

.. : : :5tion shot showing another- r ' ' .1 6. 28 Red', taking on fuel from a: I \rot9 the reference marks on the hose,- -:- the unusual white-painted lin tip-: --? receiver aircraft is interesting in that

:: -,erted from a very early Kuibyshev-: ':':ft with one-piece mainwheel well door

.' . : ::3ments. unusually, the tail bumper' :' '::racted after gear retraction. The white.'; : on the tanker's rear fuselage is a

- : : - keeping reference point tor the' :' :.rcraft's pilots. Yefim Gordon archive

; -' 'ef uelling was vital during overwater: ::s in which the Tu-16 was actively

: :: The tanker is a Batch 29 Kuibyshev-: ':'aft. Yeiim Gordon archive

-:: renceforth were to have provisions: -: reluelling.

:- :re co-operation of OKB-918 underl,: qner Semyon M Alekseyev which.: - bringing the system up to scratch.

.:- ' ots involved in the Tu-4 s IFR tests.: - - :re Soviet Air Force, two Tu-16,:-: adapted at the Kazan'factory as the. :-r the receiver aircraft could be ready:.=-: acceptance trials by January 1955.

. - - :: Ministers issued directive No 1013-: : - s effect on 26th May 1954, giving more- . : specifications for the system, fol-., :. VAP order No354 of 3rd June.

--: ::rKeT prototypes were, in fact, not.---':..it aircraft but the first production-::s from Kuibyshev (c/ns 1880001 and

: -:' Later, Tu-16 c/n 1880301 was also,':: as a tanker to investigate IFR tech-

. ,.. 'cr-the Mikoyan/Gurevich MiG-19 tacti-

.^'.4'.--= 'rst Tu-1 6 (Z) (the Z stood for for:-=nvshchik - tanker) began an almost 1B---- ::st programme in 1955. Taking due note-: :'Lricisms made, OKB-1 56 made the nec-

, .', :crrections and revisions and prepared

. --::nical documentation for the production':-=s Thirty Tu-l 6 were then modified in

--rance with CofM directive No247-159 ol- ::cruary 1956 and MAP order No111 ol': =ebruary, ten as tankers and 20 as

-= .:rs. for Air Force trials which were held

-::ssfuLly in late 1956. From early 1957 all- =: production factories were required to' --3crate IFR capability on the Tu-16 while

, r'". :g out modification and refit work. Tanker.-. :ns in production were referred to as'order

=: and in service as the Tu-'16 (Z) (later simply- -" aZ). Tu-16Yu or izdeliye NZ. Receiver air-

-.:. .ad the ZA suffix at first (standing for for

-::'z.,lyayemw samolyot), but this lapsed with

- - as almost all examples remaining in service

=': iFR-capable. During production the.:: .,er aircraft was referred to as 'order 229'.

a

'I

Tupolev Tu-1 6 33

Durlng the IFR operation the receiver aircraftassumed echelon starboard formation with thetanker, which then deployed a hose attached toa cable from its starboard wing. The receiveraircraft placed its port wing on the hose andmanoeuvred so that the hose slid along thewing until it was stopped by a fitting under thewingtip. The hose was then rewound by the

cable until its end was automatically connectedto the receiver aircraft's refuelling receptacle.When this had been done, the two aircraft tookup close formation with the tanker slightlyahead. Decoupling of the two aircraft could be

effected at any stage in the process, either by

the operator or automatically if the two aircraftdrew apart. Supervision and control of the fuel

transfer was the responsibility of the co-pilot in

each aircraft while the aircraft's captainmanoeuvred and then maintained formation.

ln its final form, the tanker had a normal take-

off weight of 75,800k9 and carried a maximum24,500k9 of transferable fuel. IFR was prac-

ticed intensively over the sea during training,

reconnaissance and patrol flights both by theDA and the AVMF. One refuelling increased theTu-16's range by almost 2,000km, and a sec-ond refuelling raised this to almost 3,500km(with 5% fuel reserves).

The wingtipto-wingtip refuelling methodhad its advantages in that the aircraft beingrefuelled was not in the tanker's wake vortex, atight formation between the two aircraft was notessential, and the components of the systemwere straightforward and uncomplicated.There was, however, the risk of damage to thewing skin if the initlal contact was made clum-sily, and no option for a second coupling if thedrogue parachute stabilising the hose was lost.

An added bonus was that the Tu-1 6 was ableto operate from shorter and less heavily con-creted runways by taking off with a substan-tially lower fuel load (that is, a take-off weight of60,000k9) and then taking on fuel in the air

immediately afterwards. The range in this casecould be slightly greater than if the aircraft had

taken off with a full fuel load. Experience also

Another refuelling scene. This view illustratesthe shape which the refuelling hose assumesafter the receiver aircraft makes contact andmoves into position. Yefim Gordon archive

'02 Red' (cln72o342a), a Tu-16N hose-and-drogue tanker. Note that the aircraft wears the'nuclear'; white colour scheme usually worn byTu-16As (no doubt having been converted fromone ol those) and has been retrofitted with a

iammer covering the forward hemisphere forsell-protection, as revealed by the ECM antenna'horn' above the flightdeck. Yefim Gordon archive

proved that it was easier to carry out IFR at alti-

tudes lower than the cruise altitude, since theengines had a bigger power reserve and pilot-

ing was easier.ln the autumn of 1955 IFR experiments were

made in accordance with the aforementionedCouncil of Ministers directive No 1013-438 andMAP order No354, involving two speciallymodified MiG-19s (manufacturer's designationizdeliye SM-10) using the wingtip-to-wingtipmethod. The fighters serialled 316 Red' (c/n

59210316) and'415 Red'(c/n 59210415) weremodified by OKB-155 (the Mikoyan designbureau) and the Tu-1 6 tanker (c/n 1 880301 ) by

OKB-156 and OKB-918. although the tanker'srefuelling equipment remained virtuallyunchanged, apart from the replacement of thenormal BBmm hose by one 50mm in diameter.A Komissarov was the chief engineer for theproject. with lgor' Shelest as Lll's project testpilot. Some 3,000 litres of fuel could be trans-ferred at a rate of 1,000 litres per minute - hallthe usual transfer rate for Tu-16 to Tu-16 refu-

elling. During one test the MiG-19 was twicerefuelled in the air and able to remain airbornefor six hours. Refuelling could be carried outseveral times during a mission - both in thedaytime, unless impeded by cloud, or by nightusing fixed and manually trained lights.

The vortex generated by the Tu-16 wingtipcaused problems, but after initial factory tests

n o**ru*liri,rr,,ri+ ;r .,i;;ildiomu,,MfufrtJF'g"&' *,,*, ".'detu

Tupolev Tu-1 6

d'-

!}W rdh {

-lio the SM-10 and its Tu-16 tanker were

=-::C over to Lll for further testing with a-.:C hose. This had a more reliable attach-

-:-: rnechanism, was less prone to folding,:: .ss affected by the tanker's wingtip vortex: ,',as shorter. Factory tests of the new fuel

::: croved favourable, but the verdict of the: -:- :rg State trials was that the method was

: : nicult. Work on IFR for fighters was there-': shelved, resuming only in the 1970s.::cording to OKB-156, 1 14 Tu-16 bombers

=': converted to serve as wingtipto-wingtip.--3rs (other sources give a total of 46), and:-' aircraft - over a third of all the Tu-16 built -, :': equipped as receivers. Tanker aircraft::- c be reconfigured as bombers by field-i ltenance units by removing the extra fuel:- -,s from the aircraft's weapons bay, although:::: the OPB-1 1R sight was also removed,-:<ing reversion impossible. The pedormance:- 'eceiver aircraft was not affected by the addi-::i of the IFR receptacle to its wing.

Tu-16N ln-Flight Refuelling Tanker'order 358', rzdefiye NN)

.', :n the introduction of the supersonic---22RD, Iu-22KD, fu-22PD and Tu-22UD

::mbers equipped with refuelling probes (D =J a h I' n iy - long-ran ge) i nto Lon g-Ran ge Aviation

=rd Naval Air Arm service in the 1960s, the con-,:rsion of the Tu-16 into a probe-and-drogue

=R tanker was again considered. ln{light refu-

: f ng of Ihefu-22 had been carried out using

',!yasishchev 3MS-2 tankers, but after several

The broadly similar Tu-l6NN was the last of thetanker variants, and these aircraft wereconvened from whatever was available - exceptmissile strike versions. This example (c/n1 882302) coded '41 Red' on the nose gear doorsand '41 Blue'on the tail (!) used to be a Tu-l5Rcoded'35 Blue'. Yefim Gordon archive

'45 Blue' (c/n 1882503), another Tu-l6NN.Yefim Gordon archive

years of practice by the Soviet Air Force the

drawbacks of this combination became appar-ent, as did the advantages of using a lightertanker able to use the same or similar airfieldsas the Tu-22. Being based solely at Engels-2 AB

in southern central Russia, the 3MS-2s had to fly

across almost the whole extent of EuropeanRussia to reach the rendezvous zone, whereasthe Tu-16 tanker could operate from neighbour-ing airfields in the Ukraine or Belorussia.

The refuelling system in use on the 3MS-2 was

adapted and developed on suitably modifiedTu-16 c/n 1882401. From 1963 several Tu-16

were convefted as 'order 358' at Kazan and des-

i gnated the Tu- 1 6N or izde I iye N N in service. The

tanker could revert to bomber configuration if

necessary. ln '1966 a Tu-16N (c/n 1882314)

underwent refuelling trials with aTu-22RD (cln

3083012) reconnaissance aircraft as thereceiver aircraft. The success of these prompted

the conversion of 23 Tu-16 bombers to Tu-1 6N

standard at the Kazan'factory between 1968

and 1970. With a single top-up from the Tu-16N

Ihefu-22 had an increased range ot7,200km,increasing to B,000km with two top-ups. Using

IFR once on the outbound leg and again on the

return flight further extended the range to8,500km. The Tu-1 6N itself had a normal take-ofiweight of 76,670k9, but could carry a maximum

transferable fuel load of 19,500 litres. Refuelling

took place at a speed of 630kmih and at an alti-

tude of 6,000m. With improved drogue-and-hose equipment the Tu-16N served on into the

1980s. The Tu-16N was yet again referred to by

NATO as lhe Badger-A.

Experimental Tu-1 6 (Tu-1 5D?)Probe-and-Drogue Refuelling Receiverln the late 1950s a single Tu-16 was convertedinto a receiver aircraft using the probe-and-

drogue IFR technique. Although the trials weresuccessful the method was not adopted. Thismodified Tu-16 was used, however, in devel-oping IFR equipment for the Tu-95KD andTu-22KD long-range ASM carriers. The desig-nation Tu-16D has been reported for this ver-

sion, although it was not officially used duringthe trlals.

Tu-16NN TankerSeveral standard Tu-l6(2) tankers were con-verted to probe-and-drogue tankers in 1969

along the lines of the bombers converted toTu-16N standard. Although designatedTu-1 6NN, they were so similar to the Tu-1 6N thatthey were referred to as the Tu-16N in Soviet AirForce service. ln all, some 20 Tu-16(Z)s were

conveded into Tu-1 6NN tankers.

Tupolev Tu-16

Chapter Four

Tu-16KS('order 187', izdeliye NKSIWork on the first Soviet long-range air-to-sur-face missile system began in 1947, involving

development of the missile by a section of

Mikoyan's OKB-155 (Mlkhail I Gurevich was

project chief, wlth Aleksandr Ya Bereznyak in

charge ofthe actual design). The carrier aircraft

was developed byTupolev's OKB-156 (underA

V Nadashkevich) and the missile's control and

guidance system by SKB-1 (under Sergey L

Beria, son of the infamous KGB chief Lavrentiy

P Beria); the latter design bureau bore overall

responsibility for the system as a whole.The missile was developed in three versions:

The Missile Garriers

as an air-to-surface missile (the KS-1), as ashipto-ship missile (the KSS) and as a surface-

to surface missile (the KS-7). All three missiles

were very similar and varied only in their provi-

sion for their specific funciion.ln June 1948 the Soviet Council of Ministers

issued a directive on the creation ollhe Kometa(Comet) weapons system, which involved

adapting Tu-4 bombers to enable them to

launch air-to-surface missiles against surfacevessels over an operational range of up to

2,000km from their bases. The missile to be

used was the KS-1 'winged missile' (izdeliye E)

which resembled a scaled-down MiG-15 fighter(KS stood for krylahtyy snaryad winged mis-

sile). ln 1 950 the ASM was ready for testing as

the diminutive izdeliye K proof-otconcept air-

craft (a manned version of the actual KS-1 with

a bicycle landing gear and a cockpit instead of

the explosive charge), and in 1 952 the f irst true

missiles were tested and placed in series pro-

duction. The production KS-1 was 8.29m long.It featured wings swept back 55', with a span of

4J72m. The missile was powered by a RD-

500K turbojet engine with fuel load of 330 litres

and carried a 1 ,000-kg warhead over a range of70-90km at a maximum speed of 1,050-

1,100km/h.The guidance system devised by SKB-1 for

the KS-1 consisted oI aK-2 radio control unit

with a receiver antenna on the fin, plus a K-1

passive radar homing set for terminal guidance

installed rn the nose, both linked to an APK-S

autopilot. The carrier aircraft's K-3 target illumi-

The unserialled Tu-16KS prototype (c/n 4200305)with two KS-'l air-to-surface missiles seenduring trials, Note the one-piece forward-hingedmain gear door segments and the hemisphericalbottom of the Kobal't-1N radar's radome whichwas taken straight from the Tu-4KS. Tupolev JSC

Another view of the Tu-16KS prototype. TheKS-1 was quile a large weapon, Note how thecommand link antenna at the top of the fin ispositioned above the wing upper surface whenthe missile is on the wing. Tupolev JSC

lli I'iil'liri

.,:l*ilh

Tupolev Tu-1 6

;l

:- r missile guidance system comprised:.- f Cobalt) 360" search radar which pro

::arch, detection, lock-on and target-: Cnce the target had been detected, it-=:<ed by the Kobal't radar; the missile--.n launched and radio-controlled

-=: by the weapons systems operator

-ntil the missile's own homing radar-g reflected echoes from the target

:- .',as continuously illuminated by the'adar) could take over

--= -r-4KS (alias Tu-4K) made the first suc-",.-- cractice launch on 21 st November.:- ::stroying a decommissioned ship used

: -:-jet; the Kometa system became opera--: ^ September '1953. The KS-1 missiles

,, = -anufactured at Dubna and some 50- , - ::nbers were modified as Tu-4KS missile

. = : rcraft at plant No 23 in Fili, then a west-

- .-:rrb of Moscow (now a part of the city).*-

= ':mained the sole Soviet ASM carriers for: :-:. years.--: availability of the Tu-16 immediately

--':r a better air-to surface missile carrier: .:: reach high subsonic speeds, an altitude

'2300-13,000m and possessing a large

- -:ai radius. The bomber was immediately:::::d to take the Kometa system; the result-

- : : ':raft received the designation Tu-16KS (it:: : so known in service as izdeliye NKS and

- -: croduction plants as'order 187').

- {azan'-built Tu-16 with no tactical code- - :200305) was the first to be modified to

F

-:: :.ght: Front view of the Tu.16KS prototype, showing how the pylons'

=taining arms tit around the fuselages of the saucily grinning missiles.

- :::r right: The same aircraft with two torpedoes on the missile pylons;:pparently it was used lor development work which led to the appearance:f the Tu-16T torpedo-bomber. The torpedoes appear to be dummies.

-: r,'e left: This view shows to good eflect how the KS-1 missiles were lifted:]to position lrom their ground handling dollies, using hand-driven hoists,\ote the windows for the landing lights in the main gear doors.

::lve right: Close-up of a KS-1 in position on the prototype's port pylon.ihe weight ol two missiles and the resulting compression of the main gear3leos caused the Tu-loKS to assume a nose-up attitude on the ground.

: :it: The port BD-187 missile pylon of the Tu-16KS prototype. The retaining3rms folded away to reduce drag after the missile had been launched. Thesuspension lock is located closer to the rear pair, Note that the pylon has3 cutout closed by a metal fairing; this was a provision lor carrying the:nanned test version of the KS-l (lhe izdeliye K). All Tupolev JSC

Tupolev Tu1 6

]

Above: A view through the open bomb bay doors of the Tu-16KS

prototype, showing the missile launch operator's selt'containedpressure cabin, Note the dorsal escape hatch at the top of the

picture. Tupolev JSC

Above right: A production Tu-16KS coded'63 Blue'takes off, carrying

two KS-ls. The missiles are painted bright red overall, revealing

that they are inert examples. YeJim Gordon archive

Right: Tu-16KS '24 Red' (cln72o3afil'7163') makes a low-level pass'

cairying two KS-1s. Note that the missiles'nose radomes are of

diflerent colours. Yefim Gordon archive

missile carrier configuration. This involved

adaptation of the bomb bay to house the

WSO's pressurised workstation and elements

of the K-1M Kobal't-1M radar (including a

Below left: Close-up of the nose ol Tu-l6KS '25Blue' (c/n 5203125) seen from a sister ship -probably a tanker. Production aircraft usuallyhad strake aerials on the lorward fuselage, as

distinct lrom the prototype which had 'towel rail'aerials. Yefim Gordon archive

Below right: This view of a Tu'l6KS shortlybefore missile launch shows the angular radome(a fealure ol production examples) in lullydeployed position, the missile launch operator'sentry hatch immediately aft of it and the ventral

windows llanking the said hatch.

Ye{im Gordon archive

revolving antenna in a semi-retractable

radome), the addition of missile pylons under

the wings (which had to be reinforced accord-

ingly) and modifications to the fuel system

enabling the KS-1 misslles to be fuelled from

the carrier. Manufacturer's tests were held

between August and November 1954 with test

pilot Yuriy T Alasheyev at the controls. A total of

18 flights was made, totalling t hours and 14

minutes. The KS-1 was released ai altitudes

between 3,500 and 4,000m and indicated air-

speeds up to 370km/h without any detrimental

effeci on the aircraft's handling; the aircraft's

AUW was 58,0OO-59,000kg With two missiles

the Tu-16KS clocked a maximum speed of

575km/h without any vibration generated by

the external stores. The take-off run with two

missiles and an all-up weight of 54,000k9 was

1,240m - the same as for the bomber version

ln fact, handling during take-off or landing was

barely affected at all, although the landing

speed with a landing weight of 47,000k9 (with

both missiles) was 10-1skm/h greater.

Tesied at altitudes of 4,000m, 6,000m and

B,0OOm, the K-1M radar had a detection range

of 160km, and lock-on and automatic target

tracking were stable and consistent. When fly-

ing with a single missile under the port wing,

stability could be maintained by transferring

fuel to the starboard wing, and when the

antenna for the K-1M was lowered it was rec-

ommended that the maximum speed should

not exceed 520-55Okmih to prevent vibration

from the radome. After these tests Tu-16KS c/n

II

"ntiitt"

Tupolev Tu-1 6

The KS-I missile under the starboard wing ofTu.16KS'18 Red' ignites its engine prior tolaunch. Yefim Gordon archive

Seconds later, the missile lalls away andaccelerates towards its target.':'iim Gordon archive

-200305 was ferried to Bagherovo airfield in thel:imea for further tests at the special weapons:'aining range located there.

ln early 1955 the Tu-16KS prototype passed:s tests at Bagherovo and was recommended':: series production for the AVMF. Between'354 and 1958 a total of 107 examples were:-lilt at plant No 22 in Kazan' in parallel with the-.l-1 64 bomber (59 of these built in 1958 were:R-equipped and known as the Tu-1 6KS (ZA)).: oout 40 Tu-1 6KSs were supplied to lndonesia:rC Egypt in the early 1960s, and a further 65:-csequently upgraded to carry KSR-2 and' SR-11 airto-surface missiles as the---16KSR-2 and Tu-16K-1 1-16 respectively.

The Tu-16KS missile system was intended-:'attacking radar-defined maritime and land-=-gets within a maximum combat radius of- 3O0km with a cruising speed of 800-850km/h:-C an all-up weight (with both missiles) of-:000k9. Targets could be detected at a dis-.:ce of 150-180km and the KS-l launched at:- altitude between 4,000 and 5,000m some-,-90km from the target, after which the missile':,v towards the target at an altitude of 400m.r':duction models of the Tu-16KS had the-oroved Kobal't-P radar.

The Tu-16KS was given the NATO reporting- zne Badger-}.

Tu- 1 6KSR Development Aircraft--: 90-km range of the KS-1 and its subsonic.::ed soon ceased to satisfy the requirements:' ihe Soviet Air Force which needed a new: -:ersonic missile with a range of up to 150km.

- : nsequently, in the mid- 1 950s OKB- 1 55

=:=1ed working on ways of improving on the' 3-1 . using an improved control and guidance-.siem and a missile propelled by a liquidJuel-::{et motor. On 29th April 1957 MAP issued:-:er No 169 tasking OKB-283 with developing-- - Rubicon guidance system based on the lat-.:: Rubin-1 aircraft radar for the KS and its'::(et-powered development, the KSR (k4z-

ahyy snaryad raketnyy - rocket-propelled^ged missile). An experimental form of the

-.,siem was to be ready for tests by the third:-arter of 1957, with Tupolev's OKB-156:-arged with preparing the technical docu--::ltation for an adaptation of the Tu-1 6KS by

-- !,. Meanwhile, OKB-155 was working on a- -,',' rocket-propelled air-to-surface missile.

1 the autumn of 1958 two examples of the---16 had been fitted with the Rubicon system:: crder245', oneto carrythe KS-1 missile and--= other the KSR, and sent for trials at3:_rherovo range. During the trials held:.:,veen 1st July and 15th November the:,rerimental Tu-16KSR launched eleven KSR

missiles- six against target vessels and five

against ground targets with radar reflectors.

Out of the six launches against targets shipsover a range of 90-96km there were four hits,

one miss and one discounted launch due to afailure of the guidance system. The 52.721V liq-uid{uel rocket motor designed by Aleksandr M

lsayev's OKB proved reliable, igniting withoutany problems after release at altitudes between4,000 and 10,000m and speeds between 400

and 500km/h. lt functioned as required in twomodes: maximum power, with athrust of 1,200-1,22okg and cruise, with a thrust of 680-700k9,after in-flight ignition.

Tests at altitudes of 4,000-10,000m showedthat the new KS-PM guidance radar could detecta ground target at ranges up to 200km and pro-

vide stable tracking over distances between 160

and 180km. At a distance of up to 13-1skm themissile's own homing radar took over. ln

launches against maritime targets, detectionand acquisition depended on a number of fac-

tors, including the type of target and the angle ofapproach. The results of these tests formed the

basis for the development of new air-to-sudacemissile carrier combinations and for the K-11

and K-16 with their different guidance systems.

The Tu-l6KSR-2 (Tu-16K-16)('order 352E', izdeliye NKSR-2 and NK-Z)The KSR-2 missile, a production derivative ofthe KSR, was carried by the Tu-16 equippedwith the Rublcon guidance system as part of

the K-1 6 complex for use against surface ships,bridges, dams, power stations, factories, railjunctions, airfields and other targets of importance. ln May-July 1957 a production Tu-1 6KS('49 Red', cln 72036081'7124') was convertedinto the first experimental carrier aircraft for the

K-16 complex as the Tu-16KSR-2. State accep-tance trials involving the State Committee forAviation Hardware (GKAT - Gosoodarstvennyykomitet po aviatsionnoy tekhnike), the State

Committee for Electronics (GKRE

Gosoodarsfve n nyy kom itet po r a hd i oe I e ktron -

ke) and the State Committee for Defence Tech-nology (GKOT - Gosoodarsfvennyy komitet poo boronnoy tekhnike) w ere held between Octo-ber 1960 and the end of March 1961. Afterthese the complex was accepted for opera-tional service once the problems thrown up bythe trials had been dealt with. (Note: ln 1957MAP was 'demoted' to a State Committeealong with several other ministries due tochanging government policies. The unluckyones included the Ministry of Electronics lndus-try (MRP - Ministerstvo rahdiotekhnicheskoypromyshlennosti) and the Ministry of Defence

lndustry (MOP Ministerstvo oboronnoypromyshlennosti). ln 1 965, however, theirnames and status were restored after Nikita S

Khruschchov had been unseated and replacedby Leonid I Brezhnev as the Soviet leader.)

The success of the K-16 complex promptedGKAT to propose to the Sovlet Ministry ofDefence that 1 00 examples of the Tu-1 6KS and

Tupolev Tu-16 39

a* ! 'i

i

J*itffir*h

The Tu-1 SKSR-2 prototype, '49 Red' (ci n

72036081'7124'), seen during trials; note thephototheodolite calibration markings on theforward fuselage. This aircralt survived thebreak-up of the Soviet Union, becomingUkrainian Air Force'25 Blue'. Tupolev JSC

Tu-1 SKSR-2'65 Blue' (cln 72038201'7164') wasconverted from a Tu-16KS. Note the open exhaustdoors for the engine's S-300M turbostatters onthe engine housings. Tupolev JSC

Front view of Tu-1 6KSR-2 c/n 7203820 duringState acceptance lrials at GK Nl WS.Tupolev JSC

having a Rubin-1 K radar instead of the Rubin-1 ,

a new command link system for working with

the missile's KS-1 M radar, revised wing pylons

for the missiles and so on. Tests continued until

the summer of 1964 with intervals for alterationsand adjustments, but their successful outcomeconfirmed the viability of the system and

allowed the ways of future development to be

outlined, The K-16 system was the first com-posite aircraft-missile system able to operate

both as a missile strike aircraft and as a bomber.The KSR-2 was a conventional mid-wing

monoplane with swept wings and tail sudaces.It was powered by an lsayev 55-6 twin-chamberrocket motor burning TG-02 hypergolic (that is,

self-igniting) fuel (called TT-S2 in some docu-ments) and AK-20F oxidiser which provided up

to 1,200k9 initial thrust and up to 700k9 thrust at

normal cruising speed. An 840-B50kg high-explosive warhead was fitted, but provision was

made for fitting a nuclear warhead. ProductionKSR-2s were 8,62m long, with a wingspan of4,52m and an all-up weight of 4,077-4,100k9. Amaximum speed of 1,260km/h was reached

over a flight distance of 120-140km. One or twoKSR-2s could be carried and launched either

simultaneously or individually. Preparations

for launch were the responsibility of the naviga-

tor, the automated processes carried out by

the Rubicon system making the provision

of a WSO (as on the Tu-16KS) unnecessary.

.{

6 r ; 1La ''11,,i ffii,tffilirr;'s'1ii"

E**-,ri,.*,"'l-

,g,. JF*.F'X *'ffi:

i ;*. il-,s:,j+'r'1..1

300 Tu-164 bombers should be converted to

carry the KSR-2 and equipped with the Rubiconguidance system. lt was also suggested that

the viability of adapting the supersonic Tu-22

bomber to carry the KSR-2 should also be

explored.On 4th February 1961 the Soviet Council of

Ministers issued directive No117-49 spelling

out the performance specification for the K-16

weapons system. This document ordered addi-

tional development work and testing to be car-

ried out on the guidance system - particularly

the KSR-2's KS-PM radar which was given alarger antenna dish. Atter passing State trials in

July-August 1961 the K-16 system was clearedfor service with the Long-Range Aviation and

the Naval Air Arm pursuant to Co{M directiveNo 1 1 84-51 4 of 30th December 1 961 .

ln 1962 work on converting Tu-16KSs to

carry two KSR-2 missiles began in DA andAVMF maintenance units. A total of 50 exam-

ples was refitted with the K-16 system. Such air-

craft were known as order 352E' in production(the E denoting a modified Tu-16KS which, as

mentioned earlier, was the delivery vehicle for

the KS-1 , aka izdeliye E), The service designa-tion was Tu-16KSR-2 or izcieliye NKSR-2:

sometimes this version was referred to as theTu-16K-16 or izdeliye NK-3 (although somesources call it Tu-1 6KS-KSR 2 ).

Also in 1962, the first two operationalTu-16KSR-2s, '65 Red' (cln 72038201'7164')

and '66 Red' (c/n 5202010), converted from aTu-16KS and a Tu-16A bomber respectively)

underwent checkout trails at GK Nll WS. The

two aircraft differed from those tested in 1960 in

40 Tupolev Tu-16

,',ien Tu-164 bombers were converted to---16KSR-2 standard, they retained the capa-: iyto carryfree{ali nuclear bombs.

The Rubicon-1 K radar could detect and::rect a target at a range of 300-350km. lt then::ssed the information to the missile's own'SPM radar which had been locked on to the.-get prior to launch. Once the KSPM was-::eiving a clear signal from the target, the nav-

;ator switched over to the missile's own track-- g and homing system. Missiles were launched

=: altitudes between 4,000 and 10,000m at::3eds between 700 and Bookmih. After:-rching its missiles, the Tu-16KSR-2 could-,'r away from the target thus reducing its vul--='ability to enemy anti-aircraft defences. No

=i system was initially fitted to the Tu-1 6KSR-2.The following data refers to the K-16 air-to-

:-:ace missile system:

- : - lat radrus ot the Tu-1 6KSR-2* 1 ,900km: ;-: alt tude of carrier aircraft 4,000-1 1,000m

--,: "g speed with launch at 10,000m 750-B00km/h-:':::

detection range':,',rs and large targets 320-340km

:-;: b'idges 250-280km

:'g: surface vessels 200-220km

:--aL range of KSR-? 120-140km

:, *!rn range of KSR-2 i 140"150km:-:''rtyofTu-16KSR-2totarget 110-130km

' :.obabilty B0%

' :- i'ro ASl\,4s, a 75,800-kg AUW, without inJlight refuelling

:-: ,', th 596 fuel reserves,

- -:r an altitude oJ 1 0.000m with the aircraft turning away

-: - :ne target,

--e data below refers to the Tu-16KSR-2 carrier:':raft:

Tu-1 6KSR-2A (Tu-1 6A-KSR-2)('order 352A', izdeliye NKSR-2 and NK-Z)ln parallel with the modification of the Tu-16KS

and Tu- 1 6KS (ZA) into the Tu-1 6KSR-2, ref its ofthe Tu-164 and Tu-16 (ZA) were also carriedout but their capability as bombers was

retained. In this aspect the Tu-16KSR-2A (con-

versions from the Tu-164 under 'order 3524')difiered from the Tu-16KSR-2. Subsequentlythis difference disappeared when theTu-16KSR-2 was again modified to carrybombs. The first Tu-164 to be refitted in thisway was '66 Red' (c/n 5202010) which, as

already mentioned, took part in the checkoutState trials in 1962. Under the terms of 'order

3524' 155 examples of the Tu-164 were modi-fied as Tu-16KSR-2A (they were also some-times referred to as the Tu-16A-KSR-2).

Comparatively few Tu-164 and Tu-16KS wereconverted to Tu-16KSR-2 (Tu-16KSR-2A) con-figuration in the f irst half of the 1 960s due to thedecision to develop the K- 1 1 -1 6 combined sys-tem able to use the KSR-2 with active radarhoming and the KSR-1 1 with passive radarhoming. ln the 1970s the Tu-16KSR-2 andTu-16KSR-2A were again refitted as theTu-16KSR-2-5 ('order 386A') as part of the K-26

ASM system.

Tu-16KSR-2(modified under'order 68412')As mentioned above, initially the Tu-16KSR-2

could not carry bombs. However, after modifi-cations under 'order 68412', tree-tall bombscould be carried in the bomb bay as on theTu-16KSR-2A and the two sub-variantsbecame identical in their capabilities.

Tu-16KSR-2A(modified under'order 6841 1')The Tu-16KSR-2A was able carry a limitedbomb load internally, but it was further modif ied

under the terms of 'order 684/1 ' to carry bombsexternally, bringing its maximum bomb load to1 0,000k9,

Tu-16KSR-lSln the early 1970s some Tu-16KSR-2s were fit-ted with ECM equipment to prevent detectionby enemy radars - either for individual protec-tion, using the SPS-S Fasol' (String bean)active jammer, or for operations as a group,using the SPS-I00 Rezeda (Mignonette, pro-

nounced rezedah) jammer. The latter was

housed in a UKhO ECM fairing. Aircraftequipped with these were designatedTu-16KSR-lS.

., rum TOW with two KSR-2: - ^.i'r, rum operational range *

i-:":ance at maximum range

::-, ce ceiling t- -: to service ceilrng

,r :r a 62,000-kg take-otf weight--: to 10,000m with 62,000-kg TOW-:.:-ol1 run with two KSR-2s:

,r :h a 75,800k9 take-off weight

,', :h a 79,000k9 take-off weight.-r ng run +

,r :h brake parachute

,', :hout brake parachute-':.ng run s

,r ih brake parachute

,', rhout brake parachute

39.200-39,500k9

79,000k9

29.500.30,300k9

3,900km

5 hours 20 mins

1 1,900m

37 mins

21 mins

2,200m

2,400m

1,200m

1,600m

1,450m

1,900m

Above: Tu-l6KSR-24 '25 Blue' (c/n 5201604) shows oft its multiple eiector racks carried on the wingstations. Note Each MER carried eight 250-kg bombs. Tupolev JSC

Below: Front view of a Tu-l6KSB-2A showing the high-drag external stores. Tupolev JSC

= r, :" 596 fuel reserves on landing and with launch ol two

' !1-2 at mid-range; t with two KSR-2, a 56,000-kg AUW and

: a2 000-kg TOW; + with a 48,000-kg landing weight (after

:--:h of both KSR-2); $ with a 57,000-kg landing weight

r, :r both KSR-2 unlaunched),

-re Tu-16KSR-2 was given the NATO code-âme Badger-G.

Tupolev Tu-l6 41

lfr,

I litl].

iirrit, iitifl

.r1i1iflti,

i,'"

'iriliss

*j'l'ot"''

.-

Tu-16K-1 1 ('order 285')Work on the K-1 1 weapons system was carriedout in parallel with the K-16, the KSR-2 beinggiven a passive radar homing system for use

against the enemy's ground or shipborneradars and becoming the KSR-1 1 anti-radiationmissile (ARM). Preliminary design work on theK-l 1 and its Tu-16KS carrier was initiated by

Council of Ministers directive No902-41 1 of20th July 1957 and MAP order No2BB of 31stJuly 1957, with project completion scheduledfor early the following year, manufacturer'stests in the spring of 1959 and final trials of thewhole complex in the autumn of 1959. Thequestion of updating the K-10 anti-shippingsystem (see later) with passive radar homingwas also to be examined. OKB-156 was to be

responsible for work on the Tu-16, the Ministryof Defence's Central Research lnstitute No 108

(TsNll-108) for the search and target markingsystem, OKB-155 for the missile and Nll-648 forthe guidance and passive homing system.

The design work on the K-1 1 system tooktwo years. By the end of 1959 the basic issues

of radar detection and target indication, as

well as passive homing, had been solved (the

former by the Ritsa system named after a lake in

the Caucasus region) and the first modelsof the eniire system were ready for testing.Two examples of the Tu-16 were adapted at

the Kazan' aircraft factory and designatedTu-16K-1 1 (in production they were referred

to as 'order 285'). The first Tu-16K-11 made

its first flight from Kazan'-Borisoglebskoye in

January 1960 and underwent flight testing at

Zhukovskiy the following month. ln April itwas joined by the second Tu-16K-1 1 and man-

ufacturer's tests of the K-11 began in May.

Despite the Jundamental design complexityof the system's components, the tests were

concluded successfully in the spring of 1962

and the Tu-16K-1 1 was passed for operationaluse by CofM directive No314-157 of 13th April

that year.

The K-11 was the first Soviet air-to-surfacemissile with passive radar homing for use

against enemy radars. radar-controlled anti-air-

craft defences and surface-to-air missiles. The

Tu-16K-1 1 modified from production Tu-164and Tu-l624 bombers could, like theTu- 16KSR-2, also be used as a bomber. lt was

outwardly identifiable by an inverled T-shapeddirectionJinder antenna on the extreme nose(on the navigator's siation glazing frame). ln

order to accommodate the Ritsa radar detec-tion/homing system, save weight and keep theCG within prescribed limits the PU-88 fixed for-ward{iring cannon installation and the PKI gun-sight were removed. The KSR-1 t hardlydiffered from the KSR-2 in its design and car-

ried a high-explosive or explosiveJragmenta-tion warhead. At 4,000k9 its all-up weight was'1 00kg less than the KSR-2's due to its lighterguidance system (a 2PRF-10 passive homingradar in a nose radome which increased themissile's length to 8.6m and an AP-72-11 mis-

sile autopilot which maintained coursebetween launch and impact). The missile waslaunched once its radar had locked-on. Afterlaunch and ignition, the KSR-11 climbed tothe same height as the Tu-16 and maintainedthat altitude before finally entering a 30' diveto impact. The Tu-16 could carry out any

Tu.16K-11-16'28 Red' (c/n 5202501), a convenedTu-16A, seen during tests with two red/whitechequered KSR-11 missiles. This aircraft hasbeen retrofitted with an SPS-100 active iammerin a boattail fairing supplanting the tail turret.Tupolev JSC

Tu.16K-11-16'53 Blue' (c/n 4201005) ispreserved at the Central Russian Air ForceMuseum in Monino near Moscow. Thisillustrates the inverted-T antenna array of theRitsa radar homing system. Yefim Gordon

Tupolev Tu-1 6

i .,*. .qr"

i*-... :i€"+'': . ",#iiJ;"ed.*'

Left: A technician screws a cover plate into place on a Tu-l 6K-1 1 -1 6 coded '73' wherethe fixed lorward-firing cannon used to be. This aircraft has had its bomb carryingcapability restored under the terms of 'order 68412', as revealed by the open bombbay. Sergey and Dmitriy Komissarov archive

Above: Sorties were sometimes flown with only a single missile, as this Tu-16K-11-16illustrates. Yefim Gordon archive

-::oeuvre after launch, including U-turns;-: :arget tracking information was retained by-= KSR-1 1.

-1e K-11 complex had a 2,000-km combat.:: rs with the aircraft flying at altitudes:::,'/een 4,000 and 11,000m. Missile launch at-- l00m was effected at a cruising speed 750-:-l<m/h. The radar detection range was 270-:: lxm, with the KSR-1 1 possessing a range of-:lkm and a 'kill' probability of 80-90% (the-:ading memory feature meant that the radar

: rld in all probability be destroyed even if the:-:my switched it off).

lithough the K-11 system was accepted, it

=s decided to use the combined K-1 1 and'-'6 for operational use.

Tu-16KSR-2-11'order 497A', izdeliye NK-11-16 and NK-2)

--e high degree of commonality between the'SR-2 and KSR-1 1 suggested that they could:::h be fitted to the same carrier. Therefore, in-352 the K-1 1-16 complex was accepted for:.erational use, its Tu-16KSR-2-1 1 carrier air-

:'aft (equipped with Rubicon 1K and Ritsa

:-idance systems) carrying either two KSR-2s: - KSR-1 1 s, or one KSR-2 and one KSR-1 1 . The

-aximum range of the KSR-11 was 85km if

:rnched from 4,000m and 120km if launched-:m 10,000m, with detonation between 4 and'2m above the target. The KSR-2 (with either a-E or a nuclear warhead) had a maximum-:nge of 150km if launched from 10,000m and: minimum range of 70km. The Tu-16KSR-2-1 1

-ad an operational radius of 2,050km.

An air-to-air of a Tu-16KSB-2-1 1 carrying twoK-11 anti-radiation missiles. Note the cutoutsin the outboard llaps allowing them to bedeployed without striking the missiles'fins."eiim Gordon archive

Under the terms of'order 497A' 155 Tu-164and Tu-l64 (ZA) bombers were converted toTu-16KSR-2-1 1 configuration and theTu-16KSR-2As were modified. ln service theTu-16KSR-2-1 1 was known as izdeliye'NK-1 1-

16' or izdeliye'NK-2'.

Tu-16K-1 1-16('order 497E',izdeliye NK-l1-16 and NK-2)15 Tu-16KS missile carriers and a number of

Tu- 1 6KSR-2s, as well as some Tu-1 65 SAR air-

craft which lacked bomb-carrying capability,were also upgraded to Tu-16K-1 1-16 standardunder the terms of 'order 497' (or 'order 497E'

if they carried KS-1 missiles). lnitially their abil-

ity to carry bombs was not restored, but thiswas subsequently done on many of these air-

craft. ln such cases, the underside of the

machine was painted white either completelyor partly. Conversion of the Tu-16KSR-2 into

the Tu-16K-1 1-16 entailed installation of theRitsa radar homing system and removal of the

nose gun turret and gunsight. The missilepylons could be used for either KSR-2 ASMs orKSR-1 1 ARMs. Outwardly the Tu- 1 6K-1 1 -1 6 dif-

fered from the Tu- 16KSR-2 in having extra skinpanels on the weapons bay doors closing theaccess hatch to the former WSO's cabin andthe cutout for the deleted Kobal't-P radar. lnaddition, the undersurfaces of the machineslacking bomber capability were natural metal.

The designation Tu-16K-1 1-16KS was alsosometimes used where the conversion had

been from a KS-1 ASM carrier.

A total of 441 Tu-164, Tu-16 (ZA), Tu-16KS

and Tu-16S aircraft were refitted to take theK-1 6 and K-1 1 - 1 6 weapons systems. Of these,

211 aicraft served with the Air Force and 230

with the Navy. The main delivery vehicle was

the Tu-16K-11-16 which was equipped withSPS-5 and SPS-100 ECM sets. Refits weredone at maintenance factories in the 1960s.

Later, in the 1970s, the Tu-16K-1 1-16 was mod-ified yet again to Tu-16K-26 configuration.

Tupolev Tu-1 6

A small number of Tu-16K-1 1-16 were sup-plied to Egypt and lraq, taking part in the armedconflicts in the Middle East in the early 1970s

and 1980s (the 1973 Arab-lsraeli war and thelran-lraq war).

The performance of the Tu-1 6K- 1 1 -1 6 barelydiffered from the Tu-16KSR-2, although theneed to carry two guidance systems increasedthe former aircraft's empty weight to 40,600k9,necessitating a reduction of the fuel load to29,000k9. The Tu-16KSR-2-1 1 and Tu-16K-1 1-

16, as well as the Tu-16KSR-2, were all knownby the NATO reporting name Badger-G.

Tu-1 6K-1 1-16(modif ied under'order 684 l2')At first the Tu-16K- 1 1-16 lacked bomber capa-bility, but after modification under the terms of'order 68412' it could carry a full bomb load ofup to 13,000k9 comprising 40 FAB-100 orFAB-250 bombs, or 26 FAB-500s, or fourFAB-1500s, or two FAB-3000s, or eight torpe-does (four in the bomb bay and four on under-wing pylons).

K-26 long-range stand-off ASM SystemDesign work on the new K-26 air-to-surfacemissile system bullt around the improved Rubi-

con-1 KV radar and the new KSR-S ASM was ini-

tiated by Council of Ministers directiveNo838-357 of 1 lth August 1962. The systemwas to comprise either the Tu-16K-26 orTu-16KSR-2-5 or Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1 as a carrier,

two KSR-S (with conventional or nuclear war-heads), KSR-2 or KSR-1 1 ASMs, and the Vzlyot(Take-off) guidance system.

The KSR-S was developed by OKB-2-155(the missile branch of the Mikoyan OKB) duringthe late 1950s and early 1960s; its designbenefited from the experience gained with

the KS-1, KSR-2 and KSR-1 1 missiles, as well

as with the Kh-22 for the supersonic Tu-22K.

It was devised as a highly accurate delta-wing'fire-and{orget' missile for use against ground

or maritlme targets. The missile was powered

by a 55.35 three-chamber rocket enginedesigned by the lsayev OKB and equippedwith a VS-K active radar homing system, prov-ing superior to all preceding Soviet air-to-

surface missiles. With a length of 10.56m, a

wing span of 2.6m and a launch weight of3,900k9, the KSR-5 had a maximum speed of2,500-3,000km/h and a flight altitude of 22,000-

25,000m. lts range Jrom low-altitude launchwas 200-240km, but up to 500km if launched at

a higher altitude. The KSR-5 could carry eithera high-explosive warhead which detonated on

impact with the target or a nuclear warhead set

for a predetermined height Later developmentsincluded the KSR-SP, KSR-SM, KSR-SB and

KSR-sN, as well as the D-sNM ([/V) target drone.

Flight tests and State trials of the K-26 com-plex were held between October 1964 and Dec-

ember 1967, using two machines, a Tu-16K-26

and a Tu-16KSR-2-5, modified from Tu-16K-1 1-

16KS'54 Red' (cln 8204022i'8191') andTu-16KSR-2A'66 Red' (c/n 5202010) respec-tively. During this first stage 82 flights and ten

Iaunches of the KSR-5 were made, five of theseto test the missile's active homing system. Data

derived from the tests recorded that the K-26

system had an operational radius of 2,100kmwith two KSR-S; the missiles were launchedwith the carrier cruising at 750-800km/h at an

altitude of 10,000m. The maximum range of theKSR-5 was between 200 and 240km.

A second round of state trials began in Jan-

uary 1968 and went on for almost eleven

months. The Tu-16K-26 and Tu-16KSR-2-5

made 87 flights totalling 2BB hours; in order tospeed up the trials they were later joined by

Tu-16K-26 cln 4200703 and Tu-16K-10-26'15Red' (c/n 1793014). A total of 13 KSR-Ss werelaunched at ground and maritime targets.

The K-26 system was accepted by the Long

Range Avlation and Naval Air Arm pursuant toCofM directive NoBB2-315 of 12th November1969. The Tu-16K-26, Tu-16KSR-2-5 and

Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1 were all known by the NATO

reporting name Badger-G Mod.

L

I

::*; - ':"_B*---

Tu-16K-26 ASM Garrier('order 386', izdeliye NK-26 and NK-4)Fifteen examples of the Tu-16K-11-16KS were

modified into Tu-16K-26 missile-carriers. ln ser-

vice they were referred to as izdeliye NK-26 orizdeliye NK-4, and during conversion as 'order

386'. The Tu-16K-26 differed from the

Tu-16K-1 1-16 only in its new ASMs and theequipment and adaptations required to carry

them. The prototype was converted from a

Tu-16K-1 1-16 coded '54 Red' (cin

82040221'8191'). Conversion work ln air forcerepair and maintenance units began in 1969.

'54 Red' (clnA2O4O221'A191'), the Tu-16K-25prototype, at GK Nl VVS during State acceptancetrials. The sleek KSR-s missiles make a strikingcontrast with the ASMS carried by the Tu-l6hitherto. Tupolev JSC

Front view of the Tu-1 6K-26 prototype. Note howthe missiles'ventral lins lold to provideadequate ground clearance, Tupolev JSC

A KSR-5 missile on its ground handling dolly.This is a red-painted inert missile. Tupolev JSC

Tupolev Tu-1 6

---

-aF ':,-rard fuselage of the Tu-16K-25il[:::f;:r.Be: the aircraft received whiteilrrcEF:rrfaces late in its llying career. Theil{r--e */as probably taken at the Air Forcew,r:--:e in Kiev where the aircratt ended uph i :-3und instructional airlrame.

' : -'::n archive

: : :::* below refers to the Tu- 1 6K-26:

-a

:. -::: cnal combat condtttons)..:-.

39,480k9

75,800k9

79,000k9

43,800 litres

550km/h

720knlh

B20km/h

900km/h

0,88

12,300m

4,B00km

2,1 50-2,1 B0km

- - - ::rm ssible lVach number

-: :-: 'afge+- -.' ':: :s vrith a speed

'..::-:ing to [/ach 0,72

- :-: ê power and canying one ortwo ASMs:- --. ::rrvo ASMs, a62,000-kg TOWand engines at

-': ::,',er + atoptimum altitude with a normal AUW. one

:--:-:d at mldpoint and landing with 5% fuel reserves.

-" . ---16K-26 could carry one or two KSR-2,: :-l cr KSR-1 1 , or a single missile plus a con-

'--:âi bomb or nuclear weapon load up to-,---,9. Modernised versions of the KSR-S:-: ater used on upgraded carriers: the::-:)l on the Tu-16K-26M (K-26M complex),': :,,v-level KSR-sN on the Tu-16K-26N' :a"i complex) and the low-level KSR-SNM

= ,-::-drone.

---16KSR-2-5-11

:rder 386A', izdeliye NKSR.2-5-11 & NK.5)- -::: the terms of 'order 386A' 125 examples: --: Tu-16KSR-2-1 1 (which retained bomber..::cility) were equipped as K-26 complexes- : : milar way to the Tu- 16K-26, carrying a pair-- - SR-2, KSR-1 1 or KSR-S missiles of various--31_,,pes (excluding the KSR-SP). Outwardly- -. ciffered from the Tu-16K-26 in lacking the:.-:is on the rear sections of the bomb bay:::-s and the white-painted undersurfaces.-- s modification became one of the standard- :srle-carrying versions of the Tu-16.

-:: .: centrei Tu-16K-26 '06 Red' (c/n 7203819)r:s converted from Tu-16KS '24 Red'. Oncelgain the aircraft has gained white-:dersurfaces and ECM equipment lor selt-:"ctection; the additional number'7163'is no,:nger carried on the tail. Yefim Gordon archive

: :-::'16 Red' (c/n A2O41111'8211'), lhe-:.16KSR-2-5 prototype, carrying a pair of{SR-2s in this case. Note the figure-eightrhaped aerial on the tail guns (probably:ssociated with a data link system). Tupolev JSC

Tu-16KSR-2-5('order 386A', izdeliye NKSR-2-5 and NK-5)One hundred and ten examples of theTu-16KSR-2A were also conveded for the K-26

system under the terms of 'order 3864', analo-gous to the conversions of the Tu-1 6K-1 1 -1 6KSinto the Tu-16K-26 and the Tu-16KSR-2-11 intothe Tu-16KSR-2-5-11. The Rubin-Ritsa linkequipment was not installed. The Tu-16KSR-2-5could be used as a bomber and carried twoKSR-2 or KSR-S missiles of various subtypes(including the KSR-5NM target drone). Unlike the

t-r#.'4E

two preceding modifications, the Tu- 1 6K-26 andTu-16KSR-2-5-1 1, it was not equipped to carrythe KSR-1 1 or KSR-SP anti-shipping missiles.

The equipment fitted on the Tu-16KSR-2-5differed from that on the Tu-16K-26 in that itincluded a PKI reflector sight, an SP-50 blindIanding system, and later an active ECM capa-bility consisting of a SPS-SM and SPS-151/1521153 from the Siren' (Lilac, pronouncedseeren') complex. But the reconnaissance,and target-indicating equipment and thebombsight were omitted (although some

ffi.@>^,'

*-'o;*i;'r--1* ''

+ffr*@

Tupolev Tu-16 45

!',|r

:;,ii

,di lfli llilllr

i-:1T"1-":-:i:::

I

retained their OPB-1 12 bombsight which came

into use once more when they were recon-

verted to bomber capability under the terms of'order 68412').fhe version had the same defen-

sive armament as the Tu-164.Externally the Tu-16KSR-2-5 differed from

the Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1 in lacking the Ritsa radar

homing system's inverted-T aerial on the navi-

gator's station glazing and in possessing a

PU-BB nose gun mounting, and it differed from

the Tu-16K-26 in lacking the panels on the

bomb bay doors. lt also had a different kind of

antenna above the pilots' cockpit from that on

the Tu-'1 6KSR-2A.

Tu-16K-26 with the Rubin'1M RadarFrom 1973 onwards some Tu-16KSR-2-5-11s

were fitted with the Rubin-1 M combirred radar

and optical sighting system. This was an

upgraded version of the Rubin-1KV with a

greater detection range. lt was therefore quite

different in appearance from the other Tu-16

missile-carrier versions, being readily identifi-

able by the large teardrop radome under the

centre fuselage and the lack of the usual chin

radome whose position was faired over. This

was because the Rubin-1M was too large and

heavy and would have caused CG problems if

installed under the nose. The new radar instal-

lation necessitated the removal of the No 3 fuel

tank, causing a reduction in the fuel capacity by

31 50 litres, but the range of the KSR-5 ASM was

increased to 450km. On this version the PU-BB

nose gun installation was deleted.

Tu-16KSR-2-5 with the Rubin-1M RadarThis version did not carry Ritsa radar homlng

equipment and therefore could not use anti-

radar missiles. Externally it differed from the ver-

sion detailed above in lacking ARM compatibility

Above left: A'production' Tu'16KSR'2-5conversion coded'66 Red' (c/n 5202010) -apparently at GK Nll WS during checkout trials;this aircraft was previously a Tu-16KSR-zA.Tupolev JSC

Above right: An interesting perspective ol an

operational Tu-16KSR-2-5. Yefim Gordon archive

Left: Front view ofTu-l6KSR-2-5 c/n 52o2O1O.

This view illustrates the splitters dividing theinlet ducts into upper and lower channels, aswell as the area-ruled shape of the enginehousings. Tupolev JSC

and hence the distinctive aerial of on the nose

glazing. Like the Tu-16K-26 'Rubin-1 M', it also

lacked the PU-88 nose gun installation. This ver-

sion subsequently served as the basis for the

Tu-16 Tsiklon-N weather research aircraft.

Tu-16K-26M(izdeliye NK-26M)ln the late 1970s the KSR-s ASM was updated

as the KSR-SM or KSR-SB with new guidance

systems designed to strike smaller more diffi-

cult targets. Several Tu-16K-26 were modified

for this complex, known as the K-26M.

Tu-16K-26N('order 2226', izdeliye NK-26N)The K-26N system was based on the KSR-SN

low-level air-to-surface missile, its Tu-1 6K-26N

carrier having its Rubin-1 KV radar replaced by

a new radar under the centre fuselage opti-

-t

Tupolev Tu-1 6

-::.= eft and right: '44 Red',r -u-16K-26 with a Rubin-lM'rriar. rests betweenmssions. Note the openrnb bay. Yelim Gordon: l' ,2

-+15K-26 '72 Blue' (clnil93001) was converted??n1 a Tu-16A bomber,rence the white undersides.lcte the taired ventralrlEi-collision light on thesiarboard nosewheel door,r reature added to most-.-16s in service.

:'' - Gordon archive

-llS upper view of a-+1 6K-25 illustrates therr].g planform with therightly kinked leadingrdge near the inboard wingTna€s. the sharper sweep!' ttle horizontal tail and thetrgine nacelle tail fairings.:- - Gordon archive

j-: Some Tu-l6K-26s wereitted with the Rubin-lM radarfi a large teardrop radomernder the centre fuselagenr-stead of the usual chin-rdome housing an RBP-4-rdar, This example carryingi single KSR-s wasrTtercepted by NATO lightersrr'er the Baltic Sea,:=:1 Gordon archive

: -:: A Tu-l6K-26 with a3ubin.1M radar prepares to:ake contact with a Tu-l6(2)aker. Yelim Gordon archive

Tupolev Tu-1 6 47

tcarried out at Naval Air Arm repair and mainte-

nance bases. The following data refer to the

K-26P system:

2.240Kn

2 400km

2.130km

2 330km

9 000-1 1,000m

330km

100km

3 000km/h

,i50m,/secmised for low-level operations. A small number

of Tu-16K-26s, Tu-16K-26Ps, Tu-16KSR-2-5s

and Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1s were updated to Tu-16-

26N configuration in accordance with 'order

2226' and served with the Naval Air Arm in the

1980s. lJ the KSR-SN was used by the already

mentioned versions without modification, it

was launched ai the same altitude as the

KSR-S, subsequently descending to its desig-

nated flight altitud€ to enable stealthy

approach to the target.

Tu-16K-26P('order 397', izdeliye NK-26P)Developed in accordance with Council of Min-

isters directive No 123-43 of 7th February 1964,

this system was designed around the KSR-SP

anti-radiation missile with passive radar hom-

ing (P = ptotivolokatsionnayalraketal -ARM).

It used a Tu-16KSR-2-5-11 equipped with the

Plot (Raft) compatible passive radar homing/guidance system as the carrier aircraft which

received the designation Tu-16K-26P. The two

missiles could be launched against the same

target or different targets (one of which, how-

ever, had to be in line with the aircraft's line of

flight), after which the aircraft was able to turn

away. The standard K-26 equipment fit was

retained so that KSR's, KSR-2 or KSR-1 1 mis-

siles could be carried. Only the Siren' jammer

was omitted.The experimental Tu-16K-26P ('order 397 )

began its factory tests in the summer of 1967

with State trials commencing in April 1972. On

4th September '1973 the K-26P system was

cleared for Soviet Navy service by Council ofMinisters directive No643-205. Conversions ol

Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1s to the new standard were

ii.,#fl5*

'T"_-e{,24: ::.-, -;:,,,: iS:.:r AS"ls ai opt mum

a::,::s,',:':,: ::,',:- -:: : a.';-:t'atadistance.iaa' -:,^-u!--. - :.:-:.

Tu-16K-26PM(izdeliye NK-26PM)Aircrafi brougiri ,rc :o K-26PM standard and

carrying KSR-5i'.i and KSR-1 1 missiles were

oesignatec Tu-16K-26PNl or rzde\iye NK-26PM

and vrere ec;rpceC ',','rin ine AMP-IV communi-cator iinKing ihe ai:cra;1 and missile radars.

Tu-1 6K-268 (izdeliye NK-26B)This vras a srrb-\,a:;an: o: the Tu-l6K-26 modi-

fied under the ier,.ns ci order 684i2' 1o carry

a greaier ioac of cornbs or mines carried

both internaliy and extefnally. The B referred to

the bomb arrnarnent (bombardirovochnoye

vo oroozhentye).

Tu-16K-25-07One more suD-variant of the Tu-16K-26 fitted

with an L007 actrve lammer for individual pro-

tection was designated Tu- 16K-25-07.

T u-16K-22 Development Aircraft('order 29413')This was a service example of a Tu-16 ASM car-

rier fitted with test instrumentation and used to

carry and launch the Kh-22 ASM during tests of

the Kh-22 complex designed by KB-1 . lt served

successfully for several years during the devel-

opment of the Kh-22 ASM and its Tu-22K.

fu-22M and Tu-95K-22 carriers.

Later in their service lives many Tu-16K-26swere updated to Tu-16K-26P standard withcharacteristic ECM antenna fairings at thetip of the nose and under the air intake trunks'Tu-16K-26P c/n 6203102 has an identity crisis,wearing the code'16 Blue' on the nose geardoors and'18 Blue' on the tin!Yelim Gordon archive

Tu-l6K-26P '66 Red' (cln7203614) with twoKSR-5 missiles has been prepared for a display,as the data placard near the nose gear indicates.Yefim Gordon archive

Front view ol a Tu-16K-26P, Yefim Gordon archive

48 Tupolev Tu-1 6

-----

! cair of fully armed Tu-l6K-26Ps led by'71 Red': n 7203605) makes a demonstration flypast.:=r Gordon

&lother shot ol Tu-16K-26P'71 Red' (c/n-?03605) as it stages its show performance.:'-: Gordon

-:js culaway drawing of the Tu-l6K-10Ilustrates the trademark nose radarerangement, the semi-recessed K-10S missiles1d the missile launch operator's cabin in theF-€pons bay just aft of it. Tupolev JSC

:u-16 ASM Carriers with Restored andncreased Bombing Capability'Tu-1 6KSR-2, Tu-1 6KSR-2A, Tu-1 6K.1 1 -1 6,-u.1 6K-26 and Tu-16KSR-2-5 modified-nder'order 684/1' and'order 68412')- :re late 1960s it was decided to expand the.::cal capabilities of the Tu-16 by refitting

: : -e of the missiletoting versions with.:-::ored and increased bomb carrying facili-:s ln 1969 Tu-16KSR-2-5 c/n 6203130 was:: .cted for modificatlon in this way by the',:,al Air Arm's Engineering Service, and suc-::-:sful GK Nll WS tests of the aircraft were-: I in June and July the following year. With:':,,ision for carrying these munitions exter--: v as well as in the bomb bay, the machine:::,d carry 3,000k9 of bombs or mines weigh--l between 500 and 1,500k9 (maximum

-:-rb/mine load 9,000k9) in additlon to its

- 3'.'ls.

-imost simultaneously, between March and-,-e 1970, GK Nll WS carried out trials on---1 6KSR-2A cln 5201604 refitted at plant..22 in Kazan' (referred to as the Tu-16A-

'Sl-2 in documents) with increased bomb:.Js of up to 13,000k9, 4,000k9 of which was::-:.ed externally. The aircraft attained a maxi---m speed of 820km/h at 7,550m and had a::-rice ceiling of 11,100m, with a take-off: ght of 60,000k9. At optimum altitudes and:r a 13,000k9 bomb load the aircraft had a

-:ximum operational range of 2,820km with a

-3ximum weight of 79,000k9 and 2,400km:r a weight of 75,800k9.n comparison with the original Tu-16KSR-2

::'rying two KSR-2 missiles, the range with a- : 000k9 bomb load and with a normal take-off',:,ght of 75,800k9 was reduced by 1,430km

due to the smaller fuel load and increased fuelconsumption.

On the basis of the tests carried out on thesetwo aircraft, work on restoring the bombercapability (as per 'order 68412') was carried outby repair and maintenance factories on theTu-16KSR-2, Tu-16K-11-16, Tu-16K-26 andTu-16KSR-2-5, and on increasing bomb carry-ing capability (as per 'order 684/1 ') on theTu-1 64, Tu-1 6KSR-2A and Tu-1 6KSR-2-1 1 .

Tu-l6K-10('order 238', izdeliye NK-10, izdeliye NK-l1ln the early 1950s Mikoyan's OKB-155 andTupolev's OKB-156 co-operated in the devel-opment of a new air-to-surface missile system

based on the Kometa. This was to be the K-10Swhich, unlike the KS-1, would be supersonic,possess a significantly greater range and a150% improvement in accuracy. lts primary tar-gets were to be vessels with a displacement in

excess of 10,000 tonnes. A new guidance sys-tem, the K-10U. was devised by a team led byS F Matviyevskiy based on the YeN airborneradar. The work on the new system was kickedoff by CofM directives No178-1 10 of 3rdFebruary 1955 and No1946-1045 of 16th

November 1955; plant No22 in Kazan'was charged with modifying a Tu-16 intothe prototype of a new missile carrier desig-nated Tu-16K-10, using drawings suppliedby OKB-156.

[-

*

. .-- Ail|'

..'.lj] -:;

Tupolev Tu-1 6

lill, rtlli irrl , ''tlii, :ll

Hir rlr :rii 'r 'i I i:til iillil 'r

j,

The K-10S had a mid-set wing swept back

55' and tail surfaces with 55'30' sweepback'

Some examples had a ventral fin The missile

had a shaped-chargeihigh-explosive warhead,

either the FK-1O ('one-o') or FK-1 M - the latter

{or striking large naval vessels below the water-

line. Nuclear warheads could also be used

Propulsion was by a Mikulin M-9FK afterburn-

ing turbojet, a disposable short-life version of

th; RD-98 fitted to the MiG-19 fighter' Launch

and guidance were semi-autonomous and

could be effected eiiher from a ground control

station or from the carrier aircraft Detection of

the target by the YeN radar depended on the

aircraft's flight altitude but was about 480km'

with missile launch at a range oI 12O-27Okm'

Once the target was detected, the radar locked

on and the automatic tracking system was acti-

vated. After launch the K-1 0S entered the beam

of the aircraft's radar and was guided by it The

guidance system on the missile consisted of

two parts: the first (YeS-2D) guided the missile'

using signals transmitted by the aircraft, and

made altitude corrections, while the second

(YeS 1) comprised the missiles own active

50 I uoolev I u- tt)

: sts#s-.#

radar homing and command system as it came

within a pre-set range of the target. The missile

was also equipped with YeS-3A autopilot (ln

the designations of the guidance system's

components, N stood for nosife/'- carrier [air-

craftl and S for snaryad - missile )

An attribute of the K-1OS was that the missile

manoeuvred in both horizontal and vertical

planes en route to the target After launch, the

missile lost height slightly, then flew straight as

it entered the aircraft's radar beam At a range

of 100-1 1Okm from the target it began a shallow

dive, levelling out when some 60 to 70km {rom

the target and again assuming horizontal flight

at an altitude of B0O-1 .000m until some 10 or

16km remained; at this point ihe active radar

homrng system was activated for terminal

guidance. lmpact was at very low level either

above or below the target vessel s waterline'

The missile's vulnerability to anti-aircraft

defences was reduced by its speed' relatively

small radar signature and the brief period in

which its homing radar could be jammed After

launch the aircraft could make an B0'turn away

from the target (the K-1OS then followed a hor-

The tirst prototype Tu'16K'10 (c/n 7203805)

during manufacturer's llight tests' The huge

'snout' is plainly visible. Tupolev JSC

A side view of the lirst prototype Tu-16K-10 with

no missile. Note the telemetry data link (?) aerial

supplanting the tail guns' the ventral blisterfairing supplanting the ventral gun barbette and

the teardrop fairing under the starboard wingtip;

the latter houses a cine camera to record

missile launches during trials. Tupolev JSC

The same aircraft with a K'1OS missile in stowed

position, the way it is during take'olf and cruiseflight. TuPolev JSC

izontally curved flight path); this considerably

increased the minimum distance between air-

craft and target (to 1 1 0-1 50km), minimising the

risk that the aircraft should come within range

of the enemy air defences.Design of the Tu-1 6K- 1 0 carrier to Naval Air

Arm requirements began in December '1956

and was based on the Tu- 1 6 bomber, drawing

on the experience acquired during the devel-

opment of the Tu-16KS. The Tu-16K-10 was

optimised for attacking naval targets The big

YeN radar occupying the place of the usual

glazed nose (the navigator's station was

moved aft) had two antennas - one for the

search/target illumination channel and one for

the missile's command link channel While the

latter antenna could be accommodated in a

neat teardrop-shaped chin radome without any

problems, the main antenna was too large to fit

inside the fuselage nose. As a result, the

Tu-1 6K-10 received a distinctive nose profile

with a 'duck bill' radome that was wider than the

fuselage. The work on fitting the YeN radar and

modifying the weapons bay to accommodate

the large semi-recessed missile was carried out

by the equipment section of OKB-1 56 headed

by A V Nadashkevich Before launch the K-1 0S

had to be lowered clear of the fuselage on a

hydraulically actuated centreline pylon and its

engine started; after launch the inwards-open-

ing weapons bay doors were closed pneumat-

ically. The special door/Pylon design meant

that the Tu-16K-10 could not carry bombs or

mines, and no strike cameras were fitted'

ln 1957 OKB-156 passed the conversion

documents to plant No 22 in Kazan' , where the

first two Tu-16K-10 prototypes (converted from

brand-new Tu-16s with the c/ns 7203805 and

7203806) were completed in November ano

December. ln October the {irst K-10S to be

assembled was sent for tests by GK Nll WS ln

January 1958 the two prototypes were ready

for flight tests; the first flight took place on 4th

January and the tests continued until 29th Sep-

tember. Part of the programme was pedormed

with Air Force participation at GK Nll WS's

main facility in Akhtoobinsk, southern Russia

Before the State acceptance trials had started

the YeN radar was put through its paces on the

two prototypes, while the YeS system was

tested on two specially modified MiG-195 fighl

ers designated Mic-l95MK (c/ns 61 210418

and 61 21 041 9). The f irst K-1 OS test launch f rom

lilriili,liii;ll'li r"f'l ' l

, r,r*,,,,',t11l1irili

c' *T+.a.,. "..d;..** ,. ''-l * f,

.+ .Sr"#B"i .'

G

,+;.-

: F,i.ff"..

fi#

:tis view of the first prototype Tu-16K-10 showsrow the missile is lowered clear of the fuselagerefore engine starting and launch. Tupolev JSC

l= :vr iefl: Close-up of the rear end of Tu-l5K-10: n 7203805, showing the assorted antennas:,1d fairings associated with test equipment.--:clev JSC

:= :,y right: Close-up of the K-10S missile in fully€wered position, showing the hefty BD-238-ydraulically retractable centreline pylon. Note:nat the missile's fin is still partially inside thereapons bay. Tupolev JSC

: .u-16K-10 prototype in autonomous mode.1 inout using the guidance and homing sys-

-:11s) was made on 28th May 1958, and on 21st'.lvember the Tu-1 6K-1 0 prototypes were sub-- :ied for State trials.

Combined state trials of the Tu-16K-10, the' -: 0S missile and the K- 1 0 system as a whole.3re conducted by GK Nll WS over almost

---ee years over various phases of develop--:nt and with interruptions for further modifi-:::ions and trials of the system's components.-ê last phase involved its operation in an

=::ive ECM environment. After the first test:.:nch in May, five more were made between--ne and September 1958 against small radar--:'lecting ground targets over a range of 96km:., a test crew headed by Hero of the Soviet,"ion Lt Col V V Zentsov. Four hits were:lhieved. Overall in 1958, during manufac-:-'er's tests and joint State trials, six missiles,r:re fired, four of which hit their targets.

Ten more K-10S were launched in 1959 as:ê joint State trials continued. These con-'-med the safety of missile separation; the abil-:,' of the aircraft to land with the missile still in

: ace was also verified.The trials also revealed the impossibility of

=chieving any substantial increase in the mis-: Ie's range (compared to the KS-1) due to

The likewise uncoded second prototypeTu.16K-10 (c/n 7203806) with a K-l0S missile.This aircraft has a similar ventral blister but nocine camera fairing under the starboard wingtip.--polev JSC

defects in the guidance system. Constant prob-lems with the YeN radar and YeS receiver, as

well as with the missile's engine, resulted in all

five test launches at a range of 1 30-1 50km end-ing in failure. There were also problems with theaircraft's fuel system when subjected to G

loads for prolonged periods. Thus, by early1960, only six hits had been recorded.

Council of Ministers directive No1475-685ordering the K-10 system into production wasissued on 31st December 1958, wlth produc-tion of the K-10S missile allocated to aircraftfactory No31 in Tbilisi. However, by this timelhe K-22 complex based on the supersonic'aircraft 105' bomber (Tu-22) and lhe Kh-22ASM seemed to offer more promise. The K-10Swas thus intended mainly for the obsolescentTu-16 which looked set to be taken out of pro-

duction soon; it was planned to replace theTu-16 with lhe Tu-22 at plant No22 and theAn-10 at plant 64 Voronezh. Nevertheless,

series production of the Tu-16K-10 wasinitlated in Kazan'. The first productionTu-16K-10 (c/n 8204010) was rolled out at plantNo 22 in April 1958, and a mere five Tu-16K-10(ZA) aircraft featuring the wing{o-wing IFR

system were built in 1958-59, whereuponTu-16 production in Kazan' was suspendedto free up production capacity for the Tu-22.Later, in October 1 959, the Tu- 1 6K-1 0 enteredproduction at plant No 1 at Kuibyshev in

accordance with CofM directive No 709-337 of2nd July 1958. During production theTu-16K-10 was designated 'order 238' andlaier, in operational service, as Zdelrye NK-10or izdeliye NK-1 .

Tupolev Tu-16 51

,.'''..,,#'-1iFt

#

,F24 i'

LTu'1 6K'1 o. Unlike the other versions' production

::=-:1:t> Kazan"built Tu'l6K' l os never carried the c/n

visibly' Ye'-: G:'::- :':- 'e

-:: :: An inert K'10S missile bedecked withphoto calibration markings on a ground

handling dolly. -,:: :. ,30

-::'g-: The same missile suspended beneath

one of the Tu-1 6K''1 0 Prototypes. Note the large

size of the engine Pod in relation lo the fuselage

and lhe open entry hatch of the missile launch

operator's cabin. -':::. 'SC

Aoo,a :: '24 Blue" another operational

Above rghi: Lower view of a K-'l0S under the

belly of a Tu-16K'10' Ye: ir Gcrdon archive

Lefl: '75 Bed', a production Tu'15K-10, taxies at a

snowbound airf ield on a winter afternoon' Yefim

Gordon arch,ve

Bottorn: Head'on view ol a Tu'16K'10' Tupolev JSC

Opposite oage:

Top: Maintenance day in a Soviet Navy unit as a

Tu-16K-10 is iacked up lor a wheel change and

possibly landing gear operation checks' The

iispersal area has a central taxiway and a guard

lower. Yefim Gordon archive

Bottom left:'16 Red'(c/n 1884001)' a Kuibyshev-

built Tu-16K'10(ZA), passes overhead, showing

the semi-recessed missile. Yefim Gordon archive

Bottom right: An atmospheric shot ol Tu-16K-10

being prepared lor a sortie. Ye{im Gordon archive

II

igtc\

q) Tupolev Tu-1 6

Nikita S Khrushchov's preoccupation with'eplacing strategic bombers by ICBMs raised:uestions about the viability of persevering with:re K-10 system, and the Kuibyshev factory,vas instructed to terminate Tu-16 production in

'avour of manufacturing the R-7 ICBM. Only a

.cint letter to the Communist Party's Centrallommittee sent by the Deputy Chairmen of thelcuncil of Ministers, Dmitriy F Ustinov and3oris M Ryabikov, GKAT Chairman Pyotr V

)ement'yev and Soviet Air Force Commander-

"-Chief Air Marshal K A Vershinin, pointing out:re inadequacy of the USSR's air-to-sudace

-issile carrier resources (a mere 90 Tu-16KSs).rd the comparative shortcomings of their,',eaponry averted this. The instruction was-:voked and an order for another 173 Tu-16s: aced. Thanks to this, plant No 1 in Kuibyshev-ad provided the Naval Air Arm with 59---16K-10s by July 1960 when it was ultimately-:assigned to building rockets and missiles.

ln June 1961 series production of the-r-16K-10 was reinstated at plant No22.^cluding the first seven examples, the Kazan'

'=otory had supplied 157 Tu-16K-10s by the

=rd of 1963 when the type was finally phased

--t of production. ln all, 210 examples of thb-.l-1 6K-10 were built.

Dry launches of the K-10 were practised,

-sing ships of the Black Sea Fleet as targets,:rd live launches carried out against decom--ssioned vessels between September 1959:rd November '1960. The old tanker M/y'iakalov specially fitted with a tall wire mesh:rntraption by way of a superstructure to-srease the radar signature was used to simu-

":e a cruiser-sized target; if a missile hit the wire-esh, this was considered a 'kill'. In the course:' ihe joint State trials, Tu-16K-10 missile-carri-

='s made 184 flights. Problems encountered: -nng the trials delayed their official completion

-rtil the second quarter of 1960, although in-=ality they were not completed until the end of- e year. Only four launches were made in 1 960.

The trials program involved both Tu-16K-10:'ctotypes, the two Mic-lgSMK 'missile simula-

tor' testbeds and 34 K-10S missiles, three ofwhich had live warheads. Out of the 20launched, only 10 hit their targets. Failures weredue to crew errors (one missile destroyed an icefloe instead of the target vessel), failures of theradars and one failure of the missile's engine.According to the system's designers there was

a71.4% chance of the K-10S hitting itstarget; in

the opinion of the Naval Air Arm it was only62.4/o. Anolher unpleasant fact emerged duringthe trials; the location of the weapons systemsoperator's pressurised cabin in the forward part

of the equipment bay where the air temperaturewas somewhat higher than elsewhere in the air-

craft meant that he was subjected to tempera-tures over 40'C in the summer.

There were, however, positive aspects to thetrials. Large ships could be detected at dis-tances close to the theoretical radar horizon anda lock-on was achieved after closing by a further

4ii;,riirlliili' , lili

50 or 60km. Although special maximum-rangetests on the missile had not been performed,

after one miss a K-l0S had carried on to cover245km in ten minutes and ten seconds andsplashed down with some fuel still left. ln 1959

the K-10 achieved initial operational capabilitywith the Soviet Navy as the first highly effective

supersonic air-to-surface missile system.The K-10 had a maximum combat radius of

2,400km; the carrier aircraft's cruising speedwas 700-B00km/h, and a target (a cruiser-sizedvessel) could be detected at 240-360km. The

K- 1 0S missile was launched at 1 70-200km f rom

the target at altitudes between 5,000-1 1,000m.the aircraft approaching within 110-150km ofthe target by the time the missiie switched to

active homing mode and flew on with an B0% 'kill'

probability. The K-10S weighed 4,418-4,550k9with a normal warhead weighing B35kg. ltsmaximum speed was 1,700-2,000km/h.

Tupolev Tu-16 53

r

L

I

I

Top: '15 Red', another Kuibyshev-built Tu-16K-10(ZA)' Yefim Gordon archive

Above:Kazan,-builtTu-l6K-1o.12Blue'wasoneolseverallittedwithansPS-100Rezedaiammer in a UKhO tail tairing. Yefim Gordon archive

Below: The wings ol the K-l0S folded upwards to save space on the glound' Note that the

Tu.15K-lointhebackgroundsportsthree.kill,starssignifyingsuccesslulmissilelaunches.Yefim Gordon archive

'::in'l22acn

'3i0m' 75Cm

]]JU I

l- '- - --=-.: -I- :-: 3olncil of Ministers

::-:: : -::- : '.: -!2':'a clearing the K-10

::: :-: : :-:- -:- !:. =: \avYService lnthe

:---:- -'---1- .::-:'::-3iion examples of

:-: ----:'-' - ' :': S-1'''n OVer MOSCOW-

--:- -: -.-a==-' -::-:annual AviatiOnDay

'.::.- :- : ,:: :-: '-s: :rne theY had been

:-: '- :: -:'- :' -1' ::a3res The K-10S ASM

'.:: I .:- ---:'.:-l::::.lame KiPPerandlhe-,-- a'-'I :-: :: a=^=,*= tsadger-C.

- '?a. :-: ::sS c i.ry of operating the

--'' a'-- - '- -* --oaved airfields was

:,: :':: :-: :,'.aS ^3:oUrsued in PraCtiCe'On;t-: --:-:: -3i2 a K-10S air-to-surface mis-

: a ,'. :- : a-' ::3: nuclear warhead was

a-- :--a.- :'a- :^3 iest range at the Novaya

-1- :1 '.=,', -and ) archipelago by a North

=::: r' -'- Tl-i6K-10 during the Shkva/

S:-a :\e'. se. The huge responsibility

ass:: a:.3 ,', ir ihis rmportant mission weighed

s3 -3a. 5' or ihe WSO that he messed up the

3-3- aijis: ci'ocedure. managing to complete it

o3'rec: v cnly on the second trY.

Sorne Tu-1 6K-1Os were equipped with an

SPS-I51 SPS-152 or SPS-153 Siren' jammer

**snk

54 Tupolev Tu'1 6

-l

Lil'jl

"**""

r#*

".**.

h{*F-

*{itrF*,*

llriliitlr,riii, i

- a UKhO tail fairing. Others featured an

>PS-100 Azaliya jammer in a UKhO fairing:lmplemented by an SPS-S in the avionics::y. Some examples were retrofitted with ASO-

={-E7R IRCM flare dispensers.

Tu-16K-102A('order 238' , izdeliye NK-1024 and NK-1):s already noted, this was a version of the--r-1 6K-1 0 equipped for wingtip{o-wingtip lFR.

3nly five aircraft were completed in this config-

-'ation in Kazan',later, however, all Kuibyshev-:.li1t Tu-16K-1 0s had IFR capability.

Tu-1 6K Development AircraftSetween 1959 and 1961 GK Nll WStested three,ramples of the Tu-1 6K - a version of the-:-1 6K-10 re-engined with RKBM (Zoobets):D16-1 5 turbojets. Aparl from structural modiJi-

:ations, the electric starters of the new engines-:quired additional DC batteries to be provided.

The Tu-16K was intended for use by the'raval Air Arm and differed little from the-;-16K-10, apart from its longer range thanks to:re more fuel-efficient new engines. At the same: ne GVF tested two prototypes of the Tu-104E

- a derivative of the Tu-1 048 f itted with the same

:ngines. Although the tests of the Tu-16K were

sJccessful it was not placed in production,

Tu-1 5K-1 0D(izdeliye NK-10D, izdeliye NK-1D)3ne of the items of the said CofM directive\o742-315 of 12th August 1961 clearing the-u-1 6K-1 0 for service ordered the K-1 0 systemas a whole to be updated; within three months:.re organisations involved were to suggest,vays of extending the K-10 missile's range to

300-350km. Studies carried cut by the Naval Air

Arm's 33rd Combat & Ccnversion Training

Centre at Kool'bakino AB in Nikolayev indi-

cated the possibility of launching the K-1OS

from an altitude of 600m over a range of up to

325km. Work on an improved system known as

the K-10M began in 1961 , but was complicatedby the simultaneous requirements to increase

its range and decrease the altitude at which itwas launched. The resulting missile was the

K-10SD with a greater fuel load, while itsTu-16K-10D carrier was to have a modernisedYeN-D radar with a detection range of 400-

45Okm (in both cases, D stands tor dahl'n-odeystvuyushchaya - Iong-range).

The K-10D complex with its longer-rangeK-10SD missile had obvious advantages when

compared to the K-l0, but by the end of the

1960s the Western navies' shipborne anti-air-

craft defences had greatly improved. Aircraftcarrier groups had little difficulty in detecting a

large subsonic enemy aircraft flying at cruisingaltitude 500km away. lt was therefore decidedto extend the range of altitudes at which the

K-lOSD could be launched by modifying the

airborne and missile radars. The resulting

A steady stream of Tu-1 6K-1 0s passes overheadduring the 1961 Aviation Day parade.Yefim Gordon archive

This Badger-c coded '15 Red' is the Tu-16K-10-26prototype carrying one K-10S missile and twoKSR-5 missiles. Yefim Gordon archive

K-1OSDV (vysotnaya - high-altitude) could be

launched at any altitude between 1,500 and'1 1,000m, increasing the missile's effectiveness

and making the aircraft less vulnerable. ln early

1970 tests of the system against a target from

medium altitude confirmed its value and viabil-

ity, after which some of the Tu-16K-1ODs were

again modified by Naval Air Arm maintenancebases. These machines could carry K-1OSD

and K-1 0SDV missiles (launched from

1,500m), as well as the older K-10S and the

low-altitude K-10N and K-1OSNB, although in

these cases the attack range was curtailed. The

K-IOSDViSN/SNB could be launched from

1 ,500m and the K-10S/SD from between 5,000

and 11,000m.

i6ts#fjHbEn%fi

-=E;: l-. t

'sffi**"*--

Tupolev Tu-1 6

Hea!-r i'tr 3' :u -- ':il.":-26 Prototype witha :: r€:,-a:\:n: rH:- - - : :

Tu-':r.-' :-l': ..- :,.€' =r5€s ci'er hilly terrain9re.5;!F.Ac|'r r l-* !f r's' ;:: E:st). carrying a

i: =r-,:rs-sq f :-rg -L-(5 es. Traces otthet-:,--i-.inE... rEa-,F€,:: : - ...651034 (the

:'si 3!g- s r sl r-r:dlplft ! are discernible3-:-*:r

Tu-16K.10N(izdetiye NK-l0N, izdeliYe NK'lN)The increased potency of shipborne anti-air-

craft defences prompted another develop-

ment of the K-10 to enable it to be launched at

low level. Estimates suggested that decreas-

ing the height at which the missile was

launched would halve its vulnerability to anti-

aircraft fire and fighter interdiction. The

K-1OSN and K-1OSNB (the latter with a nuclear

warhead) were carried by the Tu-16K-10N

(izdeliye NK-10N) equipped with a modified

YeN-2-6 radar and could be launched from an

altitude of 500-600m; the N suffix stood for

nizkovysotnaya - low-altitude. During the ter-

minal guidance phase the missile flew only a

few metres above the water. The range at

which a'cruiser-type' target could be attacked

by the K-IOSNB was in the order of 350 to

42Okm. The Tu-16K-10N could carry a stan-

dard K-10S, but had to launch it at altitudes

between 5,000 and 1 1 ,OOOm. The K-1OSN and

K-1 OSNB could also be used by the Tu- 1 6K-1 0

or Tu-1 6K-1 0D, but in these instances ths - :-siles could only be launched at the airc':. :normal operating altitudes.

Tu-16K-1OPBetween 1972 and 1979, developmer: ,',:-'

was carried out on fitting an Azaliya aci '3.:--mer to a K-1OSN missile in lieu of a \\a".?=Designated K-1OSP (tor pomekhi- inte.E-:-::or jamming), this 'ECM missile' was ic c: -:=:to cover the launch of ordinary live miss :s =-_carried by an aircraft designated Tu-i 6{-- -=The complex was designated the K-i CF

The Tu-16K-102A, Tu-16K-10D. Tu-' 6^l-- -"and Tu-16K-10P shared the commc' '.:-:codename Badger-C.

Tu-16K-10-26('order 644', izdeliye NK-10-26 and NK'6\

The K-26 anti-radar weapons svs::- "::incorporated not only on Tu-1 6 ASI;1 .='::-.used against ground targets but c. :-:-:---ping versions as well. The modiies s.,:::-

-: . -: ::: :- stage itwas' :: --: '-i: -:hat is,'K-10'

: : - -- : ::s gnation was

:: - .-:.:':' use against-: .- -- ::: :argets, using" - : - := :s ihe lattertwo

- .^ ^^\: : -' 9r'----:'-:a carried two

- - '-: .', -g hardPoints' :: : . :::- alSO Called

: : -;:'.-'lSD or K-10S

:'. -; ,'.:^ ihe YeN-D

: ' -- --:a :'3iotypes were

'.:.- -. -:-:.'actory No22

:' '--= : -s 1793014and. -:-:: ,',:s coded '15

' : - -: :': :-: -anUfaCtUrer'S

: : -: : :.- ::-'.:Vembef 1966

:,,- - '--'- -: ii State trials:.:- -- : ,- -.itomodifica-

: :: : : - '.- ' '2- sYstem, theY

- -' : - :: - ::--::: --::l MaY 1968

- : - -: ' ' -: '- : <-1 0-26 system

: ::-:= --:-:Naval AirArm

- -:':': : -::: '3 NO882-315,

- -. -:- =-= :- :'35Tu-16K-10D

- -: = '-:'-': --. rlodifications,

,;#st\

56 Tupolev Tu'16

-his aircratt coded'63 Red'represents the-u-16K-10-268 version featuring conventionaliomber capability; note the MBDU.46-68N MERs

-nder the fuselage. Yefim Gordon archive

*nese Tu-16K-10-268s are equipped with single3D4-16-52 bomb racks under the fuselage.:' '.r Gordon archive

-:.uding wing reinforcement, revisions to the':3 controls and fuel system, were carried out

- - Jer the terms of 'orde( 644' at Naval Air Arm

-a ntenance factories in the 1970s. Some of--: 85 examples carried Siren' jammers in

- (rO tail fairings while others retained the tail

- -1ner's position. Externally the Tu-16K-10-26

=s distinguishable from other versions of the---16K-10 by the underwing missile pylons.

ihe performance was almost identical to that:' ate-production Tu-16K-10s, with the follow--l exceptions:

. :-: empty with residual fuel

:::cn load

: -: K-1 0S- ,: KSR-5

:-e KSR-5

-., : KSR-S and one K-1 0S

:-: KSR-S and one K-10S

i.-, :e range*

41 ,850k9

4,400k9

7,600k9

3,800k9

1 2,000k9

B,200kg

4,700km

' .: :liimum altitude with a K-l0S and a 75,800-kg take-off

= ;-: with 5% fuel reserves and mid-flight missile launch

Tu-'l6K-10-26Nizd eliye NK-1 0-26N, izdeliye NK-6N)*-e

Tu-16K-1 0N modified to take the K-26.:apons system was given the new designa-

tion Tu-16K-10-26N (or izdeliye NK-10-26N).

The simultaneous use ol two high-speed, high-

altitude KSR-5 missiles with a low-altitude mis-

sile of the K-1 0S type put the enemy anti-aircraftdefences in a much tougher situation.

Tu-1 6K-1 0-26P ('order 23O3','order 644P',izdeliye NK-l0-26P, izdeliye NK-26P)ln keeping with ruling No 14 passed by the Coun-

cil of Ministers' Military lndustrial Commission (a

standing committee on defence matters) on 21st

January 1976 and pursuantto MAP order No56of 9th February 1976, in the late 1970s a small

number of Tu-16K-10-26s with ECM tail fairings

were modified to carry KSR-SP missiles and

equipped with the ANP-K system for locating

active enemy radars. Designated Tu-16K-26P,

the aircraft could carry KSR-Ss with active radar

homing or KSR-SP ARMs, as well as normal

attack missiles (one K-10S and two KSR-Ss or

KSR-2s of various versions). The revised com-plex was given the designation K-10-26P. The

Tu-16K-10-26 and Tu-16K-10-26P shared the

NATO codename Badger-C Mod.

Tu-1 6K-1 0-268 ('order 26448', izdeliyeNK-1 0-268, izdeliye NK-68)The issue of enhancing the tactical and strategicpotential of the Tu-16K-10 by reactivating its

bomber, mine-laying and torpedo-bomber capa-

bilities was raised several times by the Soviet Air

Force, culminating in CofM directive No709-337of 2nd July 1958 ordering the Tupolev OKB to

explore the possibility of using lhe Badger-C tordelivering conventional and nuclear freeJall

bombs by 1st August. Accordingly in the .1970s

the Tu-16K-10-26 underwent such a modificationat Naval Air Arm maintenance factories to enable

it to carry a 4,000-kg bomb or mine load or four

650-kg torpedoes under its wings (using multi-

ple-store racks under the fuselage and racks

attached to the standard missile pylons) and a

further 4,000k9 of bombs or mines or four more

torpedoes internally. Designated Tu-16K-10-

268, it possessed both air-to-surface missile and

conventional bomber capabilities. Examples ofthe Tu-16K-10-268 modified to carry bombs or

torpedoes in this way were referred Io as izdeliye

NK-10-268 or NK-68 in service.

**uuryr**r,,,$ffffif'l *q**;

il;13-l',"*,,,*.,,, *

'w-*---

Tupolev Tu-1 6

Chapter Five

Reconnaissance andElectronic Gountermeasures Verstons

Tu-16R & Tu-16RN (aircraft'92' project)

OKB- 1 56 began work on a reconnaissance air-

craft based on the Tu-1 6 bomber in 1 953' From

the outset, the resulting aircraft was conceived

as combining photographic reconnaissance,

electronic intelligence (ELINT) gathering and

the resources to jam enemy air defence radars'

Much depended on the design and production

of the crucial electronic equipment.

The Council of Ministers directive No 1659-

657 of 3rd July 1953 and the corresponding

Minisiry of Defence lndustry order No521 of

l Bth July called for the creation of the following:

- a new RBP-6 lyustra (Chandelier) bomb-aiming

radar developed {rom the production Rubidiy-

MM-2 (Rubidium), able to overcome enemy ECM

by means of an ECM-resistant high-frequency

head, a 2-cm waveband antenna/feeder array and

an antenna with a wider scanntng arc. Two sets ol

the new equipment were to be provided by

TsNll-108 and OKB-253 by'1954, while OKB-156

was to carry out the installation of one set on a

production Tu-1 6 in the autumn of that year'

- a new Sl/lkaht (Silicate) active jammer with a

21 .8-30.5cm waveband ior jamming enemy

ground and shipborne air defence and lighter

control radars. This was to be supplied by

TsNll-108 which was to co-operate with OKB-156

in installing the set in a Tu-16 in the |ate spring

and earlY summer ol '1955.

- a new Apatit (Apatite) active jammer with a 2-

1Ocm waveband for jamming enemy ground ar:shipborne detection, guidance and target

marking radars. This was again the respons:bt :i

of TsNll-106 which was to co-operate with

OKB-1 56 in installing this on a Tu-16 during tr:e

autumn of 1 954,

- anew Avtomaht2 (Automatic device) airborr-

automatic chaff dispenser to scatter radar-

reilecting strips of metal-coated glassfibre 1c'a'at three- to five-second intervals, working in i'=0,6-12cm waveband. The equipment was tc ::designed by I I Toropov's OKB-134 and reac, ':'state trials on a Tu-16 in the late summer alc

autumn o1 1954.

- a new SRS-3 Romb-l (Rhombus) automai:c

ELINT set (SRS = stanhtsrya ranredki svyaz'-

communications intelligence set) for use aga -s:

enemy ground, shipborne and aircraft raca's

which registered the working frequencres oi:-:radars it detected over the bandwidih 2 9 io

30cm. This was to be supplled by OKB-483 a^:

TsNll-108 and installed on a Tu-1 6 with the c:-

operation of OKB-156.

- a new electronic counter-countermeasures

(ECCM) highJrequency head and array

developed under the P/aneta programme ::protect the lzumrood (Emerald) airborne

intercept radar (developed for the MiG-17P

interceptor) and Argon gun-laying radar v''ii a

This cutawaY drawing dePicts twoconfigurations of the Tu'15R PHOTINT aircraftfor day (above) and night photography' Note the

flare boFnb cassettes of the latter configuration'

cauonB'r -pagsBAIll4K ,Tv- l6P"

BRpmanr' /{HEBHono PA3BEI+rI4KA

:o'"rom l.r-a* v+ ,' 'ft(- /r-hu

il-1t

t1*-1)'.cl ,

!iFrri! raa!040^qfdq

nnlevri -rn$um

k!rrrAFt'e it!!etd !s@of 0

ciirtrDoi ! urnFL eo!.!if

Bapnanl?vr fruNiu! AV 21 4iisr 2l,v

HOLIHOIO PA3BEAT'II4KA4 ktftfd lnr lE setlnEnhH!tr

5oMt lFbim/D 'nt

S.$L- .

2osaoeomooNoF!na rAohV5Cafc Nqiou ootorlttxe

Tupolev Tu-1 6

+-F=:V-*-i, -r r:'-"'!" : t'nntr i0 ]'r--:')'rtttrlrAi -$ !;'r i b/

r!ahee trrih$oQ snilmfa II s! tuodM. f,M 25 iriusq ll14

The design and development of this new

equipment involved the close co-operation ofthe aircraft designers, who had to work out the

best and most compact ways of installing it. On

24th June 1953 MAP issued order No405, fol-

lowed by Air Force Operational RequirementNo 1 197989 which was received by OKB-156 on

9th July; these documents required the OKB tofit the PR-1 and Natriy to production Tu-16 air-

craft. After making some preliminary assess-

ments the Tupolev OKB judged it moreexpedient to develop a dedicated reconnais-sance version, the Tu- 1 6R (lsamolyot-l razved'chik - recce aircraft) equipped for photographic

and electronic intelligence. This was acceptedcy the Air Force, and on 23rd June 1954 theCouncil of Ministers issued directive No1249-558 followed by MAP order No 408 of 29th June.

These documents tasked Tupolev with building:he Tu-16R powered by two modernisedAM-3M-200 engines (rated at 9,500k9 for take-cff and 7,650k9 at nominal power) giving a

'ange of 6,000-6,200km. The Air Force was toclace one of its Tu-16s at the disposal of the OKB

n July 1 954 and supply the necessary radio and

chotographic equipment. The Tu- 1 6R was to be'eady for State acceptance trials in March 1955:

The advanced development project of the-iu-16R or 'aircraft 92' approved in November:nvisaged two versions: a daylight reconnais-sance version (Tu-16R) and a nocturnal recon-âissance version (Tu-16RN, razvedchik'cchnoy). As most early Soviet ELINT and-CM systems were not automated, the Tu-16R

:ad to have a special pressurised crew com-.artment (similar to that on the Tu-16KS) for:ieir operator, bringing the number of:rewmembers to seven. The operator was to:e given an ejector seat, but shared hls quar-::r's with some of the PR-1 (or 'Natriy') equip-

-ent and an air conditioning system. The:.rtennas for the PR-1 (or 'Natriy') were housed

' fairings above and below the operator's posi-

: cn as well as in dielectric blisters under the'-selage and wing centre section. lt was alsoîended to accommodate the SPS-3 Romb-1-:lNT equipment in underwing pylon-mounted

: cds. ln the aircraft's tail section an antenna for:re Sirena-2 radar warning receiver (RWR) was:r be fitted above the radome of the Argon gun-

:ying radar. The standard Rubidiy-MM-2 radar.ras fitted with a special FA-PL-1 camera for:lotographing images on the radar screen.

-con inclusion into the inventory the PR-1 jam-

-er was designated SPS- 1 , SPS-2 and SPS-2K.

The Tu-1 6R day reconnaissance version was:: be equipped with four AFA-33/75 or:FA-33/100 cameras on AKAFU pivoting

-ounts for daylight veftical photography in its:amera bay. An AFA-33/20 vertical camera was

a so carried for 'opportunity en route' photog--:phy. Behind the forward pressurised cabin an:FA-33/75 for oblique photography was pro-, ced with a rectangular camera window on the:lrt side. The night reconnaissance version.,, as to carry two NAFA-6/50 night cameras and- 6 flare bombs. Both versions had provision for

installing the ASO-16 chaff dispenser in place

of the PR-1 , an estimated service ceiling (with

an all-up weight of 55,000k9) of 12,800m and a

range of 6,000-6,200km. At 37,765k9, the

empty weight of the Tu-16R would have been

259k9 greater than the Tu- 16RN's.

Tu-1 6R-1 Reconnaissance PrototypeConversion was carried out on a production

Tu-1 6 bomber (c/n 1880302) built at the Kuiby-

shev aircraft factory No1 in December 1954.

Re-designated the Tu-16R-1 after modificationat plant No 22, with the assistance of the Kazan'

branch of OKB-156, the first prototype carried a

single AFA-33/20M vertical camera, two

AFA-33/75M for oblique photography and twoAFA-33/1 0M for 'opportunity en route' photog-

raphy. An SPS-1 active jammer was also pro-

vided. The crew consisted of seven members,with the radar operator housed in a specialpressurised position at the rear of the equip-ment bay (the former bomb bay, that is).

Manufacturer's flight tests began on 30th

November 1955 and were completed by mid-May 1955. Sixteen flights were made totalling26 hours 16 minutes. The flight test results

yielded the following data:

Empty weight

Maximum take-otf weight

l\,4aximum speed with TOW of 62,000k9

at an altitude of 6,200m

Service ceillng

Time to an altitude oJ 10,000m:

with an all-up weight of 62,000k9

with an allup weight of 75,400k9

Operational range

Take-off run

vented its submission for State trials. The

Tu-16R-1 was also tested with various combi-nation loads of flare bombs for night photogra-

phy. When the cameras were removed from the

equipment bay, the machine could be recon-

verted to bomber configuration.The positive results of the State trials were fol-

lowed by an order for series production in

December 1956 (Council of Ministers directive

No1545-777 of 3rd December and MAP order

No601 of 1Oth December). The series produc-

tion model was to be powered by two AM-3M

engines, and 44 examples were built in 1957 at

plant No 1 in Kuibyshev after the defects and

shortcomings noted during the prototype trials

had been rectified. The Tu-16R-1 was to

become the basis for a series of reconnais-

sance and ECM versions of the Tu-16, includingthe Tu-16SPS, Tu-16P, Tu-16 Yolka and so on.

Tu-16 Romb Reconnaissance Aircraft('order 261')Although the SRS-3 Romb-1 was not availablein time for the manufacturer's tests or State tri-

als, it was still planned to fit it to the Tu-16R-1

once it became available. But tests wlth the

intended underwing pods showed that

increased drag caused some deterioration inthe aircraft's performance. lt was thereforedecided to accommodate the SRS-3 in the

fuselage, the antenna being housed in a dorsalfairing. The urgent need for this long-rangereconnaissance aircraft led to plant No 1 atKuibyshev producing the first five aircraftequipped with the SRS-3 (designated Tu-16

Romb) in 1956. ln production they werereferred to as 'order 261 ', and they are some-times called Tu-16R 'Romb' or simply Tu-16R.

There was, however, little reduction in drag andsubsequent production examples had the

SRS-3 equipment housed in underwing pylon-

mounted pods as originally planned.

Later, all five of these aircraft were retrofittedwith the SRS-1 ELINT system.

Tu-1 6R Reconnaissance Aircraft('order 361', rzdeltye NR)ln 1957 plant No 1 produced 44Tu-16Rs and afurther 26 in 1958 with various reconnaissanceequipment fits in accordance with the above-mentioned directive No1545-777. Of the total

of 70 Tu-16R reconnaissance aircraft built on

the model of the Tu-16R-1 prototype (with

pylon-mounted underwing pods for the SRS-3),

plant No 1 supplied the following variants:

- 18 aircraft with SRS-1 (bands A, B & C) and SRS-6

- 1B aircraft wlth SRS-1 (bands D & E) and SRS-3

- 34 aircraft with the SRS-1 (bands D & E)

(Note: These are purely conventional designations

for wavebands whose frequencies are not known;

this should not be confused with the familiar terms

such as 'J-band' or'S-band'.)

Examples with the SRS-3 were given the pro-

duction designation 'order 361' and wereknown in service as izdeliye NR. The equip-

38,436k9

75,370k9

1 ,000-1,1 00km/h

1 2,400m

15.1 mins

24,5 mins

6,300km

2,290-3,275n

Equipment changes were made in the courseof the tests. SRS-3 (Romb-1) ELINT equipmentwas mounted in pods on pylons beneath thewings and an SPS-1AG set for detailed ELINT

work installed in the fuselage. Delays in the

flight tests and the late delivery of electronicequipment caused the State trials to be post-poned in accordance with CofM directiveNo 424-261 of 26th March 1 956 and MAP orderNo 194 of 6th April; they took place between1gth June and 17th August 1956, involving 27

flights with 97 hours'total time.The Tu-16R-1 became the prototype for the

production Tu-1 6R. The production aircraft wasio have SRS-1AG and SRS-3 ELINT and SPS-1

and SPS-3 ECM equipment. ln contrast, theprototype had only the SRS-IAG and fourAFA-33/75M and AFA-33/100M cameras fortwotfour-strip photography, for which specialapertures (with protective shutters) were cut in

the equipment bay doors. The prototype also

had provision for twin NAFA-6/50 cameras fornight photography at the rear paft of the equip-ment bay and an aperture on the pori side ofthe fuselage for an AFA-33M/75 oblique cam-

era. Although underwing pylons were fitted forthe SRS-3 pods, the pods were not fitted as

there were problems with the SRS-3 which pre-

Tupolev Tu-16 59

Left: Tu-l6R'26 Red'(c/n 1882710) represents

the original produclion version equipped with

the SRS-1 SIGINT system (identiliable by the

ventral dielectric blister ahead ot the bomb bay)

and the SBS'4 SIGINT syslem with a similar but

slightly larger teardrop fairing aft of the bomb

bay. Yefim Gordon archlve

Cente and lower leit: Tu'16R'12 Red'(c/n 1883304)

Ieatures an SRS'4 SIGINT system identiliable by

the slightly larger rear dielectric blister' Note the

blade ierial above the llightdeck; the aircraft'scommunications suite has been updated'

Bottom: PhotograPhed at high altitude trom a

shadowing NATO fighter.'87 Red'(c/n 1883308)

is an lFR'capable Tu'15R (ZA) ' Ali three Jane s A//

the\Yct;.s;':'.:

ment ba-vs :l's:::-e ASO-16 Avtomat-1 and

ASO-28 r.:: - =:-2 :â: : spensers ln service

the Tu-:€3 ::- I :a'-,.'3'e of four sets of cam-

-lss on.Vld),v3-= - --

As -:-: a'a:- a?'=' ihe Tu-16R was Pro-

cuce: -:,',: ,:-::-s '3'cay and night Pho-ae life more modernIOO-a:-, v , =' -: := !

ci='as ,',:': =::: l" tg maintenance work

sc-= ----a= -:: :-: :':ore sophisiicated

S?S- "..=:rahl S:-e'e) SIGINT system

.:s:a :: ' = ":.

:' :-. SRS-1 The teardroP

'a'-?':".-= 3=S- ,',=s s ghilybiggerthanfor- ' -: : oures refer to the:-=:-:' = --;,

---'a: ,'. :-: -::-: S:S-3 ;iled:

75.800k9

i c0okm/h

930kmlh

6 300km

:3,100m

'800m

610 x 13km

= a::a'

:::: ,'

::'ia- ,',:- underwing SRS-3

:- :-= '.:-C reporting name--: - -.':= ;, :hout underwing- :: :-: 3=:ger-E

liojriitt, l iiil l:i

60 Tupolev Tu-16

Tu-1 6R-2 Experimental ReconnaissanceAircraft ('order 455')On 11th June 1956 the Council of Ministersssued directive NoTBB-437 followed by MAP

crder No343 on 23rd June. They required theTupolev OKB to equip a Tu-16 with two AFA-40

nigh-altitude cameras, two AFA-33/20M cam-eras and an AFA-37 wide-angle camera, sub-mitting it for checkout trials in January 1957.

Conversion work on the original Tu-16R-1

crototype started at plant No22 in Novemberi956, but the prototype of the new versionCesignated Tu-16R-2 was not completed until

:he summer of 1957. Apart from the cameras,i featured SRS-3 ELINT equipment. On 16th

August 1957 the Tu-l6R-2 was ferried fromio the GK Nll WS base at Chkalovskaya AB

rear Moscow, but problems with the camerasystem delayed the checkout trials. Theseeventually took place between 20th Augusti95B and 23rd February 1959. Series produc-iion, however, was not recommended - againCue to problems with the cameras installed;coded '50 Red', the Tu-16R-2 finally ended up

as an exhibit at the Soviet (now Russian) AirForce Museum in Monino near Moscow.

Tu-1 6RP Reconnaissance Aircraft('order 697')A few Tu-16Rs fitted with the podded SRS-3

ELINT system had additional ECM gear. These',vere given the designation Tu-16RP, the P

referring lo pomekhi - jamming.

Tu-1 6RE Reconnaissance AircraftSome Tu-16Rs had their SRS-1 ELINT equip-rnent replaced by the SPS-2 ECM set. The rest

of the equipment was unchanged, but the air-

craft designated Tu-1 6RE.

Top left: The port pod ol the SRS-3 Bomb-1 SIGINTsystem under the wing of a Tu-16R undergoingrefurbishment in Khabarovsk. Yuriy Kabernik

Top right: A Tu-16R (cln 1Aa242O) equipped withthe SRS.3 system undergoes maintenance.Yelim Gordon archive

Upper right: Air-to-air shot ol SRS.3 equippedTu-l6R c/n 1883215. Yefim Gordon archive

Lower right: Seen just before touchdown, thisTu-16R appears to have diflerenlly coloured portand starboard SRS-3 pods. Yefim Gordon archive

Right: The Tu-l6R-2 on display at the Soviet AirForce Museum in Monino. Yefim Gordon

$-ffi.,,{M*.]llir',ii$ffisiis

# ks,,"-

Tupolev Tu-1 6 bt

Tu-16R(ZA) '20 Red' (c n 1883408) combines theventral blister ol the SRS-4 SIGINT system withthe SRS-3 Romb-1 SIGINT Pods. Jane's Allthe

Tu-l6R'29 Red' (c n 1S43511) equipped with theSRS-1 and SRS-4 was tie first reconnaissance-configured Tu-16 to feeture an SPS-100M Mal'vajammer in a UKhO fairing rePlacing the tailturrel Recod€d 'O4 Red'. it was later preservedat DyaghileYo AB. Rye-:n" --..lev JSC

Tu-15R 01 R€d'rrtt an identical SRS'1/SBS-4/SP91oo*{ cofibination. ':'- 3:-Con archive

Tu-l6R trZ Red" e n 1eS341O) with SRS'l/SRS'4SIGIXT gear teatures a smaller rear ECM fairinghousing an SFs-15:" SFS.152 or SPS'153 iammer,plus ECI* amtEtraas on ttr€ extreme nose and

u nder th€ alr lnt:ke trunks.' =' - Gcrdon archive

Tu-168 €2 R€d rs amoti€t dual'mission aircraftcombining lr€ :CU slae of the previous aircraftwitir SRS3 urEie{lF€ oods- ':'- Gcrdon archtve

Tu-16RR ZA 2: 3.;E e n 1883i105) shows thepylon-{-rouniE€

"RE3:1-im air samPling pods.

'':'-::-:--.-:-. :

Seen fro,r: }"{ae,a: ta€ r1ng of Tu'16 c/n620300g a T+.'il Ln--€d -rissile strike aircraft)'Tu-16RF €3 B€C" :: 1E€3{16) features ECM

equipmenl fd ser'-gr.gtectlon: note lhe thimblefairing on t5e rEsc arxd E]e arTtennas under theair intal(er ':'- l: :r- 1-:- .:

:ddlEli*+* 1s*

I

I

___,1

62 Tupolev Tu-1 6

ihe Tu-16R with the Lyustra Radar Sight- s:nall number of Tu-16Rs was similarly fitted

:r the new RBP-6 Lyustra ground-mapping-::ar. These were given the NATO codename

ihe Tu-16RR NBC ReconnaissanceAircraft ('order 2694')j^ 22nd November 1967 the Council of Mlnis-':'s issued directive No 1081-370 requlring theI {B to create a version of the Tu-1 6R capable:'sampling the atmosphere for nuclear conta-- "ation. ln October-November 1969 a pro-:-:tion Tu-16R (ZA) built at plant Nol ('27

= -e . cin 1883305) was accordingly equipped. :r two RRB31 1-100 air sampling pods

- l Jnted under the wings (replacing the SPS-3

- : rs), an onboard dosimeter and sampling pod:::rating controls. Although the new variant.:s called Tu-16RR (radiatsionnyy razvedchik -

':iration reconnaissance aircraft), the pods::rld also be used for detecting chemical and

- rlcgical contamination. The SRS-1 and cam-.'a equipment of the Tu-16R were retained so--ai the machine could be used as a conven-- :nal reconnaissance aircraft. Tests of the filter:..stem were carried out successfully betweenl:cember '1969 and January 1970.

During the early 1970s eight operational-,-16R (ZA)s were converted to Tu-16RRs,-:'erred to during production as 'order 2694'

=-d by NATO as Badger-L. These were used to-cnitor Chinese nuclear tests; flying at high

=:rtude, they also collected data from Soviet

-:derground nuclear weapons testing pro-

l'ammes. Each of these flights counted as an:cerational mission for the aircraft's crew.

Tu-16RM Reconnaissance Aircraft^ the late 1970s and early 1980s a number of

-..i-16Rs was re-equipped as the Tu-16RM'azvedchik moderniizeerovannyy - reconnais-

:ance aircraft, modified). The Tu-16RM carried:ê more sophisticated AFA-41120, AFA-42120,:,trA-42175, AFA-421100 and NAFA-MK-75 cam-::as, the SRS-4 Kvadrat ELINT set and theiBP-4 radar gave place to the Rubin-1 K which-ad better target resolution. The SRS-1 andSRS-3 were removed. Externally the Tu-16RM

::tfered from the Tu-16R in lacking the latter's;nderwing SRS-3 pods and having ditferent:ielectric fairings for the Rubin-1 K radar and

SRS-4 antennas.

Tu-16RM-1Maritime Reconnaissance AircraftThe need for a more specialised maritime'econnaissance version of the Tu- 1 6R arose in

:re late 1950s and early 1960s, and a spin-offcf the Tu-16K-10 ASM carrier was chosen as:he most suitable option for Naval Air Armaeeds. Two examples of the Tu-16K-10 nearing:he end of their service lives were chosen foroonversion as the Tu-16RM-1 prototypestrazvedchik morskoy - reconnaissance air-

craft, naval), the work being carried out by theNavy's maintenance services under the super-

"" ,,h*,,.; I ;i

lry

vision of Tupolev's OKB-1 56. The movable mis-

sile pylon and launch equipment was removed,the weapons bay faired over and a specialisedYeN-R radar installed in the nose (it was out-wardly distinguishable from the YeN by theslightly enlarged chin radome). Three ventral

teardrop antenna fairings were provided for theSRS-1 (forward and aft) and the SRS-4 (central

and slightly larger than the other two). The

ELINT system was operated from a ventral

3**#iltff,s\

ltlt^

pressurised cabin. Conventional AFA-33/20M(vertical) and AFA-42175 (oblique) cameraswere also carried, and some Tu-16RM-1s car-

ried SPS-1 and SPS-2 ECM sets. The maritimereconnaissance version was accepted for ser-

vice in the early 1960s; since series productionof the Tu-16 ended in 1963 and no new-buildaircraft were available, 11 (12, according tosome sources) Tu-16K-10s were converted toTu-1 6RM- 1 configuration.

i lir 11q,,'

, i.'i; +l:4

TupolevTu-16 63

This air-to-air shot of Tu'l6RR (ZA) cln 1883305

at a later date, now upgraded with additionalELINT/ECM equipment, repainted and recoded

'28 Red', shows the starboard RR831 1-100 airsampling pod in action. The movable noseconeis retracted and the rear shutter turned through90", enabling an unrestricted airflow; comparewith the inactive pod on the port wing station.Note also the refuelling receptacle under theport wingtip. Jane s All rhe Waild s Atrcraft

A number of Tu-16K'10s were converted toTu-16RM-1 and Tu-16RM'2 maritime recceaircraft: '89 Red' is one of them. This viewclearly shows the ventral blister radomes, theenlarged chin radome and dorsal blade aerial.Jal]g S /lii i!',a t,','ar a S A raral

'::iit

iii,irr' ,xi'Ifii

il

i-

An upper view of the same Tu'16RM'1 or Tu-I68M-2 cruising over thick

clouds.Asthehorizontal'winglet'ontheportwingreveals,theaircraltused to be an IFR-capable Tu'1 6K'10(ZA). Jane's All the Wotld's Aircraft

Lower view of the same aircraft: its V/estern shadov/er really made an

effort to get a piclure from every possible anglel Note the IFR receptacle'

Jane's Allthe World s Aircrart

, :. il',:;1:l

n: ,r r.ll'ir''rl':tl.r.,:

t"

H

I

64 Tupolev Tu'16

A Tu-16RM.1 or Tu-16RM-2 coded'84 Black'formates with a Tu-I6(2) tanker, ready to takeon fuel. Yefim Gordon archive

Below and bottom: A Tu-16SPS ECM aircraft. Thisversion can be discerned from the SRS-1/SRS-4equipped Tu-l 6R by the equal size of the ventraldielectric blisters. Jane's All the World's Aircraft

Aside from reconnaissance, the Tu-16RM-1could provide mid-course guidance for K-10

ASMs launched by Tu-16K'10 and Tu-16K-10-26 aircraft. This version had the NATO code-:lame Badger-D.

Tu-16RM-2Maritime Reconnaissance Aircraft-welve (or eleven) Tu-16K-1ODs were also mod-'ed as maritime reconnaissance aircraft. They,'rere conveded to carry the same equipment as:re Tu- 1 6RM-1 but designated Tu-1 6RM-2.

Tu-1 6RTs Experimental MaritimeReconnaissance / OTH Targeting Aircraftr 1956 OKB-52 headed by Vladimir N Chelomey:egan preliminary design studies for the P-6

:.ore-launched anti-shipping cruise missile, lt

:cpeared in 1962/63, successfully passing its::ate trials, and was accepted for use with Pro-:ct651 and 675 submarines. The P-6 could be

=rnched while the submarine was submerged.,','crk proceeded in parallel on an airborne target:3tection and over-the-horizon (OTH) targeting:,'stem able to transmit target data directly to'-e submarine. After missile launch, the aircraft', culd provide mid-course guidance.

Three aircraft were converted into the:-ctotypes of the maritime reconnaissance/ITH targeting version designated Tu-16RTs

' azved c hi k-tseleookazate l'). Their Rubin radar,as replaced by an Oospekh (Success) radar',1ose antennas were housed in large teardrop-:Comes near the bomb bay.

The P-6 was accepted for service with the: rviet Navy in 1 965, but the Tu-1 6RTs was not.: Cid, however, take part in tests of the recon-

- :,ssance and target-indicator equipment fitted': production Tu-9SRTs machines filling the::.ne role.

Tu-16SPS EGM AircraftThe first SPS-I and SPS-2 active ECM setsinstalled in the Tu-16 in the 1950s weredesigned for group protection of strike aircraftformations and were relatively unsophisticated,with low emission power; besides, they werebulky and heavy. Basically, they were intendedto jam AA artillery, land, shipborne and air-borne radars produced in the 1940s. TheSPS-1 and SPS-2 required an additionalcrewmember to operate them who had first todetect the enemy radar, establish its frequencyand then tune his ECM set accordingly. All thiscould take a well{rained operator three min-utes - too long if the aircraft was flying at lowaltitude. Added to this was the inability of theSPS-1 and SPS-2 to jam multi-channel andtuneable radars effectively.

Production of Tu-16s fitted with the SPS-1

and SPS-2 jammers began in 1955. During1955-56 plant No'1 in Kuibyshev produced 42

aircraft with SPS-1 sets, plus another 102

machines with the SPS-2 in 1955-57, includingfour IFR-equipped examples.

Like the Tu-16R, this version designatedTu-165PS (stahntsiya pomekhovykh signalav

= active jammer) had a removable pressurisedcompartment in the aft part of the bomb bay forthe electronic warfare officer (EWO), the forward section still remaining usable as a bombbay. The two antennas for the SPS-2, coveredby teardrop fairings, were housed in the lowerpart of the fuselage fore and aft of the bombbay. The whip aerials for the SPS-1 could besited either dorsally (aft of the WSO's blister)or ventrally (forward of the bomb bay). Aircraft

i,li!i: ;t::ri, i,!i)tt!1,

*,, **'s*a*lrg&,*+.ffirn

d#

Tupolev Tu-16 65

*0

'dh+'

fitted with the SPS-1 and SPS-2 were desig-

nated Tu- 1 65PS - or sometimes Tu-1 6P.

At first the Tu-16SPS was not equipped with

the ASO-1 6 chaff dispenser, and the absence

of chaff vents in the bomb bay doors distin-

guished it from the later Tu-16E. Later, how-

ever, chaff dispensers were fitted to the

Tu-1 6SPS and the difference disappeared'

During the 1960s, almost all the Tu-16SPS siill

in service were refitted with the Buket ECM set'

Tu-16P EGM Aircraft (izdeliYe NPIThe Buket system of automated active jammers

was developed in the late 1950s Unlike the

SPS-1 and SPS-2, these new sets could functicn

automatically and jam several radars, including

multi-channel and tuneable radars, simultane-

ously. The system comprised the SPS-22.

SPS-33, SPS-44 and SPS-55 sets, each ofwhich

could cover a certain waveband. ln its day the

Buket was the world's most powerful ECM suite.

Buket ECll a r:=ii ':'- ::':3:l archive

-": '?0 Rec c:13€?s5). aTu-!6SPS'

l--:- ;- T'rrs Fuo,licrtYshotof aSovietAirForc€ cre'r cosing ri"tfr their Tu'15P Buketillusffies tiE:out heat exchangers llanking the

vedtral cano€ fei nng of the Buket jammer'

3.-;=. :-: l-:- ':- =!.':. :'al'ive

l:::- ' :-- A pair of Tu'16Ps, '06 Red' (c/n

8204OO8r and 'f,6 Rad' (c n 8204009)' llies in

echelon staF€,ad formation' The picture was

most probabtr'J iaken from a Tu'16(Z) tanker'

a-: :. ::-: -::-: :' :.'ercoming ECM were

-:-:::,: -= --a".2 - :s:unction, the enemy

'?=='.. -: :-, :-e-:: :s ooeratingfrequency,

:-: :.s- '--:- ---:-: ,',:'e four Buket systems,

:a:- .1 :- :: :,',- ':^:e of frequencies: B-2

2' :-:::- ,',:.::^:.- B'3(12.5-21 Scm), B-4

9 3-'2 3:- =-: :-j 8 6-9.8cm).

=::^ s,.s::- -:: :our generating transmit-

:e's ,',:- r-:-:-: ,',ar,'elengths (except the

Buite:-3 ,', - :^ -:l s x . enabling it to cover the

T

:::.: '13 3ac c r :641602). a standard Tu-l6P

-:::.:==--'*

66 Tupolev Tu-1 6

,,,nole spectrum of wavelengths. The Buket:ets (B-2, B-3, B-4 and B-5) had a range of-3ception channels (18, 45, 30 and 30 respec-:,,ely) and ratings of 340-1000 watts, 500-100,r atts, 440-680 watts and 400-860 watts respec-: rely). The B-2 set weighed 854k9, the B-3

:70k9, the B-4 722k9 and the B-5 755k9.3round radars were jammed with full 360" cov-:r'age, and the Buket sets could function either

=utomatically or semi-automatically. This auto--tatic capability meant that an additional:rewmember was not required, and they couldoe operated by the navigator-operator from his

rormal crew position.The Buket sets were installed in the Tu-16

'rom the early 1960s onwards. They werentended to counteract enemy long-range

3round detection and guidance radars and sur-:aceto-air missile (SAM) sites. From an altitudecf 10,000-1 1 ,000m one ECM aircraft could pro-

:ect a whole formation of attack aircraft within a

radius of 3,000 to 5,000m.

Top left: Close-up ol the massive tail lairinghousing the SPS-1OO Rezeda active iammer.The small dielectric blisters conceal the actualemitter antennas. Tupolev JSC

Top right: The same fairing opened formaintenance, showing the equipment rack otthe SPS-I00 and the emitter antennas whichare positioned under the dielectric blisterson the fairing. Tupolev JSC

This Tu-l6P ('94 Red', c/n 5202602) wasconverted lrom a Tu-l6A. Yefim Gordon archive

This Tu-16P ('42Red', c/n 1881305) leatures a

UKhO rear ECM lairing housing a Siren'(SPS.I51, SPS-152 or SPS-I53) jammer and ECMantennas on the forward and centre fuselage.Note that the tactical code is painted twice onthe nose gear doors. Yelim Gordon archive

Front view ol Tu-l5P c/n 1881305.Yefim Gordon archive

!,11ryr'fl ,*!ri,

o

Tupolev Tu-1 6 67

r'w**

The Buket suite was first fitted to the Tu-16 in

1 962. ln the course of the 1 960s, 34 aircraft had

the SPS-22N installed. nine aircraft received

the SPS-33N, 28 the SPS-44N and 20 the

SPS-ssN. Not only the Tu-16SPS but also the

Tu-16 Yolka was modified to carry ihe Buket

system, as were several other versions. lf the

aircraft undergoing conversion had a mission

equipment operator's pressurised cabin in the

weapons bay, this was deleted - the Tu-16P

with the Buket suite had the normal Tu-16 com-

plement of six crewmembers. The power of the

ECM sets meant that maintenance personnel

on the ground had to observe rigorous safety

measures when they were switched on.

The Tu-16P operational in the 1960s had a

maximum take-off weight of 75,800k9, a top

speed of 1,OO0km/h at an altitude of 6'250m

(and 98Okm/h at 1O,00Om), a service ceiling of

13,100m, an operational range of 5,B00km

(with 5% fuel reserves) and a take-off run of

1,BO0m. With the transition to low-level opera-

tions several Tu-16P were re-equipped with the

SPS-77 jammer optimised for these conditions'

During the 1970s and 1980s the ECM equip-

ment was constantly updated. The Tu-16P car-

ried the SPS-151 , SPS-152 or SPS-153

individual and formation protection ECM sets

belonging to the Siren' series. These were

located in the equipment bay and in the UKhO

rear ECM fairing replacing the DK-7 tail turret'

The transmitter antennas were mounted along

both sides of the fuselage near the engine air

intakes, and the receiver aniennas in the air-

craft's nose. The Tu-16P had the NATO code-

name Badger-J.

Tu-16P Ficus ECM Aircraft('order 2231')Experience with the Tu-16P revealed that when

aircraft were flying in close formation the Buket

suite not only jammed enemy ground radars

but disrupied the operation of the bombers'

own radars. lt was therefore necessary to mod-

ify the Buket in order to narrow the angle of tts

powerful jamming signal. A crash programme

to resolve this problem resulted in ten Tu-16Ps

with the Buket system (SPS-22N and SPS-44N)

being modified from 1970 onwards to work with

the Ficus array ('order 2231 '). Tests were car-

ried out using Tu-16Ps c/ns 1882409 and

1 8831 1 7.

The Ficus was intended to increase the

energy potential of the Buket suite by narrow-

ing its directional angle in both the vertical and

A rare upper view ol Tu-l6P c/n 1881305'

Yefim Gordon archive

Tu-16P Buket'34 Blue' (c/n 1881410) combines

the ECM antennas on the lorward and centre

luselage with a standard tail gunner's station'Yefim Gordon archive

The Tu-16P Ficus is identifiable by the much

larger ventral canoe fairing. This is '80 Red'

Gl n A2O4212)' Yuriy Kabernik archive

i; ;il;*Jtr*:Ad

r

Tupolev Tu-1 6

-:-:3ntal planes and directing its jamming

. :-ai either to port or starboard. The appara-'-: ,,, as handled by the weapons systems oper-

: . -E directional antennas with a drive mecha-- :- Iocated in a large ventral dielectric fairing.--: Tu-16P fitted with the Ficus system pro-::r more effective protection for a formation

:- :'craft than previously.

ir.r-'l6P Cactus ECM Aircraft::-e Tu-1 6Ps were re-equipped to carry the::S-120 Cactus' on a platform in the equip--=r: bay, with a large antenna under the plat--:'- itself. Access to the equipment was via- .: natches in the platform and in the antenna-- -rg. The 'Cactus' was handled by the navi-

:::lr-operator and thus the number of crew-:rbers was unchanged.

Tu-l 6P Rezeda ExperimentalECM Aircraft- :he second half of the 1960s a production

---1 6P ('17 Red', c/n 5202907) was fitted with:- SPS-100 Rezeda-AK jammer. The tail turret:- r PRS-1 gun-laying radar were removed and-::jaced by a new conical fairing housing the

-::: This Tu-16P Buket coded'01 Red' (ex-'28',: n 1882205) is a gate guard at Shaikovka AB.'='m Gordon archive

: l'rt and below: This Tu-l6P Buket ('29 Red',c n unknown) was used for some sort oldevelopment work. Note that the fin torsioncox is outlined in white. Tupolev JSC

"li'siwe**-"-*,**'"."8Fnfr..-f-'4!li##']

*,, ,

fr

Tupolev Tu-16 69

,li I tiitlllilir'rir,

**I

l-

Top left:'19 Red', the prototype of the Tu-l6 --

vott<a EClvt aircraft, showing the ventral chaff

outlets. The aircraft is additionally equipped

with an SPS-100 active iammer' Tupolev JSC

Top right: Close-up of the chaff outletscharacterising the Tu-16 Yolka'

Viktor KudrYavtsev archive

Centre: Very weathered-looking Tu-16 Yolka

'09 Red' (c/n 188230G). Yefim Gordon archive

Above: Tu-l6 Yolka'53 Red'flies over the

Russian countryside, with three sister ships

cruising at a lower level. Yefim Gordon archive

SPS-100. The a r-::at',vas also equipped with

an SPO-3 S.:e-a-3 R\'/R which was part of the

SPS-100 .a3(ale Tesis of the SPS-100

proved sj33ess'-. cui operational Tu-16s

were no: :3-€CL C33O wrtn it. although several

combai a-c sa=a a jsec versions of the Tu- 16

were f,::c ,',:: :'e Rezeda-AK lrom 1969

onv/arcs. iê o:::cryce ended its days as an

M-16 re.:c:e-:3r:!-3 e3 iarget drone at GK Nll

WS rn Arll:c:c -s<.

Tu-16 Silikat and Tu'16 Fonar'

Experimental ECM AircraftAcicrc r: :c Cc-rorl cf Ministers directive

No1659-657 3'3:l JJiv 1953 and MOP orderNia rc. -i . :-- r, 'he Silrkat ECM setI\U J4

deslgr:ec ':: .a--r'9 ground and shipborne

radais ,'.c:i ^: ^ :ê 21.8-30 scm waveband

was ic a€ -s:a :: ^ a Kuibyshev-built Tu-16

(c n 'i 8E2: Ca '3' :esl ng in the late spring or

earlv s;nr:' a' :955. Hcwever, this was never

done: :s:ga: :-e 1e\'/ Fonar' (Lantern, or

Streeil:ch: =C',1

svs:grn was installed some-

vrhai ra:e' N=:^=- s!'s:em was placed in series

^'^d, ^_ ^^Pl!UUv- -

Tu-16 Yolka Passive ECM Aircraft('order 214')ln paraiie ,', :'. :ne development of the

Tu-:6SPS ac:'.3 EC!1 aircraft, OKB-156

workec or a sass Ve ECM version designated

Tu-16 Ycrka Sc',ce - or. if you like, New Year

Tree) i'trrcr ,',as c:cduced at both the Kuiby-

shev ard V3ro'rezn factories from 1957

onwards in acss.Cance with order 214' This

aircratt carrieo se','en ASO-16 Avtomat-1 auto-

matic char drscensers in its cargo hold which

was provided v'::r chatf outlets (three in the

port bomb bay ccor and four in the starboard

door). Tne reniarning section of the bomb bay

was ava,lable :cr bomb carriage'

ln addition:o the chaff dispensers, an SPS-4

Modulyatsiya tModulation) radar jamming set

was installed uncjer a teardrop fairing forward

of the bomb bay. The antenna of the SD-1 dis-

tance measuring equipment (DME) was

housed in the bomb bay. and its forward sec-

tion proiected against damage by the ejected

chaff bY a sPeciai cover.

When the ASO-1 6 chaff dispensers were not

installed ihe entire bay was available for carry-

ing bombs. but in the 1950s the seven ASO-16s

*.r" "rg..nted

by two APP-22 chaff dis-

pensers (avtomaht postanovki pomekh - auto-

'?$,";

;Jl$,,r'

70 Tu1olevTu-16

a

l:ne shot of Tu-16E'45 Red' (c/n 1882411).:'- Gordon archive

&1 upper view of the same aircraft,:'- Gordon archive

t! Red' (c/n A2O4214) is an example of the-.r-16E Azaliya (note the two smallrernispherical ventral blisters) ahead ol therain gear and the dorsal intakes and outlets:if the Azaliya jammer's heat exchangers).t is equipped with a UKhO tail lairing housingr Siren'iammer, Yefim Gordon archive

-a:rc lpassive] ECM device). In this case no

::'rbs could be accommodated. Some

-:3hines were fitted with the ASO-2B and:S3-21-E7R versions. Externally the Tu-16': {a could be distinguished from the bomber. :'sion by the teardrop fairing for the SPS-4 for-.a-d of the bomb bay and by the chaff outlets: :'rg the bomb bay doors.

r 1 957 plant No 1 produced 42 Tu- 1 6 Yolkas

=:Jrpped for in-flight refuelling, and a further-:r were produced in that year by plant No 64.-^ s version was not built at plant No22 in

'=zan', although 19 of the 44 Tu-16 bombers:-iii here were modified to Yolka configurationa possessing IFR capability). Thus, alto-

;:iher, the Soviet Air Force took delivery of 71

:iamples of the Tu-16 Yolka which were later

-rdated and modified more than once so that:-:y resembled the Tu-16P in their mix of pas-

: ,e and active ECM equipment.During production the Tu-16 Yolka was

':ierred to as 'order 214'. LaIe-r some were

-cdified under the terms of 'orde( 212'.

The Tu-16E ECM Aircraft (izdeliye NE)'3t another passive ECM verslon designated--:e Tu-16E or izdeliye NE (in Soviet Air Force

-rits it, too, was known as the Tu-16 Yolka)-esembled the Tu-16R in its equipment. As on--re reconnaissance version, a special cabin,ras installed in the aft sectlon of the weapons:ay for the operator of the SPS-1, SPS-2 orSPS-2K jammer (the latter model was calledtron - Peony) with its antenna mounted under:re operator's cabin. The cabin (similar to that'ited in the Tu-16R) had life-suppoft systemsand control mechanisms for the ECM set. The

ocmb bay also featured mounting racks for twoASO-16 chaff dispensers. Bombs could be car-:ied in the forward section of the bomb bay.

-ater, additional ASO-16 chaff dispensers wereroused in the forward section, as well as twoAPP-22 chaff dispensers, with appropriaternodifications to the bomb bay doors; thisgreatly improved the aircraft's ECM capabilityat the expense of the offensive armament.

Between 1957 and 1959, 51 examples oftheTu-16E were produced at plant No1; another38 were built by plant No22 in 1958. All pos-sessed lFFl capability. The Tu-16E differedexternally from the Tu-16 Yolka in having an

access hatch for the EWO's cabin cut in thebomb bay doors. The Tu-16E was given theNATO codename Badger-H.

i

Tupolev Tu-1 6 71

Tu-16E Azaliya EGM AircraftDuring the 1970s a number of Tu- 1 6 Yolka and

Tu-16E ECM aircraft were modified rn slfu tocaffy SPS-61, SPS-62, SPS-63, SPS-64,

SP5-65 or SPS-66 jammers which had the com-

mon name Azaliya (Azalea); such aircraft were

accordingly known as the Tu-16E Azaliya. As a

rule, the SPS-63 or SPS-66 was f itted. Many also

had jammers of the Siren' family fitted.

According to MAP order No 121 of 1gth April

1972Ihe Tu-16E had its DK-7 tail turret, PRS-1

Argon gun ranging radar, ASO-1 6 chaff dis-

penser. SPO-2 RWR and SPS-2 jammer

removed. These were replaced by one of the

Azaliya-U series jammers, an SPS-I51 Siren'-1

jammer, an SPS-151M Siren'-1 M jammer, two

SPS-152 Siren'-2 jammers, two SPS-153

Siren'-3 jammers, a Beryoza-P (Birch-P) radar

homing and warning system (RHAWS) and an

ASO-21 chaff/f lare disPenserThe Siren' sets were installed in the familiar

UKhO conical fairlng replacing the tail turret.

Aircraft with the SPS-61, SPS-62 and SPS-63

also carried an SPS-6 Los' (Elk) jammer for col-

lective protection, while those with the SPS-64,

SPS-65 and SPS-66 had the SPS-S Fasol'(String Bean). The antennas for the Azaliya

were housed in teardrop fairings under the

fuselage in the forward or aft section of the

bomb bay, the remainder of the bay being used

to carry bombs or ASO-16 and APP-22 chaff

dispensers. When the Azaliya was installed on

the Tu-16 Yolka, the antenna was located in the

forward section of the weapons bay; on the

Tu-1 6E it replaced the entry hatch of the EWO's

cabin (which was removed).Some examples of the Tu-16 Yolka and

Tu-16E Azaliya had active jammers of ihe

SPS-100, SPS-100A and SPS-100M type, and

at least some had the SPO-15 Beryoza

RHAWS. During their service life the aircraft

were constantly modified and updated in line

with other versions of the Tu-16.

Tu-16ER Reconnaissance andECM AircraftSome Tu-16Es were re-equipped as the

Tu-16ER, which had the SPS-2 ECM set

replaced by an SRS-1 ELINT system. This ver-

sion had a distinctive appearance wiih its whip

antennas for the SPS-1 and SRS-1 sets.

Tu'16E (Tu-16E-KhR)NBC Reconnaissance AircraftYet another ECM version is officially referred to

as the Tu-16E, but more commonly as the

Tu-16E-KhR (khimicheskaya raztedka). lts

equipment fit permitted photographic, elec-

tronic and nuclear/biological/chemical (NBC)

reconnaissance, and it closely resembled the

Tu-16RR. lts ECM equipment merely facilitated

its reconnaissance functions. A crew of seven

was carried.The forward section of the equipment bay

accommodated a pivoting platform on which

two AFA-42/100 cameras were mounted, and

A head-on view of Tu-l6E Azaliya'69 Red'

GlnA2O4214), YeJim Gordon archive

Tu-l6E Azaliya'23 Blue'takes off on a trainingmission. Yefim Gordon archive

the aft section a pressurised operator's cabin.

The central section of the bay could be used to

carry bombs or up to four ASO-16 chaff dis-pensers. The wing structure was reinforced so

that two pylon-mounted pods (identical to

those carried on the Tu-16RR) could be carried

for atmospheric sampling. The ECM equip-

ment, apart from the ASO-16, included SPS-5

and SPS-151 sets and two SPS-Is. The anten-

nas for the SPS-S were mounted under the

fuselage forward of the weapons bay, for the

SPS-151 beside the engine air intakes and for

the SPS-1 aft of the operator's cabin above and

below the fuselage.Two aircraft built by plant No 1 in Kuibyshev

were refitted in this way. One of them served

with the 226ih OAPREP (otdel'nyy aviapolkrahdioelektronnovo protivodeystviya - lnde-pendent ECM Air Regiment) based initially at

Poltava in the Ukraine, between 1978 and 1980

at Priluki (also in the Ukraine) and then from

1980 at Spassk-Dal'niy in the Russian Far East.

The second aircraft was based at Spassk-

Dal'niy from the start. At Poltava and Priluki

these aircraft were referred to as the Tu-16E-

KhR. During maintenance work in 1979-1980

the aircraft were fitted with the Rogovitsa(Cornea) and SPS-152 jammers with the anten-

nas mounted in a small thimble fairing on the

navigator's station glazing.

Tu-16P with RPZ-59 ECM RocketsOn 21st July 1959 the Council of Ministers

issued directive No832-372 envisaging provi-

sion of a new individual passive ECM systemfor the Tu-16. Toropov's OKB-134 thereforemodified its production K-5 (alias K-51) air-to-

air missile as the RPZ-59 (raketa protivorahdi-olokatsionnoy zashchity - anti-radar protection

missile) known under the codename

Avtostrada-l (Highway-1). Rather mislead-

ingly, the weapon was referred to in Russian as

an 'anti-radar missile'; however, it was not an

ARM - that is, it was designed to disrupt the

operation of enemy radars, not destroy them

The RPZ-59 was to be fired by the Tu-16, eject-

ing clouds of chaff some way ahead of the air-

craft to jam AA artillery gun-laying radars, SAM

guidance radars and radar homing air-to-air

missiles. Six RPZ-59 rockets were to be carried

on a special extensible launcher lowered clear

of the weapons bay for loading and firing them;

the launcher featured an emergency jettison

system. The missiles could be fired singly, or

automatically at preset intervals.

After preliminary factory testing of the sys-

tem at OKB-134, combined state trials involving

OKB-134, OKB-156 and the Soviet Air Force

were held by GK Nll WS, using a modified

Tupolev Tu-1 6

Tu.16P'12 Red'(c/n 6400903) was modified byNll-131 fortesting the RPZ-59 rockets.

Tu-16P c/n 6400903, showing the underwing racksfor the RPZ-s9 chaff-dispensing rockels. Thepurpose of the small lairings under the wingtipsis unknown. Bolh Tupolev JSC

Tu-l6P ('47 Red', c/n 8204130) built in 1958 at3lant No22. The trials continued until early

i964 but proved unsatisfactory as the missile:rrned outto be unstable in flight; also, a num-:er of uncommanded launches occurred. Dur-

ng one test flight in 1963 the missile struck the'adome of the RP8-6 Lyustra radar, destroying:: on another occasion the missile collided with:re fuselage, making a big dent in it. On 1st July:963 the State acceptance trials were discon-: nued at the insistence of the Soviet Air Force

rwing to the system's poor reliability which put:re aircraft and crew in danger.

ln 1964, therefore, a new system code-.amed Pilon (Pylon) was devised, comprising:he Tu-16P with a Buket ECM suite augmentedcy 12 RPZ-59 rockets carried on underwing:ylons (hence the name). A Voronezh-builtfu-16P ('12 Red', c/n 6a00903) was modified:y Nll-131 at Pushkin, Leningrad Region an

avionics house which later became LNPO

-eninets ('Leninst' Scientific & ProductionAssociation) and then the Leninets Holding Co.

=urther trials were held on this aircraft betweenSeptember 1968 and May 1969, using an

'nproved version of the RPZ-59. The aircraft3gged 39 hours 49 minutes in 19 test flightsrvolving ground radars and the Smerch-ATornado-A) fire control radar fitted to the',likoyan/Gurevich Ye-1 55P experimental inter-.eptor. The tests proved successful and therilon system was adopted for service use with:he Tu-16P.

Frcm 1972 onwards a small number of ECM

aircraft were adapted to carry the RPZ-59.

lxternally these differed from the standardTu-16P in having two underwing hardpolnts,each carrying six missiles in tandem groups of:nree. Each missile weighed around 1,000k9.

Before firing the missiles the crew of the

Tu-16 had to on put oxygen masks and protec-

tive goggles and keep them on untilthe aircrafthad passed the cloud of chaff. With the missilesexpended, the centre of gravity shifted forwardby 0.5% mean aerodynamic chord; therefore,to maintain a safe CG position after firing themissiles the Tu-16 had to land with a fuel load

of at least 2,000k9.

The overall number of Tu-16 versions, includ-ing the Tu-16P, is remarkable for the numerouscombinations and types of ECM equipment fit-

ted. For example, the 226th lndependent ECM

Air Regiment based at Poltava had 30 Tu-16s

with active ECM equipment, and no two were

identical. The new improved Klyukva (Cran-

berry) ECM set with improved performance

was installed, and several machines had theSPS-4M Modulyatsiya jammer fitted under theterms of 'order 2615'.

The introduction of infra-red seekers on sur-

face-to-air and air-to-air missiles and the expe-

rience gained in local wars compelled theinstallation of infra-red countermeasures (IRCM)

equipment on some versions of the Tu-16,

including the Tu-16P. These aircraft had ASO-

2l7ER challlllare dispensers in the rear portions

of the main gear fairings and in the rear fuselage,

Below left: This is how the RPZ-59 rockets wereloaded by means ol hand-driven hoists.

Below right: This photo shows well the design ofthe unusual twin-row six-round launchets.Both Tupolev JSC

----- '4P

.._

*-*U t,trtl

Tupolev Tu-1 6

Other Versions and Testbeds

TARGET DRONE CARRIERS

Tu-16KRM ('order 299')To assist the Air Defence Force (PVO - Pro-

tivovozdooshnaya oborona) in the develop-

ment of missiles for use against high{lyingsupersonic aircraft, production Tu-16KS and

Tu-16KSR ASM carriers were modified under

the terms of 'order 299' in the late 1960s andgiven the service designation Tu-16KRM. They

carried two MV-1 supersonic high-altitude tar-

get drones (MV = mlshen' vysotnaya), alias

KRM-2 (krylahtaya raketa-mlshen' - cruise

missile used as target), on underwing pylons.

The drones were used in the development of

the Tu-1285-4 long-range air defence system

comprising the Tu-128 heavy interceptor and

the R-4R and R-4T air-to-air missiles.

The MV-1 was a derivative of the KRS-2

cruise missile with a top speed of 2,760kmlh at

an altitude of 22,500m and a maximum range

of 376km. lt was flown at altitudes between

20,000 and 25,000m with a flight time of 7.2

minutes and weighed 4,000k9 at launch.

The modifications on the Tu-16KRM

included changes to the flap operating system(flap deflection was restricted when the drones

were carried) and strengthening of the wing

spars. There were certain alterations to the fuel

system and special equipment to effect the

launch of the drones was fitted. The original

RBP-4 radar was retained.

A Tu-16 configured as a drone launcher comesin to land, showing the two target droneslooking like large bombs carried on underwingpylons, Yefim Gordon archive

Chapter Six

Tu-16KRME ('order 299E')A variant of the Tu-16E ECM aircraft adapted to

carry MV-1 target drones but retaining itsSPS-1/SPS-2/Siren' jammers and ASO-16

chaff dispenser was designated Tu-16KRME.

When the drones were launched, the aircraft

could simulate enemy ECM against the PVO s

SAM complexes. Like the Tu-16E, it had a crew

of seven.

Tu-16NKRM ('order 332')Appearing in 1964, the Tu-16NKRM known as

'order 332' in production, carried two 540-kg

high-speed, high-altitude lTs-59 O/en' (Deer)

drones (lTs = i mitahtor tsell - simulated targel)powered by liquid{uel rocket motors. ln 1980

the improved 1,052-kg lTs-59V Magnit (Mag-

net) with a liquid{uel cruise engine and hvc

solidjuel rocket boosters became available.

Both drones were used by the PVO for SA\4

development and troop training,

Tu-16NMThe KSR-SNM (D-sNM; M = mlshen') anc

KSR-SMV (D-SMV) target drones were evolvec

by MKB Raduga ('Rainbow' Moscow Design

Bureau, pronounced rahdooga) from the

KSR-sN low-altitude cruise missile in the early

1990s. Both drones simulated air-to-surface

and anti-shipping air-launched missiles anc

were used in the development of new SAM sys-

tems. The drones could be programmed to

simulate high-altitude missiles, strategic or tac-

tical bombers or low-altitude missiles. Depend-

ing on the programme, the drone could have a

top speed of Mach 4.2, a maximum range of

400km and a maximum flight altitude ol

4C:::- --: 3--:- ,',: ort of both drones',',3s j j:i.: .' -- : a--:^ altitude between

5C::-: - - -::- --:,. ,',::eabletocarryaddi-ic^: ::- :-:-: ::-:- ^ s ngle items or as a

se: ':- -:::-' -: :-: :'a ectorY, transmitting

ca:::: -=::-' - -: ::a: :-S .''ia data Iink, fecofd-

'= z -:: :. :- ?:::' ^c nissile and auto-

-=a -U , :::::: -l:-: a.j-lCh reSUltS.

--: ^:=-:r,r,' l-:'.',1 Crones were carried

c-, :-. ---'i'.',' -::':i from a Tu-16K-26

- ss : -::' .: =-.'^j-. The modifications

': -::: ::':-::^:-:1,', rgs. alterationsto the' a= :::"='. -: :. s:=- :ianges in the fuel SyS-

:a- :-: ::.:::-':-:'essurising the drone

aa-a=.-=-,. --: iSR-5NM was launched at

a- : : :,:: -' :5 --::lir r lvhilethe carrierwas: ; -: :i :::-:::-- - Tie Coweredflighttime:':^: :':-= ,',:: :::,',4:^ 75.7 and 379.4 sec-

3-:s :.:- 7-.-'---'ange of 110.4km. The

a-:-:s :: - : a :: aa iaunched bY suitablY

-:: ':: ---'ai-26s Tu-16KSR-2-5s and

The Tu-16 Target Tug--. ---'i ,',as : s: -sed by the PVO as a tug

i-,-s'.-.,2 - shen - glrding target). The tail

:u"e:.',as -:'s 's:ance. replaced bythetow-,1C 334-

RADIO.CONTROLLED DRONES

ln 19c6 OKB-'aO ,,'ras called upon to provide a

radio-con::cltei versicn of the Tu-16 for the

PVO. On 23'c Ncvernber 1956 the Council of

Mrnisters issuec di:ective No 1528-768 fol-

lowed by lvlAP crder No 592 on 3rd December.

bolh conce:rng development of the Tu-16M

large targei crone (M = mishen'). The aircraft

was to reiain ihe flight performance of the pro-

ouciion Tu-16 and the first three examples were

io be ready for ioint OKB/Air Force trials during

the second quarter of 1958. Development was

to proceed jointly with the Ministry of Electron-

ics (MRP).

Development problems caused delays so

that the f irst three experimental Tu- 1 6M drones

did not reach the Tupolev OKB's f light test facil-

ity at Zhukovskiy until ihe end of 1958, allowing

tests of the remote control system to begin.

Hence on 16th April 1958 the Council of Mlnis-

ters followed up with directive No 419- 198 (anc

MAP with order No 131 of 24th April), postpon-

ing the beginning of the trials until the secondquarter of 1 959.

Tupolev Tu-1 6

-'i ; rri.16 target drone ('61 Red', cln 1882216){: :r:sumably a convened Tu-l6R with ECM.:L :ment for selt-protection still in place. Note-E -etal panels mounting the forward probes-: s of the radio control system which replace:"8 Dwer side quadrants of the navigator's:=-: cn glazing. Yuriy Kabernik

- -:1t view of the same aircraft. The inverted-T;a:ed aerial under the nose is also associated!"-: :he control system. Note the triple strutsrcgr lhe outer wings; these carry marker";r:s making the aircraft observable at night.

':aSrnik

. - e the research and development work:: -.der way, during the first six months of;:? ciant No1 produced 13 Tu-16s (c/ns

::i701 through 1883713) specially for con-:': cn inio drones for the PVO. But again

-': rress was hindered by the problems

=-::ndered by the creation of a reliable and

:-:crive radio control system and in 1960

:-:3-156 transferred all further work on the---'6 drones to its Tomilino branch headed by

= \ezval',-re PVO required the Tu-16M to be con-

'': ed by radio commands transmitted either::: a ground command post or a drone direc-': - a;rcraft. The aircraft was to have both active.-: passive ECM equipment installed, as well

:s Cata link to transmit all the required data to'-: command post. At first, in accordance with: - Defence Force instructions, the Tu-16M was

::s,gned as a pilotless disposable drone. lt,:s to take otf with a normal crew on board, ^ c vrould bale out, after which it was planned

-: use it as a target with the option of self-

::struction. The specialists at OKB-156 work-- 3 with Lll, however, devised a system:âbling the Tu-16M to take off and land under-:tio control. The Tu-16M also differed from::1er types of target drones converted from air-

:'aft in being able to accommodate a large

:':ount of ECM equipment.After further development work, the Tu-16M

::'get drone was accepted for use on 17th April'965 under the designation M-16. By then a

:cnsiderable number of Tu-16s were reaching:re end of their service lives and were modified:s M-16 drones. For a brief period the designa-: cn Tu-16M was only applied to those drones

"'itlgeTl-i; F'F*

'-e, ,*-'..*.fl,*il$ ,:61fu;*_ .,g* t=F;-q

%*.t* 4s !

-13-?so,

f#*;&e-

modified from Tu-16 aircraft at plant No22 in

Kazan'.The demand for the drones was small at f irst,

with only the Kazan' factory carrying out themodifications in parallel with series production

of the supersonic fu-22 and later fu-22Mbombers, but the early 1980s saw the en masse

retirement of the Tu-1 6 and the re-equipment of

the Long-Range Aviation with the Tu-22M. As

the volume of conversion work grew, the dronemodification job was taken on by the Air

Force's aircraft overhaul plant (ARZ - aviare-

montnw zavod) No 12 in Khabarovsk. The air-

craft converted there still had some airframe life

remaining, allowing them to be used as trainersfor a while.

Regardless of the original version, the M-16

drones could be identified by the forward- and

aft-pointing probe aerials of the command link

Below left: This M-16-3 (also converted from anaircraft with individual protection ECMequipment) has a dilferent undernose antennaand camera pods carried on V-struts iustoutboard of the main gear fairings to recordmissile attacks. Yuriy Kabernik archive

Below right: Close-up of the forward fuselage ofM-l6'51 Red' (c/n 1882216). Yuriy Kabernik

Tupolev Tu-16

Isysiem on the nose and tail. Some aircraft had

three tracer flares under each wingtip to facili-

tate visual observation from the ground during

night shootdowns. The aircraft converted by the

two plants had some fundamental differences;

for instance, the Tu-16Ms converted in Kazan'

usually had passive ECM gear, while the M-16s

converted by ARZ No 12 had active jammers.

After conversion the doomed aircraft were

delivered to regiments for crew training, their

last flights usually taking place over a target

range in Kazakhstan as targets for SAM com-plexes. ln the early 1990s some M-16 were

operated by the GK Nll WS facility at

Vladimirovka AB in Akhtoobinsk, southern Rus-

sia, from where they were also finally sent to the

Kazakhstan range. The Tu-16 was a tough air-

craft, and at times the drone stayed in onepiece and flew on even after receiving a direct

hit; in this case a second missile had to be fired

or a self-destruct command sent. lf the missile

was not fired for some reason (or missed), the

aircraft could return to base and land in radio

control mode.

Tu-16M (M-16) Target Drone('order 212','order 2212', izdeliye NMITu-16s converted at the Kazan' plant No22were initially known by the service designationTu-16M (or izdeliye NM) and during production

as'order 212'. Subsequently, in common with

the conversions carried out at Khabarovsk,they were called the M-16. At Kazan' most con-

versions were from Tu- 164 bombers which had

ASO-2B Avtomat-2 chaff dispensers installed in

their bomb bays and were known during con-

version as 'order 2212'. Laler it was the turn of

Tu-16E and Tu-16P ECM aircraft to be con-

verted; missile strike versions rarely ended up

this way. They were intended for use in the

development of SAMs and AAMs, four flights

being made with a crew on board and a fifth as

a pilotless target.

'32 Red' (c/n 7203616) was converted into theone-off M-16 Orbita drone. lt displays thedished lairing mounting the rear probe aerialsol the radio control system which supplantsthe tail turret, the angular dielectric lairingsreplacing the dorsal and ventral turrets, andthe bory fairings low on the aft fuselage sideswhich house automatic chaff dispensers.Yuriy Kabernik archive

This close-up shows to advantage the typicalrear end treatment of an M-'16 target drone.Yefim Gordon

M-16-3'77 Red' (c/n 82O42O3) pictured atVladimirovka AB in Akhtoobinsk, the seat of GK

Nll WS, is a converted Tu-l6E Azaliya ECMaircraft, as revealed by the dorsal heatexchanger air intakes and outletsi so is M-l6'3'90 Red' (c/n 8204108) parked alongside. Theseaircraft were previously coded'90 Red'and '23Red' respectively. Ot note are the Mikoyan/Gurevich MiG-21 fighters in the backgroundearmarked lor conversion to M.21 target dronesand the Antonov An-124-100 Ruslan transport otVolga Dnepr Airlines which probably deliveredthem to the base. Yelim Gordon

*$%,ti,

ha

# * # E $'-"q #

*'ffi-

fr*r

I

r

fupolev Tu-1 6

lhe tail of M-16-3'77 Red' (c/n A2O42O3),

-<howing the rear UKhO ECM fairing which nowiounts the aft pair of radio control systemsrobe aerials. Yefim Gordon

M-16-1 Target Drone- Khabarovsk various versions of the Tu-16

-:derwent conversion into drones. Tu-164:cmber conversions with Siren' ECM sets were:esignated M-16-1 .

M-16-2 Target Drone-nose Tu-16 drones fitted with Siren' active

_ammers covering the forward and rear hemi-

spheres were designated M-16-2. These con-. ersions were mainly carried out in Khabarovskand based on Tu-164 bombers and Tu-16E

=CM versions which had an UKhO ECM fairing.

The M-16-3 Target Drone ('order 254')Some drones had the Siren' jammer coveringcnly the forward hemisphere and were desig-nated M-16-3. Various versions of the Tu-16,rncluding those fitted with ihe Azaliya, Buket andFicus ECM systems, underwent this conversionat ARZ No 12 under the terms of 'order 254'.

M-16K Target Drone ('order 254K')Drones converted at Khabarovsk from 'glass-

nosed' missile-carrying versions of the Tu-16with forward-looking Siren' jammers, as on theM-16-3, were known as 'order 254K' duringconversion and as the M-16K in service. Themissile pylons were not removed.

M-16 Orbita Target Drone('order 254 Orbita')ln 1990 a single retired Tu-16 ('32 Red', c/n7203616) was converted into the M-16 Orbita(Orblt) experimental target drone (referred to

during conversion as 'order 254 Orbita'). lt dif-fered from the other drone conversions in hav-

ing additional antennas replacing the dorsaland ventral gun positions and boxy pods cov-ering automatic passive ECM on the lower rear

fuselage sides. This version did not pass its

State trials, so no more were converted.

M-16 Target Drone ('order 285K')An unconventional version of the target dronewas developed under the aegis of the AirDefence Force and converted in 1991 underthe terms of 'order 2B5K'. lt was given a three-year service life extension and used to carry tar-get drones until it reached the end of its servicelife when it became a target itself . Outwardly theaircraft could be recognised by the trapezoidalcommand link aerials at the wingtips. The can-non armament was retained and the crew com-prised six persons.

OTHER VERSIONS AND TESTBEDS

Tu-16U Bomber Trainer (project)As the standard bomber in the Long-Range Avi-ation (DA) and Naval AirArm (AVMF), the Tu-16was also used to train aircrews. The bomberwas on strength with the training regiments atthe Tambov Military Pilot College, theChelyabinsk Military Navigator College, theDA's 43rd Combat & Conversion Training Cen-tre at Dyaghilevo AB, Ryazan', and the AVMF's33rd Combat & Conversion Training Centre at

Kool'bakino AB, Nikolayev. At first machines ofthe first production batches were relegated fortraining, but they were joined later by examplesof the Tu-164 bomber and even, in small num-bers, by the 'Tu-16K-something-orother' mis-

siletoting versions. The signing of arms

limitation treaties meant that examples retired

from operational service could, with armament,ECM and other miscellaneous items of equip-ment removed, be used for crew training as theTu-1 6U (o oc h ebnyy ls am oly otl - trai ner). Vari-

ous versions of the Tu-16U bomber trainer,which was to be outwardly distinguished by a

red band round the fuselage forward of the tail

assembly, were planned.The Tu-l6U-1 was to be a dedicated flying

training version for mastering piloting and nav-

igation techniques, the Tu-16U-2 used forbombing training, the Tu-1 6U-3 for ASM launchtraining, while the Tu-16U-4 was to be a trainingversion of the Tu-16K-10-26. For political rea-

sons none of these versions actually materi-alised: firstly, the Tu-16 fell outside the strategicweapons category; secondly, many examples ofthe Tu- 1 6 were already being converted as M-1 6

drones. lt was decided, therefore, to combinetwo functions in the M-16: bomber trainer and

target drone. For that reason the M-16 droneswhich underwent conversion in Khabarovskhad major overhauls to give them three moreyears of service life. This permitted them to be

used as training aircraft for some considerabletime. As for the training roles described above,they were assigned to the Tu-95U and Tu-95KU -decommissioned versions of theTu-95A bomberand Tu-95K missile strike aircraft.

Tu-l6 Development Aircraft withRD-3MR Engines and'Hushkit'Between 1957 and 1959 the Flight Research

lnstitute (Lll) carried out ground and flight testsof Tu-16 c/n 1BB2B0B fitted with new RD-3MRengines featuring thrust reversers (hence the Rfor reyers tyagl. fhe new feature reduced thelanding run by some 30-35% (from 1,500 to950m). At the same time the engines were

TupolevTu-16 77

prone to exhaust gas ingestion and surging,

which led to the eventual abandonment of

these tests. ln 1961 the same Tu-16 was used

to test noise-suppression engine nozzles (or, to

use a commercial aviation term, a 'hushkit').

The new nozzles were not adopted, however,

due to increased fuel consumption.

Tu-16KP (Tu-16RT)Airborne Command Postln the late 1950s Semyon A Lavochkin's OKB

designed a high-speed long-range cruise mis-

sile powered by a ramjet engine designed by M

M Bondaryuk. Tests of the missile necessitated

several command posts along the missile's

flight path for controlling its flight and making

whatever corrections were necessary. Airborne

command posts (ABCPs) able to fly at high alti-

tude and cover a wide radius, as well as accom-panying the missile for some time, were cleariypreferable to ground installations; therefore a

few Tu-16s were suitably converted. The

Tu-16KP (komahndnyy poonkt - commandpost) carried the special missile control equic-

ment in the equipment compartment and in the

bomb bay, with the operator's pressurised

cabin in the aft section of the bomb bay. as cn

the Tu-16R. These specially converted exarn-

ples of the Tu-16 were stationed on normal ai:-

fields along the missile's flight path; after iiemissile's launch they were able to take off a:ctrack it. After Lavochkin's death in 1960 furthe:

work on the missile was discontinued anci :leTu-16KPs reverted to their original form.

Tu-'16 Aerial Cinernatography VersionTwo exa-: =s :' :-: ---i6K-10 were con-

verted fcr' - -: --: -_ :^: a : during testing and

develoc:-:-: :' :-: --' ;r: refuelling system.Arl pnr. ^-:-- :::- - :-:- ,,, ih the fOfmef miS-, r,r v9u s

sile ca":": : .1 :: -=-:'=3 and remote-con-

trollec ::-:-a: :. special mounts

reola::: :-: :: -:: :- : :a :Jrrets. Both aircraft

servec':' : :--: : -. ^ 1-umber of flighttestprcg'a- s

Tu-16 Weapons Testbed with a DK-20

-":'. :' - s;ngle Tu-16 was

l. -L- -,'. ^-cannon tail turret

.2 . -',^ g evaluation flight

:. S::

Tu-1 6 Tsiklon-N Tr/eather ResearchAircraft ('order 386').^'.'= 2=-. - :--: a - --.at of aircraft, includ--J = ---- :-:: :- --'31 ard two An-12BPs,

,'.:': -: : =:: -: - -:: - :ê Tsiklon (CYclone)

3-::-:--: -:- ::-:Sa-3rrC reSeafCh and

: : -:-:::: -: - ^ -:- :-: A-SOiCeS Of the Cen-

'.'a :a':- .::-' l:::-,a:cry (TsAO - Isen-trahl' 1. = ==', : g. ch

= :'.i' 2 observatoriya)' a

: . : :- :'--- S:. :: -^ 3^ s State Commlttee

':' - . :-: - - = :': a:, -a'a Environmental Con-'.'. Gcs.--:- :-:met On 4th APril 1976

',':= :-:-:: :-::-'.: --6 envisaging the con-

,:': :- :- ::.:-: ---'is rlio Tu-l6Tsiklon-N,',:::-:' '::::-:- :':-:: :ê N fgfeffgd tO thg

::s ::':-;: --:: .:'. -heTuPolevOKBcol-

1::-:-:: . -.-'- ='.:.a -.'ArmtO prOCUretWO

':-= ---'a<-26 (or Tu-16KSR-2-5),

-i =-: a::32C8 built in Kazan'in: ' ::r : - a: :t'e Navy's ARZ No 20_ :---s - :--'. ,',as intended for studY-

:. :-=--:dYnamic and electric: :: :-3--3OYnamlC arlu eleuLllu

:' :-: ::-:schere and cloud for-

Though it looks Iike an M'15 target drone, '10Red' (c n 820.{203) is the Tu'16RT telemetryrelay aircrafl used in missile test programmes.

Tu-16N1'{ Tsiklon CCCP-42355 No 1 (formerlyTu.1 6N Tsiklon. c n 6203203) sits forlorn in aremole corner of Chkalovskaya AB lollowing itsretirement from aclive duty' The aircraft'sorigins as a Tu.16KSR.2'5 with a Rubin-lM radarare patently obvious. the large teardrop radomeand missile pylons being plainly visible; allarmament has been removed. The Yuriy AGagarin Space Centre's Aero L-39C Albatrostrainers are lined up in the background.

A Tu-16 in 1973.standard Aeroflot livery certainlywas a slrange sight. CCCP'42484 (c/n 6203208)'

the other Tu-16N Tsiklon, differed slightly in

equipment fit and colour scheme (note theangular dorsal sensor tairings). The rainmakingchemical dispenser pods carried on the pylons

are probably modilied stock KMGU-1submunitions dispensers used by tactical strikeaircraft and helicopters. Tupolev JSC

Tail TurretT;- -- - .-

rec::3::, I

{ffith*

,

rp-42 3E It!ff-.{l

-*s{

,b" .+

ffi:

78 Tupolev Tu-1 6

: *ake rain (for instance, when it was neces-

::-, io prevent an impending hailstorm which::- c destroy crops, or to scatter rain clouds- :n could ruin a public holiday). Accordingly

i armament and military equipment (except

:- :he missile pylons) was removed and

:: aced by R-802V and R-BO2GM radios, a:-::n-1M wide-scan weather radar with its

n-::nna in a large teardrop radome under the:.-:r'e fuselage and other special equipment.--: former weapons bay and wing hardpoints

:'e used for carrying speclal bombs filled with'= -.naking chemicals (such as silver iodide) or:::oial pods housing research equipment or: -:rnical dispensers.

-:ials by GK Nll WS and TsAO lasted from',: . ember 1978 to April 1980, whereupon bothi':raft were placed on the civil register as

: ICP-42355 (c/n 6203203) and CCCP-42484

: " 6203208). ln keeping with their new mis-

- :r they gained the blue/white 1973-standard:::cflot livery - save that the type was marked:^ the nose simply as 'Tu'. Like the other-:search aircraft in the Tsiklon series, the-,-16s (redesignated) wore the eye-catching-s klon emblem on the nose to clarify their

::crm chaser' role.The two Tu-1 6 Tsiklon-Ns served for more

--an ten years in a variety of scenarios over::ntral Russia and the Ukraine, including 'sky

::aning' missions during the 1980 Moscow3 ympics and damage control in the wake of:-e 1986 Chernobyl' nuclear disaster.

Tu-16 Tsiklon-NM\Yeather Research Alrcraftf :r 1gth November '1 gBG the Soviet Council of

',linisters ordered that both Tu-16 Tsiklon-N air-

:'aft should be re-equipped to enable them to

:articipate in international weather research:fogrammes. Eventually only CCCP-42355

:he first aircraft to be thus registered) was so

rodified, beginning its iests in 1991 which,'rere interrupted by the dlsintegration of the

JSSR that year. The Tu-16 Tsiklon-N and the-u-16 Tsiklon-NM were to have been used for

:re last time during the First Chechen War in'995-96 but they did not, in fact, take part and

,vere retired soon afterwards. The fate of

CCCP-42484 is unknown, while CCCP-42355

No 1 was last noted in reasonably good condi-

Close-up ol the nose of Tu-16NM TsiklonCCCP.42355 No 1, showing the characteristiclogo carried by all weather research aircraft inthe Tsiklon series; curiously, the type is markedon the nose only as 'Tu'. The airliners in thebackground are actually Tu-134LK-2 cosmonauttrainers operated by the Yuriy A Gagarin SpaceCentre. Yefim Gordon

One of the Tu-l6LL engine testbeds operated byLll - presumably'01 Red' (c/n 6401501) - with alarge turbofan engine (probably a Solov'yovPS-90) lowered into running position. Note thetest equipment heat exchangers mounteddirectly on the development engine's nacelle.Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

tion at Chkalovskaya AB (its home base) in

August 1999. Curiously, back in late 1987 the

registration CCCP-42355 was reused for a

Yakovlev Yak-42 short-haul airliner (c/n

4520424711399) delivered to Aeroflot'sLithuanian Civil Aviation Directorate; thus, con-

trary to all rules there were lwo aircraft with the

same registration operational at the same time!

Tu-16 for Spraying Carbonic AcidTwo Tu-16N tankers were used for spraying

carbonic acid in the late 1970s as part of the

Tsiklon research programme. They were based

at Chkalovskaya AB.

Tu-16AFS Photo Survey Aircraftln the early 1970s a Tu-16 operated by one of

the Soviet Air Force units (coded '69 Red', c/n

unknown) was re-equipped to perlorm aerial

photography along the route of the Baikal-AmurRailway. The Tu-1 6AFS (aerototos"yomshchik -photo survey aircraft) operated from various

civilian airports, although it was 'registered' to

Lll and officially home-based at Zhukovskiy.

Tu-16LL Engine TestbedStarting in 1954, the Tu-16 was used on a wide

scale for testing new jet engines, structural

components, assemblies, avionics, equipment

and armament. Such aircraft were usually

called Tu-1 6LL (letayuschchaya laboratoriya -lit.'flying laboratory');this Russian term is used

indiscriminately for any kind of testbed,

research or survey aircraft.

Most often, however, the designation

Tu-161L applied to the nine engine testbeds

operated by Lll from Zhukovskiy. The Tu-1 6LLs

had the radar and all armament removed and

carried the test engine in a special nacelle

housed in the former bomb bay. The nacelle

was semi-recessed during take-off/landing to

provide adequate ground clearance and

extended clear of the fuselage by a special

hydraulic mechanism before the test engine

was started. The nacelle featured an emer-

gency jettison mechanism (in case it failed to

retract before landing or the development

engine caught fire); a movable circular cover

closed the air intake when the nacelle was

stowed to prevent foreign object damage and

stop the engine from windmilling. As a rule, test

equipment heat exchangers were mounted on

the upper centre fuselage or on the test engine

nacelle.The first example to be adapted for engine

testing was a standard bomber (tactical code

unknown, c/n 1880403) built in Kuibyshev in

1954, which was used to test the Lyul'ka AL-7F

t-4tr#ffliiti"!4

;4d4#al$

fili ii*,irfil. '',l]i, I i

lliii,ltl

c#t'sd,.dMiM1M',d l',', -i

Tupolev Tu-1 6

afterburning turbojet developed for the Sukhoi

Su-7 fighter-bomber. The other Tu-16LLs were

adapted as test beds, including Voronezh-built'01 Blue' (c/n 6401 401 ), '03' (c/n 6401 403), '08'

(c/n 6401408),'41 Blue'(c/n 6401410) and'01Red' (c/n 6401501), Kazan'-built '02 Blue' (c/n

42O1OO2) and '05 Blue' (c/n 8204105), and

Kuibyshev-built '10 Red' (c/n 1881110). Some

30 engines, including the Dobrynin VD-7 after-

burning turbojet, Kuznetsov NK-8, Solov'yov

D-20P and D-30 turbofans, Tumanskiy R13-300

and R158-300 afterburning turbojets, R-27

afterburning turbofan, R27V-300 thrust-vector-

ing turbofan and R-29 afterburning iurbofan,

Lotarev D-36 turbofan, Lyul'ka AL-7 and AL-7F

turbojets, lvchenko A|-25TL turbofan, Gavrilov

R-95Sh turbofan and so on - in short, nearly all

Soviet second- and third-generation jet

engines - were tested on these aircraft in the

course of some 30 Years.

ln the 1970s and 1980s Tu-161L'41 Blue'

was modified for perlorming an extensive test

and development program on the D-36 turbo-

lan intended for the Antonov An-72 Coaler shorl

take-off and landing (STOL) light transpod and

the Yak-42 C/obber short-haul airliner; at Lll this

aircraft was known as the Tu-161L-410 At this

time, too, the Tu-1 6LL found use for testing full-

size airframe assemblies together with their

engrnes. For instance, '02 Blue'and '41 Blue

carried complete fuselages of the Yak-36M

Forger shipboard vertical/short take-off and

landing (V/STOL) attack aircraft incorporating

an R27V-300 lift/cruise engine and a pair of

Kolesov RD36-35V lift-jets; '10 Red' (probably

called Tu-16LL-1 10 at Lll) and '02 Blue' carried

a complete fuselage of the Czech Aero L-39

Albatros advanced trainer with an AI-25T1

engine, and the like. These tests enabled the

etfect of the air intake design on the engine s

Left: Another Tu.15LL '01 Blue' (c/n 6401401;note the differentty aPPtied tactical code),with a very similar develoPment enginenacelle - right dohn to the test equipment heatexchanger placen'lent ln this case, however'the test engine app€a6 to be an afterburningturbofan, which required the rear end of thenacelle to be lengfrened accordingly.Crnm^ I --.::::: -_ _:-' -:

O33'a::- :: := ::-: =: a^d engine operation): 2- ^ : :--:: -: =-=-/:o be verified. As ln

t^: ::s: :' :-= :-:^:: alone. the aircraft

ass=-: :: .',:': -:--331 r ihe former bomb

3a, :^: :r,:':: : =:-::':'e engine starting....---.-^-..-- .-----:s were used during

c3,: ::-:-: ;,:-- :^ :le equipment and

a'-:-:-:':-:-=',' 3-23 =',crum Iaclical fighter- -3-:--: - ^- --+ Tu-16: an example

-^ zs LL-88 was used to

:es: :-: ::::, :l-13 ::e'burning turbofan.

3-=---' :--,',:: :::,',henthetestengineer!'- s:::- :-: : :,', :' :-: setting sun on the

r€.: ::-:-: :-: -: s âcelte for a fire and the

e^:': :':,', == ==,-,

:-3iherexamplecrashed

cr -s: =::'-:-, '3-' <,lling the crew of five

cao:a -:: :-. ---.':-:,ls:est pilot Sultan Amet-

K'z' -a'a :':-: S:. =:

Union: the cause was

:":-::-: ..'-='.:- :'- :ab deflection which

3a-s::'.- = - z:' -: .l tr ve into the ground.

,, :

-.rn, T-L-a-{dl-,ll1L!1@*-

-. *i mw!*r**-ATT@

80 Tupolev Tu-1 6

''- -": ;'::hs on the opposite page::

-- { :- ::: The detached development engine nacelle ol a Tu-1 6LLn;mus rear fairing) on a ground handling dolly in one of Lll's hangars,sring the numerous access panels and cooling air intakes, An-l28K

=Cp{a974 in the background is a de-icing systems testbed.

*' :-- - :'rt: The detached tail fairing of the Tu-l6LL's development enginesdfe. Tu.16LL'02 Blue' (cln 42O1OO2I is visible in the background.

rr::- i;t: A view inside the Tu-16LL's bomb bay, looking aft, showingb sp€cial retractable pylon for the development engine nacelle andil$ -:tration mechanism. Note also the fuel line and the many electrical:slirectors dangling from the bomb bay.

::-:-',ght: Another view inside the Tu-l6LL's bomb bay, showing the

- ntake shutter in retracted position, All Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

:" :--;'achs on this page:

- : : r-: upper right: A Tu-16LL in action, probably with a Lyul'ka AL-7Fftrburning turbojet. The development engine nacelle is identical to the!r1ic in the preceding views.

-: , :- ::ght: For ground runs and installation/removal of the developmentrmgine the Tu-l6LLs had to be parked on special elevated concrete rampsE rncrease the ground clearance, as illustrated by'41 Blue' (c/n 6401410).

:q : r, ieft: The compressor face ol a development engine installed in a

'turry extended nacelle. For ground runs the air intake was closed by arcial foreign obiect damage (FOD) prevention grille.

:n:r, right: At one stage of its career Tu-l6LL'41 Blue' (c/n 6401410) wasIled 1s;1""1;nn the Lotarev D-35 turbofan developed for the Yak-42 short-ra.rl airliner, complete with a standard Yak-42 engine nacelle and pylon.fris view shows clearly that the Tu-l6LLs had the RBP-4 radars deletedrs superfluous lor their testbed role.

l:-::n left: A fighter engine (the convergent-divergent supersonic nozzles clearly visible) is prepared for a ground run beneath a Tu-l6LL. Notefie tarpaulins covering the main gear bogies, the pan collecting any oilcaking lrom the test engine and lhe makeshift FOD prevention grilletfected in lront ol it. Most ol the access panels have been intentionally+i missing to tacilitate adjustments in case ol need.

:::cm nght: A Lyul'ka AL-7F runs in full afterburner during a ground$eck. All Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

{

81Tupolev Tu-16

Lefi: Another air-to'air of Tu-'l6LL '41

Blue'with the D-36 out and running.ln this configuration the testequipment heat exchangers had tobe installed on the uPPer centrefuselage. G:cmov Flighi Research

3:13,', .: a.3 right: Tu'l6LL'01 Blue'(c n 6401401) makes a low Pass withan unidentified development enginein fully lowered position during theAviation Day flypast at Zhukovskiyon 16th August 1990. Lll's airtieldwas still ofl limits to the generalpublic then. so demonstration llightswere staged over sPecially builtpublic grandstands on the bank olthe Moskva River. Victor Drushlyakov

t-

T

\

a_,€t€

-*.33:-

ff?

*

l=I t

#rl"*;

d. tkI*{a@

i'liijitt

:::.= Tu. l6LL'02 Blue' (cln 42O1OO2)

with a stowed develoPment enginesits in front of one of the PurPose'buitl ramps at Zhukovskiy in the199Os. ':'- Gcrcon archive

-:: The same aircraft in an earlierconfiguration with a different testengine taxies at Zhukovskiy' thenacelle's intake firmly closed by theshutter. Note the difterence in thepresentation and location of thetactical code and c/n which changedin the course of an overhaul.v:'- G:-::r archive

I

82 Tupolev TuJ 6-

--dd

-: r,- reft and right: Tu-16LL'01 Blue' (c/n 5401401) was part ol a display;i3ged at Zhukovskiy in May 1991 on occasion of the Flight Researchi-stilute's 50th anniversary. Note that the design of the nacelle's intake;.rtter varied on individual aircraft, depending on the type of engine fitted:(. to be precise! its intake diameter). The unusually low position ol the: : on the nose is also noteworthy. Yefim Gordon

: :-: Close-up of the last engine tested on Tu-l6LL'01 Blue' (c/n:.!11401). As was the case with several other engines, the test equipment-€at exchangers are mounted directly on the nacelle, YeJim Gordon

:. :,,, flght: A rear view ol the same turbofan, showing the subsonic nozzler''Jr a core/bypass flow mixer; the oblong objects at the nacelle's trailing:€ge are not adiustable nozzle petals! Note also the open doors ol the{I{-3 engine's turbostarter exhaust port. Yefim Gordon

l= : ,',, left: Tu-16LL '10 Red' (c/n 1881 1 10) sits forlorn on a rain-drenched-ardstand close to Lll's main hangars. With no development engine:stalled, the modified door-less bomb bay creating a concave lower-;selage contour is readily apparent. Note the open brake parachute bay:oors. Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

:::.nr left and right: Tu-16LL '05 Blue' (c/n 8204105) caught by the camera:n short finals to runway 30 at Zhukovskiy after a test tlight. Usually it was:ll but impossible to guess what type of development engine was:lstalled, Victor Drushlyakov

fi14

\{""',{r,r, xr9i"n

F

IHnb-*I

_,1

Tupolev Tul 6 83

I

Abcve lei a^: 'g^: Tu-16LL'10 Red' (c/n1881 1 10) was used for testing the lvchenkoAl.25TL turbofan - a version of the Al-257optimised for the Aero L-39 Albatros advancedtrainer. ln order to accurately model theinteraction between the engine and the lateralair intakes the development engine wasinstalled in an actual full-size L-39 fuselage,seen here in semi-recessed position on theground. Gromcv F rghi Fesearch lnstitute

Left: Tu-16LL c/n 1881110 with the L-39 fuselagelowered clear ol lhe bomb bay and the testengine running. Gromov Flight Research lnstitule

Below left: To speed up the trials of the A|-25TL a

second Tu-16LL ('02 Blue', c/n 4201002) wassimilarly configured with an L-39 fuselage.Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

Above: Air-to-surface missile? No indeed! The stowed L-39 luselageon Tu-l5LL'10 Red', seen here approaching Zhukovskiy's runway30, could be easily mistaken for a large ASM.Victor Drushlyakov

Left: Tu-lGLL'41 Blue' (c/n 6401410) had a similar configuration atone time, being used for testing the Tumanskiy R27V-300 thrust'vectoring turbojet/Kolesov RD36-35V lift-jet combination installedin a full-size luselage of a Yakovlev Yak.36M (Yak'381 Foryershipboard V/STOL attack aircraft. Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

L-

84 Tupolev Tu-1 6

: :* Close-up oltheYak-36M

'Essage lowered lor ground tests oft* rovrerplant as Tu-'l6LL'41 Blue'rlr Do the special ramps. The opena-d air intake doors and the ventral:s.-:shell exhaust doors lor thery€d RD36.35V lift-jets are just

'rrbrC in this view. Note the FODtgl€frtion wire mesh screens on theGrd intakes of the lift/cruise enginerlE *l€ short ogival nosecone tippedilif a pitot as incorporated on then -l first and second prototypes;tllg gave place to a longer conicalese on subsequent aircraft.r: -:, iiight Research lnstitute

l+ : :i: Again, due to the highlrcrity of the Yak-36M programmea recond 'wish I had wings'rselage/powerplant combinationres built and litted to Tu-16LL'02*u€' (ch 42O1OO2). The aft fuselage!1;a9€ of lhe real Yak-36M was,Ir course, rather diflerent.- : -: / Flight Research lnstitute

Tu-16 Avionics and Equipment Testbeds- :1e late 1950s and early 1 960s OKB-156 mod-=:d two Tu-16s to serve as testbeds during::relopment of the'121 'cruise missile and its:-lduction derivative, the Tu-123 Yastreb (Hawk)

: -gersonic reconnaissance drone. Both aircraft::ionged to Lll; one - obviously one of the---1 6LLs listed above - served as a testbed for:e drone's Tumanskiy RK-15-300 afterburning.-rbojet (a short-life version of the R-15-300

:cwering the MiG-25 fighter) and the second::rved for verifying the Tu- 123's data link system.

A Tu-16 coded '44 Red' (c/n 4200404) was

aier used for aerodynamic tests and de-icing

-iystem trials, featuring an aerofoil-shaped test

=rlicle installed atop the fuselage.

The Flight Research lnstitute also convefied:ne first Kuibyshev-built Tu-16 ('57 Red', later'ecoded'24 Red',c/n 18801 01) fortesting mis-sile guidance systems. A missile seeker head in

a conical metal fairlng tipped by a dielectric:adome was installed at the extremity of therose (on the navigator's station glazing); toprevent the heavy assembly from breakingloose it was firmly secured to the forward fuse-iage structure by four sloping twin bracingstruts and a horizontal beam ahead of theflight-deck windscreen. A cine camera in an egg-shaped fairing was fitted aft of the flightdeck torecord the guidance system's accuracy.

Above right: Another view ol Tu-16LL'02 Blue' in 'Forgerised' configuration - probably the lirst in itscapacity as an engine testbed; note that the standard bomb-aiming radar is still in place. Both nozzlesol the R27V-300 lift/cruise engine are visible here, Note that the aft fuselage underside is sheathed inheat-resistant steel to protect the skin against the jet exhaust, Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

Below: Tu-l6'44 Red' (cln 42OO4O4) was converted by Lll into a de-icing systems testbed with anaerofoil-shaped test article mounted dorsally on the centre fuselage. The tubular object on top of thestarboard engine housing may be a heat exchanger, Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

ks \tgd}"' I..*ryrygi

ff' il-h*qe

Tupolev Tul6 85

Tu-1 6 Undercarriage Testbedln the late 1950s a single Tu-16 coded '56 Red'

(c/n unknown) was adapted for ground tests of

the 'jump strut' nose landing gear mechanismdevised for the Myasishchev M-50 Boundersupersonic heavy bomber. An extensible extra

twin-wheel strut was mounted immediately aft

of the nose gear unit, emulating the M-50'sfour-wheel nose gear bogie which could be

tilted to increase the angle of attack on take-off.This feature was necessary because the M-50

had a bicycle landing gear.

17LL-1 Testbedln 1978 a modified Tu-16 (obviously again oneof the aforementioned Tu-16LLs) was suppliedto Lll as the 17LL-1 for use in tests of the

Kolesov RD36-51V turbofan scheduled for

installation in the Myasishchev M-17 Mystic-Ahigh-altltude aircraft. The 17LL-1 carried the

engine in a special ventral nacelle which was

lowered into the slipstream when test runs of

the RD36-51V were carried out.

17LL-2 TestbedA Tu-16K-10(ZA) coded '57 Red' (the c/n ends...2042) was obtained from the Soviet Navy bythe Myasishchev Experimental Machinery Fac-

tory and converted for testing the search andtargeting system (STS) and gun turret devel-

oped Jor the M-l7. (Best known as a recon-naissance and research aircraft, the M-17 was

conceived for use against drifting reconnais-sance balloons which were a real menace right

up to the end of the 1 970s.) The nose radomeswere replaced by the M-17's forward fuselage

incorporating sighting windows, and the stan-

dard DT-7V turret was replaced by the onedeveloped for the high{lyer. The distinctivenose profile made the 17LL-2, as the aircraftwas known, look uncannily like a saiga ante-

lope. Live weapons trials were carried out on

this aircraft, using real balloons as targets.

ln describing the variants of the Tu-16, the dif-

ferences between the various versions equippedfor in-flight refuelling have not been describedin detail. The distinguishing features of the IFR

system have been covered in descriptions ofthe Tu-16 (ZA) and Tu-16K-10(ZA). ln all otherrespects the aircraft were identical to thosewithout IFR capability.

lnitially aircraft equipped for IFR were denoted

by the letters ZA in brackets: Tu-16(ZA),

Tu-1 64(24), Tu-1 6KS(ZA), Tu-l 6K-10(ZA) and

so on. Later the brackets were omitted and theaircraft designated as Tu-1624, Tu- 16424,Tu-16KSZA, Tu-16K-102A, Tu-16RZA and so

on. Occasionally the letters 'za' in lower case

were used in documents - Tu-1 6za, Tu-1 6Rza.

Tu-1 6Eza and so on. Once the IFR system had

become an almost standard feature of the aircraft and most Tu-16s possessed IFR capabil-ity, the letters 'ZA' were no long used and thedesignation reverted to its original form:Tu-164, Tu-16E and so on. To determinewhether a pafticular example was IFR-capableor not you needed to see its record card where

the ZA suffix was retained.

There were subtleties in the designation ofmissile-carrying versions, and various modifi-

cations were often 'grouped together' under a

Left: An air-to-air shol of Lll's Tu-15 de.icingsystems testbed. 3':-:. F rght Research lnstitute

Bottom left afc - j-: Tu-16K-10(ZA)'57 Red' (c/n...2042) was converted inio the 17LL-2 targetingsyslem/weapons testbed by the MyasishchevExperimental Machinery Factory as part of theeftort to create the M-17 'balloon killer' aircraft.The weird shape ol the nose is visible in theseviews. V c:o' l'-:- ,:':.

common ces g.ai cn 'n Soviet Air Force ser-

vice. Thus:he T;-'6KSR-2. Tu-16KSR-2A andTu-16KSR-IS ',',e:e generally given the com-

mon desrgna: cn T;-16KSR-2, while both theTu-16K-1 1-16 aro Tu-16KSR-2-1 1 werereferred ic as ihe Ti,-16K-11-16. The largest

single groucrng ',','as ihe K-26 group, where the

designaiio" T;- 1 6K-26 might refer to a

Tu-16K-26. a Tu-i6K-26-07. a Tu-16K-26V, a

Tu- 1 6K-26 wrih a Rubin- 1 M radar, a

Tu-16KSR-2-5 a Tu-16K-26-2-5 with a Rubin-

1M radar cr a Tu-16KSR-2-5-11. Only theTu-16K-26P ASM version armed with anti-ship-ping missiles reiained its own individual desig-nation in seuadron service.

The specialised naval missile-toting versionswere treated in a similar fashion. ln squadronservice the Tu-16K-10, Tu-16K-10D.

Tu-16K-10N and Tu-16K-10P had the commondesignation Tu-16K-10. Sometimes the

Tu-l 6K-10D was given its own individual des-

ignation. Similarly K-26 ASM versions, includ-ing the Tu-16K-10-26, Tu-16K-10-26D and

Tu-16K-10-26N, were referred to by the desig-nation Tu-1 6K-1 0-26. The exceptions were the

Tu-16K-10-26P equipped with the Ritsa radar

homing system and KSR-SP anti-shipping mis-

siles and the Tu-l6K-10-268, the only version

of the K-10 family with bombing capability.Sometimes the Tu-16KS was referred to by

the alternative designations Tu-16KS 'E' or

Tu-1 6KS (E), the letter 'E' indicating that the air-

craft was armed with the Kometa ASM whichwas given the production designation 'izdeliye

E'for security reasons. For this reason a series

of orders for the Tu-l6 to be converted fronone version to another had only letter suffixes

to differentiate them - for instance, 3524 anc

352E,497A and 497E, depending on the origl-

Tupolev Tu-1 6

-s'i*,"s*

-: : ,: ieft: The first Kuibyshev-built Tu-16 ('57i€d'. c/n 1880101) was converted into a missilellridance systems testbed. The missile's radarr€eker head installed on the nose glazing (with'!,teining braces) and the cine camera'egg'aft3f the llightdeck are clearly visible. Gromov Flight::=:3rch Institute

-- : .3 right: The same aircratt at a later date,ra{lowing recoding as'24 Red'. Gromov Flight::. aa.ch lnstitute

:lose.up ol the nose of Tu-l 6 '24 Red' (c/n'3€o101); the missile's radar seeker head hasreen removed, leaving only the braced mountinga'at{orm. Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

lu-16 '30 Red'seen in one of Lll's hangarsiuring conversion into a testbed of unknownatrrpose. Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

:his Tu-l6 was used for ejection seat tests,:i€re a seat with a dummy is seen leaving theltghtdeck; a special hatch with a reinlorcementslate around it appears to have been incorporatedior this purpose. Gromov Flight Research lnslitute

-: version from which the modification had

::en made (Tu-164 bomber or Tu-16KS mis-

s e carrier). For that reason too the-,-16KSR-2 is sometimes referred to as the---16KSR-2E, and the Tu-16K-11-16 as the---16K-11-16E.

ln the service manuals the Long-Range Avi-

::ron's Tu-16 missile strike versions (and some---'nes the naval verslons as well) are given the:cmmon designation Tu-16K (lor kompleks'_.,o'oroozheniyal

- weapons system), althoughai the end of the 1 950s an experimental version-ad also been given this designation.

ln squadron service bareiy any differentia-:,cn was made between the Tu-16RE, Tu-16RR,Tu-16RM and Tu-16 'Romb' which were all'eferred to by the normal reconnaissance des-gnation Tu-16R. Similarly, no differentiation,vas made between Tu-16 aircraft fitted with theBuket, Kaktus and Fikus ECM systems orthosearmed with the RPZ-59'anti-radar' missile, andihey were all frequently referred to as theTu-16P. On the other hand, the Tu-16E was

almost invariably referred to as the Yolka,

although this particular designation was borneby the special Tu-16 Yolka. The Tu-16ER was

referred to as a normal Tu-16E, while theTu-16E itself in its chemical reconnaissanceversion was given the 'unofficial' designationTu- 1 6E-KhR.

ln Soviet Air Force service no distinction wasmade between the Tu-16NN and Tu-16N

tankers, which were both known by the latter

/tn

Tupolev Tu-1 6 87

Top left: Tu-16'46 Red' (c/n 1881907) starred in a Soviet motion picture called

The barriet of the llnknown, depicting a'mother ship'lor an imaginaryhypersonic rocket-powered research aircraft designated Ts-1' This photo

shows preparations tor a static filming sequence' Yefim Gordon archive

Top right: A GAZ-69A ieep tows a dolly with the partially assembled full'scale mock-up of the would-be Ts-l . The Tu-l 6 made high'speed taxi runsbut did not fly with the Ts-l because the mock'up was not stressed towithstand dynamic pressures. Yefim Gordon archive

Bottom left: Tu-l6'56 Red'was converted into a testbed for the'iump strut'nose landing gear devised lor the Myasishchev M'50 bomber. This viewshows the telescopic second nose gear at maximum extension; note theauxiliary wheels on the tail bumper. Gromov Fiight Research lnstitute

Bottom right: Close-up of ihe highly modified nose gear unit of Tu-l6'56Red'. The olficer standing next to the aircraft is holding a control box lorthe 'iump strut' mechanism connected to the aircraft by a cable.Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

implemented by order numbers. Orders forproduction or modification were issued by the

aircraft's operators - the Soviet Air Force (WS),

the Soviet Naval Air Arm (AVMF) or the Air

Defence Force (PVO).

Order '684' for the increase in bomb-carryingcapacity was especially unusual in that several

versions of the Tu-16 were affected. Some

versions merely had their capabilities as

bombers enhanced, while others assumed abombing capability they had not had before.

Refits under the terms of 'order 684' began in

1972 and involved aircraft previously modifiedin accordance with 'order 657'. Aircraft whichhad hitherto lacked bomber capability couldbe affected by both orders. These ordersbrought no change in the aircraft's designation.Only the Tu-1 6K-11-16 was redesignatecTu-16K-26B when it was equipped with the

K-26 ASM and received an increased bombload. Similar work was carried out in the Navar

Air Arm when the Tu-16K-10-26 was modified tc

carry bombs, Originally these machines Iackec

bombing capability and were redesignatecTu- 1 6K-1 0-268 after modification.

designation. Target drones were also given the

common designation M-16, and Tu-16M was

rarely used. The Tu-16PLO is sometimesreferred to as the Tu-16PL in documents, and

the Tu- 1 62 tanker as the Tu-1 6Yu.

When aircraft were refitted, special attention

was given to lncreasing the bomb-carryingcapacity (under the terms of 'order 684')

and in OKB-156 such modifications were given

the 'B' suffix. But even within the design

bureau itself the designations Tu-1648,

Tu-1 6KSR-28, Tu-1 6K-1 1 -1 68, Tu-1 6KSR-2-58and Tu-16KSR-2-118 were hardly ever used,

nor were they used by service squadrons. Even

the aircraft record cards showed no change in

designation, with just a note made to the effect

that the machine had been modified to carry agreater bomb load. Exceptions to this were the

Tu-16K-26B and Tu-16K-10-268 whose desig-

nations rarely appear in special documents. ln

squadron service these designations were

hardly ever used.The Tu-16 was also subject to the secrecy

imposed on all Soviet military equipment in thepost-war years. Almost every item of military

technology had two designations: the actual

one (which was classified) and an unclassified

designation for everyday use in a service con-

text. Thus Tu-16 was the actual designation,wilh'izdeliye N' as the unclassified 'cover des-

ignation'. ln unclassified documents the desig-nation Tu-16 was changed to 'N', with theversion designator letters added, when led to

some monstrous ciphers, Thus the Tu-1 64 was

the 'NA' and the Tu-16R was the 'NR', which

was tolerable; but the Tu-16REZA became the'NREZA', the Tu-16KRMEZA turned into'NKRMEZA' and the Tu-16K-10 the 'NK-10'.

After declassif ication, the izdel iye designationsfor the Tu-16 fell into disuse.

Over its many years of service, the Tu-16 was

subjected to many kinds of refits and modifica-

tions which were denoted as 'orders' followed

by a series number. Since othertypes of aircraft

underwent similar alterations, the numbering of

the orders was strictly sequential. The degree

of work involved in these orders varied - from

replacing a certain item of equipment to a cap-ital refit inio an entirely new version. Manufac-

ture of the aircraft at MAP factories was also

Itj,'irir

88 Tupolev Tu-1 6

Chapter Seven

--= 'cllowing description relates to the pro-

:-:::n bomber version of the Tu-l6 ('order

:,: tzdeliye N) built in the mid-1950s, and

- -:-:cted by subsequent bulletins concerning-: : 'craft's systems, armament and equipment.

-ê Tu-1 6 was a high-speed long-range jei

::-3er (or, in the light of its many modifica-

: - s a multi-role long-range jet aircraft)

:.: :ned to carry out heavy bombing raids on

,--::egic enemy targets. lt could operate singly:' :s part of a formation, in all weather condi-' : ^s by day or night. lt was equipped with the-:,rsite means for navigation, radio commu-- :::rons and radar, possessed a formidable

::':nsive cannon armament, was able to carry

: -:'econnaissance and support missions, and

: =:able of striking enemy surface vessels.-c improve aerodynamic characteristics at

- _:^ subsonic speeds, the swept wings were

-are up of special high-speed airJoil sections:^ a small thickness/chord ratio. The engines

. ='e sltuated in close proximity to the fuselage:- J the wing/fuselage/engine housing junction

, =s designed in accordance with the area rule,

:: ,,/ere the wing-mounted main undercarriage-a',ngs, which allowed drag to be minimised.

The aircraft's low drag combined with the

::nparatively high degree of lift provided by:-: lvings accounted for the Tu-1 6's high aero-

:.ramic qualities (the maximum lift/drag ratio

,,,as 16.5 at an indicated airspeed of 350-:lckm/h with an angle of attack of 5-6"). With

:ê undercarriage down and flaps set at 35",

:ê L/D ratio was approximately 7.

All of the aircraft's essential equipment,

:'mament and crew were accommodated in

::e fuselage, which was divided into sectlons

- cng its length, with forward and aft pres-

-.rrised cabins to house the six crew members.

aoove right: The lorward fuselage of a typical'glass-nosed' Tu-16, showing the navigator'sstation glazing and the chin radome of theRBP-4 radar, Note the dorsal observation/gun.aiming blister and the triple rod aerialsof the SRO-2M Khrom (NATO Odd Rods) IFFtransponder, Yefim Gordon

Right: Another perspective ol the lorwardluselage (this time a Tu-l6KS), showing thenavigator's ventral eiection hatch, the entryhatch aft of the radome, and the lixed for\ rard'tiring cannon on the starboard side'Yefim Gordon archive

Structu ral Descri Ption

FuselageMonocoque all-metal structure of basically cir-

cular cross-section with a smooth stressed skin

supported by frames and stringers made of

pressed and formed components. Fuselage

length 34.6m, fuselage diameter 2.5m, fineness

ratio 13.9. The fuselage featured 75 frames set at

intervals of 260-570mm; the cylindrical portion of

the fuselage was located between f rames Nos 1 2

and 46. The stringers were placed around the

fuselage circumference at 10" intervals; auxiliary

stringers were used in some places to reinforce

the skin in the gaps between the basic stringers

The overall number of basic stringers in the for-

ward section of the fuselage was 36, wlth fewer

in the aft section. Where the structure was

weakened by cutouts, extra transverse and lon-

gitudinal reinforcing beams were provided to

absorb the loads from the structure's load-

bearing elements, equipment and armament.

I "i;S***

Tupolev Tu-1 6

_ ror%n

- sectron F-2 (the forward fuselage between

frames Nos 2 and 12)

The fuselage skin rvas made of D16ATV

and Dl6ATNV dural.rr-nin and their varieties;skin thickness ',vas 1-2mm, increasing to3mm in the mosi highly stressed areas. Theframes and stringe's rvere also made of thesematerials. frorr fr'lA8 magnesium alloys alsobeing used. The navigator's station glazingframe. the eniry hatcr and ventral escape hatchcovers. the frames ol ihese hatches and theframework oi :he iarl gunner's station glazingwere made ci i''1L5 magnesium alloy and itsvarieties. and scme non-load-bearing parts ofthe fuselage ',vere made of sheet magnesiumalloy.

The sunace of the skin was electrochemi-cally coated ano its sheets butt-jointed. The

skin was seci.rrecj io ihe framework by flush riv-

ets or. in hrghly siressed locations (round thegun barbeties). by brazier-head rivets; button-head riveis rvere used in zones not subjected tothe airflovr. Double-row rivet joints were used

throughoui. The fuselage was assembled in

five sections:

- seciion F-1 r'lhe navigator's station glazing

framev,'crk)

- section F-3 (the centre fuselage between frames

Nos 12 ano 26 - ihe so-called forward section);- section F-4 (the unpressurised aft fuselage

behveen frames Nos 26 and 69 - the so-called

aft secticn)- seclion F-6 (the aft extremity of the fuselage

between frames Nos 69 and 75 which mounted

the tail barbette).

For some obscure reason there was no section

F-5

All sections were assembled on separate jigs

and joined together in the plane of the follow-ing fuselage frames: F-1 with F-2 at frame No 2.

F-2 with F-3 at frame No 1 2 ( a pressure dome).F-3 with F-4 at frame No 26 and F-4 with F-6 aiframe No 69.

The pressurised cabin in the nose formed by

sections F- 1/F-2 accommodated the navigator.

captain (crew commander), co-pilot and the

weapons systems operator ('navigator-opera-tor', in Russian terminology) who operated the

RBP-4 bomb-aiming radar and controlled the

dorsal gun barbette. The aft pressurised cabir

The nose of a Tu-l6K-11-16, showing theantenna array of the Ritsa radar homing systemon the navigator's station glazing and the lack olthe forward-liring cannon whose position isblanked oft. Yefim Gordon

The nose ol a Tu-16KRME target drone carrier('08', c/n 1883704) featuring lateral radio controlsyslem antenna pods. Note the shape ol theoptically llat window. Yuriy Kabernik archive

The nose of the Tu-l6K-10 is extensivelymodilied to accommodate the twin antennas ofthe YeS target illumination/missile guidanceradar. Tupolev JSC

I

L

Tupolev Tu-1 6

,;:W$'#, i{,3peww"e

;1

-.::ion F-6) accommodated the radio opera-:- JUnner (working the ventral gun barbette):-: ihe defensive fire commander who oper-:-:r the tail gun barbette and the PRS-1 Argon

. - ^ r'anging radar. Access to the forward cabln:s via a ventral hatchway under the WSO's

: ::,iion and to the rear crew cabin via a ventral-:::rway under the defensive fire comman-::- s seat, lf the aircraft had to put down on

::er or make a belly landing, the crew could,::ape from the forward cabin through a hatch- :re glazing, and from the aft cabin through an

:-3rgency exit in the tail gunner's station glaz--; The aircraft would remain afloat long:^cugh to enable the crew to take to their- "ghies. Each crewmember was supplied with

: cersonal first-aid kit, a thermos flask, in-flight-:: cns, an emergency radio and emergency-::icns.

lJnder the forward pressure cabin was a:lmpartment for the RBP-4's antenna closed:; a dielectric fairing. lmmediately behind this.,,as the nosewheel well closed by two doors;n3ove it was the No 1 fuel tank. The nosewheel,',ell gave access to the DC batteries and the':..ward equipment bay which housed the

AFA-33M aerial camera, the dorsal gun posi-

tion, the KPZh-3O liquid oxygen converter for

the forward cabin, the AC generator and other

equipment. Above the compartment was the

container for the LAS-SM dinghy for the aircrew

in the forward cabin. Further back was fuel tankNo 2, the wing centre section with the No 3 fuel

tank. beneath which the No4 fuel tank was

located. The weapons bay closed by two doorswas situated immediately aft of the wing centresection and went back as far as the Nos 5 and

6 fuel tanks. Under the No5 fuel tank was acompartment for illumination and signallingflare bombs, also closed by twin doors. Aft of

the tanks came the rear equipment bay hous-

ing the ventral gun barbette, the KPZh-30 LOX

converter and dinghy container ior the aft cabin

crew and other equipment. The Argon radar

was positioned above the aft cabin.The brake parachutes were to reduce the

landing run and were deployed when landingon a waterlogged or short runway, an unpavedairstrip, after an incorrectly executed landing

approach or in the case of brake failure. The

parachutes were housed in a detachable con-

tainer in the lower rear fuselage. The PT-16

Top lelt: The centre luselage underside of theTu-l6P Buket ECM aircraft, showing thecentrally mounted canoe fairing of the emitterantenna llanked by three heat exchangers and a

cooling air intake. YeJim Gordon

Top right: The llightdeck canopy, showing thejettisonable upper sections for eiection, thesliding direct vision windows and the dorsalECM antenna lairing (a mid-life update). Notethat the dorsal observation/gun-aiming blister isbuilt into an escape hatch. Yuriy Kabernik archive

Bottom left: The centre luselage of Tu-16 '17 Red'(cln 52O29O7), showing the open bomb baydoors, the rear portion of the starboard enginenacelle and the nacelle/fuselage fairing.Yefim Gordon

Bottom right: On some special mission variants,including this... um.,. masculine-looking version(probably an EGM aircraft ol some sort), thebomb bay doors are non-functional. Note thatthe engine nacelle/fuselage lairing is skinned inheat-resistant steel. Yefim Gordon

Tupolev Tu-1 6 91

brake-parachute system gave a landing run of

no more than 1 ,535m on a dry concrete runway

with automatic wheel braking applied and the

parachutes opened after touching down at aspeed no higher than 270kmlh, at a landing

weight no greater than 47,000k9.

WingsCantilever mid-set wings swept back 35' atquarter-chord (leading edge sweep is 37" ftom

root to rib No 7 and 36" along the remainder of

the span). Anhedral 3", incidence 1", aspect

ratio 6.627, laper 2.416; wing span 32.98m,

wing area 164.65m'. The mean aerodynamic

chord (MAC) is 5.021m.The wings were built in five pieces: the cen-

tre section built integrally with the fuselage,

inner (first) and outer (second) detachable sec-

tions. The centre section is joined to the lnner

wing sections along the fuselage sides, the

outer wing sections being mated to the inner

ones at rib No 7; the engine housings were built

integrally with the inner wings. The wings were

made of D16T, D164T and Dl6ATNV duralu-

min, AK-6, AK-B and V95 aluminium alloy; flush

riveting was used throughout.The wings were of all-metal two-spar con-

struction. The central portion (the torsion box)

is made up of panels with thick skinning rein-

forced by stringers. From the fuselage out to rib

No12 the torsion box structure is utilised to

accommodate flexible fuel tanks. The leading

edge of the inner and outer wings and the

wingtip fairings were detachable. The wings

were made up of different aerofoil sections (the

aerofoil varied along the span). A TsAGI PR-

S-10S-9 symmetrical section with a thick-

ness/chord ratio of 15.7o/o was used at the

roots, a TsAGI SR-1 1-12 aerofoil with a thick-

ness/chord ratio of 15% at rib No 7 and a TsAGI

SR-1 1-12 aerofoil with a thickness/chord ratio

oI 12/" aI the tiPS.

The trailing edge section of the wings was

occupied along the entire span by flaps and

ailerons. The slotted Fowler flaps were built in

two sections located inboard and outboard of

the main landing gear fairings; flap settlngs

were 20" for take-off and 35" for landing. The

one-piece ailerons were of single-spar con-

struction and carried on five brackets each,

featuring internal overhand balances for aero-

dynamic compensation; each aileron incorpo-

rated a trim tab.The centre section was the central part of the

wing located between fuselage frames Nos.26

and 33. The inner detachable wing sections

were attached to it. The centre section was aload-bearing box structure and consisted of a

front and rear spar, two connecting ribs and one

centreline rib, and upper and lower skin panels.

The centre section skin was smooth and com-posed of aluminium alloy sheets 3-5mm thick.

Tail UnitConventional cantilever swept tail surfaces,

utilising symmetrical aerofoil sections. The tail

assembly was made of duralumin, except for

the attachment fittings and bolts (which were

mostly made of steel) and the wooden fairing at

the top of the fin. All duralumin parts were elec-

trochemically coated, the steel parts primed,

and the wooden part coated with VIAM-B3

bonding agent to prevent decaY.

The vertical tail was a two-spar structure with

an area of 23.305m'; sweepback at quarter-

chord 42',leading-edge sweep 46". The fin was

attached to fuselage frames Nos 64 and 69 by

bolts at four points (two points at each frame).

A smooth fin/fuselage joint was provided by a

fillet attached by screws. The one-piece rudder

of single-spar construction was hinged on

three brackets and a lower support, featuring

aerodynamic balancing and a trim tab. Maxi-

mum rudder deflection was +25'.

The horizontal tail of similar two-spar design

had a span of 11.75m and an area of 34.452m':

sweepback at quarterchord 42', leading-edge

sweep 45', no dihedral. The tailplanes were

likewise attached to fuselage frames Nos 64

and 69 by bolts at four points (two points at

each frame). Tailplane incidence was -1 .5' and

could be adjusted on the ground between 0"

and -2.5" at 0.5" increments, using the holes in

the attachment fittings on the fuselage. The

smooth tailplaneifuselage junction was

effected by a fillet which was attached by

screws to the lower stabiliser skin and to the

side of the fuselage.The one-piece elevators were of single-spar

construction and connected on the centreline by

a shaft with a universal joint ensuring simultane-

ous deflection. Each elevator was carried on five

brackets and incorporated a trim tab. Maximum

deflection angles were 12" down and 26" up.

Landing GearHydraulically retractable tricycle type; all three

units retracted aft. Wheel track 9.775m, wheel-

base 10.913m. All three units had oleo-pneu-

maiic shock absorbers and scissor links.

The nose unit had twin 900 x 275mm non-

braking wheels and a shimmy damper; it was

steerable through +40" for taxylng. The main

units featured four-wheel bogies equipped

with KT-16, Kr-1612, KT-16/2M, Kr-1612U or

KT-16/2D brake wheels, all measuring 1,100

x 330mm. During retraction they are rotated

aft through 1S0' by separate hydraulic rams/

rocking dampers to lie inverted in the stream-

lined fairings protruding beyond the wing

trailing edge.A retractable tail bumper protected the aft

fuselage in the event of overrotation or a tail-

down landing;itwas extended and retracied by

an electrical mechanism simultaneously with

gear retraction/extension.

Tupolev Tu-1 6

Ei-----

-::.= left: The Tu-16's air intakes have a::aracteristic shape resembling a triangle with:Llged sides and rounded corners, Note the

=ncave fuselage side where the luselage isrea-ruled at the wing/nacelle/fuselage joint.:-- Gordon

-::,: right: The Mikulin AM-3 turboiet. The longr--ake centrebody houses an S-300M:-rbostarter (note exhaust port). Two ol the:ree accessory gearboxes are visible here.

='- Gordon archive

: :^: This view accentuates the Tu-l6's area--rled engine nacelles. The turbostarter exhaust:oors are closed, as they are in flight.

='- Gordon

Powerplant-,1c Mikulin AM-3 (RD-3) turbojets with a take-:- thrust of B,750kg or two RD-3M turbojets', :.r a take-off thrust of 9,500k9 (later replaced:. RD-3M-500s or RD-3M-500As with an-3reased time between overhauls and better'= rability). Specific fuel consumption (SFC) at:'-rse power 0.97k9/kgp'hr; engine pressure-a:io 6.4 at maximum powerlT.2 at contingency-::ing, Length overall 5.38m, casing diameter' .+m, dry weight 3,100k9.

The AM-3 (RD-3) was an axialJlow non-after-:lrning turbojet with a fixed-area subsonic air

riake, an elght-stage compressor, an annular:cmbustion chamber with 14 flame tubes, a

:,'/o-stage turbine and a fixed-area subsonic

Joposite left: The lin incorporates llush antennasior the short.range radio navigation system andhas a wooden tip fairing. On aircraft intended tooperate in a nuclear environment the undersidesand the rudder are painted gloss white. '18 Red'(c/n 1883701) at Akhtoobinsk is a Tu-I5 YolkaECM aircraft. Yefim Gordon

Cpposite right: The rear fuselage and tail unit ofthe Tu-15R.2 reconnaissance aircrafl'showingthe tail gunner's station and the characteristiclateral observation/sighting blisters of thedefensive lire commander's station. The darkpanel immediately ahead of the port stabiliser isthe cover of a rescue dinghy bay, Yefim Gordon

I

L

I

I

II

I

nozzle. Three accessory gearboxes (Ieft, right

and lower) were provided. Starting was by

means of an S300M turbostarter a small gas

turbine engine housed in the air intake centre-body and driving the spool directly via a clutch(the term 'jet fuel starter' is not applicable, sincethe S300M ran on aviation gasoline); there

were four igniters.The engines and their accessories were

located on either side of the fuselage behindthe rear wing spar in housings immediatelyadjacent to the fuselage, which were'squeezed' into the centre fuselage sides tominimise the cross-section area in accordancewith the area rule. The rear sections of theengine housings served as a protection, safe-

guarding the fuselage from the effect of

exhaust gases emerging at high temperatures.The housing consisted of forward and centresections, cowling and exhaust section. The

engine air intakes were located well forward ofthe wing leading edge, the air being fed to theengines via long ducts which were divided by a

partition into upper and lower ducts routedaround the wing spar; these merged again aft

of the rear spar at the engines' compressorfaces. Part of the air was diverted for cooling theengine accessories and the engine housingsproper, subsequently being ejected togetherwith the engine efflux.

There were separate lubrication systems for

the engines and the turbostarters; the enginesfeatured an engine control system and the

required engine monitoring instruments.Most aircraft left the factories with RD-3M

engines, which were replaced later in squadronservice by its later RD-3M-500 and RD-3M-500A

derivatives. Eventually all Tu-1 6s remaining in

service were fitted with RD-3M-500 engines.

Fuel SystemThe Tu-1 6 used two types of fuel: a primary f uel

(T-1 or TS-1 kerosene) and a starter fuel for the

engines' turbostarters (B-70 aviation gasoline).

The aircraft had, therefore, two fuel systems.The primary fuel system consisted of two sep-

arate subsystems, one for each engine. lf nec-

essary, both systems could be connected via a

cross-feed valve. The system had electronicautomatic controls ensuring a strictly set

sequence of fuel consumption and measuring

the fuel quantity. Provision was made for in-

flight refuelling of the aircraft's fuselage tanks

and for emergency fuel jettisoning.

The fuel was carried in 27 flexible rubbertanks making up ten groups (five for each

engine). Within each group the tanks wereinterconnected and formed one large fuel

resource. Each group had a supply tank from

which the fuel was drawn. At the normal all-up

Tupolev Tu'16 93

weight o{ 72,OOOkg the maximum fuel load

comprised 34,360k9 (equals 41 ,400 litres of

T-1 or 43,750 litres of TS-1). The full fuel capac-

ity of the aircraft was 43,800 litres. The tanks

belonging to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and Sth

groups were located in the fuselage, two tanks

of the 6th group in the wing centre section; the

tanks of the 7th,Bth, gth, 1 Oth and 1 1 th groups

were housed in the detachable inner wing tor-

sion boxes, while the tanks of the 12th, 13th,

14th, 1sth and 16th group were accommo-

dated in the outer wing section. Each group of

tanks had a single filler cap; during ground

refuelling, each group of tanks had to be filled

separately. The supply tank in each group had

a ETsN-T electric booster pump, but the supply

tanks for the 2nd and sth groups had two such

pumps to ensure greater reliability.A vent system for the fuel tanks was incor-

porated. Provision was made for emergency

fuel jettisoning from the tanks of the 1st, 3rd

and 4th groups.All fuel tanks (apart from the tanks of the 1st,

2nd and Sth groups, the fuel from which was

consumed first) were self-sealing. An inert gas

pressurisation system using carbon dioxide

was provided to minimlse the risk of fire and

explosion if hit by enemy fire.

Electrical SystemTwo electrical supply circuits. Main 28-28.5 V

DC power was supplied by four of 1B-kW

GSR-18000 engine-driven generators working

in parallel to power a common circuit, each

engine driving two generators. Each generator

worked with a RUG-82 carbon voltage regula-

tor, a DMR-500 differential minimum relay and

a BS-1800 ballast resistor (the latter maintained

the voltage of the generator, protected it

against reverse currents and ensured opera-

tion in parallel with the other generaior).

Backup DC power was Provided bY two

12SAM-53 or 12SAM-55 storage batteries.

Ground power supply was provided via aRAP or ShRA-400LK connecior on the porl side

located at frame No16. The operation of the

electric power sources was monitored with the

aid of four type A-3 ammeters, a type A-2 (A-1)

ammeter and a switchable V-1 voltmeter.

1 15V/400H2 single-phase AC power was pro-

vided by two type PO-4500 conveders, each of

which worked with a R-25V carbon voltage regu-

lator and an RS-4M rheostat. One conveder was

used while the other was a back-up; these oper-

ationat modes were switched periodically with

the aim of equally sharing the wear on the carbon

brushes and the converters' service life. Control

was exercised through a VF-150 voltmeter.

ln addition to the main power sources, there

were various autonomous system and sub-unii

sources of electrical supply to provide the

required power for the control, navigation and

communications systems. These were type

PAG-1 F, PT-125Ts (later PT-200Ts) three-

phase AC converters, MA-1 (later PO-500) sin-

gle-phase AC converters and U-500 and

RU-1 lAlV dynamotors/converters .

As a safety measure, the DC supply was

delivered through three circuits:

- a normal circuit which could draw on all four

generators in any combination and the DC

batteries- an emergency circuit which drew on only one

generator and one DC battery

- a dual circuit which automatically switched itself

over either to the normal or emergency supply.

The circuit wiring was mainly BPVL and MGShV

copper single-strand wire and BPVLA alu-

minium wire. To reduce radio intederence, part

of the copper wiring was screened (BPVLE) or

enclosed in a screened sheath.

The interior lighting equipment comprised

PS-45 and PSM-51 overhead lights, KLSRK-4S

light fittings, ARUFOSh-45 ultra-violet lights for

the instrument panels to make the dials glow in

the dark and PL-10-36 movable lamps. The

exterior lighting comprised BANO-4S naviga-

tion llghts on the wingtips, a KhS-39 (or

KhS-57) tail navigation light in the lower part of

the tail fairing, LFSV-4S or FRS-200 landing

lights in the lower part of the fuselage at frame

No 13, FR-100 taxying lights fitted to the nose

gear strut, PSSO-45 formation/anti-collisionlights on the starboard nosewheel well door

and the centre fuselage upper surface and an

SMF-1 light for illuminating the tanker's fuel

transfer hose during night contacts.

Pressurisation & Air Conditioning SystemThe Tu-16 had the following equipment

enabling high-altitude operation:

- a system for heating the pressure cabins using

engine bleed air

- a ventilation system providing fresh air from .the

outside at low altitudes

- systems for pressurising the entry and escape

hatches with compressed air, using rubber seals

in the hatch frames

Air for warming the pressure cabins was bled

from the seventh compressor stage of both

engines via a TKhU-128 cooling turbine. The

maximum permissible f low of air through each of

the two cabins was 500m' per hour. The quan-

tity of air supplied to the two cabins from both

engines was 2,000m' per hour, which allowed

the system to work using only one engine

At low altitudes the cabin ventilation system

provided fresh air up to an altitude of 2,000m. lt

was mainly used in hot weather when the cabin

temperature on the ground could be anywhere

between +20 and +40"C. The air for the for-

ward cabin was induced through an air intake

on the starboard side of the fuselage at frame

No 13, and for the rear cabin through an intake

in the front of the fin.

The pressurisation system relied on rubber

seals between the hatch covers and hatch

irames. The cabins themselves were pres-

surrsed with compressed air from the onboardpneumatic system.

The air pressure in the cabins was main-

tained by ARD-54 or ARD-50 automatic valves

or regulators, one of which was fitted in each

cabin. The air temperature in the pressurised

cabins was maintained automatically by

TRTVK-4s (TRTVK-4sM) air temperature regu-

lators. The pressurisation system provided the

following:

- lrom an altitude of 7.250m and above a constant

pressure differential of 0.4kglcm'- on entering a zone of anti-aircraft fire or combat

with enemy fighters, the pressure differential was

reduced to 0.2kg/cm'by either KKD (manual) or

ARD-54 (automatic) valves in order to avoid a

sudden drop in the cabin pressure when the

aircralt s skin was pierced.

ln the event that the ARD-54 valves were out

of action in both cabins, pressure could be

maintained using the KKD manual valves.

allowing the pressure differential to be main-

tained at 0.05-0.43k9/cm'. The cabins'temperature could be automatically regulated within

set limits between + 15.5 and +26.5"C or man-

ually between + 10 and +30"C.

Orygen EquipmentThe Tu-16 was the first Soviet aircraft to carry

oxygen in liquid form which was then converteo

to gaseous form. The use of liquid oxygen(LOX) achieved a weight and volume saving six

or seven times greater than that obtained with

gaseous oxygen.The oxygen equipment was provided tc

allow flying at high altitudes and ensure survivar

after ejection in an emergency. The oxygerequipment iherefore belonged to two cate-

gories: that supplied to the crew stations anc

that forming part of the rescue equipment. The

crew station oxygen was administered by the

use of oxygen masks in normal flight condi-

tions. lt consisted of two KPZh-30 LOX contain-

ers. six KP-24 breathing apparatus (KP-16 ot-

early production aircraft) with KM-24 masks, as

well as fixtures. manometers and charging cotr-

nectors.The emergency equipment was for uss

when ejecting from the aircraft at high altitudes

Each crewmember had aKP-23 parachute un :

as part of his PLK-45 parachute pack.

De-icing SystemThe hot air de-icing system comprised two sec-

arate subsystems: one for de-icing the leadin;edges of the wings and one for de-icing ele-

ments of the engine housings. The wing leac'

ing edge de-icing system was fed by tv':branch pipes which distributed air bled fro-the eighth compressor stage, the port wir:being supplied from the port engine and ti-=starboard wing from the starboard engin:Both main supply plpes were connected so tha:

if one engine failed the system could still b:supplied by the other engine. The de-icing sys-

tem for elements of the engine housing:heated the air intake leading edges, i-:

Tupolev Tu-1 6

-'iG captain's eiection seat, control column andlsfument panel. The large handwheel on thedt operates the elevator trim tabs.

1c co-pilot's control column and instrumentrfiFl. The aircraft type is marked on the control-rEel hubs. The passage on the left leads to thesiJator's station,

-,tG navigator's station commanded an excellents:1. The navigator sat sideways, with therln€ipal navigation instruments on the left wall;rote the radar display and the rubber-bladedsling fan typical of Soviet aircraft.r .-.,y Kabernik archive

: ,':ers in the engines' inlet ducts and the tur-:':s:arter exhaust pipes. Air for this system was

: +r from the seventh compressor stages.-1e pilots' windscreens and the forward

i;1iing window of the navigator's station had

-=Erated electrical heating. Additionally, all

:-er glazing in the navigator's station and" ;rideck, as well as the blisters for the opticals:'rting stations, were heated with hot air. The:actric de-icing system featured an AOS-81M

:-:cmatic regulator to prevent the glass from:.:rheating and cracking.

Fire Extinguishing System

":=:ronary fire extinguisher bottles charged with

=iron dioxide (later with grade '3.5' or 11Y2

:- crofluorocarbon extinguishing agent) for':1ting fires in the engine bays and fuel tank:.:rtainers; several portable fire extinguishers in:-e crew cabins. An SSP-2A fire warning system

=-C new OS-8M stationary fire extinguisher bot-::-s were retrofitted as part of a mid-life update.

AYionics and Equipment-re Tu-16 was fully equipped for poor-weather:aylnight operation, including automatic flight

=:sisted by an autopilot.

"avigation and piloting equipmenf.' The Tu-1 6's

-avigation and piloting suite included:

an AK-53P celestial compass

a DAK-2 remote celestial compass, replaced

later by a DAK-DB (DAK-DB-S). Early production

aircraft had the DAK-50M

an Nl-50B navigation display

a DIK-46M remote flux-gate compass, replaced

by a DGMK-7 which featured a VK-S3RB

correction switch

a Kl-1 2 (later a Kl-13) magnetic compass

a GPK-48 (later a GPK-52) directional gyro

an SPI-1 (SPl-3[/) aircraft receiver-indicator

device as part of ihe RSDN-1 Meridian long-

range radio-navigation (LORAN) system

main and back-up ARK-5 auto direction finders

an RV-17M high-altitude radio altimeter

an RV-2 low-altitude radio altimeter

an SP-50 Materik (Continent) short-range

navigationiblind landing system comprising a

KRP-F localiser receiver, a GRP-2 glideslope

receiver, an SD-1 or SD-1 M distance measuring

equipment kit and an MRP-4BP marker beacon

receiver,

fupolev Tu-1 6

The Tu-16 had conventional electromechanicalinstruments throughout. Each of the pilots coulddeploy and jettison the brake parachute bypushing buttons on the instrument panel (here,they are immediately to the right of the bank olcaulion/warning lights). Yuriy Kabernik archive

The starboard instrument panel ol a Tu'16(Z)tanker. The tuel transfer control panel is locatedto the left of the main panel. Yuriy Kabernik archive

The missile launch panel control of a

Tu-16KSR-2.5 located on the port side console;the upper half is for the port wing station andthe lower hall for the starboard station' ltleatures guarded switches for (left to right)oxidiser dumping. launch abort, warheadarming disarming and emergency jettison ofthe missile, \ -- _.

(:c:r: < archive

Subsec;e^:', 1 ::'te course of series produc-

tion. Lcc.::s -ociiication and service experl-

ence. :ê 'e3 3 navigation equipment was

rene,".: l^ -o:e ihan one occasion and by

lhe 3rc .' :s :3e.aironal life it differed slightlyon cr-:'a-: ,a',anis. On some aircraft the

ARK-5 A-= ,',as 'eciaced by the ARK-1 1; oth-

ers -ar '.^. = , -2 al:i.neter replaced by the RV-

Ul,i. - I SS-- Vef:.2 (Wind-2) Doppler speed)-- ^-- ---: i.^<.r svstem was fitted; thei

=

e vv Jvr et

1,'1RP-aa: -a--:e- oeacon receiver was replaced

or,:ê '.'::-56? an A-711 LORAN system was

:.:e: :::::-:' ,',:r :he A-713M receiver; an

ARK--2 : -::: o^ i nder was fitted. SomeTu-'6s -a: :^= RSBN-2S Svod short-range

'a3 c â, 3=::- SHORAN) system; finally, an!--a)^:^--=- ^^ j ^.i qvqtem waS fitted.

T: 'a: :::: g o: ng and to ease the work-rca: :- :-a : ::s and navigator during long

it :^:s :-: ,',^ e .o1.b'ng, an AP-5-2M autopi-l.: ,,,as ^s:: 3: T.rs performed the followingiu-a::--.

- z-'.:-1'..=- , -. -:: - 1g straight and level flight

- ::-:': -: :-: : ':':: 3y means of the autopilot

s:-,:: -: -: :-3 ':-3ie control handles- -::: -: :: ::: :- :-'^g target course settings

," :- :-: : : :':-: :3: :al oomb sight

- s:a: :3: :- :':-: ::::31 bomb sight in the

a: --:- : :-:

T.e ;=-:-t',' a,::c roi incorporated a longitu-

a.:? =': ::3-: s:aa .ser. a course stabiliser, a

c3--s3 -: :3::' Sencs. an amplifier, a unit of

3'e: s l- l.':s:3o:s and PAG-1 F and PO-45

iC::^.:::'s:':. C'ng electric Power. From

:9a3 r^,',:':s .r-6E autopilots were fitted to:-3 -,-'| :-:s::lently all examples pro-

.-::: :3':-: :â: caie were refitted with the

^-"=:=- -^-l^'

C:--,':-.-::'s equipmenf; The Tu-16 had

:ê ': :,', -l 'acrc equipment: a 1-RSB-7OM

=-::- - l-.'-:lJency (HF) communications

'a3 : l, :- a r..S-9 receiver, a 1-RSB-70M

F-3:3 ;= :3-'r'rand radio with a US-9DM

:3:: . =' a-: a' RSIU-3M VHF command radio5.q rr2rer the RSIU_5V and

-vv !e u \rs!!

r-332',' !,'=lipt lEucalyptus) VHF radios were

[F:'--...:- 4-trt:M

96 Tupolev Tu-1 6

te

-tr€ iiews of the UKhO tail fairing of a Tu-I6Ellca:/a undergoing conversion to an M-l5-24€l drone at ARZ No 12 in Khabarovsk., ':33rnik archive

-18 Dort underwing pod housing an SRS-3

=-|{T system on a Tu-l6R. Yuriy Kabernik archive

-:- .d). An SPU-1 0 intercom provided crew:: - -.Lnication.

- :re course of operation an R-851 emer-::-:. SOS transmitter was fitted; there was: :: an AVRA-45 emergency radio, later:: ::ed by the R-861.

t::'-' and IFF equipment; The basic Tu-l6::-oer featured an RBP-4 Rubidiy-MM-2::-l-aiming radar capable of detecting large

;-:,1d targets at no less than 140km range,- :r worked in conjunction with the OPB-1 '1 R

::--:al bombsight. A PRS-1 Argon gun ranging:::'was installed above the tail gunner's sta-:- :n most versions.

^ ihe late 1950s a small number of Tu-16s

='= built with the RBP-6 Lyustra bomb-aiming.::' which had improved performance and:'.red with the OPB-1 12 optical sight. Some

---'6s were produced and modified with the:-' combing system (the Rubin radar plus: :3-1 12 optical sight).

-r SRZ IFF radar interrogator (samolyotnyyzniiolokatsionnyy zaproschik) was fitted as:=: of an autonomous identification system-:- ihe recognition of 'friendly' aircraft or ves--: s fitted with SRO or Fakel-MO transponders

=-: for short-range radio navigation) with an:::r'ational range of 30-40km. An SRO IFF-::ar transponder (samolyotnyy rahdio-:.etsionnw otvetchik) wilh an operating range:'35km was also fitted.

:1!"4 and ESM equipment: In the course of sev-:-ai refits and upgrades while in service, the---1 6 had various types of active ECM equip--ent. ELINT equipment and radar warning-::eivers Jitted which differed on various ver-

: cns of the aircraft and was constantly

-:dated. Towards the end of their service lives,:ê bomber versions (Tu-16 and Tu-164) had---e SPS-S (SPS-SM) active jammer and theS rena-2 RWR fitted.

= ight lnstrumentation: The pilots' and naviga-::r's instrument panels featured an AGB-1 arti-=oial horizon (replaced later by the AGB-2, and:ren by the AGB-3 and AGD-1 ); a KUS-1 200 air-speed indicator; aVD-17 altimeter (laterVD-20);a VAR-30-3 vertical speed indicator; an SSN-3jynamic pressure indicator; a BSPK-1 unit forcomparison?) and banking limits, installed

Juring squadron service; an EUP-46 turn anglendicator (later EUP-53); an MS-1 Mach meter;

a AM-10 accelerometer; an IAS-51 aircraft sex-:ant; AChKhO and AVR-M clocks (later theAChS-1); a UVPD-15 altitude and falling pres-sure indicator; a VS-46 high-altitude pressure,,varning indicator and a TUE thermometer.

Tupolev Tu-1 6

The following engine instruments were

installed: TE5-2 electrical remote-controlledtachometers for the engines and TE-45

tachometers for the turbostarters; TVG-1 1 and

TVG-29 exhaust gas thermometers; a TTsT-13

thermometer; an EMI-3R three-needle electric

indicator showing fuel pressure, oil pressure

and oil temperature; an EDMU-3 electric

remote-controlled standardised manometer:

RTS-16 (later RTS-164) fuel consumptiongauges, and fuel gauges making up part oftheSETS-60D fuel metering kit.

The basic flight/navigation and engine

instruments were located on the instrumentpanels in the crew cabins and only a few were

positioned elsewhere.The antenna location on the Tu-16s built in

the 1950s were as follows. The 1-RSB-70M

radios and ARK-S ADF used 'towel rail' or

strake aerials on the fuselage; the aerial of

the RSIU-3M radio and the KRP-F localiser

antennawere located atthetop of thefin. Awhipantenna for the SPI-1 receiver-indicator and

another aerial for the ARK-S were located aft oJ

the flightdeck (the ARK-S antenna was glued to

the dorsal observation blister). The GRP-48

glideslope receiver antenna was mounted on

Top teft: This view shows the open bomb baydoors and the access hatch to the drone launchoperator's station on Tu-l6KRME'08' (c/n1883704). Yurry Kabernik archive

Left: The dorsal intakes and outlets of the Azaliyajammer's heat exchangers on Tu-16E Azaliya

'61 Red' (c/n 8204203) at ARZ No 12' Note theopen engine cowling and the faired dorsalanti-collision light between the air intakes,with three pitot heads further lorward'Yuriy Kabernik archive

Bottom left: The starboard bomb bay door ofTu-16KRME'08' (c/n 1883704) leatures threeoutlets of the ASO-16 chaff dispenser.Yuriy Kabernik archive

Bottom right: The faired starboard antenna of theSiren' jammer on M-16-3'51 Red' (c/n 1882216).

Yuriy Kabernik archive

ffi"'IL-98 Tupolev Tu-1 6

\liiher view illustrating the Tu-l6's bomb bay:aar design. Yelim Gordon

-: -avigator's station glazing; the dipole aeri-

: : :' :he RV-17 and RV-2 altimeters, as well as*: ::rials for the SD-1 DME and the SRO IFF

:-: rnder the fuselage. The SRZ IFF inter-

::::cr aerials were mounted under the wings: - : ahead of the flightdeck windscreen.::-=ath the flightdeck was a radome housing-: ?BP-4 radar antenna. Subsequently the- ::s of aerials and their positioning changed in*: :3urse of the numerous upgrades of radio

-:-'runications and radar equipment as well

.-. ,'. lh the appearance of new versions of the: - 1lt.

: -::cgraphic equipment: To carry out the lim--:: 'ange of reconnaissance duties, including:-::cgraphing targets of opportunity, as well

:. :cst-attack reconnaissance, the following: -::cgraphic equipment was carried:

: :et of AFA-33/50M (low-altitude), AFA-33/75M

:^C AFA-33/100M cameras for daylight

: -otography

. set of NAFA-3S/50 or NAFA-6/50 cameras for- Jnt photography

: :ARL-I camera for photographing the screen

:'ihe RBP-4 radar

:' AKAFU-156N automatic swivelling camera

-cunt (for all types of daylight cameras listed

aocve) which enabled two-strip vertical and

:cljque photography; a mount for night

:ameras; a camera hatch and a control panel for

:-e hatch and the AKAFU camera mount

-^,y one camera could be installed on the---i6 at any one time (excluding the FARL-1

.- ch was always fitted) and only one camera

-cunt. The photographic equipment was-:used in the fuselage (section F-3) aft of the-:sewheel well.

The bomb bay could house 24 FOTAB flare

-:mbs for recce missions flown by night.Starling with c/n 6203401 , the Tu- 16 was fit-

:=C with a swivelling mount for the AFA-34-OK

=^,d AFA-42175 cameras and the AFA-BAF-4OR

:'aining camera. Aircraft from c/n 7203509:rwards were fitted with an NAFA-MK/75 cam-:'a for night photography.

Until 1957 the set of cameras fitted was

:ecided in squadron service, depending on the-eeds of the particular unit. However, that year:re following photographic equipment becamesiandard for the Tu-16. One aircraft in every:hree was fitted with the AFA-34-OK, AFA-

3AF-40R and NAFA-6/50 cameras. From July:957 onwards each Tu-16 had an AFA-34-OK

and an AFA-42175 camera, and one aircraft in

everythree had an AFA-BAF-40R and an NAFA-

M K75. At the end of the 1 950s the FARL-1 wasreplaced by the FARM-2 camera, and thePAU-457-4 gun camera was fitted to record thescreen of the PRS-1.

Data recording equipment: ln squadron servicethe Tu-16 was retrofitted with the MSRP-12

flight data recorder (FDR). Some examples had

the KZ-63 backup FDR fitted. The primary FDR

captures 12 parameters, including barometricaltitude, indicated airspeed, roll rates, verticaland lateral G forces, control surface deflectionand throttle settings, as well as gear/flap transi-tion and the like. The backup FDR records onlyaltitude, IAS and vertical G forces.

An M5-61 cockpit voice recorder was retro-

fitted in service. Some machines had an MIZ-9

CVR.

Crew Escape Systemln the event of an emergency in flight, all

crewmembers were provided with ejectionseats. These were devised in OKB-156 and thisparticular model was only used on the Tu-16.

The pilots ejected upwards. Before ejectiontheir seats were forcibly slid into the extreme aftposition, after which the flightdeck roof hatcheswere jettisoned and the control columns foldedaway to prevent injury. The remainingcrewmembers (navigator, WSO, gunner/radio-

operator and tail gunner) ejected downwardsafter the hatch covers below the seats had beenjettisoned. The G force on ejecting upwards was

15-18 Gs, lasting 0.2 to 0.3 seconds; the initial

ejection speed was 20-22mlsec to ensure thatthe pilots' seats cleared the vertical tail. The G

force for those ejecting downwards was 3-5 Gs.

Each seat had a pan attached to a movableframe on which it could move along guide rails

firmly secured to the fuselage. Each seat had a

base, a back, a headrest and grab handles. The

piston of the ejection gun was rigidly attachedto the seat frame, and its cylinder to the fuse-

lage structure. The head of the piston was

packed with a cartridge which exploded whenthe firing pin was pulled by means of a handle,

creating high pressure which forced the piston

out, carrying the seat with it.

ln the event of a ditching or a belly landing

the crew in the forward cabin could escapethrough a hatchway in the cabin roof, while the

crew in the rear cabin could escape through an

emergency window in the rear glazing. The air-

craft was able to remain afloat long enough for

the crew to use the life rafts, and its ability in this

respect was significantly improved if the fuelhad been dumped before the aircraft ditched.

Two LAS-SM five-man inflatable life rafts

were carried. These were stored in special

boxes in the upper part of the fuselage on theport side between frames 12-15 (for crew mem-

bers in the forward cabin) and between frames

62-63 (for those in the aft cabin). On release,

the dinghies were inflated by carbon dioxidefrom the two bottles attached to them. Each

crew member had his own first-aid kit, thermosflask and emergency rations. When the crewabandoned the aircraft they took with them the

emergency and emergency SOS radios. ln the1980s the Soviet Air Force and Soviet Navy

started providing the Tu-l6s with radio bea-

cons working with the KOSPAS search and res-

cue satellite system (kosmicheskaya sistemapo i s ka avareey ny kh soodov).

ArmamentThe Tu-16 had typical bomber armament. The

bomb racks, bomb hoists and the release

and locking mechanisms for the bomb load

were housed in the bomb bay between fuse-

lage frames Nos 33 and 49. The bomb baywas 6.702m long. The sights, release mecha-

nisms and bomb bay door control panels were

located in the forward pressurised cabin. lnaddition to the main bomb bay, there was acompartment housing two DYa-SS box{yperacks for TsOSAB coloured marker/signal flare

bombs or SMAB maritime marker bombs.Depending on the composition of the bombload, the following racks were fitted in thebomb bay:

i

i.i[ '. f'

Tupolev Tu-16 99

_]

ir'1.

six KD3-488 cassettetype fourshackle racks

with De13-48 shackles

four KD4-3BB two-shackle racks with De14-49

shackles

an MBD6-16 beam{ype rack with Der6-5

shackles

The bomb release control system was electrl-

cally operated and divided into normal bomb-ing and emergency controls, each of which had

its own independent electrical wirlng to the

release mechanism. The basic control was the

normal bombing control which functioned in

conjunction with the sight, electric releases.

and the bomb release mode relay used forselecting the sequence and intervals in whichthe bombs were dropped. The lifting and low-

ering of bombs was carried out using BL-47Elv1

electromechanical hoists with the aid of cables.

belts, pulleys and crosspieces. Control of the

electrical winches was effected using a speciaimobile control panel which was part of the

ground equipment.The normal bomb load was 3,000k9 and the

maximum bomb load 9,000k9. Bombs o:

5,000-kg, 6,000-kg and 9,000k9 calibre were

suspended on the MBD-16 beamtype rack

smaller bombs were carried on KD3-BB anc

KD4-2BB cassettetype racks attached to the

bomb bay walls. When the Tu-16T torpedo-bomber was used on naval theatres of opera-

tions, carrying mines and torpedoes, the latte'

were suspended from the KD3 and KD4 racks

The maximum load of mines and torpedoeswas 8,700k9. The alrcraft was fitted with arESBR-49A electric release mechanisrenabling single weapons or 'sticks' of bombsmines or torpedoes to be dropped throughou:the Tu-16's altitude and speed envelope. Th=

bombing system drew its electrical power fror'-

the two-circuit electrical wiring system.Bomb-aiming was done by means of a-

OPB-1 1R vector-synchronised optical sigi^:

with automatic drift correction linked to th:AP-5-2M autopilot, thanks to which the aircra .

could be automatically held on course by ti':navigator during bomb-aiming. Some Tu-16=

had an OPB-112 sight which operated in co--junction with the RPB-6 Lyustra or R-1 Rubin-'radars. The optical sight was located in the na '

-

igator's station in the extreme nose.

The DT-7V twin-cannon powered dorsal turret isIocated directly ahead of the engine air intakes,Note the steel gun blast plates riveted to theupper luselage skin. Yelim Gordon archive

Like the dorsal turret, the DT-7N poweredventral turret is recessed as much as possibleto cut drag and provided with gun blast platesprotecting the fuselage skin. Yelim Gordon

The port BD-352 missile pylon of a Tu'16KSR'2'5the retaining arms are deployed and themaintenance cover in the middle is open. Notethe cutout in the wing flap accommodating thepylon's rear end at maximum dellection'Yelim Gordon

.# ,i

.t"r, ,,.lrlll - '

tr'-rlil

100 Tupolev Tu-16

During night operations 12 TSOSAB-10 or

SMAB signaUmarker bombs could be carried

on DYa-SS racks. These were released by the

navigator.

The Tu-16 could carry the following types of

ordnance:

Number Total weightType

= the target was not visible, bomb-aiming:::id be carried out using the RBP-4 Rubidiy-

','t.l-2 (or RBP-6, or R-1) radar. ln these-rs:ances bombing accuracy was increased

--:e the OPB-11R (or OPB-112) was linked to:-: radar sight and computed the necessary::-:ameters for it: the slant range, the lateral sta-

: sation angle and the azimuth stabilisation.- 3le.

The dropping of bombs, mines and torpe-

:.es was carried out by the navigator, but

:::uld also be done by the WSO (radar opera-::'; with the aid of a release switch. ln this-siance, all parameters for the drop had to be

:'awn up by the navigator. The bomb bay::crs opened and closed hydraulically; if the

hydraulic system failed they could be opened

by a spring-loaded mechanism. The opening

and closing of the bomb bay doors was electri-

cally controlled by the navigator.When the bombs were released using the

OPB sight, the bomb bay doors were opened

immediately before release. The emergency

opening of the bomb bay doors, as part of the

emergency jettisoning of the bomb load, was

carried out by the navigator and the co-pilot.

The pilots operated the secondary bomb bay

door closing system. Kazan'-built Tu-16s up to

and including c/n 5201801 had lights in the

main gear fairings which the lead aircraft used

to indicate the start of bomb dropping to the

wingmen.

tb

24

24

24

18

18

6

6

2

2

1

1

tb

12

4

4

1

4 and 12

4

6andB

8

6

8

8

4

6

1 ,1 52kg

1,920k9

5,253k9

5,660k9

7,686k9

B,sB6kg

8,871 kg

9,324k9

5,963k9

6,1 1 6kg

5,220k9

9,290k9

4,000k9

5,706k9

4,380k9

B,260kg

The Tu-16 was equipped with an EKSP-39 elec-

tric flare launcher (elektricheskaya kasseta

signahl'nykh patronov) firing four 39-mm sig-

nal ftares (red, green, yellow and white).

A passive ECM system could be carried in

the bomb bay, with an attendant reduction inthe bomb load. Some production Tu-16s had

ASO-16 Avtomat-1 chaff dispensers; earlierproduction examples were modified to incor-porate the 430-16 system. ln the 1970s the

ASO-28 Avtomat-2 chaff dispenser was

installed on the Tu-16. Bomber versions (the

Tu- 1 6, Tu-1 64 and Tu-1 624) had three ASO-1 6

or ASO-28 units in the bomb bay between

frames Nos 46 and 48. The bomb load could be

reduced if necessary.

A close-up of the DT-7N ventral turret.Yefim Gordon

This view of a retired Tu-l6 reveals the internalstructure of the DK-7 tail turret and theammunition feed sleeves. Note the partiallyopen port side escape hatch and the ventralaccess/eiection hatch. Yef im Gordon

Bombs

SAB-1 00-75 llare

FotAB-1 00-80 flare

FAB-250M46 high-explosive

FAB-250M54

FAB-500|V46

FAB-500|VI54

FAB-1500M46

FAB-1500|v54

FAB-3000|vI46

FAB-3000M54

FAB-5000|vl54

FAB-9000|v54

FAB-250|V43

FAB-5OOM43

FAB-10001\i143

FAB-2000N43

BrAB-6000 armour-piercing

Mines

AMD.5OO

At\4D-1000

A[/D-2tV

IGD-M

Serpei

Desna

Lira

Torpedoes

HAT-52

45-36-IVAV

Tupolev Tu-16 101

,iliI

Also in the 1970s some Tu-16s were retrofit-ted with ASO-21 flare dispensers for releasinginfrared countermeasures flares. Three sets(six 32-round uniis) were fitted in the rear fuse-lage and in both main gear fairings.

For defence against fighter attacks the Tu-1 6

featured the PV-23 cannon system which con-sisted oJ the following:

- seven remote-controlled Afanas'yev/Makarov

AM-23 cannon in four positions, of which three

were twin-cannon powered turrets (the DT-V7

dorsal barbette, DT-N7S ventral barbette and

DK-7 iail iurret) and one (the PU-BB mount) had

a single fixed forward-firing cannon

- the components ofthe remote control system for

the powered turrets synchronising cannon

movement with that of the sighting position (the

MA-500 converter, the KS-3 and KS-4 synchro-

sensors and receivers, the SU-3R and EMU

U-700 servo-amplifiers, the DV-1 100A drive

motors, control panels, AP-10 automatic cocking

devices, round counters and S-13 gun camera

for the PU-88)

- the components of the sighting computer unit

which provided corrections to the lead angle (on

examples up to and including c/n 4200603 the

PS-48MM sighting computer unit was fjtted,

replaced by the PVB-53 from c/n 4200604

onwards)- the optical sights - the pilot's PKI collimator

sight for the PU-88, the PS-53-VK dorsal

sighting station, the PS-53-BP starboard blister

station, the PS-53-BL port blister station, the

automatic devices for air gunnery (the AVS-53

automatic correction computer, the DSP-53

speed and density sensor, the VSP-53

computers for speed and density. and the

ADP-53 automatic auxiliary parallax, up to and

including c/n 4200603 the PS-48MM sighting

stations were fitted- the PRS-1 Argon gun ranging radar for gunnery

under all conditions ol visibility

The PU-BB cannon installation was intended tofire ahead in the direction of flight and its fixed

cannon with 100 rounds was fitted on the star-

board side of the nose. lt was operated by thecaptain who used a PKI sight on a foldingbracket.

The three powered turrets (the DT-7V, DT-

N7s and DK-7) covered the rear hemisphere;additionally, the DT-7V covered the upper part

of the forward hemisphere. The field of fire ofthe DT-7V was 360" in the horizontal plane, with

90" elevation and 3" depression. 500 rounds

were provided (250 rounds per gun). The main

control of the dorsal posiiion was exercisedfrom the WSO's dorsal sighting post. Auxiliary

control could be exercised by the rear gunner

from the rear sighting station.The DT-N7S turret had a +95" field of fire in

the horizontal plane in the rear hemisphere,2'40' elevation and 90" depression. The full

ammunition supply was 350rpg. Main controlwas from the gunner/radio-operator's two (pod

The tail gunner's station, the DK-7 tail turret andthe associated PRS-1 Argon-1 gun-laying radar.The AM-23 cannon are at maximum depressionon this preserved aircraft, Note the port sideescape hatch of the tail gunner's station. Onlythe rear halves of the lateral sighting blisters aretransparencies, the forward halves being madeof metal. Yefim Gordon

and starboard) blister sighting posts. Auxiliarycontrol could be exercised from the rear sighi-ing post by the rear gunner.

The DK-7 had a +70'field of fire ln the hori-

zontal plane in the rear hemisphere, an eleva-

tion of 60' and a depression of 40'. The ful

ammunition supply was 1,000rp9. The main

control was from the rear sighting post by the

rear gunner, who was in charge of all the gurpositions. Auxiliary control could be exercisecfrom the dorsal sighting post by ihe WSO, c'from the ventral sighting post by thE

gunner/radio-operator. The PRS-1 radar pe'mitted fire in the rear hemisphere within +35" it-

the horizontal plane with an elevation anc

depression of +35'.

Characteristics oi the AM-23 Cannon

Calibre

Weight of shell

Muzzle velocity

Rate oJ fire

Weight

23mm

200 grams

690misec

1,300 rounds per minute

43kg

102 TupolevTu-16

Chapter Eight

--= first production Tu-16 bombers began to;-::: squadron service with the Soviet Air::-:e (WS -Voyenno-vozdooshnyye see/y) in

=.::uary-March 1954. During the May Day

- i-ade in Moscow that year a formation of nine---:6s passed over Red Square.

-: the beginning of the 1950s the piston-;-: ned Tu-4 was the backbone of the Soviet-:avy bomber force (DA). The introduction ofi- aircraft belonging to a new generation - or,

-::e accurately the new jet era - demanded:-:rges in the Long-Range Aviation's order of:

=-re. the fundamentals of its operational train-

- 3. and radical improvements to its airfield net-::k and supply system. The significant

:=erences between the Tu-4 and Tu-16, par-

:..;larly in speed, called for a modernisation of.. sting airfields - concrete runways had to be

=:'=ngthened and extended, taxying strips and:::king areas reorganised. New storage facili--:s were built for fuel and lubricants to cope.r :h the large quantities of kerosene required:-C airbases were provided with new radio::mmunications systems and navigation aids.

lnitially heavy bombers were parked in long':,ys on the flightlines. The Tu-16 gained the: stinction of being the DA's first type to use: spersed parking in earthen revetments,',nich were sometimes covered with camou-

'=ge netting) to minimise vulnerability to air-ards and missile strikes. The appearance of:-e Tu-16 requlred a complete overhaul of all

. rlields used by the Long-Range Aviation - all

,rere upgraded to 1st class, and often to an: ren higher grade, able to take practically any

' nd of aircraft, including the main Soviet strate-

; c bomber, the Tu-95. Civil airfields equipped:l these standards did not come into being until:re end ofthe 1950s.

ln the mid-1950s the Tu-16 was already:eing built in large quantities and by the end of

The Tu-l6 in Service

the decade had become the DA's standardbomber type. lt retained this position until themid-1980s when it was gradually replaced by

the third-generation long-range supersonicf u-22M. This dominating position also

extended to the Soviet Naval Air Arm for the

same reasons. The Tu-16 remained in serviceuntil 1994. Several air regiments equipped with

the Tu-16 never made the transition to thef u-22M after the disintegration of the USSR in

late 1991.The Tu-16 was induced into squadron ser-

vice rapidly, successfully and without any

undue difficulties thanks to the thought whichhad gone into its design and the shrewd choiceof stability and handling attributes under differ-

ent flying conditions. At cruising speeds thegradient of stick forces was within the acceplable limits for heavy aircraft (30-1 00kg). At highMach numbers they increased more steeply: at

an altitude of 10,000m with a speed equivalentto Mach 0.9 and a centre of gravity al21%MACthe stick forces reached 120-130k9 and han-

dling became more difficult. The Tu-16 was sta-

ble up to Mach 0.83, with some instability, butnot causing too much trouble, appearing at

speeds of Mach 0.83-0.87. At Mach 0.87 the air-

craft became stable once more - in fact signifi-cantly more stable than at lower speeds.

The aircraft's highest Mach number deter-

mined by its longitudinal stability and controlla-bility was limited to 0,9 at altitudes up to10,000m. Higher speeds below l0,000m gave

rise to an inadmissible increase in all controlforces and the machine became to all intents

and purposes uncontrollable. The Tu-16 couldonly exceed Mach 0.9 in a dive from 10,000-

13,000m in order to evade SAMs.As far as lateral stability was concerned, the

aircraft behaved normally at speeds up to Mach

0.8. At higher speeds lateral stability declined

sharply until, between Mach 0.87 and 0.9, it

became neutral, and was then lost as speedwas increased further. This induced a reverse

roll reaction to rudder inputs (that is, the aircraftrolled right instead of left when left rudder wasapplied).

During squadron service, the following indi-cated airspeed limits were imposed:

- 645km/h with an all-up weight of 70 to 75.8

tonnes at altitudes up to 7,000m

- 685km/h with an all-up weight of 55 to 70 tonnes

at altitudes up to 6,250m- 700km/h with an all-up weight of 55 tonnes or

less at altitudes up to 6,000m- 420kmlh at all altitudes with the undercarriage

extended

The maximum permissible IAS with the flapsdeployed was 400kmih with 20" flap and

340km/h with flaps set at greater angles. The

maximum landing gear transition speed was

set at 400km/h lAS.

In its 40 years of service the Tu-16 equippedmany air regiments of the Soviet Air Force and

the Soviet Navy. Most of these regiments hadpreviously operated piston-engined aircraft,

but some were newly organised as jet bomberunits. ln the course of theTu-16's service careersome of the units operating it were disbanded,others re-equipped with new aircraft, and therewere some which, after operating more mod-ern machines for a while, reverted once more tothe Tu-16.

The Tu-16 served in roughly equal numberswith the Long-Range Aviation and the Naval Air

Arm. By the early 1960s the Tu-16 completely

The personnel of a Soviet Air Force heavybomber regiment equipped with Tu-16s lined upfor an inspection, Yefim Gordon archive

Tupolev Tu-16 103

Tu-1 6

tu-tbA

Tu-1 6 (Z)

Tu-1 6N

Tu-1 6T

Tu-16S (SP)

Tu-1 6R

Tu-1 6RP

Tu-1 6 Yolka

Tu-1 6E

Tu-1 6SPS

Tu-16P Buket

Tu-1 6BR

Tu-1 6KS

Tu-1 6KSR-2

Tu-1 6KSR-2-1 1

Tu-16K-1116

Tu-1 6KSR-2-5

Tu-1 6K"26

Tu-1 6K-1 0

Tu-1 6K-1 0-26

Tu-16RlV

Tu-16R1\']"1 & RM-2

replaced the Tu-4 in DA service. In AVMF regi-

ments it replaced the Tu-14T torpedo-bomberand, to a certain extent, the lL-28T torpedo-bomber and lL-2BR photo reconnaissance air-

craft. The table below shows which versions ofthe Tu-16 saw service with the DA and the AVMF:

Version Long-RangeAviation Naval AirArm

sion). The TBAD could consist of two, only very

occasionally three, heavy bomber air regi-

ments (TBAP - tyazhelobombardirovochnyyaviapolk, = Bomber Wing, Heavy). lndepen-

dent heavy bomber air regiments and divisionswere attached to independent air corps(OTBAK - otdel'nW tyazhelobombardi-rovochnyy aviakorpoos), which in 1980 were

grouped into the Air Armies of the Supreme

Command (VA VGK - vozdooshnaya armiyaVerkhovnovo glavnokomahndovaniya). fheLong-Range Aviation consisted of either two or

three air armies. When the DA was dissolved,its air armies came directly under Air Force

(WS) command. (ln the modern Russian Air

Force, the Long-Range Aviation has re-

emerged as the 37th VA VGK.)

By the end of the 1 950s the Long-Range Avi-

ation's heavy bomber air regiments and inde-pendent long-Range reconnaissance air

regiments (ODRAP - otdel'nyy dahl'niyrazvedwatel'nyy aviapolk) were equipped with

the Tu-1 6, Tu-1 64, Tu-1 6SPS, Tu-1 6 Yolka and

Tu-16R. The task of the heavy bomber air regi-

ments was to carry out bombing raids deep into

enemy territory, and to photograph the results

of bombing raids and objects of opportunity en

route to and from the target area. The recon-

naissance regiments were to carry out visual

reconnaissance and Elint missions by day ornight in their support. Their ECM-equipped air-

craft, the Tu-16SPS, Tu-16 Yolka and Tu-16E,

were to be employed as required against

strong enemy anti-aircraft defences.During the 1960s some of the Long-Range

Aviation's bomber regiments converted to ASM

carrying versions of the Tu-16 for operationsagainst surface vessels and strategic land tar-gets ln the European, Asian and Pacific the-

atres. The later availability of more modern

versions of the Tu-16 with more sophisticatedand powerful ECM (the Tu-16P Buket and the

like) enabled the Long-Range Aviation to retain

an effective strike presence on the most impor-tant sectors of potential theatres. The Tu-16

kept its functions in this respect virtually until

the end of the 1 980s.The first DA air regiments to be equipped

with the Tu-16 in early 1954 (and subsequentlythe Tu-1 6A) were the 402nd TBAP based at Bal-

basovo near Orsha and the 203rd TBAP at

Baranovichi (both Belorussia), which com-prised the 45th TBAD. Subsequently produc-

tion examples entered service with the air

regiment based at Engels-2 AB near Saratov,

southern central Russia, Concurrently, several

were supplied to the special Long-Range Avia-

tion unit based at Bagherovo AB which was

involved in the nuclear weapons developmentprogramme. Soon large numbers of Tu-16

were available for service with the DA units and

then with the AVMF. Tu-16R reconnaissanceaircraft began to reach the independent long-

range reconnaissance air regiments and the

Tu-16SPS (and later Tu-16P Buket) ECM ver-

sions were supplied to the independent ECM

air regiments (OAP REP).

By the start of the 1960s several dozenTu-16s in various versions were serving with

the DA and the AVMF. At various times, the

following Tu-16 regiments were based at the

following bases:

- in the western regions of the USSR: at Tartu in

Estonia (Baltic Defence District), at Sol'tsy in the

Novgorod Region (Leningrad DD), ShaikovkaAB

near Moscow and Migalovo AB near Kalinin

(both Moscow DD) [Kalinin has been renamed

back to Tver'l- in the Belorussian DD: at Baranovichi, Bobruisk

(two regiments), Machulishchi AB near Minsk

and Zyabrovka AB near Gomel'

- in the Ukraine: at Belaya Tserkov', Nezhin,

Priluki. Poltava (two regiments), Ozyornoe AB

near Zhitomir. and also at Stryy AB

- inthe eastern regions of the USSR: at BelayaAB

in the lrkutsk Region (Transbaikalian DD, two

regiments). Zavitinsk in the Amur Region,

Spassk-Dal niy and Vozdvizhensk near

Ussuriysk (all Far Easiern DD).

The DA air regiments in the western defence

districts formed two air armies of the Suprem:

Left: This cutaway Tu-16 airframe minus the portwing and stabiliser is used as a teaching aid atone of the Soviet Air Force's technical schools:here, an instructor in the rank ol LieutenantColonel explains the aircraft's design details tothe cadets. One of ihe eiection seats isdisplayed separately lor ease ol inspection. Thetactical code'42'is still carried on the starboardair intake cover. Yefim Gordon archive

Opposite page: Escorted by two US NavyMcDonnell F-4Js (and probably photographedfrom a third), Soviet Navy Tu-16R'30 Red' (c/n

1882309?) maintains a close interest in theaircraft carrier USS Cora, Sea (CV 63). TheTu-16R is a Badger-E with SRS-I and SRS-4blister fairings but no SRS-3 underwing pods.US Navy

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

The Tu-16KRM drone launcher and the M-16

target drone were operated by the Long-Range

Aviation, the Air Defence Force and the Naval

Alr Arm for air defence training.Tu-16 regiments could be either part of a

heavy bomber air division IBAD - tyazh-

el o bo m bard i r ovoc h n aya av i ad iveeziy a, rou g hly

equivalent to a Bomber Group (Heavy) in the

US Air Force) or independent (that is, direct

reporting units not forming part of an air divi-

r'1

tffi,l

,Anll

hflItr

-ffi;mtF u#ffi:mru.=

104 Tupolev Tu-16

#*

:-;

-_)I cmmand and those in the eastern military dis-:'cts one air army. After the dissolution of the

- SSR there was only a single such formation in

,r estern Russia.

'.aval Air Arm Tu-16s were based as follows:

- rvith the Black Sea Fleet at Kool'baklno AB near

Nikolayev, plus Novofyodorovka AB near Saki

and Gvardeyskoe AB on the Crimea Peninsula

(all three Red Banner Odessa DD)

- with the Baltic Fleet at Kaliningrad (Baltic DD),

Ostrov AB near Pskov (Leningrad DD) and at

Bykhov AB (Belarus', two regiments)

- with the Norlh Fleet at Severomorsk-3 AB near

Murmansk, Olenegorsk AB near Arkhangel'sk

and at Lakhta AB in the Karelian Autonomous

SSR

- with the Pacific Fleet at Knevichi AB (two

regiments) and Khorol'AB in the Primor'ye

Region, at Mai-Gatka AB, Mongokhta AB,

Kamennyy Roochey AB near Sovetskaya Gavan'

(all Khabarovsk region) and Yelizovo airport near

Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy on the Kamchatka

Peninsula- with the Caspian Sea Flottilla - near Shevchenko

Inow renamed Aktau], Kazakhstan

The type also saw service with the air compo-

nent of the Air Defence Force (PVO) alPriozy-orsk, Kazakhstan.

ln addition to the airfields listed above, Tu-16

units were based at various times at Mozdok(lngushetia, North Caucaslan DD), Engels-2

AB. Skomorokhi AB, Oktyabr'skoe AB, and

Vesyolaya AB, as well as at other locations.The Tu-16 was also used by two of the

Soviet Air Force's training establishments:the Chelyabinsk Military Navigator College(WAU Sh - Vyss heye voy enn oye av i ats i on n oy e

oochilischche shtoormanov), operating from

Kamensk-Ural'skiy, Shadrinsk and Kustanai,

and the Tambov Military Pilot College (WAUL -Vyssheye voyennoye aviatsionnoye oochilis-chche lyotchikov). lt was also used extensively

by research and development establishments:

by the main facility of the Soviet Air Force

Research lnstitute (GK NIIWS) at VladimirovkaAB near Akhtubinsk, the Ministry of Aircraft

lndustry's Flight Research lnstitute (Lll) and

by the Tupolev Design Bureau at Zhukovskiy.

After their retirement from service, Tu-16 air-

craft were kept at the Soviet Air Force storage

base at Chagan, Semipalatinsk Reglon, Kaza-

khstan.

The Tu-16 equipped the minelayer and tor-pedo-bomber regiments (MTAP - minno-tor'pednyy aviapolk) and maritime missile strike air

regiments (MRAP - morskoy raketonosnyy avi-

apolk) of the Naval Air Arm which were either

components of air divisions (MTAD - minno-

torpednaya aviadiveeziya or MRAD - morskaya

raketonosnaya aviadiveeziya) or independent.

These divisions and independent regiments

made up the fleet air arms of the Soviet Navy.

ln 1956 the then Soviet Defence Minister

Marshal Gheorgiy K Zhukov signed an order by

which the Soviet Naval Air Arm was equipped

with the Tu-16. These were mainly 'landlubber'

(that is, not specialised naval) versions, with only

a few Tu-16KS and Tu-16T aircraft designed

specifically for naval service at first. lt was

intended that they should be flown by aircrew

with some experience of overwater operations.The plan envisaged supplying the North

Fleet with 85 Tu-16s in 1956, a further 170

going to the Black Sea Fleet and Pacific Fleet

the following year. The Baltic Fleet was to be

the last, receiving 170 Tu-16s in 1958. Thus,

over the course of three years, the Naval Air

Arm would have 424 Tu-16s, just slightly less

than the number supplied to the Long-Range

Tupolev Tu-16 105

,,: 1,,., .l:, :., -r ..l,lt,l |,i,"' i,t,l,,rt,r'iti.,'l,l:rl;t;.itr:.

Aviation. ln practice, things worked out some-what differently. The first examples were in factsupplied to the Baltic Fleet. This was becausein 1955 the 57th TBAD comprising two regi-ments o1 Tu-4 bombers had been transferredfrom the Long-Range Aviation to the Naval AirArm where it was redesignated the 57th MTAD

The division's aircrews had been well trained,but their obsolescent Tu-4 bombers were notsuited to Naval Air Arm requirements. Since thedivision was stationed in one of the 'hottest'

sectors of the Cold War, it was decided it

should have priority in receiving new aircraft.

Some of the Tu-4s were handed down to theNaval Air Arm training centre at Nikolayev-Kool'bakino, others converted into transports,and some high{ime examples scrapped. Thedivision's command staff, flight and ground

crews were sent to factories for Tu-'l 6 conver-sion training.

The Naval Air Arm took delivery of its first fourTu-16s on 1st June 1955 and on 25th June the57th MTAD made its first training flights. The

crews went through an elitensive theoreticaltralning course lasting some 400 to 500 hours,

and the flight crews were subjected to a rigorousselection process. The Tu-16 was at that timeconsidered the very latest in aviation technologyand the best aircrew were chosen to fly ii. ln the

Naval Air Arm, Tu-16 captains were strictly Pilots

1st Class (an official grade reflecting experience

and expertlse) with no less than 600-700 hours

on the lL-28 or Tu-14, and for co-pilots the qual-

ifying level was no less than 200 hours.

The first version to enter service with the

Baltic Fleet was the baseline bomber, but withthe start of production and conversion of theminelayeritorpedo-bomber version the Baltic

Fleet air regiments began training on theTu-16T. The Tu-16KS missile strike variantjoined the Northern and Pacific Fleets, at firstaugmenting the Tu-4KS and then completelyreplacing it.

In June-July 1956 the first Tu-16T torpedo-bombers were supplied to the 57th MTAD, and

by September nine crews of its 240th MTAP

had carried out five practice torpedo attacks.

two with RAT-52 practice torpedoes. Alter this.

the Tu-16T was delivered to other naval units:

the sth MTAP was equipped: in April 1956, the

124th MTAP following suit in June, the 943rcj

MTAP in May 1957 and the 574th MTAP in

November. Gradually, other units of the Naval

Air Arm were re-equipped.Unlike the lL-2BT and Tu-l4T, which coulc

only carry two torpedoes, the Tu-16T coulctake up to six torpedoes. Theoretical studiesindicated that the probability of hitting a surface

ship when four torpedoes were launched was

increased by amere2-3/owhen compared witt-

a single-torpedo attack. Experience with the

Tu-16T proved that its operational radius was

significantly greater and its equipment more

sophisticated than that of the lL-28T or Tu-147therefore, different tactics could be employecThe Tu-16T was to be used predominantly a:

night and in adverse weather to strike selectecenemy vessels. The probability of hitting th:target was to be increased by 50-100% b.launching the torpedoes in a fan-like spreacalthough in practice this method of torpec:attack was not used.

The Good, the Bad (it's up to the reader todecide which is which) and the Double Ugly. Thesame Badger-E and the same F-4J-32-MC BuNo15839114367'NH' in an interesting formationwith a Vought F-8A Crusader. US Navy

More action over the sea in a different part olthe world as Tu-16SPS'91 Blue'is escortedaway from its 'target' by a pair of Royal NavyBritish Aerospace Sea Harrier FRS.1s. TheBadger's tail cannon are in the lully up positionto avoid incidents; it is a standing rule duringsuch encounters that neither aircraft may usethe other as a practice target. Royal Navy

106 Tupolev Tu-16

-1e Tu-16T took part in several exercises naissance versions of the Tu-16 were used in-:: by all four Soviet fleets, the last of these land and naval exercises, and the Tu-16R was

-- :he Black Sea Fleet in 1959. Each of the regularly used to follow the movements and

-- aircraft involved carried up to six 45-53W exercises of NATO navies in the seas and

:-:edoes optimised for high-altitude attack. oceans adjacent to Soviet territorial waters. A

l,- ng the exercises the aircraft took off from couple of Tu-16Rs were normally assigned to

--:aved airfields with their maximum take-off this in the 1960s: one fitted with an SPS-1 jam-

= lnt. The toroedoes were released in a sin- mer and the other with SRS-3 ELINT sets This= 3rt. The torpedoes were released in a sin- mer and the other with SRS-3 ELINT sets This

: cass, using optical sighting. ln 1960 as a was to ensure the comprehensive coverage of

::-lt of Khrushchov'sfar-reaching cutbacks in all the possible radar frequencies used by the

::. et air power, minelayer and torpedo- NATO vessels. When the Tu-16RM-1 and

::-:ber units were to all intents and purposes Tu-16RM-2 entered Soviet Navy service they,

: rrnated.Almostall regimentsequippedwith too, were used in these operations. ln the'-

= tL-2BT (the Tu-1 4T was by then no longer in 1 960s and 1 97Os Western aviation publications

.:-.,,ce) were disbanded and their aircraft were full of photographs of Soviet Tu-1 6s on

:::cmmissioned and broken up. ln the Pacific which the 'R and 'RM versions were shown fly-

= :.i alone some 400 aircraft were scrapped in ing over the decks of American and British air-

: snod time; such devastation had not been craft carriers.

: --ered by the Naval Air Arm even in the dark- Outside the USSR, Soviet Navy Tu-16s were

.:: days of the Great Patriotic War. Only the stationed ln Vieinam. Tu-16R reconnaissance---16 in its various versions remained as the aircraft and Tu-1 6P ECM versions flew from

:: e heavy combat aircraft in naval air service. Cam Ranh AB in southern Vietnam (Da Nang

Cn 20th March 1 961 some of the Tu-1 6 naval Province) in the 1 970s and early 1 980s. Stud-

= - :egiments remaining in service were redes- ies were made at this time on the effects of the

;:ated naval missile strike air regiments by prolonged effects of thetropical climate's heat

:-ler of the Soviet Ministry of Defence. This and humidity on the aircraft's airframe, equip-'='.ected the actual state of affairs, since by this ment and electrical wiring.- -e they had been re-equipped to a consider- Various versions of the Tu-16 served with air

::ie degree with the Tu- 1 6KS. As well as this, regiments at different times. A regiment usually-: K-10 anti-shipping weapons system com- consisted of three squadrons, equipped at first

:. sing the Tu-1 6K-1 0 and the K-1 OS ASM had with the Tu- 1 6 and Tu-1 64. When the Tu-1 6KS

::gun to enter service in ever-increasing num- entered service, the regiment might consist

::rs. The remaining Tu-1 6T torpedo-bombers solely of this version or of one Tu- 1 6KS squad-

.,,ere almost all converted into the Tu-165 ronandtwosquadronsof bombers.Thenum-

::arch and rescue version which stayed in ber of versions in a regiment rose with the

Scviet Navy service for a considerable time. On advent of in-flight refuelling. Normally the first

26th January 1966 the Soviet Council of Minls- two squadrons flew bomber or missile strlke

::rs authorised the transfer of six Tu-16T air- versions, including those with IFR capability,

:.aft, apparently the last machines of their kind, while the third operated tankers. With the

:t the United Arab Republic. appearance of ECM versions, these were usu-

ln the early lg66s the assimilation of the allyflownbythethirdsquadron,tankersbythe-r-16K-10 into the Naval Air Arm got under second squadron and combat versions by the

,', ay. and by August 1 961 individual launches of f irst. Sometimes the third squadron comprised

:re K- j 0S ASM had been carried out by the var- tankers with ECM capability while the first two

rus fleet air arms. Soon afterwards, exercises squadrOns flew combat versions.

:volving groups of the new ASM carriers ln the early 1970s the number of Tu-16 (Z)

against convoys of ships began, and before tankers in squadron service declined as the

cng many naval missile strike air regiments requirement for wingto-wing refuelling

rad acquired familiarity with the K-l0. Recon- changed and the aircraft reached the end of

their service lives, Most of the tankers were

converted into ASM carriers. A whole series of

regiments lost their tankers, despite the fact

that almost all combat versions of the Tu- 16, as

well as reconnaissance and ECM versions,

were IFR-capable. One regiment at Poltava, the

226th lndependent ECM Air Regiment, con-

sisted solely of ECM versions - the Tu-16E and

various versions of the Tu-16P, including sev-

eral with the Cactus system. ln 1986 this regi-

ment was disbanded, leaving a single ECM

squadron. lndependent reconnaissance air

regiments operated tankers and ECM versions

in addition to reconnaissance machines. The

Tu-1 6N tanker using the probe and drogue sys-

tem equipped one squadron (the fourth) in the

200th GvTBAP (Gvardeyskiy tyazhelobom-

bardirovochnyy aviapolk - Guards Heavy

Bomber Air Regiment) based at Bobruisk and

later at Belaya Tserkov'.Naval air regiments had an even more varie-

gated mix of aircraft. As well as the versions

they had in common with the Long-Range Avi-

ation, they also possessed purely naval air ver-

sions: the Tu-16K-10 missile carrier, the

Tu-16RM-1 and Tu-16RM-2 spyplanes, the

Tu- 1 6T torpedo-bomber, the Tu-1 65 SAR ver-

sion and the Tu-16PLO ASW version. The

Tu-16T was the basic element of minelayer and

torpedo-bomber units and the Tu-1 6K-10 of the

missile strike units. With the conversion of the

Tu-16T into the Tu-165 and Tu-16PLO, these

latter versions were operated by ASW units.

Thus, the Tu-16 with its initial mass produc-

tion and introduction into squadron service

became the standard machine in both the

Long-Range Aviation and Naval Air Arm. This

gave rise to a number of problems associated

with aircrew training and, after some years, with

repair and maintenance issues.

A pair of Tu-16R Badger-Fs coded '02 Red' and

'37 Red' make a formation llypast during theopen doors day at Kubinka AB on 1 1th April1992.'O2 Fed' is additionally equipped with aSiren' jammer in a UKhO tail fairing; missionswere often llown by such mixed pairs ofdifferently conligured aircraft. Yefim Gordon

Tupolev Tu-16 107

The Combat & Conversion Training Centres(TsBP i PLS - Isenfr boyevoy podgotovki ipereoochivaniya lyotnovo sosfahva) bore themain responsibility for preparing aircrews.These centres were established in Ryazan'(Dyagilevo AB) for the Long-Range Aviationand in Nikolayev (Kool'bakino AB) for the Naval

Air Arm. The centres were supplied with earlyproduction examples of the Tu-16 for aircrewtraining. At first the specially convertedTu-4UShS navigator trainers fitted with Tu-16

sighting and navigation equipment were used

for navigator training. Several regiments had

this machine and it remained in service untiltheearly 1960s.

When units converted to the new bomber ormissile carrier versions of the Tu-16, crew com-manders (captains) were appointed andtrained from the following personnel:

- captains of Tu-l4 crews

- IL-28 pilots trained in all-weather day and visual

flight rules night flying- co-pilots who had qualified on the Tu-16 with no

less than 150 hours flying time- captains of military transport aircraft trained to a

set minimum in all-weather flying by day and night.

Pilots accepted for conversion training on theTu-16 as crew commanders had to have at

least 800 hours flying time, a good or excellentgrasp of piloting skills and an unblemished ser-

vice record.Tu-16 navigators were selected from the

following:

- Tu-4 navigators with navigational and

bombardier experience in all-weather conditions

by day and fine weather conditions by night at

medium and high altitudes- co-navigators on the Tu-4 who had successfully

carried practice operational flights on the Tu-16

Co-navigators were appointed from:

- Tu-4 weapons systems operators with

navigational and bombardier experience by day

and night at medium and high altitudes- Tu-4 assistant navigators with navigational and

bombardier experience by day and night at

medium and high altitudes and who had passed

their preliminary evaluation for the Tu-16

- navigators who had qualified at Long-Range

Aviation operational training schools as

navigator-operators

Co-pilots for the Tu-16 were chosen from:

- co-pilots on the Tu-4- pilots who had qualified on jet aircraft at frontal

bomber aviation flying schools

Defensive fire commanders (chief gunners)

and senior radio operators were selected fromradio operators/gunners trained for the Tu-16

and possessing a qualification no lower thansecond class (national service and extended

108 Tupolev Tu-16

service sergeant and warrant officer ranks).

Radio operators/gunners who had qualifiedat sergeants' schools and had been trained tomeet the requirements for Radio Operator 3rd

Class after two flights on the Tu-4UShS trainerwere appointed as radio operators/gunners onthe Tu-16. Usually these were national servicesergeants (until the mid-1950s, the conscrip-tion term the Soviet Air Force was five years,

during which tlme outstanding flight andground crew personnel were trained).

Flying instructors were trained within theoperational units under the authority of theregimental commander and the control of thedivisional commander. Bombardier and navi-gational instruction were allocated to leadingnavigation personnel who had gained topgrades in navigation and bomb-aiming as nav-

igators or co-navigators.As the number of aircraft in squadron service

increased, so did the need for aircrews. The

Soviet Air Force Command decided thereforeto give initial training directly to aircrew cadetsin military schools. The training of navigatorswas inaugurated at the Chelyabinsk WAUShand the training of pilots at the Tambov WAUL.Those qualifying from their schools wereappointed WSOs and assistants to crew com-manders when they were posted to an air regi-

ment. After obtaining a set standard, theybecame navigators and crew commanders.The centres in Ryazan' (43rd TsBP i PLS) and

Nikolaev (33rd TsBP i PLS) specialised in thetraining of commanders, and subsequentlythey trained captains for other types of aircraftin service with the DA and AVMF the Tu-22,

Tu-95 and fu-22M.The Tu-124Sh-1 was a version of the

fu-124V short-haul airliner specially modifiedfor navigator training in the Long-Range Avia-

tion. lt was fitted with the bomb-aiming and

flight instrumentation of the bomber, and later

the missile strike versions, of the Tu-16. Theywere used in the training regiments at theChelyabinsk WAUSh and also for trainingpilots at the Tambov WAUL, since the aircraftwas similar to the Tu-16 in its handling charac-terlstics. Later these two schools, the mostimportant ones for training navigators andpilots for the Long-Range Aviation, were sup-plied with actual examples of the Tu-16 to opti-mise aircrew training.

Ground crews were trained in military avia-

tion technical schools (VATU - voyennoyeaviatsionno-tekhnicheskye oochilischche).Specialists on airframes, engines and aviationequipment were trained at the lrkutsk VATU,

those specialising in armament at the AchinskVATU, and radar specialists in Tambov.

ln this way the requirement for qualified per-

sonnel for the Long-Range Aviation and Naval

Air Arm was met. The repair and maintenanceproblems were met by the DA's aircraft over-

haul plants in Khabarovsk, Orsha and Belaya

Tserkov', while AVMF aircraft were repairedand refurbished in Nikolayev and Artyom (near

Vladivostok). Aircraft repair factories in

Ryazan', Tartu, Baranovlchi and StarayaRoossa were also involved in the repair and

maintenance of the Tu-16.As well as repairs, the aircraft repair plants

(ARZ) carried out more far-reaching work. ln

the 1960s series production of the Tu-16 cameto an end and later types of aircraft, Ihefu-22and Tu-95, were built at their former productionfactories. The ARZs, therefore, bore responsi-bility for carrying out modifications to thoseTu-16s still in squadron service. During repair

and maintenance, aircraft were re-equipped.ln this way the missile carriers for the K-11.

K-16, K-26 and K-26P, the Tu-16RM-1 and

Tu-16RM-2 reconnaissance versions, the ECM

versions with Azaliya, Ficus and Cactus jam-

mers, the Tu-16N tanker, the target dronelaunchers, the M-16 target drones and otherversions of the Tu-16 came into being. Repair

and maintenance of the Tu-16 at Belaya

Tserkov' continued until 1985, at Orsha until1980 and at Khabarovsk until 1992 in whichyear all further work on re-equipping and over-hauling the Tu-16 ended.

ln the late 1980s and early 1990s the Tu-16 s

designated service life was 35 years, but the

decision was then taken to extend this to 38years. ln 1990-1991 a number of machines dat-

ing from 1955-56 were refurbished and modi-

fied as target drones at ARZ-12 at KhabarovskThe last conversion work took place in 1992

when five Tu-16s built in 1957 were modifiecas target drones. After the dissolution of the

USSR, there were no funds available to main-

tain old hardware, let alone replace it.

The Tupolev OKB kept an eye on all Tu-l6aircraft during the first phase of their squadrorservice. The slightest fault with the airframe o-

its systems, or with its equipment, was rectifiecand, if necessary, the findings applied to aiL

craft in service and on the production line. The

initial perlod of squadron service was almos:

trouble{ree, and the few accidents that dicoccur were investigated and the causes dis-

covered; measures were then taken to ensure

that they did not reoccur in future. Some of the

typical and serious accidents are detailed belor',

The first loss of an operational Tu-16 too,place even before the off icial acceptance of th-aircraft into service. On 6th April 1954 Tu-16 c '4200202 (tactical code unknown) ofthe 402n:Heavy Bomber Air Regiment crashed near r::

home base of Balbasovo near Orsha. Ti^:cause was an uncommanded deflection of tha

elevator trim tab. On 30th January 1955 th:nose gear unit of Tu-16 cln 4201302 collapse:on landing at the GK Nll WS airfield -

Akhtoobinsk. On 19th August 1955 Tu-l:'No802' (that is, cln 4200802?) crashed at a-airfield near Poltava when the AP-5-2M autop-lot failed. On lBth April 1956 Tu-16K-10 c '5202 (full cin unknown) was damaged beyon:repair at Priluki AB. A previous hard landing

had caused a weakness in the lower stringe'.near frame18, and the forward fuselage brok:away at frame 20 when the pilot put tt-:machine down short of the runway.

fI

l

.rn#iffi-: : , e: This view clearly shows the characteristici-shaped ioint line between the Tu-16K'10'sduck bill' radome and the metal portion of the:ose; note the dorsal access panels. sergey and

I - :ry Komissarov archive

r:: ie right: Maintenance work is under way on a(azan'-built Tu- 1 6K.1 0 coded' 44 Red' i note the:anel on the port side of the nose removed loraccess to the radar set ol the YeN radar.'.'m Gordon archive

: j:ri: Wearing lile iackets and the white-topped

-ps issued to Soviet Navy officers, the crew ol a

Tu-16K-10 parked in a revetment with a concrete

;et blast deflector discusses an impending:1ission, Sergey and Dmitriy Komissarov archive

i" cw right: A Tu-16RM-1 or Tu-16RM-2 passesover the aircralt carrier HMS Atk Royal, showingtie ventral radomes. Jane's Allthe World's Aircraft

On some occasions, an order given by com--1and staff on the ground was the potential

:ause of an accident. Before the 1 954 May Day

' ypast test-pilot M A Nyukhtikov was ordered to

rescend after passing over the History

'.luseum at the entrance to Red Square and

sass the Lenin Mausoleum at the same height

as the saluting stand before climbing away

sieeply over St Basil's Cathedral. Nyukhtikov

saw clearly how impossible this was; yet he had

10 alternative but to obey the order' He

:esolved the dilemma by losing height very

slightly and then accelerating away at around

1.O0Okm/h with a roar of engines. The etfect

,vas so dramatic that no one remembered to

ask why the pilot had not carried out his order

io the letter.

Air traffic control incompetence was some-

iimes to blame for accidents. Thus on 24th

August 1 98 1 Tu-1 6K c/n 62031 06 (tactical code

and exact version unknown) belonging to the

30th VA/ssth TBAD/3O3rd TBAP crashed near

r*1

;{iTki$:r. "

i. I i 'lii 'i; '

I I I I

t-

Jir?4

#*

* 'trtt

i.h ,t

i,',,4,t"&p6lffill#l}";

,dl

'i **lt"'" *t,,} di.: *,,1

' St..qtqrrd&4r

lli':it'rP

,{,i $h, il,.}r,

Tupolev Tu-16 109

Zavitinsk after colliding with an Aeroflot/FarEastern Civil Aviation Directorate An-24RV twin-turboprop airliner registered CCCP-46653 (c/n

47309204). The collision, which occurred in

thick overcast (the pilots did not see each

other's aircraft and were unable to take evasive

action), was due to poor interaction betweencivil and military ATC authorities which had

(unbeknownst to each other) cleared both air-

craft to use the same flight level. The bomber'screw perished; so did all occupants of theAn-24 except one. lncredibly, a female passen-ger survived a fall from high altitude after beingthrown clear of the aircraft as it disintegrated;fortuitously, she landed in a deep snowdrift,suffering nothing worse than bruises! lnterest-ingly, at the time of the crash the Tu-16 was

using the ATC callsign CCCP-07514; in realitythis registration belonged to an An-2TP utilltyaircraft (c/n 1G 15242) built ln December 1973.

Test pilots managed to save the Tu-16 on

more than one occasion. ln the mid-1 950s a testcrew from plant No 1 in Kuibyshev was orderedto determine the maximum permissible G load

for a Tu-16 bomber. At the time, the methodol-ogy for this lagged behind the skills in handlingthe aircraft itself and on reaching the prescribed

G load the aircraft stalled, entering a spin. The

commander ejected ahead of the other crewmembers, but was killed immediately afterwards

when he was struck by a hatch cover released

by another member of the crew as he exited theaircraft The co-pilot, Aleksandr Kazakov, man-

aged to recover from the spin, exceeding all

speed and G load limits in the process. He had

thus unwittingly tested the airJrame's strength.Special tests were carried out on a number

of examples. ln 1956 Lt Col G Yaglov landed a

Tu-16 for the first time on an unpaved runway,after which take-oifs and landings were made

on a regular basis, using sparsely equippedauxiliary airstrips in the tundra and on the Arc-

tic ice without any adverse consequences.ln the mid-1950s only a few aidields in the

Soviet Arctic, such as Amderma, Severomorsk,Chekurovka, Wrangel lsland and one or two

others, were suitable for heavy bombers. A

special operations group was formed in the

early 1960s to co-ordinate the work of the 16

airfields in the High North. ln addition to these,

temporary airfields with hard-packed earth run-

ways and ice runways were set up, although

1 10 Tupolev Tu-16

these were not intended for heavy bomberoperations; on take-ofi and landing, clods ofearth or chunks of ice could be ingested bytheaircraft's englnes, damaging them.

ln the second hall of the 1950s it was

decided to use ice fioe airfields in the Arctic toincrease the operational capabilities of theLong-Range Aviation. This turned out to be no

easy matter since the landing weight of loadedstrategic bombers was around 70-95 tonnes.While the bomber's weight could not breakthrough the ice, which was many metres thick,the aircraft could skld off the runway when it

braked on landing. Added to this, the ice's high

salt content made lts surface friable, and thevibration induced on take-off and landing wasso violent that it was impossible to read theinstruments properly.

ln April 1958 A Krotov, Commander of the

52nd TBAP, was ordered to prepare his threebest aircrews for Arctic flights, including landing

on an ad hoc ice airstrip in poor weather condi-tions. Colonel A Alekhnovich, a Hero of the

Soviet Union and Vice-Commander of the 45th

TBAD to which the 52nd TBAP was subordi-nated, was appointed to head the mission.

Shortly aftenruards more detailed orders were

issued. Two aircraft (a Tu-16 and a Tu-95) were

to fly towards the North Pole and effect a landingon ice in the vicinity of the SP-6 drifting polar

research station; a third aircraft was to remain at

Tiksi until further notice. The two aircraft landed

safely on the ice. The Tu-16 piloted byAlekhnovich and the Tu-95 piloted by Major N

Bazarnyy were the world's first heavy aircrafi toland on Arctic ice. But during take-off the Tu-16

veered off the runway; the take-off was abortedbut the bomber's starboard wing struck a Polar

Aviation lL-1 4transport parked nearby -the pilot

only just managed to avert a fatal accident.Both aircraft were seriously damaged. The

repair crew which arrived two weeks later couldnot repair the Tu-16 on site - in Arctic field con-

ditions the job proved to be beyond their capa-

bilities. Nor could the machine could be dumpedinto the ocean, as the ice floe was ringed by ice

hummocks some 16 to 20 metres high.

News of the accident was kept secret; offi-

cially the aircraft was 'undergoing repair on the

mainland'. For almost a year, from 23rd May

1958 until 16th April 1959, the Tu-16 drifted

through the Arctic Ocean, accompanied by the

ln Soviet times great care was taken to maintainserviceability and keep up combat training. ThisTu-l6K-10 coded'55 Red' wears the'ExcellentAircraft' maintenance award badge (a stylisedaircraft silhouette incorporated into the Soviet'Quality mark' pentagon) and three'kill' starsmarking successlul missile launches againstpractice targets. Note the very dirty undersideof the nose, probably a result of minute rubberparticles separating lrom the nosewheel tyreson touchdown. YeIim Gordon archive

staff of the polar station and the technician left toguard it. Meanwhile, pieces kept breaking away

from the ice floe so that by April 1959 it was only

half its original size. lt was only when the windsand currents began to cany the polar station

towards the Greenland Sea that the decision

was taken to destroy the alrcraft after all sal-

vageable equipment and engines had been

removed. As early as September 1958 the Tu-1 6

had been spotted by a Royal Canadian Air Force

reconnaissance aircraft and the Western press

began to make noises about the setting up of

Soviet strategic bases on neutral tenitory rela-

tively close to the American continent.While stripping the Tu-16 down, the technl-

cal crew had to use an LAS-SM inflatable

dinghy to reach it due to the melting ice. Once

the engines and equipment had been recov-

ered, the airframe was doused with kerosene

and set alight. The personnel from the drittingpolar station, the technician and the disman-tling crew were evacuated to the mainland. Fo'his 'lengthy secondment' technician R Kagilo',

was given a substantial reward and leave. Afte-

this, no more landings by the Tu-16 were maoe

on ice strips in the Arctic, although for various

reasons some unplanned landings on the ic3

did take place.

Altogether between 1954 and 1956 te^

Tu-16 were lost in fatal and nonjatal crashes

The worst attrition in the Tu-16's service caree'was between 1957 and 1960 when about te'machines were lost each year. Then the acc -

dent rate fell sharply; in the 'sixties and 'seven-

ties the average annual attrition was one or twcOn 15th July 1964 a Tu-16R crew reporte:sighting an American carrier group 200km i:the east ofthe Japanese coast. Afterthis, notr--

ing more was heard from the aircraft; ther:were no survivors among the crew of seven. O-25th May 1 968 another Tu-1 6R reconnaissanc:aircraft was lost near NeMoundland after ove'-flying the aircraft carrier USS Essex. There wa:a suspicion that the aircraft had been shc:down by the US Navy air defences immediate .

after reporting the location of an America-destroyer, but this allegation was refuted by th:Americans. Wreckage from the aircraft cc -

lected during the ensuing search and rescu=

operation was transferred to the Sov'::destroyer with the tactical number '31 1'.

By the end of 1981, 106 examples of t":Tu-1 6 had been lostforvarious reasons, inclu:-ing 72 Air Force (DA) aircraft and 34 Navy a -craft. ln the early years the share of fatal a^:non{atal accidents caused by hardware fa -

irirjrfl

iiitir:

!. Tu.'16 coded '04 Red' deploys its brake

-rachules after landing on a ice runway near::e North Pole, Krasnaya Zvezda

--:s was fairly high; as the bomber's assem-

: :s and components were developed and

-aroved this was reduced to almost zero, and- ,r as the errors of the f light and ground crews'.-:: became the major culPrits.

\ot all such incidents ended badly for the---16, though. In the early 1980s a Tu-16 on

: ::rol overthe Atlanticwas intercepted bythree

-' :1e latest American carrier-based fighters,--: McDonnell Douglas F/A-18A Hornet. Trying-- scare the Soviet aircraft off its intended

:::rse, the fighters performed dangerous

-a.roeuvres, including head-on passes. This

:::-and-mouse game ended in tragedy when-.', o of the 'attackers' collided directly above the---16 and exploded; one pilot was killed, the

::-er managed to eject. The flying debris dam-

:;ed the Tu-16 but managed to limp back to

: ase thanks to the courage and skill of its crew.

in the course of its service career the Tu-16

,. as called upon to carry some unusual civilian

::ssengers. ln 1957, when it was vital to sum-

-3n the first secretaries of the regional and

: sirict Communist party commlttees for an

:,:raordinary full party meeting to support'. (ita S Khrushchov against an 'anti-Commu-- si opposition group' within the Soviet gov-

:-'rment, Gheorgiy K Zhukov used his power as

l:fence Mlnister to arrange for the necessary

:arty bosses to be flown in on Tu-16 bombers.irrushchov was thereby enabled to convoke a

: .num quickly and gain the necessary num-

-:r of votes. ln this way the Tu-16 played a cru-

: al part in the power struggle among the

::litical leaders of the USSR in the second half

-=n",ntO. __

'Cherry picker'trucks with powered telescopicladders were used lor maintenance of the tailunit. Yefim Gordon archive

The Tu-16 in its various versions formed the

backbone of the Long-Range Aviation for aconsiderable time. From the late 1950s, when

lhef u-22long-range bomber entered service,

several DA regiments at Baranovichi, Machul-

ishchi, Zyabrovka, Ozyornoe and Nezhin and

naval air regiments at Saki, Ostrov and Kalin-

ingrad began converting to the new type.

However, thefu-22 was not a completely suc-

cessful aircraft, accident-prone and compli-

cated to operate. Production of the Tu-22 was

terminated at the end of the 1960s. The air reg-

iment at Vozdvizhensk took delivery of several

new machines initially, but then passed them

on to other regiments and reverted to the

Tu-1 6.

The service debut of the Tu-22 in the 1960s

hardly diminished the role of the Tu-16 in the

nation's defence. Firstly, there were far fewer

regiments equipped with the Tu-22 than with

the Tu-16; secondly, the Tu-16 was the more

versatile machine with a significantly wider

range of applications; thirdly, at its subsonic

cruising speed the Tu-22 had no advantages in

performance over the Tu-16; finally, the K-26

weapons system with the KSR-5 missile was at

least equal, and in some aspects superior, to

lhe K-22 system.During the 1970s more modern types of

bombers and missile carriers, the Tu-22M1,

f u-22M2 and later the Tu-22M3, began to enter

service with the DA and the AVMF. ln 1972 the

air regiment at Poltava was the first to get the

fu-22M, followed by the unit at Sol'tsy, both

regiments at Belaya Tserkov', the regiment at

Shaikovka and so on. ln the Naval Air Arm the

regiments at Nikolayev, Sovetskaya Gavan',

Bykhov and the like were re-equipped. The reg-

iment at Priluki was re-equipped with this type

in the 1980s. But even when full-scale produc-

tion and delivery of the Tu-22M2 and Tu-22M3

got under way in Kazan', the Tu-16 remained in

service with the overwhelming majority of

Long-Range Aviation and Naval Air Arm regi-

ments. The numbers of the different versions

of the Tu-16 in service with the DA as of 1st

January 1979 are given in the table below.

About as many Tu-1 6 (of which 209 were

missile strike aircraft) remained in service with

the Naval Air Arm .

At the end of 1981 the Long-Range Aviation

had 487 Tu-16 and the Naval Air Arm 474' One

hundred and fifty-six were in service with other

elements of the Soviet Armed Forces and the

defence industry. MAP documents also listed

106 examples as 'not current' by then (this

included both aircraft written off due to techni-

cal condition and accident attrition). The

remaining machines, apart from those

exported, do not appear in the statistics for

some reason.

The scales began to tip in favour of the

f u-22M in the 'eighties after the Tu-1 6 had been

taken out of service in large numbers. At the

end of 1990 there were 173 Tu-16s in the Euro-

pean part of the USSR, of which 81 were in

Long-Range Aviation service and 92 in Naval

Air Arm service. The DA Tu-16 served with the

251st Air Training Regiment (UAP - oochebnyy

aviapolk) at Belaya Tserkov' (40 aircraft), the

260th TBAP based at Stryy (23 aircraft) and the

2o0th TBAP at Bobruisk (1 B tankers). The Black

Sea Fleet's 540ih MRAP based at Nikolayev-

Kul'bakino in the Ukraine had 20 machines,

and there were 38 further examples, mainly

Tu-16K-10-26s, operating from airfields in the

Crimea. ln the North Fleet in 1991 there were

four examples in service with the 924th Air Reg-

iment at Olen'ya AB and 30 more with the regi-

ment at Severomorsk-3 AB. There were also

_l

Year Built Tu.l6Tu-l6ATu.162Tu.16NTu-l6RTu-16KSRTu.16YolkaTu.15PBukel

1 954

1 955

1 956

1 957

1 958

Total

14

8

I4

10

1

o.1

3

5

I21

5

t5

20

il

99

52

38

5

211

B

27

4

29

6B

25

44

27

B

104

2

B

38

Overall Total 496

TupolevTu-16 111

The end of the road. lgnominiously dumped, the severed flightdecksections at the Hussian Navy's Ostrov AB near Pskov testify that another12 Tu-l6s have gone the way ol all metal. The second aircraft in the rowwas c/n 72o3A2O and was equipped with individual protection ECM gear(note the traces of the nose thimble radome); the seventh aircraft lromright was a Tu-16K-1 1-16. Yefim Gordon

The savagely hacked rear fuselage of another Tu.1 6 at Ostrov AB, with lhemain gear bogies (probably belonging to the same machine) visiblebeyond, The number on the remains serves to make sure all parts areaccounted for and nothing is stolen! Yefim Gordon

some 60 machines in service in the Far East with

the Pacific Fleet Air Arm. After 1991 almost all

surviving Tu-16 were withdrawn from use, a

handful remaining with the NavalAirArm, GK Nll

WS and Lll. From the close of 1995 the Tu-16

virtually ceased to operate in the Ukraine,

although 49 examples were stored at air basesand 1 9 others continued in serve as trainers with

the 540th Air Regiment. By this time not a singleactive Tu-16 remained in Belarus'.

The last Long-Range Aviation regiment to fly

the Tu-16 was the lndependent Long-RangeReconnaissance Air Regiment based at

Spassk-Dal'niy. After the regiment had re-

equipped with the fu-22M, the remainingreconnaissance and ECM versions were ferriedto Belaya Tserkov' AB for mothballing. Sadly,no money could be sourced for even placing

the aircraft in storage; the remaining Tu-16s in

Russia were scrapped.At the Chagan storage depot in the Semi-

palatinsk Region, some 100 examples of vari-

ous versions of the Tu-16 stood rusting awayfor a long time. After their 'privatisation' by

Kazakhstan, they soon became non-airworthy.A similar fate befell the Ukrainian machines

after the disiniegration of the USSR.

ln Russia the Tu-16 was officially retired from

service in 1994, although there were examplesof the Tu-1 6K-10 family built in 1963 which had

not reached the end of their 35 year service life.

By this tlme the Tupolev OKB had ceased towork on the Tu-16.

For a long time the two 'Cyclone' weatherresearch aircraft stood unused. At Zhukovskiyonly a single Tu-161L was kept in flying condi-tion. Apparently this was the last f lying exampleof the Tu- l6 on Russian soil.

The Tu-16 in Action

ln addition to the many exercises, reconnais-sance flights and other special duties on behalfof the Soviet Armed Forces, the Tu-1 6 also tookpart in actual combat in other countries.

ln August 1968 the Tu-16P was employedduring the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia,providing ECM cover during the deploymeni oftactical aviation and military air transport for-mations on the day that Warsaw Pact Jorces

intervened. The only real war in which SovietAirForce Tu-16s took part was the Afghan War.

The type was used in bombing raids against

Mujahideen bases and concentrations wher^

apart from attacking insurgent positions, it car-

ried out bombing raids in the vicinity of the

towns of Herat and Kandahar which were con-

trolled by the rebels.The bomber versions were used on th:

largest scale - the Tu- 1 64, Tu-1 6KSR-2-5 anc

Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1 bomber/missile strike ai'craft, as well as Tu-16R reconnaissance aircra:and the Tu-16P ECM version. Other varianis

rarely saw action in Afghanistan. A typicabomb load consisted of 12 FAB-500 bombssometimes, in special circumstances, larger c'smaller calibre bombs (250-kg, 1,000-kg

3,000-kg, 5,000-kg and even 9,000-kg bombsof the M-54 or M-46 series) were used. C-occasion this was because the bombs wer:nearing the end of their storage life and had ::be disposed of.

Aparl from the Tu-16, other Long-Range A,, -

ation units armed with the f u-22R andTu-221'' :took part in operations over Afghanistan. Tl-:'veteran'Tu-1 6 was used in this conflict primar .

because of its ability to carry a 9,000-kg bon::The FAB-9000 could give the terrain a 'workir:over', levelling hills and high ground and pr:-ducing craters so that the terrain resemblec :lunar landscape.

Bombing raids were carried out during da.-light hours, using optical bombsights. T-:bombers were supported by Tu-16P ECM a-.craft with Buket sets to jam the Pakistani .'defence radars, and also to counter the P,-'istani Air Force fighters which often interven::and posed a serious threat to the So,' :'bombers.

The aircraft flew from Soviet territory in srragroups: a f light of three or four or a squadron :eight to ten machines. Only experienced a ''

crews trained in formation flying were chos:-and the overall standard for aircraft comma-ders and navigators had to be no lower tia-Pilot 2nd Class.

A Tu-l6 drops a stick of bombs; the aircraftappears to be equipped with the SRS.I SIGINTsystem (note the small blister ahead of thebomb bay). Yefim Gordon archive

-3

J

-

IG

-t-*

t

L

112 Tupolev Tu-16

=:nbing operations over Afghan territoryr:': carried out by almost all air regiments:::'aiing the Tu- 1 6 in the European part of the

- :S3. The most active was the Belaya Tserkov':_: rent. The missions were flown from Central

-.. :r airfields, particularly from Maryy in Turk-

-:^ a and Karshi in Uzbekistan. From here the

:-:;,s made training flights over the desert and

--:::ised bombing with the aid of LORAN.

l:re of the biggest raids on the Mujahideen:a:e took place on 22nd April 1984. Twenty-":-- Tu-16KSR-2-5, each carrying either 40 or

-: =AB-250 HE bombs, took part in the raid.--: target was located in a mountain valley-::r Kandahar. Two squadrons from the regi-

-:.ri at Bobruisk and one squadron from the-=l ment at Belaya Tsekov' were involved; ihe. -::aft flew in echelon formation, one squad-

Tu-16 Operators Abroad

Xian H-6 Strategic Bomberln early 1956 a Sino-Soviet agreement was

reached for the licence production, with Soviet

assistance, of the lL-28 and Tu-16 bombers in

the People's Republic of China (PRC). The

licence agreement for manufacture of the

Tu-16 was signed in September 1957. Under

the terms of this, China received two produc-

tion Tu-16 bombers and a further aircraft in the

form of a completely knocked-down (CKD) kit,

essential for mastering the assembly of the first

examples, from plant No22 in Kazan'togetherwith the necessary technical documentation.

ln 1959 the decision was taken to begin

licence production on China, and in the same

year a large technical team left the USSR for

China to assist in setting up series production.

It remained in China until the autumn of 1960.

The Chinese allocated two factories in

Harbin and Xian (sometimes spelled Xi'an) for

Tu-16 production. ln May 1959 the assembly of

a Tu-16 from the parts supplied from Kazan'

began in Harbin (the Harbin factory received

assistance in the form of 200 qualified workers

seconded from the aircraft factory at Shenyang

which was producing MiG fighters under

'10794 Blue', a standard People's LiberationArmy Air Force nuclear-capable H-6A. Like thegenuine Tu-16A, it has a'nuclear'colour schemewith white undersurlaces, China Aircraft

',,ffiWffiTr,*;x,:*******r,- i

:- oehind the other. The first eight machines .

=-e led by Colonel Pachin, Commander of thei-.lin GvTBAP.

.i first it was planned to deliver the bombs-:'n an altitude of 6,000m, but the formation':/,'into cloud on approach to the target, which:'=ated the danger of collision since the aircraft'":'e flying in close formation. Under these::rditions, the group leader took the decision-: :iimb and the target was approached at an

:: iude between 8,700 and 9,500m. The lack of,

= bility meant that the bombing had to be car--:i out using LORAN. The first eight machinesr:re greeted with anti-aircraft fire, although:-:y were out of the air defences' range. The

::mbs dropped by the leading squadron neu-

:aiised the anti-aircraft defences, so that the::'rer two squadrons carried out their attack

-^molested. Gaps in the cloud showed explo-: cns testifying to the accuracy of the bombing.Jr average each squadron dropped 250

::mbs into an area measuring 200 by 300m.

After the Tu-16s had done their bit, the base

,ras hit by Sukhoi Su-24 tactical bombers and

S..:-25 ground attack aircraft. As the Tu-16,

:J-24 and Su-25 formations attacked from dif-

':r'ent directions, the raid was unofficially:rbbed a'star strike' (zvyozdnyy nalyot - an

: d term for such a tactic dating back to the late' 920s).

After their return to the airfield at Karshi, the-u-16KSR-2-5s were refuelled and rearmed,:nd a repeat raid was carried out four hours

ater. This time each group of aircraft had its:wn individual objectives in destroying the'emains of the Mujahideen gang who were flee-rg in all directions from the devastated area.

The bombs were dropped from between 1,500

and 2,000m with the enemy clearly visibleagainst the snowy background.

Postattack reconnaissance was made with:he assistance of the Tu-168; photographs

showed clearly that the air group had carriedcut their mission with distinction.

The Tu-l5 was built in China as the H-6. Here,lhree substantially complete H-6s share the finalassembly shop at Xian with two Y7H (licence-built Antonov An-26) transports' China Aircraft

Tupolev Tu-16 1 13

d$*i'rin'tr

:-*J1 -H#''*.o**.,

Above left: A pair of H-6As ('10897 Blue'and'10990 Blue') lly in echelon starboard tormationhigh above mainland China. The first two digitsof ihe serial may be a code denoting one ofChina's eight detence districts, the fourth digit isa unit code, while the third and fifth digits makeup the individual number ol the aircraft in theunit; thus, '10897 BIue' and '10990 Blue' are the87th and 90lh aircraft in their Heavy BomberDivision. Note the low-visibility presentation olihe 'stars and bars' national insignia, China Aircra:

Above right: More H-6As, including'50674 Blueoutline'and '50675 Blue outline', at a PLAAFbase; the low-visibility serials are noteworthy.The entrance hatches are kept open to save timein the event of a 'hot scramble'. China Aircraft

An impressive line-up of at least 17 PLAAFH-6As parked at a Chinese airbase, with a Y7Hin between. China Atrcraft

Two H-6As taxi out tor a sortie. China Aircraft

Photographs on the opposite page:

An H-6D at the factory airfield in Xian, with a Y7airliner (licence-built An-248) visible beyond.The two C-601 Silkworm ASMS are clearly visibleunder the wings. Note how much longer themissile pylons are than those of the Sovietmissile-toting versions, China Aircraft

An operational camouflaged H-6D with twoC-601 missiles. The missile pylons are nofbifurcated; quite simply, their leading edges arepainted green while the rest is left unpainted,creating this eerie impression. China Aircraft

An air-to-air view of an H-oD serialled'61225Blue outline', showing the characteristic tripletail surfaces of the C-601 missiles. lnterestingly.this one spons a'nuclear'colour scheme moretypical of the H-6A. China Aircraft

Bottom left: This factory-lresh H-6D displays anunusual dark green colour scheme intended tomake the aircraft less conspicuous over the sea.Note the non-standard aerial ahead of thellightdeck windscreen. China Aircraft

Bottom right: Another view ol the H-6D, showingto advantage the much-enlarged llat-bottomedradome. Jane's All the World's Aircraft

Fl+#d!"{6j#Jti;ikrt{r; r ' r

s +i$iiwffi!r@'{#,!#*i L ti,tffi4;jffidEF'dt I

*"ffirtr

trtA

lfiw

1.,,,,,,I

l:r',

l. 1

f ",'* *",L

t"E *iit r"

'l "1

ir

#ffi* {*,,

i;nr"11, i: r - l"4F"l'f_dtr ',fu.#

114 Tupolev Tu-16

f*** lq*s

l

l

*-'

Tupolev Tu-1 6

*,.il;s. .,"11 lriJ

licence). The first Chinese Tu-16 assembledfrom Soviet-supplied parts made its maidenflight on 27th September 1959 and was handedover to the People's Liberation Army Air Force(PLAAF, or Chung-kuo Shen Min Taie-Fang-

Tsun Pu-tai) that December.ln 1958 the large aircraft factory at Xian was

completed, and to assist in Tu-16 production

there 1,040 skilled technical and engineeringstaff and 1,697 other workers were transferredfrom Shenyang. ln 1961 the Chinese leaders

decided to concentrate all work on the licence-built Tu-16 at the Xian factory. The Chinesehave a habit of giving local designations to the

aircraft they build under licence, and the Tu-16

was known locally as the Hongzhaji-6 (Bomber

Type 6), often shortened to Hong-6 or H-6.

Even before production ofthe H-6 had been

fully implemented, the modification of a Tu-16

assembled from Soviet parts into a carrier forthe Chinese atomic bomb started at Xian. The

bomb bay and bomb release system were mod-ified, a thermal stabilisation system for nuclearweapons fitted in the bomb bay, and the neces-

sary monitoring and recording equipment fornuclear testing installed. To all intents and pur-

poses this aircraft was the counterpart of the

Soviet Tu-16A. On 14th May 1966 this aircraft

carried out the successful testing of the thirdChinese A-bomb over a range in western China.

Work on preparing the jigs for the series production of the H-6 began in 1964. ln 1966 the

first airframe assembled from Chinese parts and

intended for static tests was finished. On 24th

December 1 968 the first production H-6 bombercompletely built in China (with Chinese'Wopen-8' engines - licence-built versions of the SovieiRD-3M-500 with a take-off thrust of 9,520k91

made iis first flight. The crew were commandecby test-pilot Li Yu-Anui. After this, full-scale pro-

duction of the H-6 in China got under way.

The reason that it took so long to establish

the H-6 in production in China was a result of the

disorganisation of their aircraft industry causecby the spread of the Great Chinese CulturaRevolution. ln all, up to 1987, the London lnstr-

tute for Strategic Studies estimates that some-thing like 120 H-6 bombers in various versionswere built in China. The standard version was

an analogue of the Soviet Tu-1 64 and intendecto carry conventional and nuclear bombs.

H-6Aln 1970 work began on designing a new gener-

ation integrated navigational and bomb-aimingsystem for the H-6 with a high degree oiautomation. The system comprised an onboarccomputer, automatic plotter, Doppler navigational radar, a more developed autopilot and anew bomb-aiming radar.

Tests of the H-6A fitted with the new syster:were held betvveen 1 975 and 1 981 . The systen:

in many of its essentials, was based on Wester:components and whatever other parts wer=

available. Production of the new version with th:updated avionics began in 1982. The aircra:could carry conventional and nuclear bombs

-.. erryry; .**fr tu{l t

U

l1i:{

1 16 Tupolev Tu-16

A Chinese-built llatbed lorry with a crane tows a whole train of trailersloaded with general-purpose bombs due to be loaded in a squadronof H-6Es. '50778 Blue' wears the 'nuclear' colour scheme'

The H-6D missile strike aircraft evolved into the H-6H identifiable by

lhe ventral dielectric teardrop fairing alt of the bomb bay, probablyassociated with ECM. Here, H.6Hs are lined up at a PLANAF base; the

serials have been covered lor security reasons.

Close-up ol the rear luselages of three H-6Hs, showing the additionalradomes. The aircraft in the foreground is c/n 21O4O4' while the one

next in line appears to be c/n 210401' All China Aircraft

:holographs on the oppostte Page:

'61223 Blue outline', another H-6D in'nuclear'colours, makes a lowpass; the missiles are painted red, suggesting they are dummies orinert practice rounds' Curiously, the aircraft appears to lack delensivearmament, the usual positions ol the cannon turrets being faired over'

A line ol 13 H-6Es at a PLAAF base. Eight ol the aircraft wear an

overall bluish grey colour scheme (including'50679 Blue'which used

to be natural metal/white); the rest retain'nuclear'colours.'50777Blue' in the foreground is a bit 'unbuttoned' for maintenance.

'50679 Blue' is a modernised H'6E. Note the ECM antenna fairings at

the wingtips, All China Aircraft

r

liiln'iltiii',;li;

lltnolev lu-lo lll

lay mines and drop smoke markers. Most Chi-

nese bombers were produced in this version.

Reconnaissance and ECM VersionsAs in the USSR, recce and ECM versions were

developed from the basic H-6. Their precise

designations are still unknown, but they differexternally Jrom the bomber version in havingunderwing pylon-mounted pods (similar tothose on the Soviet Tu-1 6R)

H-6D Anti-Shipping Missile Carrierln 1975 work began on an anti-shipping version

of the H-6A armed with two underwing anti-

shipping missiles. The carrier, given the desig-nation H-6D (or H-6 lV), was equipped with amissile guidance system, an automatedonboard navigational system and a new sur-

veillance radar (type 245) in a much-enlargedflat-bottomed radome linked to the missileguidance system. The wings were strength-ened to carry the missiles which were sus-pended on pylons like those on the Tu-16R.

118 TupolevTu-16

The YJ-6L ASM (export designation C-601 ,

given the NATO codename Sl/kworm) wasdeveloped in the PRC from the Soviet P-15 anti-

shipping missile supplied to China at the end ofthe 1950s. The missile had a range of 120km

and a speed of Mach 0.8.

The first flight of the experimental H-6D tookplace on 29th August 1981 , with the first launch

of a YJ-61 following on 6th December. The testprogram for the aircraft and the ASM complexas a whole concluded at the end of 1983. ln

December 1985 the new anti-shipping complexentered service with the People's LiberationArmy Naval Air Force (PLANAF).

ln May 1985 the H-6D with its C-601 missileswas exhibited at the Paris Air Show.

Recently, the YJ-61 (C-601 ) has been replaced

by the more modern YJ 61 (C-61 1) which has a

range of 200km.

B-6D (Export Version of the H-6D)A version of the H-6D for export was designatedB-6D (B for bomber). Four were supplied to lraq.

'43595 Blue', an HY-6 refuelling tanker. sho r ! : tthe two podded hose drum units with lhe h:*-:deployed. The stripes on the wing undersic:near the HDUS are relerence markings for t-:pilot of the receiver aircraft, serving for cor:::alignment prior to contact, China Aircraft

A PLAAF Shenyang J-8D interceptor breakslormation with HY-6'43595 Blue'after a simu.::r:in-flight refuelling during an airshow. Chr= : ':'

Photographs on the opposite page:

Crews run towards their aircraft as a squadr: -

ol HY-6s prepares to scramble. This view shc r:well the tanker's redesigned nose with a wea:-'iradar mounted in front of the navigator's stat :iwhose glazing is reduced to a narrow ring oftransparencies, China Aircraft

A retouched photo showing an HY-6 refuellin-ctwo Shenyang J-8Ds at once, China Aircraft

This modilied H-6 serialled '086 Blue'was theChinese countelpart of the Tu-16LL testbeds.leaturing a very similar development engineinstallation in a hydraulically retractable pod i:the bomb bay. Note the sprinkler grid installecahead ot the engine for icing tests, China A,r:':'

This two-point tanker is believed to bedesignated H-6DU. The glazed nose and thedeep chin radome reveal its origins lrom theH-6D missile strike aircraft. China Aircraft

H-6E BomberThe H-6E is a modernised version of the H-:-with upgraded onboard equipment, up-grac::engines and a new ECM system. Externarl.

differs from the H-6A in lacking the latter's nc.=gun position and in its grey/sky-blue fir ,.-which makes it less visible from below.

H-6H Anti-Shipping Missile CarrierDeveloped from the H-6D, the H-6H differs frc-its predecessor in possessing a dielect' :teardrop fairing aft of the bomb bay. All defe'sive armament has been removed. lt seer:-.likely that the aircraft is provided with ne,',

equipment, in particular a modernised raca-

target detection and guidance system, and :new ECM set, the antenna for which is pos-tioned in the ventral blisterfairing. lt seems als:likely that its main armament is the new YJ-62

ASM with a 150-km range developed from th:YJ-6, using a global positioning system or Tt.

guidance. The H-6H and the H-6D are the

PLANAF's standard strike aircraft.

H-6H (Modernised Version)A video showing tests of a new ASM carrie:based on the H-6H was made public at Airshov'

China-2002 held at Zhuhai-Sanzao airport. This

development was characterised by four under-

wing pylons (two under each wing) with air-to-

surface or anti-shipping missiles. lt seems likely

that the new aircraft will be armed with the new

ASM in the YJ-B series similar to the US

AGIV-84E SLAM (Stand-off Land Attack Missile)

or AGM-142 Popeye missiles. lt is also Iikely tohave all-weather day/ni ght capability.

*qs.F;'

*,:{@

ho'

]r 'rlii,r,, 4

r'"" 1,,,';'1

"

t:

,

'*''l. lr,

, r,+-, ''

,"j.:i '

ar '\g

dF

14;a gi4.

*-#-{

F,'.-.-:

'ffiti';in,ffif+ dlit'

TupolevTu-16 119

;",iffrf* *

ilii I n(rq i.h ri,r€!

HY-6 (H-6U, HU-G) TankerThis two-point hose-and-drogue IFR tankerwas produced to extend the operation radius ofthe Shenyang J-8D interceptor. lt has some-times been referred to in the press as the H-6U

or HU-6. Apart from the podded hose drumunits (similar to the Flight Refuelling Mk32HDUs Jitted to the Vickers VCl0 C.1K), the HY-

6 can be identified by the redesigned nose sec-

tion with a conventionally mounted weather/navigation radar ahead of the navigator's sta-

tion which has a greatly reduced glazing area(the absence of the chin radome lends thetanker a certain similarlty to the Soviet Tu-161Lengine testbeds).

The first example was shown during the mil-

itary parade in Beijing on 1st October 1999.

Some sources date the first flight to 1990, andthe aircraft was first detected by an Americansurveillance satellite in 1996. lt is currently esti-

mated that ten examples of the HY-6 are basedon Laiyan AB in Guangzhou province. Their pri-

mary purpose seems to be the refuelling ofJ-BD interceptors over the South China Sea.

H-6DU TankerSome H-6D naval ASM carriers were convertedinto two-point hose-and-drogue tankers (provi-

sionally though to be designated H-6DU). Theycan be distinguished from the PLAAF's stan-

dard HY-6 tanker by the forward fuselageretaining a fully glazed navigator's station anddeep chin radome.

H-6 Reconnaissance VersionAt least one H-6 was converted into an ELINT

version with pylon-mounted underwing pods

similar to the SRS-3 pods of the Soviet Tu-16R

and a hemispherical dielectric blister ahead ofthe bomb bay. The exact designation is still

unknown at present.

H-6 Target Drone Carrier VersionThis is an H-6 bomber speclally modified tolaunch high-speed, high-altitude target drones.The exact designation is likewise unknown.

120 Tupolev Tu-16

Testbeds Based on the H-6

Some H-6 bombers have been refitted as test-

beds for aero engines and various other sys-

tems. One of these (serialled '086 Blue', later'86 Blue') was used to test a jet engine sus-pended beneath the fuselage, as on the SovietTu-1611. Unlike the latter type, the Chinesetestbed appeared to have an icing testfunction,with what looked like a water sprinkler grid

mounted a short way ahead of the develop-ment engine's air intake.

H-61 TestbedAnother propulsion testbed known as the H-61

has been fitted with four Rolls-Royce Spey non-afterburning turbofans. Two of these replacethe normal engines and a further two are

installed in pylon-mounted nacelles at abouthalf-span.

ln the 1970s and 1980s a few Chinese H-6s

either replaced or augmented the Tu-16 aircraftsupplied by the USSR to Egypt and lraq.

Like the Tu-16, the H-6 bomber has been

used in the PRC in various research and devel-opment work aimed at improving and develop-ing various forms of aviation technology. The

Chinese equivalent of the Soviet Lll has madeuse of several of these testbeds.

The H-6A and H-6D differ slightly from theSoviet Tu-16, as the comparative data belowshows:

Length of aircraft fuselage 34.8m 34.8m

Height of aircraft from runway 1 0.36m 1 0 36m

W ng span 34.1 9m 34,1 9m

Wrng Area 161.65m' 1 67,55m'

Weight of aircraft empty 37.729k9 38,530k9

lVax take-off weight 72,000k9 72,000k9

lVax speed with two C-601 SAMs 786km/h

Servrce ceiling 12,000m

Maximum range 4,300km

The second country to receive Tu-1 6 aircraft

from the USSR was lndonesia. ln the summerof 196.1 25 Tu-16KS missile strike aircraft (othe:

sources give 20 examples) were transferred tcthe lndonesian Air Force (AURI - Angkatar,

Udara Republik Indonesia) where they formecthe 41st and 42nd Squadrons based outsideDjakarta. During the conflict between lndone-sia and Malaysia these aircraft were used as a

display of lndonesian military might, makingincursions into Malaysian airspace near Singa-pore, although they were not used opera-

tionally. After the break between lndonesia anc

the USSR the Tu-16KSs sat parked for somstime, grounded for lack of spares. Whe:lndonesia acquired new Western air technol-ogy, they were scrapped. One example sur-vives as a museum exhibit.

In 1963 some 20 Tu-16KSs were supplied to th:Egyptian Air Force (al Quwwat aLJawwiya t -

Misriya) where they formed two squadronsThe aircrews were trained in the USSR an:Soviet specialists took part in their servic.induction in Egypt. ln June 1967, in the firs'

hours of the Six-Day War, they were destroye:by lsraeli aircraft on their airfields before the.could take part in military operations.

After the war, the USSR supplied the Egyc.

tians with about 20 further Tu-16KSR-2As ar:Tu- 1 6KSR-2-1 1 s, a stock of KSR-2 ASMs, se . .

eral Tu-16R reconnaissance aircraft with SRS--

and SRS-3 SIGINT kits and Tu-165PS ECM a '-

craft. Atotal of 25Tu-16swas delivered. Awh =

later, on 26th January 1966, the Soviet Coun:of Ministers authorised the delivery of s 'Tu-16T torpedo-bombers to Egypt. ln Septer-.ber 1967 aircrews of the Black Sea Fleet Nar:Air Arm ferried these machines to Cairo-We:'

H.6D

Opposit page: A poor-quality but interestingpicture of the highly modified H'61, showing theredesigned circular intakes in the wing rootsassociated with the installation of RR Speyturbofans and the podded installation of theouter Speys. China Aircraft

M 1618, one ol 25 Tu-16KS missile carriersdelivered to the lndonesian Air Force, with a lullcomplement of missiles and a sister ship visiblebeyond. The ZiS-150 lorry in the backgroundwas likewise Soviet-supplied. Yefim Gordon archive

Another lndonesian Air Force Tu-16KS; the lastfour digits of the c/n (6203404) are visible onthe lail, Yelim Gordon archive

An Egyptian Air Force Tu-16KSB'2 serialled4403; the serial is written in Arabic numerals onthe rear fuselage and the last two digits arerepeated in Roman numerals on the nose./el m Gordon archive

n\

i r,rii"i1l "'ri'lii1i

ilru .ia;rr 'i

ffi,*-f,r,lri

riF,,;tl

.isffi

Tupolev Tu-16 121

" S-k,-t-

#ts

sr. w$.

122 Tupolev Tu-16

A:other quasi-Egyptian Tu-16R (4376) - this::1e a more comprehensively equipped aircraft'Eaturing the SRS-'l and SRS.4 SIGINT packs -s inspected by a US Navy F-4 lrom a carrier:.eployed to the Mediterranean..:- ? , All the Woild s Aircraft

L384, another Soviet Navy Badger-F'rasquerading in Egyptian markings, llies aboveire Mediterranean. Jane's Allthe World's Atrcraft

:.381, one more quasi-Egyptian Tu.16R Badget'E,:anks away lrom its US Navy shadower...'? s Allthe World's Aircraft

:ictographs on the opposite Page:

4403, an Egyptian Air Force Tu.1 6KSR-2-1 1 ; notethe antenna array of the Ritsa radar homingsystem on the nose. Egyptian Badgers wore a

three-tone camoullage. Yetim Gordon archiveTop:

Another quasi-Egyptian Tu.16R (4376) - thistime a more comprehensively equipped aircraftleaturing the SRS-I and SRS.4 SIGINT packs -is inspected by a US Navy F-4 from a carrierdeployed to the Mediterranean.tane's Allthe World's Aircraft

Another Egyptian Tu-16KSR-2 serialled 4404;this one sports only the Arabic serial which iscarried on the nose rather than on the rearfuselage as is customary. Yefim Gordon archive

This allegedly Egyptian Tu-16R serialled 4378and equipped only with the SRS.I SIGINT Packis in fact an impostor - a Soviet Navy aircraft ontemporary deployment in Egypt. The EAF

roundels and fin llash were applied in order toavoid political complications but, unlike the EAF,

the Soviet Navy did not bother repainting theaircraft. Jane's Allthe World's Aircraft

&,;un

Tupolev Tu-16 123

illlffii

d'*tb%*.ft'

,, *",,.,,,.++ "m*r,,"

airfield where Egyptian crews were trainedunder the supervision of Soviet instructors.Hosni Mubarak, the future president of Egypt,

was taken for a flight in one of them. These air-

craft equipped two squadrons which took an

active part in operations during the Yom KippurWar of October 1973. ln the course of this 'sec-

ond round' of hostilities Egyptian Tu-'1 6 ASM

carriers launched some 25 missiles againstlsraeli targets on the Sinai Peninsula, destroy-ing two radar sites and a field supply depot. The

Tu-16R was also used for recce missionsMindful of the experience gained from the Six-

Day War, the Egyptian Tu-16 aircraft werebased on airfields south of Sinai beyond thereach of the lsraeli Defence Force/Air Force.

According to the Egyptians, their Tu-16 aircraftsuffered no losses - although the Israelis

claimed one destroyedAfter the break between Egypt and the USSR

in the spring of 1976, the Soviets cut off the sup-ply of spares for all the military equipment they

had provided. ln an endeavour to maintain theirmachines in operational condition, the Egyp-

tians turned to China. ln April 1976 an agree-

ment was signed between the two countries by

which the PRC furnished Egypt with spares fortheir H-6s. The Western press claimed thatChina acquired several examples of the latest

Soviet military technology in exchange, includ-ing a Mikoyan MiG-238N ground attack aircraft.

At the beginning of 1990 the Egyptian AirForce operated 16 examples of the Tu-16

which formed a bomber brigade based in thesouth of the country.

Above: Quasi-Egyptian Tu-16R Badger-F'4380'shows otf the SRS-3 SIGINT pods and thecamera port in the forward fuselage.Jane's All the World's Atrcraft

Below: An lraqi Air Force Tu-16 in flight.Examples delivered to the lraq wore thissand/green camouflage. Yefim Gordon archive

ln the 1970s, the lraqi Air Force (al Quwwat al-

Jawwiya al-lraqiya) acquired eight Tu-1 6KSR-2-

11s and some examples of the Tu-22 whicr-

were used to form two bomber squadronsThese aircraft were used during the lran-lracwar of 1980-BB to bomb lranian positions, as

well as military and civilian targets in lran. Irparticular, Tu-16KSR-2-1 1 aircraft bombecTeheran airport. The lraqi Tu-16 ASM carriers

also carried out several missile launches

against lranian objectives.Subsequently, lraq purchased four H-6D fror-

the PRC with a large number of C-601 ASMs

After the disintegration of the USSR, China suc'plied lraq wlth spares for its Tu-16 and H-6 flee:

At the outbreak of the Gulf War in 1991 virlu'ally all lraqi Tu-16s had come to the end of the -

service lives and were grounded. Some we:=

damaged in Allied air strikes and son'=

destroyed on the ground.

124 Tupolev Tu-16

Appendix

Foreachaircraft,theversionsaremarked'inorderofappearance'to show how this or that aircraft was converted in the course of its

serviceliJe.,Deceased'(thatis,crashed)examplesaremarkedwitht(RlPcrosses)followedbythedateandlocationoftheaccident;thelet-iers in parentheses following this mean 'fatal accident' (f) or 'non-fatal

accident'(nf),

Production List

-.-l6produciionispresentedinconstructionnumberorderforeachfac.rrr. with all identities worn consecutively by each aircraft. The four-digit

-urrbers given after a slash with the c/ns of some Kazan'-built aircraft

*e,e carrild on the tail below the c/n; the first digit is again the year of

-anufacture, followed by what is probably the sequence number of the

a-::aft built as a missile carrier.

|(aan' Aircraft Factory No 22

]--.:25Red.'c/n7'2'039'20=rnanufacturedinlg5T,planlNo22,Batch39.20thallclaftinthebalch

:n:Jation Version

ucEiTactical codel

Registratlon

Manufacture Notes

date'

Conslruction Velsion

nunbet

Iactical codel

Reghkalion

Manufaclure Notes

date'

{t::2:'){':::2

{t!4.3

r:!r:2]l

dc:.5

{r:-il1{c:t2

--lr:rl&-:r:r!5

J':.101$tt12{,:.103!:c+c4./:,.'.105

jr:i401

,-:'i502:2:0303

tr-]1504

::'11505

-l,su I

!::s602

!:,iJ603,_:0604

!,1060:

13$701

!2&702:2,10703

12!0704

'*l!ur200801

r200802

1200803

Tu-16

Tu-16

Tul6ATul6Tu-16A

TutGt::19

Tu-'16

Tu.16

Tu-16

Tu-16

li lu

tu-tbTu-16

Tu-16

Tu-16

Tu-16

'i lullTu-16

Tul6Tu-16

Tu-16

Tu-16

]i:lu^t.Tu-16

Tut6TTu-16A

Tul6Tul6ATu-16V

Tul6A

Tut6ATu-16A

Tu"16A

Tul6A

'i llATu-16A

Tu-16A

Tut6ATul6K-26Tu-16A

tY:luo.

TUtOA

Tul6ATul6A

no code

36 Black

no code

72 Red

44 Red

77 Red

71 Red {Ukraine AF)

72

?

29 Blue (Ukralne AF)

?

40 Red (Ukaine AF)

?-12-1953 203rdTBAP,Baranovichi;

?? TBAP, Kiev-BorisPol'

?-12.'1953 ??TBAP:

?? TBAP, Bagerovo AB

?-1I954 ?? TBAP;' ?? TBAP, Bagerovo AB

?-11954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichl

llllli il:191ldllo'r'illilllll'?-2-1954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichi

?-2-1954 402nd TBAP, Balbasovo AB

'| 6-41954 Balbasovo (l)

?-2-1954 402ndTBAP,BalbasovoAB;

GK NII WS

24-31954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichi;

402nd TBAP, Balbasovo AB

24:3:]e54 201dTBAP]Blrl:li:fl

?-3.1954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichi

?.3-1954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichi;

GK NII WS

?-4-1954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichi;

402nd TBAP, Balbasovo AB:

?? TBAP, Bagerovo ABI

Tupolev OKB/Kazan' btanch

?-4-1954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichi

?-4-1954

l't:'up'?-51954 ?? TBAP, Engels-2 AB

To plant No 1 as CKD kit

?-51954

?-51 954 Ll l, de'icing system testbed

?"5t954

?-6-1954

3-8-'954 p'ototype. Nll AV[,4F, Feodosiya


?-6-1954251stTBAP

1-7-1954 Tupolev OKBi

?? TBAP, Bagerovo AB;

To plant No 1 as CKD kit,

::::'l 18800!l

?-61954


25lStTBAP

?-61954 402nd TBAP, Balbasovo AB

?-7-1954 ?? TBAP, Kiev-Borispol'

?t-1e5: c:nvel:dtlTtl:16KS?

?-7.1954

?-7-1954 ?? TBAP, Kiev-BorisPol'

?-8-1954


?+1es4

?-8-1954

?-8-1954

?-8-1954

4200804 Tu'16A

| 4200805 TUIOA

i qzoosot Tu-16A

: 4200902 Tul6A. +zOosOS Tul6AI 42oo9o4 Tul6A| 4200905 Tu-16A

' +ZOtOOt Tu-16KS

| 4201002 Tu-16A

, tu'tOLt-

: qzotOOs Tu-16A

: 4201004 TUIOA

: Tu-16Kt116

: tu'tOf'2o: 42oioo5 Tul6A:

, +ZOttOt Tul6KS

| 4201102 Tu'16KS

: 4201103 Tut6A: qZOlOq Tu'16A

: +ZOllOS Tut6A,4201106 TuloKS: 4201107 Tu-16A

I +ZOttOg Tu-16A

,4201109 Tu-16A

: 4201110 Tut6A:.....: qZOtzol T!164: 42U2A2 TUIOA

, cZOlZOg Tu-16A

: qZOtZOq Tut6A: 4201205 Tu'16A

: 4201206 Tu'16A

: qZOlZOt Tul6A, 4201208 Tu-16A; [I-16?

: 42012A9 Tu-16A

. lZOtZtO Tu-16A:'.'..''.'..'..'''''''.., qZOtSO1 Tul6A| 4201302 Tu'16A

: qZOtSOg Tut6A, 5201304 Tu-16A

:5201305

i 5201306

' 5201307

: 5201308 Tu-16

:

i 5201oo9 Tu-16,Tu-16[.4

, 5201310 Tu-16, Tut6[/:'.'.',.'.'',.'.. szotqot, 5201402

:5201403

' SZO1qO+

, 5201405

: 5201406:. 5201407

: SZO1qOe Tul6,Tu'l6KSR'2'5: 5201409

: 5201410

?.8.1954

l' l: !. !Yli'i: lf] ',*11::1?.91954

?'9-1954

?'9-1954

?.9-1954

?-9-19s4

?.9-1954

? ?-11t954

02 Blue?-9-1954

?-9t954

53 Blue

?-10-1954

?-10-1954

?-1 0-1954

?1 1-1954

?t 1l 954

23 Red ?-10-1954

?.10.1954

?.10.1954

?-1 1-1954

?-1 1.1954

11Y:'!: (ulTll:oll I'I:llln

?-1 1 t95421 11954

?-12 1954n^ 1-1t-1Aql

?-12'1954?-12-1954

?-12-1954'14 Red? ?-12-1954

?,12.1954

?-12.1954

?-12-1954

?-12 1954

?-12t954?-12 1954

?-2-195s

?'21955

?-21955

65 Bed ?-2-1955'17 Red

t 15'21955 (nf) destroyed bY lre2601h TBAP, Str)ry

63 Red

70 Bed

17

07 Black

?-2-1955

"'1Y11?.2.1955

?-2-1955

?-2-1955

?.2-1955

?-2-1955

?.2.1955

?-2.1955

?.2.1955

?-2-1955

?-3-1955

Produciion standard lor 1955; Lll

Preserved Russlan AF l\,4useum,

lvlonino. now as '53 Red'

t 15-21955 Tartu (f)

251$ TBAP

[,4-16 may be c/n 8204208?

TupolevTu-16 125

Consfruction Yersion

numbet

factical codel

Registrction

Manufactwe Notes

date'

Conskuctlon Yersion

nunbetTacticalcodel Manulactwe Notes

Regisl/ation date

5201501

5201502

5201503 Tul6A

:1ol u:o

5201505

5201506

5201507

5201508

5201509

urll ul:

5201601

5201602

5201603

5201604 Tu-l6KSR-2?

5201605

5201606

5201607 Tut6A5201608

5201609

:1!lulo5201701

5201702

5201703

52017Q4

5201705

5201706

5201707

5201708

5201709

:i9r1lo

5201801

5201802

5201803

5201804 Tu-16A

5201805

5201806

5201807

5201808

5201809

::ol:l:5201901

5201902

5201903

5201904 Tu-l645201905

5201906

5201907 Tul6Tul6P Buket

5201908

5201909

:'ol:]:5202001

5202002

5202003

52A2QQ4

5202005

5202006

5202007

5202008 Tu.16A

Tul 6K-1 1-16

5202009 TuJ6Tul6Kl 1"1 6

5202010 Tul6ATu-16KSR-2?

l::l9KSR:':1

5202101 Tul6A5202102 Tul6A5202103 Tul6A5202104 Tul6A5202105 Tu-16A

5202106 Tu-16A

5202107 Tul6A5202108 Tul6A5202109 Tul6A

lio'lll Ii luo

5202201 Tu.16A

52022A2 Tu-16A

5202203 Tul6A5202204 Tul6A5202205 Tu-164

5202206 Tu-16A

5202207 Tu-16A

5202208 Tu.16A

5202209 Tut6A520221Q Tul6A

126 TupolevTu-16

?-3.1955

?-3-1955

?-3-1955

1rl*u?.3.1955

?-3.1955

?-3-195s

?-3-1955

?-31955

?3.19::

?-3-1955

?"3-1955 i 30'5-1957 (0

?-31955 Code'43Bed'is unconlirmed

?-3-1955

?-3-1955 1841hTBAP,Priluki.

17-8-1957 (0

?-4t955?-3-1955 order 684/1'

?-3-1955

?-3{955

?{-1e55

?-4-1955

?-4-1955

?-4-1955

?-4t955?.4-1955

?-4-1955

?.4t955?-4.1955

?-4-1955

?-4-1955

?-4-1955

?-4,1955

?-4t955?.5-1955

?-5-1955

?-5-1955

?-5-1955

?-5t955?-5

les:

?-5-1955

?.5.1955 i23-12-1958(0??-5-1955

?-5-1955

?-5.1955

?-5.1955

?-5-1955

?-5t955?.5-1955

l9illl olo'"9'il'l:19:l::T?l

?-6-1gss

?-6-1955

?-6t955?.6-1955

?-6-1955

?-6-1955

?-6-1955

?.6-1955

?-6t955

?.6.1955

?.6-1955

?.6-1955

?.6-1955

?-6-1955

?-6t955?-6-1955

?-7-1955

?-7-1955

?-71955

tr ln?l

?-7-1955

?-7.1955

?.7-1955

?-7-1955

?-7t955?.7-1955

?-7-1955

?-7-1955

?-7t955?.7-1955

5202301 Tul6A5202302 Tul6A5202303 Tul6A5202304 Tu-l6A

5202305 Tu-16A

5202306 Tu"16A

5202307 Tu-16A

5202308 Tul6A5202309 Tut6A5202?l: Tll6A

5202401 Tu-'16A

52A2402 Tu-16A

5202403 Tul6A5202404 Tul6A5202405 Tu-164

52024A0 Tul6A5202407 Tul6A5202408 Tu-16A

5202409 Tu-16A

ll9'1lo 't l9o

5202501 Tu.16A wth',EC[.4 tail'

Tu.16K-11-16

5202502 Tul6A5202503 TUJ6A

52Q25A4 Tul6A5202505 Tu-16A

5202506 Tu-l6At\,1-16

52A2507 Tu-16A

5202508 Tu.16A

5202509 Tul6A

:202:l: li:164

5202601 Tu-16A

5202602 Tu-16A

Tu-16P Buket

5202603 Tu-16A

5202604 Tu.16A

5202605 Tu-16A

5202606 Tul6A52Q2607 Tul6A5202608 Tu-16A

5202609 Tu-16A

5202610 Tu-l6A

5202611 Tu-16A

5202612 Tu.16A

5202613 TUIOA

52Q2614 Tut6ATul6KSR-2A

5202615 Tul6A5202616 Tu-16KS

52A267 TU-16KS

5212il8 Tu-16KS

5202619 Tu.16KS

lf9:u?l 'f l9l5202701 Tul6A5202702 Tu-16A

5202703 Tu-16A

52A2704 Tu-16A

5202705 Tu-16A

5202706 Tul6A5202707 Tul6A5202708 Tul6A52A2709 Tu-16A

52a2710 Tu-16A

5202711 Tu-16A

5202712 Tu-16A

5202713 Tut6A5202714 Tul6A5202715 Tul6A5202716 Tu-16KS

52A2717 Tu-16KS

5202718 Tu.16A

5202719 Tul6A

::0272: TY:]6A

5202801 Tu-16A

52A2802 Tu-16A

5202803 Tu-16A

5202804 Tu-16A

5202805 Tu.16A

5202806 Tul6A5202807 TUIOA

5202808 Tu-16A

5202809 Tu-16A

5202810 Tu-l64520281 1 Tu.1 6KS

5202812 Tul6KS5202813 Tu-16KS

?.7-1955 t 10-1-195i (r?

?-7-1S55

?-7-1955

?-8.1955

?.7.1955

?-7-1955

?-9-1955

?.8-1955

?.9-1955

'!lllu Il11n:l0?,9-1955

?-9.1955

?-9-1955

?-9-195s

?.91955?.9.1955

?-9-1955

?,9-1955

?.9.1955

tu lnl?

?-9'1955 SPS-I00 & SPS-s relit

?.9-1955

?-9-1955

?-9-195s

?,9-1955

?-9.1955

GK Nll WS/Akhtoobif sk

?-9-1955

?-9t955?.9.1955

tn lll .

?.9.1955

?-9-1955

?-9-1955

?.9t955?.91955?-9-1955

?-9-19s5

?-9-1955

?.9-1955

?-9-1955

?-9t955?-9t955?.9-1955

?-9-1955

?-10.1955

?.10-1955

?.10-1955

?-10-1955

?-10-1955

1 19 lntf?-10-1955

?-10-1955

?-10-1955 lS4thTBAP,Priluk.

t 1r4-1956 (0

?-10-1955

?-10,1955

?,10-1955

?.10-1955

?-10-1955

?t0t955?.10.1955

?-10-1955

?-10-1955

?-11-1955

?.1 1-1955

?-1 1-1955

?-10t 955

?-1 1 1955?.11-1955

?-1 1-'1955

I ll lnll?-1 1-1955

?-11t955

?-1 1t955?-11-1955

?-11-1955

?-1 1-1955

?-1 1-1955

?-1 1-1955 lSsthTBAP, Poltava.

t 26-7'1e56 {0?t 1t955?.11.1955

?-11-1955

?-1 1-1955

?t 1-1955

,? ui: .

21,43 Red

25 Blue

28 Red

15 Fed

94 Red

11 Red

19 Fed

13 Red?

21

23

52 Fed

66 Red

Ycrs,on Tacticalcodel Mandactue Notes

Regrstration datel

Conslructi'tn Yersion

nlnbetTacti@lco&l Manulactwe Notes

Regisllation date'

EII9ISPO

Tul6ATul64Tl}16A

T$16qTul6qTul6A

.tiluoTul6ATu16A

Tr!l6ATrl6ATul6AT$16A

Tul6KSR-2

Tu16P Rezeda

Itl6-3Tu-16A

Tu-16A

Tu16A

Tu-16A

T$16A

Tu-l6A

Tu-16A

Tu-16A

Tu-16A

Tl}16A

T$16A

Tu-16A

li:l91Tu-l6A

Tu-16K-26

TU.16A

Tul6ATu-16A

Tu-l6K-26P

Tu-16A

Tu-l64Tu-l6A

Tul6ATul6ATu-l64

Tu-16A

Tu-16A

Tu-16A

Tu-l6A

Tu-16A

Tu-16A

Tu-16A

Tu-16A

Tul0ATul6A

98101 Tu-16A

G102 Tu-16A

Tu-16K-26

Tu-16K'26PgBl03 Tu-164

98104 Tu-16A

98106 Tu-16A

98106 Tu-16A

Tu-16K- ..

38107 Tu-16A

3ts108 Tu-16A

3m109 Tu-164

ClB110 Tu-16KS

Tu-16K-11-16

Cts111 Tu-16KS

ets112 TuloKSTu-l 0K-1 1-1 6

Cm113 Tu-164

CG114 Tu-164

etsl15em116 Tu-16KS

CeG117 Tu-16KS

W118 Tu-16A

62ts119 Tu-10A

6203120 Tu-16A

6203121 Tu-16A

6200122 Tu-16A

6C00123 T!-16A

62$124 Tu-16A

W125 Tu-16KS

6m3126 Tu-16KS

W127 TutoKS

t 3-2-1e57 (q?

t 28-9-1 957 (0

GK NIIWs/Akhloobinsk

Conveded under EleKron B&D

programme

zmth TBAP, Bobruisk.

t 1c2-1956 (nf)

30th VA/ssth TBAD/3c0rd TBAP.

t 24+1 981 nr Zavitinsk (0 ,

collided rvith An-24P8

cccP-46653 (c/n 47309m4)

, turOKSR'2-5/RubinlN

' T!-l6Tsiklon-N

i Tul6Tsiklon-NM

: 6203204 TUIOA

i ozogzos Tu-16A

: 6203206 Tu'16A

i azggzot Tu-16A

: OZO3Z0S Tu-16A

i Tu-16KSR-2-5/Rubin-1N

i tu-toTsikton-N

: OZOSZOS Tu-16KS

i 6203210 Tu-16KS

: 62m211 Tu-16A

i 6203212 Tu-16A

?-5-1956

?-5"1956

?+1956

?-&1956

?-6.1956

?{-1956Tul6K-1 1n6?

?+1956 840th TBAP, Sol'tsy AB

t24.8r95i 0?.&1956

?.61956

?+1956?+1956

Tu-16K-1 1-16?

?-7-1956

?-7-1 956

?€-1956

?{-1956 ??TBAP,VozdvizhenkaAB

t 25-2-1957 (0

?+1956?.8r956?.7-1956

?.8.1956

?-7-1 956

?.7-1 956

?{.1956?.10-1956

?.8-1956

?-&1956?-1 1.1S56

?.8t956?-101956

?.1Gl956

?.1 1-1956

?.8-1 956 GIA Yegor'yevsk tec{ school

?-8-1956

ll IT?-8"1956

?-8-1956

?.9-1956

?-9-1 956

?-9.1956

?-8-1956 ??TBAP,VozdvizhenkaAB

t 31t-1e57 (0

?-$1956

?-9-1956

?.9r956?"9-1956

?-9.1956

?-9-1956

?.9-1956

?.9-1 956

?-1 0.1956

?-9-1956 ?? TBAP, Skomorokhi AB

I 2$5-1e58 (0?

?.1Gl956

?-9-1956

?-1 0-1 956

?-9-1956

?tGl956?.1 0-1 956

?-10-1956

?.11t956 t 1s3-19s8 (0

?-1 1-1956

?.1 1-1956

?-1 1t956?-1 2.1 956

?-t1-1956?.12-1956 ui

?.12-1955

?-1 2.1 955

?-12-1955 t 1041958 (0

?-t2-1955

?-12-1955

?-1 2.1 955

?-2.1956

?-1 -1 956

?-2-1956 t 1&1-1956 Kazanr

Borisoglebskoye (0

?-2.1 956

?-2-1956

11IT?-2.1 956.

?,2r956?-2-1956

?-2-1 956

?-12-1955

?-12-1955

?-12-1955

?.12-1955

?.12.1955

?-1 2.1 955

l_1?l*i?t2-1955?12-1955

?-121955

?-12-1955

?-1 2-1 955

?-12"1955

?.12-1955

?-12-1955

i ozmrze:6208129

:6203130

I

:.........., ozogzot

: 6203202

: 6203203

Tul6KSTu-16KSR-2

li l9lll i lTu-16KS

Tu-16KS

Tu-16A

CCCP42355 No l

cccP-42484

24 Red

85 Blue?

l7 Red/17 Black

25 Blue

16 Blu€

; 62m213: 62m214

i ozmzts

i 620s216

, 6N217: 62m218

i ozosztg: 6203220

: 6203221

, AZWZU.

i ozoszesi 6203n4: 6203225

: ozmzzoi 620,32ni 6203n8i ozuzzs: OemZgO

:..........i ozmgot

i oamsoz

i 620]303: 62m304

i ozossos: 62osgo6

Tu-l64Tu-l64

Tul6KS

Tu-16KS

Tu-16KS

Tu-16KS

Tu-16KS

Tu-l6KS

lilTl

Tu-16KS

Tu-loKS

Tu-16A

Tu-16KS

Tu-16KS

?.2t956?.?-1956

?.2-1 956

1-2-19ffi

?-2-1956

?-2-1956 260lhTBAP,Stryy.

t 2s7-1e56 {0?-2.1 956

?-2-1956

?.2-1 956

?.2-1956

?-2.1 956

?-3-1 956

?-3-1956

?-3t956?.3-1 956

?€-1956 2601h TBAP, Stryy.

1li l llll 11

?.3-1956

?-&1956

, OZOS3OZ

: ozoogoa 1

i Tu-16KSR-2-5

: 6200309

: ozogsto/60301 t: Tu-tsK-tt'tot:6203311

:6209312i oao$ts, 62m314: 6203315 Tu-16KS

i ezmsto Tu-16A

| 6zu317:6203318i ozmgts: 620S320

: 6203321

| 6203322

i szmgzg: 0200324

: 6203325

, OZOS3ZO

i 6zw3u: 6203328

| 62m329

! 6203330

86

EX6Br7

08

18 Blue

?.3-1 956

?.3-1 956

?-3.t956

?-3-1956

? (ATC callsign

CCCP-0751 4 which is

An-2TP c/n '1 G 15242)

?-4-'1956

?.3.1956

?.4-1956

?.$1956

?-5-1956

?.5-1956

?4.t956?4-1956 402nd TBAP, BalbasovoAB

t +7"1e57 (0

?.5-1 956

?+1956?{.t956?-5-1956

?.5-1 956

?.+1956 iS7-19s6(0?-$1956

?-5"1 956

?-5-1956

?-5"1956

?"5"1 956

?-5-1956

?-8-1956

: 6203401

: 6e$402: 6203403

' OZOgq04 Tu-16KS

i ozos+os

: 6203406

i 6203407

I OZOeqOe Tu-16A

:

: 6203409

:6203410

, ozmctt:6203412

Tu-16

Tu-l68

?-1 1-1956

?,12-1956

?12-1956

M 16... (lndonesian AD ?-12-1956

?12-1956

?.121956

?-12-1956

?-1 2-1 956 Black Sea Fleet, Gvatdeyskoye AB.

t 31{-1957 nrAnapa (0

?-12-1956

?-1 2-1 956

?.t2-t956?-12-1956

TupolevTu-16 127

Construction Version

nunberTaclical codel

Registrction

Manufaclurc Notesdatel

Conskuctlon Version

nunbetTacticalcodel Manufacturc Notes

Regiskation date

6203413

6203414

6203415 Tu-16

Tu-16KSR-2-5

6203416

6203417

6203418

7203419

7203420

7203421

72Q3422

7203423

7203424

7203425

7203426

7203427 Tul6KS?

7203428 Tu-16A

Tu-16N

7203429

1?9:1',0

7203501

7203502

7203503

7203504

7203505

7203506

72Q3507

i203508

7203509

7203510

7203511

7203512

7203513

7203514 Tu-16Awilh'EC[.4tall'

7203515

7203516

7203517

7203518

720351S

7203520

7203521

7203522

7203523

7203524 Tul6E7203525

72A3526

7203527

7203528

7203525

72:3:39

7203601

7203602

7203603

7203604

7203605

7203606

7203607

?-12-1 956

08 Black ?-12-1956

26 Blle ?-1-1957

?-12-1956

?-12-1956

?-12-1956

?.2-1957

?.2-1957

?-1-1957

?-1-1957

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?t.1957?-2-1957

l\4 1625 ?-2-1957

(lndonesian AF)?

02 Red '?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

'l-2-1957

?-21957

?-3-1957

1-2-1957

?-21957

?"2-1957

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?-3-19s7

?-3-1957

?-3-1957

?-3t957?-3-1957

?-3t957?-3t957?-3t957?-3t957?.3t957?,3-1957

?-3-'i957

?-4-1957

?-3-1957

1-4-1957

1-4-1957

1-4-1957

1-4-1957

?-4-1957

?.4-1957

t 12-2-1958 Ostrov AB {0

l\4arked 63427 on laill

t 13-1-1959 (0?

SPS-100 & SPS-s refit

Reinlorced engine nacelles

Rejnforced engine nacelles

Relnforced englne nacelles

t 10-8-1957 (0

prolotype

251$ TBAP

GK NIIWS/Akhtoobinsk

251stTBAP

t 8.8.1960 (fl

7203701

7203702

7203743

7203704

7203705

7203706

7203707

7203708

7203709

7203710

7203711

7203712

7203713

7203714

7203715

7203716

7203717

7203718

7203719

7203720

72A3721

7203722 Tu.16A

Tul6K-1 1-16

Tul6K-267203723

7203724

7203725 Tu-16K.16

7203726

7203727

7243728

7243729

'10:'::111:', 'l:lu*s7203801

7203802

7203803

7203804

7203805 Tul6Kl07203806 Tu-16Kt0

7203807

7203808

7203809

7203810 1

Tul6K-26720381 1

7203812

7203813

7203814

7203815

7203816

7203817

7203818

7203819/7163 Tu-16KS

Tu-16K-26

7203820/7164 Tul6KSTul6KSR-2

7203821

7203822

7203823

7203824

7203825

7203826

7203827

7203828

7203829 Tul6A[ur6(Z)?)tr9rT9

7203901

7243902

7203903

7203904

7203905

7203906

7203907 Tul6A

7203908

7203909

7203910

7203911

12Q3912

7203913

7203914

7203915

7203916

7203917

7203918

7203919

7 203920 17 1 82 Tul 6KSR-2-5

7203921

7203922

7203923

?-6-1957

?.6-1957

?-6-1957

?-6-1957

?-6-1957

?,6-1957

?-6-1957

?,8-1957

?,8-1957

?-71957

?-7-1957

i3 Red (Ukralne AR ?-71957?.8.1957

?.8-1957

?.7-1957

?.7-1957

?-7-1957

?-8-1957

?-8.1957

?-8.1957

?.9-1957

70 Red ?-8-1957

?-8-195i

07 Bed (Ukra ne AF) ?-8-1957

21 Black ?-8-1957

?-8-1957

?-8-1957

?,8-1957

?-8t95761 R:i ,-t

1?ll

?-8-1957

?-8-1957

?.8-1957

?,9-1957

no code ?-9-1957

no code: ?-12-1957

74Red??-9-1957

?-9-1957

?-9,1957

06 Red ?-9-1957

?-91957

?-9t957?.9.1957

?-9-1957

?-9-1957

?-9-1957

10 Red (UkaineAF) ?-9-1957

?-9,1957

24 Red ?-91957

65 Fed ?-9-1957

?,9t957?-9.1957

?-9-1957

?-9-1957

?-9.1957

?-10-1957

?-10-1957

?-10-1957

06Red(UkralneAFi ?10-1957

l i9 llll?t0-1957?-10.1957

07 Red (UkaineAF) ?-10-1957

?-1 01957

?-10t957?-12-1957

15 Black: ?10-1957

08 Fed (Uka ne AF)

26Blue(UkaineAF) ?10-1957?-10.1957

?-1 1-1957

1-12-1957

?-11-1957

?-10t95704 Bed (Ukra ne AF) ?-12-1957

?t 1-1957

?12-1957

?.11-1957

?-12-1957

1-12-1957

25 Red 2-12-1957

1-12-1957

?-12-1957

?-12-1957

251$ TBAP

WFU Kiev-Goslomel'

Firsl protolype

Second prototype

RBP-6 Lyustra & PFS-2 Argon-2

radars

WFU K ev-Gostomel'

25lStTBAP

251SI TBAP

?

251stTBAP

260th TBAP, Stryy

25lstTBAP

34 Red

30 Bed

Tu-16KSR-2

Tu-16K.26P

Tu-16KSR-2

?-4-1957

?-4-1957

?.4.1957

1-4-1957

71 Red ?-4-1957

?.4-1957

?.4-1957

49 Red ?-51957

49 Red

21 Blue (ukraine AF)

?-5-1957

?-5.1957

?-6t957?.5-1957

?-5t957?.5-1957

10 Bed

?.5.1957

32 Red ?-5-1957

?.5-1957

?-6-1957

?-5-1957

20 Red ?-6-1957

?-5-19s7

?-5-1957

?-6-1957

1 I Red (ukaine AF) ?-61 957

?-6t957?.6.1957

?-6-1957

?-6-1957

?-6-1957

?-6-1957

7203608/7124 Tu-l6KS

Tu-16KSR-2

7203609

72036r0

7203611

7203612

7203613

7203614 ?

Tu-16K-26

Tu-16K-26P

7203615

7203616 ?

Ml6 orb ta

7203617

/zuJot07203619

7203620 Tu-16K-26

7203621

7243622

7203623

7203624 Tul6ATu-16K.26 wilh ECM tall'

7203625

7203626

7203627

7203628

7203629

1i91u',o IY l9ll

128 TupolevTu-16

'order 476'

Tacticalcodel Manutacture Notes

Regislration datet

'l-12-1957

?-12t957

?-12-1957

?-12-1957

1-12-1937

?-12'1557

?-12-1957

?.12-1957

?-12-1 7

17 Red (ukraineAF) ?-12-1957

?-121957

18 Red (Ukraine AF) 1'12'1957

?-1 2''l 957

?-12-1957

?-1-1 958

06 Red

Consfuction Velsion

nunfp.t

Tactical codel

flegistration

Manufacture lvotes

datel

: 8zu213| 82U214

, AzuZtS

: 8204216

| 82M217

: 8204218

:8204219i 82Mn0| 8204?21i B2Mnz

Tu-l6P Buket

Tu-16K-10(Zq)

?-7-1 958

?-7,1 958

?-8-1958

?.12-1958

?-8t958?-8-1 958

?-8-1 958

?-9-t 958

?-91958?-12-1958

Tu-1 6 Yolka (ZA)

Tu-l6E Azaliya/'E0M tail' 69 Red

Tu-16K-10(ZA) 09

Tul6 Yolka

Tu-16P Buket

Tu-l6P Buket

Tul6K-10

08 Red

99 Red

54 Red

::t1ill

t $e1958 (nl)

251st TBAP

'order 476',; 251stTBAP

'order476'

'order 476'

I st production aircraft

GIA Kiev Air Force ln$itute

i 111-1960 (0

'order 261'

'order 226'

Lil

Consfuction Fuselage Yersion

nunb$ numbel

System 2: .15

Red', c/n 2.74.3.05.4 = Batch 74, manufactured in 1963, fifth aircraft in the batch; thefirstand lastdigih

are meaningless,

Tactical codel Manufacturc I'lotes

datet

Dl6 Tul6P Buket

Dr7II8ulr9EMIIPIIt@18191 Tu-16A

Tu-l 6K-1 1 ''t 6

Tu-16K'26

HgiEdPltt(PsEl(D6 ?, Tu'16KRM

WMIE{p8s{s) Tu'16K-10(ZA)

EM

5102 Tul6K-105103 Tut6K-10

5104 Tu-16K-10

5105 Tut6K-10

5201 Tu-16K'10

5202 Tu-16K-10

5203 Tu-16K'10

5204 Tu'16K-10

:39: I: lli ll5301 Tu"16K'10

5302 Tu''16K-10

5303 Tu-16K'10

5304 Tu'16K-10

5305 Tut6K'10

5401 Tu-16K'10

5402 Tul6K-105403 Tul6Kt05404 Tu'16K10

5405 Tu-16K'10

550'1 Tu-16K'10

?-?-1 961

?-$1961

?-9'1961

?-$1961

?-9-1 961

?-10-1961

?-10-1961

?-10-1961

?-10t961

?-10-1961

?-10-1961

?-1 1'1961

?-1 1-1961

?t1-1961?-1 1-1961

?-12-1961

04 Red (ukraine AF) ?-12n961

?.12-1961

?-12t961

I i? illl1-2-1962

1-2.1962

?-2-1962

1-2-19f,2

....?."..'.*.?.3-1962

2-2-'t9f,2

?.3-1962

1-2-1%2

?.3-1962

05 Blue

23 Bed;

90 Red

'16 Bed

?.+1958

?-1 -1 958

?.21958

?-1r958?.2t958?-2-1958

?-1.1 958

?-2-1958

?-3.1 958

?.2-1958

?-3-1 958

?-3-1958

?-2.1 958

?.2-1 95'8

?-2-1958

?.3-1958

?t.1958?.3-1958

?-3-1958

?.&1958

1:1*:?-3r958?-31958

?.12-1958

?4.1958

?-4-1958

?-4-1958

?4.1958

?-4-1958

?.4n958

?4.1958

?-4.1958

5101 Tu-16K-10(ZA) ?-6-1961: Damaged20€'196'llepaired

?-121961 andredelivered!

?-6-1961

?-7.1961

?-8-1961

'11"1?-8.1 961

?-8-1961 t 18.41956 Priluki

?-91961

?.8-1961

?-9-1961

!0{1ts Tu-16K-10(zA)

9x104Elxl05

Tu-1611gt{106gx'r07911108 Tu'16E

M-1S3

llxlB21t1110 Tu-16K'..

4fi111/8211 Tu-l6(2A)Tu-16KSR-2'5

Tu-l6KRM

e$l'12&04113

c01114ta04115

c04116c04117t2041 18

t2011 1 It204120

e04121w41nEA041 23

lflfr'.124E2041 25

82041m

w41278A04128

u041298204130 Tu-16P

: 2551023 5502 Tu-16K-10

: 5503 Tu'16K-10

i ssoq Tut6K'10

: ssos Tu-16K'10

:.......,..I seol Tu'16K'10

2561024 5602 Tu-16K10

5603 Tu'16K'10

5604 Tu-16K10

5605 Tu'16K'10

s701 Tu-16K-10

5702 Tu-16K-10

5703 Tu'l6K'10

5704 Tu-16K-10

5705 Tul6K-10

5801 Tu'16K10

5802 Tu-16K-10

5803 Tu'16K'10

5804 Tu-16K-10

5805 Tu'16K'10

?4.1958

?.4-1958

?4.1958

?.4-1958

?-5.1 958

?-4-1958 'ordor 226'

?-5.1 958

?-4t958?-5t958?.5r958?.5-1 958

?-5-1958

?-5-1958

?.5-1958

?-5-1958

?.&1958

?-5t958?+1958?.s1958

8204201

8'f/.2028204203

u042048204205

8204206

wml8e04208

820420S

8204210 Tu-16SPS

v042118m4212 Tu'16P Fikus

M.1G3

t sl 1 -1 360 Zyabrovka (0

GK NIWs/Akhtoobinsk

251st TBAP

t 1cl0-1959 (0

?-3-1962

?-31962

?-3-1962

?-3{962?-3-1962

?.4.1962

?-4-1962

?.4.1962

?-4-1962

?.+1962

?.+1962

?-5r962?.$1962

?-51962 Pacific Fleet t nr Khorol' AB

?.$1962

?.$1962

?-5-1962

?.s1962

?{-1962

?-G1962

?{-1958

?-6-1958

Iul6E Azaliya/'Ecltl tail' 90 Red ?-6-1958

M-1S2 77 Red (Russian AF)

?-6-1958

?+1958?-6-1958

?+1958?-s1958

?+1958

39 Red (Ukraine AF) ?-7-1958

?-7'1 958

80 Red ?-71958

5901

5902

5903

5904

:e05

6001

6002

6003

6004

6005

6101

61 02

6103

61 04

9i9:

6201

6202

6203

6204

6205

Tu-16K-10

Tu-1 6K-1 0

Tu-16K-10

Tu-16K-10

li ff llTu-16Ki0Tu-16K-10

Tu-16K-10

Tu-l6K-10

li lll llTu-16K-10

Tu-l 6K-1 0

Tu-16K-10

Tu-l6K-10

l: lli 19

Tu-16K-'10

Tu-l6K-10

Tu-16K-10

Tu-16Kt0

li llf ll

TupolevTu-16 129

Conshucron Fuse/age Version

nunber number

factical codel Manulactwe Notes

date'

Tactical codel Manufactwe Notes

dale'Constuction Fuse/age Version

nunber nunbet

4642012

4652012

4651034?

4652042

2743054

Tu-16K-10

Tul6K"10Tul6K-1 0

Tul6K-1 0

1: lll 19

Tu-16K-10

Tul6K-1 0

Tu"16K-10

Tul6K-1 0

1: lli llTu-16K-10

Tu-16K1 0

Tul6K-10 41 Red

Tul6K-1 0-26

Tul6Kl0

'f ll* 19

Tu-16K1 0

Tu-16K1 0

Tu-16K10

Tu-16K-1 0

T::]:K:]O

Tu-16Ki0Tu-16K-10

Tu-16K-10

Tu-1 6Kl0

'i ll* llTu-16K-10

Tu-16K-10

Tu-16K10

Tu-l6K-10

l"lu* lo

Tul6K-10Tut6K-1 0

TUJ6K-1 0

Tu-16K-10

ti:luo:19

Tul6K.1 0

Tul6K.1 0

Tul6K.1 0

Tu-16K1 0

ti l!* lo

Tu-1 6Kl0Tu-16K10

Tu-16K10

Tu-1 6Kt0

'i llf llTu-1 6Kl0Tu-16K-'10

Tu-16K10

Tul6Kl0T::l:1:l!

Tul6K-10Tul6K-1 0

Tu-16K-10

Tu-16K-10

l'- lll llTu-16K.10

Tul6K.1 0

Tu-16K1 0

Tu-16K1 0

Tu-1 6Kt0Tu-1 6Kl0D

'f ll^ ll 1?

Tu-16K-10

Tul 6Kl0Tu-16K10

Tu-16K10

I: lll llTu{6K-1 0

Tul6K-1 0

Tu-16K-10

Tul6K-1 0

'i lll llTu-16K-10

Tu-1 6Kl0Tu-16K-'10

Tu-1 6Kl0Tul6K-10

?"6-1962

?.6-1962

?,6t962?-7-1962

il '??,?-7-1962

?-7-1962

?-8t962?-81962

l l l9u?

?-8-1962

?-8-1962

?-8-1962 Flrst digii misslng on a rcrafl

?-8-1962

?.9-1962

?-9.1962

?-9-1962

?-9.1962

?-9.1962

?€:1e:2

?-9-1962

?-10-1962

?-10-1962

?-10-1962

I i9Tl??-10-1962

?.10-1962

?-10-'1962

?.11-1962

IitI???-12-1962

?t 11962

?-12-1962

?-121962

?-12-1962

?-12-1962

?-12-1962

?-12-1962

?-12-1962

1',^.',.*.',

?t.1963?tt963?.1-1963

t 1 l',u'

?-2-1963

?-2-1963

?-2-1963

I 1 1n9i

?-21963

?-31963

?,3t963?,3-1963

I l lnul

?-4-1963

?-4-1963

?-4-1963

?.s.1963

?-4t963?-5-1963

?-5-1963

?-6-1963

l' 119?

?-6"1963

?-6-1963

?-6.1963

?-6.1963

'l i?91

?.7-1963

?.7-1963

?.7-1963

?-7-1963

?-8t963

Tul6K-1 0

Tul6K-1 0

Tu-16K-10

Tul6K-1 0

'i lln llTu-16K-1 0

Tu-l6K-10"26 15 Bed

Tu-16K"10

Tu-16K-10

Tu-16K-10

':'l:1 lo

Tu-16K10

Tul6Kl0Tu.16Kl0Tul6K{0Tul 6K-10

6301

6302

6303

6304

ul9:

6401

64Q2

6403

6404

tii:6501

6502

6503

6504

u:lu

6601

6602

6603

6604

u9o:

6701

6702

6703

6704

:ro:6801

6802

6803

6804

:to:6901

6902

6903

6904

6905

7001

70Q2

7003

7044

1i9:

7101

7142

7103

7104

7105

7201

72Q2

7203

7204

!^:7301

7302

7303

7304

7305

7401

7402

74A3

74047405

7501

7502

7503

7504

7505

7601

7602

7603

7604

i905

7701

77Q2

7703

7704

7705

7801

7802

7803

7804

l9t:7901

7902

7903

7904

1'9:

8001

8002

8003

8004

8005

?.8.1963

?-8-1963

?-8-1963

?-9-1903

I l il9l?-10.1963

?-10-1963

?-10-1963

?-10-1963

?-11-1963

?-11-1963

?.'10.1 963

?-1 1.1963

?-12-1963

?-12-1 963

Kuibyshev Aircraft Factory No 1

'10 Red', c/n 1.88.1 1.10 = planl No 1, /zderye 88, Balch 1 1, 1oih aircraft in the batch

Consfruction Yersion

nunbetTacticalcodel Manulacturc Notes

Regrskalion date

1880001 Tu-16

Tu-16{Z)

l9lool' I1 19

1880101 Tul6

'i:19!111880201 Tul6

Tur6(Z)

l::::9' Ii:lu1880301 Tul6

Tu-16(4

1880302 Tul6Tul6B-1

lY t9l l1880401 Tu-16

1880402 Tu-16

1880403 Tu-16

Tu-1611

1880404

ll'910:1880501

1880502'1880503

1880504

l9l9:ou

1880601

1880602

1880603

1880604

t::::::1880701

1880702

1880i031880i04

] 88070.5

1880801

1880802

1880803 Tu-l6SPS

1880804

l9:9'9:1880901

1 880902

1 880903

1880904 Tut6SPS

I:o:9:1881001

1881002

1881003

1881004

1881005

?-1 0-1 954 Built from components of c/n

4200505i Tupolev oKB

' 1l lnll?.101954 TupolevOKB

l'lll''ili:9lb'd?-1 1-1954

GK NII WS

i'i ll,1?-12-1954

?-12-1954

Preserved Busslan AF Museum

?-12-1954

?121954 ??TBAP,Kiev-Borispol'

?-12-1954

Lll

?-2.1955

?21:::

1-2-1955

?-2-1955

?-2-1955

?-3-1955

?+le5l

?-3-1955

?-3-1955 ?? TBAP, oyaghilevo A8.

i 20-21 958 (0

?.3-1955

?-3t955?'3:1e:5

?-3-1955 lSsthTBAP,Poltava.

t?6"1956 (0

?,3-1955

?-3-1955

?-4-1955

?.+19::

?.4.1955

?-4-1 955 185th TBAP, Poltava.

t 1e-8-1e55 (0

?-4-1955

?-4t955tl nuu

?-51955

?.5t955?.5.1955

?-5-1955

l. llll?-5-1955

?-5-1955

?-5-1955


t 8-1 2-1959 (0?

?.6-1955

50 Red

57 Red, 24 Bed

76 B ack

01

14 Bed

09 Blue

130 Tupolev Tu-16

re lt.sronr-

Tactical codel

Begistration

Manufacture l'roles

datet

Corslruction Yetsion

nunhtTacticalcodel Manufaclure Noles

Reghtralion dater

rloliifilErr1@lD@ilriG!r]lEilr@,i]lcfi1Dil*'{t

Iit9lirli!!1!@I1IEIBili:lBItriE!II1E5nliFIIEEEf,r2F

!"1'lGlll Tu-'16

Tul6Gil(IP1lfiBil(D{

lfiF Tu-16SPS

Tun0P BukeV'ECM tail'

r-lim[rflI/lrfif,lrlS*r9'61{0tG1.&.tl16 Tu-16

Gr104Gr{051Gr161Gt107lGt1{BlGt{{B1G1410 TuloSPS

lYlillll

'10 Red

:1881803:1881804

, teStgOS

i 1881806

: 1881807

| 1881808

i testaog: 1881810

:............i teetgot:1881902:1881903: teet904

i 1881905

: 1881906

! 1881907

i testgog:1881909

:1881910:

,1882001:1882002

, tg8z00g, 1882004

:1882005! 1882006

i teszooz:1882008

:1882009i teozoto,1882011:1882012

, tagzots

:1882014:1882015: 1882016

: raszotrI 1882018

:1882019i tegzozo

?-6.1955

?.s1955 t 23-12-1958 {f)?

?.s1955

?-6-1955

?.61955

?+1955?+1955?-61955?.6-1955

?+1955

il?.7"1955

?.7-1955

?.7t955?-7r955?-7t955?.7-1955

?.7-1 955

?-7.1955

?.7-1955 t 15-71957 (0

1"1?ll ol'!l*:tfl':'b'T*

?.7t955

?-8r955?-7-1 955

?-91 955 GIA Kiev lnstitute of Civil Aviation

Engineers

?.7-1955

?.9t955?-9r955?-9r955?-9t955

:"i:::?-9-1955

?.9-1955

?.91955

?-8.1 955

?-9.1955

?-8-1955

?.9.1955

?.9.1 955

?-9"1955

?-9t955

t o to<<

?-9r955?.s-1955

?.8-1955

?-9.t955

?-8.1955

?.9-1955

?.9-1955

?.91955

l.l ilul?'9-1955

?-9r95s?-9-1 955

?-10.1955

?-t0-1955

?-1S1955

?-1 0.1 955

?-1 0-1 955

?-1G1955

11ir:T?n 1.'1955

?t 1r955?1G1955 tllfdthisdateasTu-16

?11-1955 MfdthisdateasTu-16SPS

?-1G1955 l,lfd this dale as Tu-16

?-11-1955 MldthisdateasTu-16SPS

?-1 0-1 955 iltfd this date as Tu-1 6

?-1 1-1955 Mfd this date as Tu-l6SPS

?-1S1955 MfdthisdateasTu-16

?-1 1"1955 ltlld this date as Tu-16SPS

?-1 0.1 955 [/ttd this date as Tu-1 6

?-11-1955 MfdthisdateasTu-loSPS

?-1G1955 MfdthisdateasTul6?-'1 11955 Mfd this date asTu-'16SPS

?10-1955 [4fd this date as Tu-16

?-11-1955 MfdthisdateasTul6SPS?-1G1955 MfdthisdateasTul6

ItilTt Yllit:glTl:l9lll?-1 t-1955

?.1 1-t955

?t 1-1955

?.1 1-1955

?.1 1-1955

?"1 1r95s?-1 2-1 955

?r2-1955?-12-1955 GKNllWSil*htoobinsk

t il llli?.12t955 t 13-3-1959 (0

?.12-1955

?.12-195s

?-12-1955

?"12-1955

?.12-1955

?.12-1955

?.12.1955

?.12.1955

Iti illi?-1 2.1955

?.12-1955

?.12-1955

?.12.1955

?-12.1955

?.12-1955

?.12-1955

?.12.1955

?-12-1955

?-2.1956

?.2-1956

?-2t956?-2-1956

?.2.1 956

?-2-1 956

?.?-1 956

?.2-1956

?-2.1956

?.2-1 956

Tul6R 12 Red

TUt6 46 Red

G|501iEt5g2irl503rGt504irl506fi506fi507'r[1508141509

*:191€81m1

1A16021881603

1S1604

161605

r881606

1881607

188t6081881609

*111881701

t8€1702

1881703

1881704

188t705

1881 706

1881707

1881708

1881709

1881710

1881801

1881802

Tu-16P

Tu-16Yolka

Tul6Tu-165PS

Tu-16

Tu-16SPS

Tu-16

Tu-165PS

Tu-l 6

Tu-16SPS

Tul6Tu-165PS

Tu-16

Tu-16SPS 40

M.1S1

Tu-16

Tu-163PS

Tu-l 6

Tu-16SPS

I t8822m

, ffizzoqi 1882205 Tu-16P Buket

i 1882206

: tggzzot:1882208

:1882209, tgazzto

| 1ffi2211. 1882212

:1882213

: 1882214

:1882215i tegzzto Tu.loEAzaliya: Tul6P Buket

: M.1G3

i ftazztti teszztg:1882219: 1882220

i':1882301: 1882302 Tu-16R

: ru-toNN:1882303i 1882304

i teezgos Tu-16RRomb

1-2-19fi?-2.'1 956

?.3-1956

?.3t956

?3r956?-3r956?.3-1956

?-3-1956

?-3.1956

?-3-1956

?.3-1956

?.3-1956

?-3-t956

?-3.t956

?-3.1956

?-3-1956

?.3n956

1 1 i?lr?-4r956?.4-1956

?4-1956?-4-1956

?-4-1956 Gate guard Shaikovka AB

?.r1956?-5.1956

?-5-1956

?-5-1 956

?.5n956

?.$1956

?.51956

?-91956 'ord€r'198'; '184th TBAP, Priluki. t17.8-1957 (0

?-9-1956 'order 198'

?-t1956?-5-1 956

?.r1956?-5.t956

?-5.1 956

1111"?.5-1 956

?-5.1 956

?-5.1956

?.5-1956

?+1956

TTl

cccP.Il5411

58 Red

42 Red

$ Red

34 Blue

10 Red

23 Blue

i 1882101

i teeztoe

:1882103:1882104:1882105

:1882106: 1882107

:1882108: taaztog| 1882110

:1882111| 1882112

:18S2113:1882114

:1882115: teeztt0: 182117:'1882118

, taSzttg:1882120:

, teSZaOt, 1882202

Tul6 Fonar'

Tu-16(4 26 Red

28:0l Red

61 Red

30 Blue?

41 Red/41 Blue

Tu-16

Tu-16N

TupolevTu-16 131

Corskucfion Yerslon

nunbetTactical codel

Registration

Manulactwe Notes

dete

Const/rclion Ve/sion

nunbetTactical codel Manufaclure Notes

Registration date'

1882306

1882307

1882309

188231 0'1882311

1 882312

1882313

1882314

Tu-l6Yolka

Tul6R?

09 Red

30 Red?

33 BlLre

45 Red

45 Blue

21 Blue

20 Red

1882315

1882316

188231 7

1882318

1882319

'991',:o1882401 Tu-16

Tu-16N

1882442

1882403

1882404

1882405 Tu-168

1 882406

1882407

1882408 Tu-l6SPS

Tu-16P Buket

1882409 Tu-16SPS

Tu-16P Fikus/'ECIV iail

1 882410

1882411 Tul6E1882412

1882413

1882414

1882415

1882416

1882417

1 882418

1882419

:882411 TY16.1

.

1882501

1882502

1882503 Tul6Tul6NTut6NN

1882504

1882505

1882506

1882507

1882508

1882509

1882510

todzci I

1882512

1882513

1882514

1882515 Tu-16E

1882516

188251 7

1 882518

1 882519

ti:::?o1882601

1882602'1882603

1882604

1882605

1882606

1882607

1882608

1882609

188261 0'1882611

1882612 TUJ6B?

1882613

1882614

1882615 Tul6SPS188261 6

1 882617

1882618

1882619

Iturl?9

1 882701

1882702

1882703

1882704

1882705

1882706

1882707

1882708

132 TupolevTu-16

?-5-1956

?-6-1956

?-6t956?-5-1956 t 6-10-1956 (0

?-6-1956 'order 198'

?-6.1956 i 3-7-1959 (0

lb- tvco

?-6t956?-6-1956

?-6-1956

?-8-1956

?-71956

?-6-1956

to- tYco

l 9 1nlu

?-7-1956

prototype

?,7-1956

1-l-tvio?-7-1956

!/. I 9)b

?-7-1956

?-71956

?-7-1956

?-7-1956

?-10t956

?.8-1956

?-8-1956

?-8t956?-8-1956

?.9-1956

?.8-1956

?-8-1956

?.8-1956

?-8-1956

lo.lnlu .

?-9-1956

?.9-1956

?-9-1956

?-9,19s6 I 14-10t959 (0

?.9.1956

?-9-1956

?-91956

?.10-1956

?-10-1956

?-10-1 956

?-10-1956

?-10-1956

?-10-1956

?-11-1956

?-10-1956

?-1 1-1956

?t0-1956

?.1'1-1956

?-10t956

?-11-1956

?t 1-1956

?.1 1-1956

?-12-1956

?-1 1-1956

?-12t956

?-1 1-1956

?"12-1956

?-12-1956

?-12-1956

?-12-1956

?-12.1956

?-r2.1956?-1 2t956?-12-1956

?-12-1S56

?.12.1956

?.12-1 956

?-12t 956

?-12-1956

?-1-1957

?-1-1957

?t-1 957

?.1-1957

?-1t957?.1-1957

?-1t957?t-1957?-1-1957 ??TBAP,Spassk-Dal'niy

i 21-21984 Spassk.Dal niy (0

1882709

1882710 Tu-16R

188271 1

1882712

1 882713

1882714

1882715

1882716

1882717

1882718

188271 I:88:l-'1?0

1882801 Tul6Tu-16(Z)

1882802

1882803

1882804'1882805

1882806

1882807

1882808

1882809

1882810

188281 1

'188281 2

1 882813

1882814

1882815

1882816

1882817

1882818

188281 9

]812820

1882901

1882902

1882903

1882904

1882905

1882906 Tu-16

Tu-16(Z)

1882907 Tu-16

Tu.16{Z)

1882908 Tu.16

Tu-16(Z)

1882909 Tul6Tul6(Z)

1882910

1882911

1882912

1882913

1882914

1882915

188291 6

1882917 Tu-l6Tu-16(Z)

1882918

1882919

tT:::9188300r

1883002

1883003

1883004

1883005 Tu"16

i Tu.16(Z)

| 1883006

: reegooz: 1883008

: 1883009

i raggotoI tB83o11

: 1883012 Tul6, futOlZl: 1883013

: 1883014 Tu-16R

: 1883015

I tegsoto: 1883017

: 1883018

: teegotg

: 1883020:-""'i rgestot Tu-16; T*16(2): 1883102

: 1883103

: tgestoq: 1883105

: 1883106I taggtoz

?,1"1S57

?t-1957?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?-2-1957 t 25-6.1957 (f)

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

1-2-1957

:"."?!?-21957

?.3-1957

?-3-1957

?-3.1957

?-4-1957

?-3-1957

?-3-1957

?-3-1957 Lll: testbed wth BD-3VR engi'es

?-3-1957 t 12-9t958 [,4igalovoAB (0

?-3-1957

?,3-1957

?-3-1957

?-3t957?-3t95i?-4-1957

?-4"1957

?-4-1957

?-4-1957

?-4-1957

:41e?7

?-41957

?-41957

?-41957

?-4-1957

?-4-1957

?-5-1957

?-5.1957

?-5t957

?-5-1957

?-5-1S57

1-4-1957

?-5t957?-51957

?-51957 i ?l 1-1957 (0 shot down by A :

Defence Force l\,4iG-1 I?.5-1957

?.5.1957

?-5-1957

?-6-1957

?-6-1957

in l'11

?-9-1957 Feinlorcedenginenacelles

?-6-1957 Reinforcedenginenacelles

?-6.1957 Reinlorcedenginenacelles

?- 1 1 t 957 Rei nlorced engi ne nacelles

?-6-1957 Re nforced englne nacelles

?-6-1957 Beinforcedenginenacelles

?-6-1957 Seinforcedenginenacelles

?-6-1957

?-6.1957

?-6,1957

?.6-1957'?.7-1957

Tu-16

Tu-16N

26 Bed

30 Black

33 Red

39 Blue

Gate guard Priluki AB

?-7-1957

?-7-1957

1-7-1957

?,7-1957

?-7-1957

?-7-1957

?-7-1957

':.-l.'.nu!

1-7-1957

?-7-1957

?-7-1957

?-7,1957

?-7-1957

?-8-1957

?-8.1957

Tactiaal codel

Reghtration

12 Red

Manufactute Notes

datet

: Construction Version

i nunbet

factcalcodel i,lanufacture lrotes

Fegrstration date'

50ned ?-8-1957 Pres Long-RangeAvialion

lVuseum, DYaghilevo AB

?-81957

?.81957

?-8-1957

?-8t957?{'19s7?-8-1957

?.8-1957

?-8.1 957

?-8-1957

?-8-1 957

?-8r957?-'1Gl957

?.10-1957

?.$1957

?-9.1 957

?.9-1957

?-9-1957

?.9t957?-9r957?-s1957

?-9r957?-9-1957

?.9-1 957

?-9-1957

?.1G1957

?-1S1957

?-1 0r 957

?r0-1957

?-10-1957

?-10-1957 t 13-10-1958 {0

:1883510

i re$vt Tu-16R(zA)/'EcMtail'

i tgs3srz Tu-16R

: 1883513

i 1883514

: te&5ts: 1883516

:1883517: tgosstg:1883519

:1883520

?-3-1 958

?-31958 SPS-100MMal'vajammel

Pres€rved Dyaghilevo AB

?-3-1958

?-3-1958

?-$1958?.3.1 958

?-3-1958

?-3-1958

?.3t958?-3r958?-3-1958

29 Red

04 Bed/04 Black

Tl}16

Tu-16P(ZA) Fikus

irr'lr,roo.oii**o

?-1 1-1957

?-1 1 -1 957

?.1 1-1957

?.1 1-1957

?-1 1.1957

?-1 1 -1957 GIA Kiev lnstitute of Civil Aviation

Engineers

?-1 1.1957

?.1 1t957?.1 1-1957

?-12-1957

?.12-1957

?-12-1957

:1883601

:1883602i ta$oos: teeeoOl: 1883605

, tgS3606 Tu-16Yolka

i Tu-16P(ZA) Buket

:1883607

: 1883608

, tgeg609 Tu-loEAzaliya: M-16-2

; 1883610

:1883611

:1883612:1883613

:1883614i teesots:1883616

:1883617i re$ote: i889619:1883620:......'i 1883701

:18€3702

: tge3zo3

rta$zoq

i

: 1883705

:

:1883706

:

:1883707

: 1883708

i teesros

I

:1883710

: te$nl

:1883712

i 1883713

:1883714:1883715

i te$zto:tA$zlz:1883718

:1883719: tgs3zzo

69 Bed

?4-1958

?-5-1958

?-5-1958 t 14'11-1960 (0

?-5-1958

?-5-1958

?'5'1 958

?'51958

?-5-1958

?'5'1958?.s-1958

18 Red (Ru$sian AR ?-2-'1959 GK Nll Ws/Akhtoobinsk

?.2-1959

?.2-1959

08Red(RussianAn ?-2-1959

?'21959

?3'1959

?.+1959

'16Red(RussianAF) ?-4-1959 GKNIIWs/Akhtoobinsk

?-5-1 958

?-519s9

10Red(RussianAR ?-5-1959 GKNIIWS/Akhtoobinsk

?-3r 958

?-4.t958?4.1958

?-4-1958

?.4-1958

?.4-1958

?.4-1958

?4t958?-4t958

22

-!1-B810Eti

-12-r3Er4Ersrer6El7

-r8-r9-3Il3p3B

?.10-1957

1'9:llll?-10-1957

?-1G1957

?-1 0-1 957

?.1G1957

?-1S1957

?-11r957

?-1 11957

?-1 1-1957

3XG

Tu-16R(ZA)

Tu-16R{ZA)

Tu-16RR(ZA)rc:lgr/re Tu-16SPS(ZA)

Tu-16R(ZA)

ttgpllB10 Tul6R3311tst2re13 Tu-16R(ZA)

!3311

G1s Tu-16R(ZA)

!3316 Tu-16fl

13317 Tu-16R(71)

f3318 Tu-16R

l(}19t3r0!3101!31{12G100 Tu{6R18404!3405G106{t3407u3408 Tu-16R(ZA)

1G409 Tu-16E

t3110 Tu-16SPS

Tu-l0R

rt341l14412r8413l!83414 Tu-16R(ZA)

1S3415It83416 Tu-16R(ZA)

Tu-16R8(ZA)

rE834'17

1883418

r88341 I1*11883501

1883502

18$5m1883504

1883505

1435061883507

1883508

r883509

Tu-16R(ZA)/'ECIV tail' 05 Blue

?-12-1957

?-12-1957

1-12-1957

?-12-1957

?-12-1957 Siren'jammet

?-12-1%7

?-12-1957

?-12-1957

?-12-1957

?-1 -1 958

?-1t958?-1 -1 958

?.1-1958

?-1.1 958

?-1-1958

?-1-1958

Tul6 Yolka

lrt6Tu-16Yolka

[/r6Tul6 Yolka

M.16

Tu-16 Yolka

Tu-16KRME

M.16

Tu-16 Yolka

M-16

Tul6YolkaM-16

Tu-16 Yolka

Mt6Tul 6 Yolka

M-16

Tu-16Yolka

M.16

Tu-16 Yolka

M-l6Tu-16Yolka

M-16

Tu-16 Yolka

M.16

Tu-16 Yolka

M.16

Tu-16K-10(ZA)

Tu-16K-10(zA)

Tu-16Kt0(ZA)

Tu-16K-10(ZA)

Tu-16K-10{ZA)

Tu-16K-10(zA)

Tu-16K10(ZA)

: 1883801 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

: tg$gOe Tu-16K'10(Zq)

: 1883803 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

: 1883804 Tu'16K-10(ZA)

: 1883805 Tu-16K-10(Zq)

:tAggg06 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

: 1883807 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

: 1883808 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

: tgS3g09 Tu-16K10(ZA): 1883810 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

: 1883811 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

, tA83ela Tu-16K'10(ZA)

: 1883813 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

: 1883814 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

: 1883815 Tul6K'10(ZA)

! 1883816 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

i 1883817 Tu.16K-10(ZA)

: 1883818 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

i reessrs Tut6K-10(zA): 1883820 Tul6K-10(ZA)

29 Red

30 Red

33 Blue

12 Bed, 39 Red

27 Blue, 28 Red

43 Red

87 Red

21 Black

28 Blue

35 Red, 23

23 Red

02 Rod

25 Red

22Blue

23

25

?-5r959

?-s1959

?.9-1959

?.1S1959

?-9.1959

?.1G1959

?.9-1959

?-1 0-1 959

?-10-1959

Tu-16R

03 Red

26 Black

44,41 Red

44 Red

26

?-1-1 958

?tt958?-1 -1 958

11I1?-2.1 958

?-2.1 958

?.2-1958

?-2-1 958

?-2.1958

?-2-1958

?"2-1 958

?-2-1958

?-2-1958

?-1 1-1959

?.1 1-1959

?.2-1960

?-1. t 960

?-1 1-1959

?.1 1-1959

?-1 1-1 959

?-11n959

?.12-1959

?-1-1960

?-12t959

?-12-1959

?-121959

?n-1960

?.1r960?.2,1 960

?-21960

?.2r960?-2-1 960

?-2.1 360

Tu-16R(ZA)

t2 Red

TupolevTu-l6 133

Construction Vercion

numbet

Tactical codel

Registration

Manufactwe Notesdatel

I Constuction Vercion

: numhet

Tactical codel Manufacture Notes

Reglskafion date'

Voronezh Aircraft Factory No 64

'35 Blue', c/n 7,4.02'1.04 = manufactured in l957, plant N064, Batch 21, foudh aircrali in the balch

1883901 Tul6K-10(ZA)

1883902 Tul6K-10(ZA)

1883903 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

1883904 Tut6K-10(ZA)

1883905 Tu-16K-10(ZA)'1883906 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

1883907 Tul6K-10(ZA)

1883908 TUJ6K-10(ZA)

1883909 Tu-l6K-10(ZA)

1883910 Tul6K-10(ZA)

1883911 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

1883912 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

1883913 Tu-i6K-10(ZA)

18839'14 Tu-16K10(ZA)

1883915 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

1883916 Tu-l6Kr0{ZA)

1883917 Tu-l6K10{ZA)

1883918 Tu-l6K10(ZA)

1883919 Tu-16K10(ZA)

lfll?'o lilu*19@J1884001 Tu-16K10(ZA)

1884002 Tu-16K10(ZA)

1884003 Tu-16K10(ZA)

1884004 Tul6Kl0(ZA)1884005 Tu.16K-10(ZA)

1884006 Tul6K-10(ZA)

1884007 Tut6K-10(ZA)

1884008 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

1884009 Tu-16K-10(ZA)

1884010 Tul6K-10(ZA)

1 88401 1 Tu-16Kr 0(ZA)

1884012 Tul6Kl0(ZA)

?-1"1960

?-1-1960

?-1-1960

?-1-1960

02 Red (Ukraine AF) ?-7-1960

?-7-1960

?-7-1960

?-3-1960

?-3-1960

?-4,1960

?-41960

?-3-1960

?"31960

?.3-1960

05 Red (Ukaine AF) ?-3-1960

?.3-1960

?.4.1960

?.4.1960

?-4-1960

?-4-1960

16 Bed ?-4-1960

?-4t960?-4-1960

?-5-1960

?-5-1960

?-5t960?-51960

?-5t960?.5-1960

?.6.1960

?-6.1960

?.6-1960

6400901 Tu-167

6400902 Tu-167

6400903 Tul6TTul6P Buket

6400904 Tul6Tul9olou

IY l9l6401001 Tul6T6401002 Tul6T6401003 Tul6T6401004 Tu-167

9i?t991 Ii lu'6401101 Tul66401 1 02 Tu-l 6

6401 1 03 Tu-l 6T

6401 1 04 Tu-1 6

9iol19' Ii lSl6401201 Tul66401202 Tu-16

6401203 Tul66401204 Tul66401205 Tu-16

6401206 Tut66401207 Tu-16

6401208 Tul6Tul6KSR-2-5

6401209 Tu-167

9i'1119 Ii t9I6401301 Tu-167

6401302 Tu-167

6401303 Tu-167

6401304 Tu-16

6401305 Tu-167

6401306 Tul66401307 Tul6T6401308 Tu-167

6401309 Tul6T

:iill9 lil'l6401401 Tu-16

Tu-1611

6401402 Tul66401403 Tul6

Tu-1611

6401404 Tu-16

6401405 Tu-16

6401406 Tu-16

6401407 Tu-16

6401408 Tul6Tul6LL

6401409 Tu-16

6401410 Tul6

. .. TI16fL

6401501 Tul6Tu-i6LL

6401502 Tul66401503 Tul6T6401504 Tu-167

6401505 Tu-167

6401506 Tu-167

6401507 T!-16

6401508 Tul66401509 Tul6

l'9llll Ii 19'

6401601 Tu-16

6401602 Tul66401603 Tul66401604 Tul66401605 Tul66401606 Tu-16

6401607 Tu-16

Tul6RT6401608 Tul66401609 Tut6

9'?tit9 Ii 19

6401701 Tul6T6401702 Tu-167

6401703 Tul6T6401704 Tu-167

6401705 Tu-167

6401706 Tu-167

Tu-16P Buket

6401707 Tu-167,401708

,401709

-401710

?-3-1956

?-3t956?-3-1956

Later used as testbed for RPZ-59

ECI\4 rockels

?-4t956t oln??

?-5-1956

?-5-1956

?-51956

?-5.1956

?-sl1e:6

?-5-1956

lc- tvco

?-5t956?.6.1e:6

?.6-1 956 I 1 1-12-1 956 (0

?-6t956?.6-1956

?-6-1956

?-6t956?-6-1956

?-6t956?-7-1956 GK Nll Ws/Akhtooblnsk

?-7-1956

?.7.19:6

?-7-1956

?-7t956?.8-1956

?-8-1956

?-8-1956

?-8-1956

?.8.1956

?-8-1956

?'8-1956 ??TBAP,SkomorokhiAB

t 27tr958 (0

?-9t956

?-8-1956

?-9.1956

?-9-1956 Lll

?-9-1956

?-9-1956

?-10-1956 Statlctestairlrame?-9-1956

?-10-1956 Lll

?-9-1956

?-10-1956 Lll

?.10.1956 Lll

?-10t 956

?t0t956?-12.1956

?-12-1956

?-1 0t956?t 1 t955?-10-1955

?-11-1955

l i?li??-1 1-1955

?t1.195s t 10-61957 (0

?,11.1955

?.12-1 955

?-1 1t955?t 1 t955?-12-1956

?-12t956?.12-1956

l1,Iuu. ... .

?t2-1956

?-12-1956

?-12-1956

?t2t 956

?t2t956?.'12-1956

?"12-1956

1-2-1957

?-2-1957

?.2-1957

?-5t955?-4-1955

l 1 illr

l'1lTlu?-8-1955

?-9-1955

?-8-1955

?,9-1955

tn,?11

?-9-1955

?-10.1955

?-9-1955

?t0-1955

Itf llti?.10-1955

?-11-1955

?-11-1955

?,1 2t955?-1 1t955

?-11-1955

?-12t 955

?-'12t 955

?-12t 955

I i' lnuf

?-12-1955

?.1 t956?-1.1956

?-1.1956

II illu?-2-1956

?-2-1956

?-2t956?-2t956

'1 1?ll

?.2t956?-2.1956

?-3-1956

?-3.1956

?-3.1956

12 Red

16 Red

14 8ed

01 Blue

03

no code

08

41 Blue

01 Red

32 Red

45 Blue

10 Red

Consfuctiorl Ve6ion

nunbetManulaclue Notesdate'

Tactical codel

Beglstration

5400001 Tut65400002 Tul6

loolo9' ]Y 19

uoo9l9l lY 19

5400201 Tu-167

5400202 Tu-16

5400203 Tu-16

5400204 Tu-16

l1991ol 'Y 19'

5400301 Tul65400302 Tul6T5400303 Tut6T5400304 Tu-167

li99'9u 'i lll5400401 Tul6T5400402 Tul6T5400403 Tu-167

5400404 Tu-167

5400405 ]::l9T

5400501 Tu-167

5400502 Tu-167

5400503 Tul6T5400504 Tu-167

lloouou li 19I

5400601 Tu-167-400602 Tu-167-400603 Tu-167-400604 Tu-167

olo9ll If 19'

-400701 Tul6T-400702 Tul6T-400703 Tu-167

6400704 Tu-167

9oo9'iu lf lul6400801 Tu-167

6400802 Tu-167

6400803 Tu-167

6400804 Tul6Tu1i9l9l

'i 19'

134 TupolevTu-16

21

Known Xian H-O Bombers:.-::-:::. VersJon Iaclicalcodel Manulacturc Notes

Registraflon date Conslruclion

nunbet

Yerslon

- :-

- :_:-_:--

'- :-f

- _ ::-- . :_:

--_' t:J

- . -.:--_ I-. . :::

Tr '1617A1

lu-lb{41---::,:: Tu-16(2A)- 'l'i T r1A/7A\-- -i-; Trr-1Al7A\--:::,:i Tu'16(ZA)--:.:,:: Tu-l6(Z4)

-.--'-r lU'10(4)

-._-r-J ru-r0(41T,, ta/7d\, u rv\s,

--:::2--::':3

--::':5--::'c6--'.2'47

-,: l0

-:'-2211

- !'-2212'.'_2213

'!'-'214- !'.22C5-:,12206

-::,2207

-1:2208

-,-:r1n

Gleaming with fresh paint' a recently overhauled Tu-l6K-26 taxies out past

several aoviet Air Force Antonov An-2TD utility biplanes and a single

Aeroflot An-2P. Yefim Gordon archive

35 Blue

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?-2-1957

?,3.1957

?-31957

?.3-1957

?.3-1957

?.3-1957

?-3-1957

?,4t957?-41957

1-4.1957 ?? TBAP, Sovetskaya Gavan'

t 29-11958 Sovetskaya Gavan'(0

?.4-1957

?-4-1957

?-4t957?-5,1957

?-519571-J.tYi/?-5r9:7

?.5-1957

?-5-1957

?.6r957?-6-1957

?-6,1957

?-61957?,6.1957

?-6.1957

?.7-1957

?.7-1957

?.8-1957 I $7-1959 (0

?&1957

?-9-1957

?-9t957?,9-1957

?-9t957?-9t957?-9.1957

?-10-1957

?-1 0.1957

?.10-1957

"'nl::1?.10-1957

1-121957

?-1 1-1957

?-11-1957

?-11-1957

?,11-1957

1-12-1957

?12-1957

1,12.1957

?-12.1957

086 B ue

10791 Blue

10792 Blue

10793 Blue?

10794 Blue

10795 Blue

10796 B ue

10797 Bhe

10798 B ue

10799 Blue?

10890 Blue

10891 Blle10892 Blue

10893 Blue?

10894 Blue?

10895 B ue

10896 Blue

10897 B ue

10898 Blue

10899 B ue?

10990 Blue

30119 Blue

30210 Bl!e3021 1 Blue

30212 Blue?

30213 Blue

30214 B ue?

30215 Blue?

30216 B ue?

30217 Blue?

30218 Blue

30219 Blue?

30310 Blue

43499 Blue

43590 Blue?

43591 B ue?

43592 Blue?

43593 Blue?

43594 Blue?

43595 Blue

50674 Elue oulline

50675 Blue oltllne50676 B ue?

50677 Blue?

50678 B ue

50679 Blue

50770 Blue?

50771 Blue?

50772 Blue

50773 Biue

50774 Blue?

50775 B ue

50776 Blue

: 50777 Blue

: 50778 Blue

, 61223 Blue outllne

i 61224 B ue outlife?: 61225 Blue outine

:1:1

210401

a4404

H.6

H-6A

H,6A

H,6A?

H.6A

H.6A

H.6A

H,64

H-6A

H.64?

H.6A

H.6A

H-6A

H.6A?

H-6A?

H.6A

H,6A

H-6A

H"64

H-6A?

H,64

H-6A

H.6A?

H.6A

H.6A?

H-64

H.6A?

H,6A?

H.6A?

H.64?

H-6A

H,6A?

H.6A

HY,6

HY-6?

HY-6?

HY,6?

HY.6?

HY.6?

HY.6

H,64

H.6A

H.6A?

H-6A?

H.6E

H,6E

H-6E?

H.6E?

H-6E

H.6E

H.6E?

H.6E

H-6E

H.6E

H.6E

H-6D

H.6D?

H-60

H-6H

H.6H

Engine testbedi later serialled '86 Blue'

Preserued PHAF Nluseum, Datangshan AB

Bluish grey c/s'Nucleal c/s, later b uish grey c/s

Nuclear'cis

Nuclear cis

Bluish grey c/s

Bluish grey c/s

Blu sh grey c/s

Nuclear c/s'Nucleal c/s, no cannon

'Nucleal c/s

ffi

#t-*4'ffi&'

TupolevTu-16 135

Tu-l6 Family Drawings

Port side view ol a standard Tu-16 bomber, This particular aircraft ('50 Fed"c/n 1880302) later became the Tu-16F-1 prototype and then the Tu-l6R'2.

The fuselage of a standard Tu-l6 bomber withthe wing and tailplane omitted lor clarity.

Schtncb sler lowe,a ae,a Ta bumpeletacled) Srk€camerapoil Land.!!h[ FBP4 Fub dy Fxed.annon

Front view of a standard Tu-16 bomber.

I 10

-

J

GK

Gb

b

FtrD

Cross-sections.

DA

D"

D"136 Tupolev Tu-l6

Upper view of a standard Tu-l6 bomber.

The'88'bomber prototyPe; note the main gear door design.

Tu-16A bomber.

Tupolev Tu-16 137

Lower view of a siandard Tu-l6 bomber,

Tu-16A equipped with an SPS-100 iammer.

Tu-16 Yolka ECM aircraft equipped with an SPS-100 iammer.

138 Tupolev Tu-16

The Tu-16KS prototype with KS-l missiles'

l6KSR-2 with KSR-2 missiles.

Tu-16KSR-2A'25 Blue' (c/n 5201604) with bomb adapters.

Tu-l6KSR-2'28 Red' (cln 52025011 retrolitted with SPS-100

and SPS-5 jammers.

;zo:l:u ;

The Tu-l6KSR-2 prototype ('49 Red').

Tupolev Tu-16 139

Tu-16K-11-16 with KSR-2 missiles.

Tu-l6K-26 '54 Red' (cln 82O4O221'A191') with KSR-s missiles.

Tu-16K-26'06 Red' (c/n 7203810) with RBP-6 Lyustra bomb-aimingradar and PRS-2 Argon-2 gun-laying radar.

16K-26 Badget-G Mod with Rubin-M radar.

The {irst prototype Tu-l6K-10 (c/n 7203805) with K-l0S missile.

14O TupolevTu-16

Tu-16K-10 with no missile.

Tu-16K-10 with SPS.100/SPS'5 jammers and K-10S missile'

Tu-16K-10-26 with K-IOS and KSB-s missiles'

Tu-16K-l0-268 with BD4-16-52 bomb racks.

Tu-l6 Yolka ECM aircraft ('09 Red', c/n 1882306).

Tupolev Tu-16 141

Tu-'l6E Azaliya ECM aircraft ('69 Red', cln 8204214) with rear fairing'

Tu-16G (Tu-lO4G) SSSR-L5411 (c/n 1881301).

Tu-16 Tsiklon-NM.

Tu.l6 de-icing system testbed ('44 Red" cln42OO4O4)'

-fr;-t= 1__

Tu-16'jump strut' testbed'

142 Tupolev Tu-16

Tu-16LL'01 Blue' (c/n 6401401) with unknown development engine'

Tu-16LL'10 Red' (c/n 1881110) with unknown development engine'

Tu-l6LL'41 Blue' (c/n 6401410) with unknown develoPment engine'

Tu-16LL,41 Blue'(c/n 6401410) with Lotarev D-36 development engine'

Tu-l6LL'02 Blue' (cln 42O1OO2) with unknown development engine'

TupolevTu-16 1€

Tu-1 6 missile guidance system testbed ('24 Red' , c/n 1 8801 01 ).

Tu-l6LL'02 Blue' (c/n 4201o02) with an L-39 tuselagewith Al-25TL engine in stowed position.

16LL '02 Blue' (c/n 42O1OO2) with the L-39 fuselage deployed.

Tu-1 6LL '1 0 Red' (c/n 1 881 1 1 0) with an L-39 fuselagewith Al-25TL engine in stowed position.

Tu-l6LL '02 Blue' (cln 42O1OO2) with a Yak-36M fuselagewith R27V-300/2 x RD36-35FVR engines.

I

i

I

l

l

144 Tupolev Tu-16

The Tu-l6 in Colour

: ght: Tu.16K-26'20 Red' (cln7203620) equippede/ith protective Siren' ECM gear sits atVladimirovka AB, the GK Nll WS facility inAkhtoobinsk in company with ECM-less sistership'14 Red' (c/n 6401208) and a lurther ECM-equipped example coded '17 Red'in 1993. Thenose sections have been covered withtarpaulins to protect the glazing and the dorsalturrets but the covers are 'gone with the wind'on the nearest aircraft, Yefim Gordon

-lwer right: A Tu-16 is refuelled for a sortie by aTZ-22 articulated luel bowser. fhe TZ-22 is aIate 1950s vintage KrAZ-258 6x6 tractor with a22,000.litre (4,840-lmp gal) tank semitrailer; thetwo-letter licence plate (10-16 ZhN) shows thisis a military vehicle, Yefim Gordon archive

Sliiom rlght: The Tu-16R-2 reconnaissanceprototype ('50 Red', c/n 1880302) on display atthe Central Russian Air Force Museum in Monino.The c/n has been obliterated by vigilant museumworkers. The free-fall bombs carried by theTu-l6 are arrayed next to the aircraft, with the9-ton (19,840-lb) FAB-9000 leftmost. Yefim Gordon

"f-,I.!S-b-$,

rll

'H,$t-l irl,'dr

*'4-r-

Below: The colour printing quality of Soviet-eramagazines was horrid, but the pictures could beinteresting for all that. Here the navigator/bomb-aimer of a Tu-I6 wearing the standard SovietZSh.7B'bone dome' helmet is pictured in hisworkstation, with the OPB-11R opticalbombsight in front of hitn, Aviatsiya i Kosmonavtika

Tupolev Tu-16 145

A Tu-16 Yolka ECM aircraft ('23 Blue', c/n1881605) and a Tu-15R conligured with SRS-1/SRS-4 SIGINT packs ('33 Blue', c/n 1882405) areprepared for a night sortie. No, the Tu-16 doesnot have airliner-style'tail logo illuminationlights' for visual identitication purposes; theeffect is created by floodlights on the verge ofthe parking area. Yefim Gorcion archive

tselorv ancj Boltom: Tu-16R'16 Red' (c/n 1883708),a GK Nll VVS aircraft, pictured at Akhtoobinsk in1993. The aircraft feaiures additional ECMantennas in pylon-rnounted pods on the sides ofthe nose. Yefrm Gcrclon

* "rs!h

ffisFe-

{

i

146 Tupolev Tu-16

-::.e eft and rlght: More views of Tu-16R '16 Red'

3 n 188370g)' showing the nose'mounted ECM

:ntenna pods. The large mainwheel well doors

: re presumably opened for maintenance:urposes; normally they open only when the

:nding gear is in transit. Yeflm Gordon

: -.-i: Tu.16R,12 Red'(c/n 1881809), one of

-.everal Badgels operated by GK Nll WS in the'990s, retained the nose cannon and featured

:ne ECM antenna on the port side of the nose'

:lus a flightdeck roof ECM blister. Yefim Gordon

:. l.r: Tu-16Rs'18 Red'(c/n 1883701) and'10?ed' (c/n 188371 1) were reportedly built as M-16

:3rget drones; according to other sources, they

-ltarted life as Tu-16 Yolka ECM aircralt' Here

:hey are seen at Vladimirovka AB, Akhtoobinsk'n 1992. Yefim Gordon

TLtpolev Tu-16 147

Top left and right: Tu-16R'12 Red' (c/n 1881809) at alater date; all armament hasbeen removed. Yelim Gordon

Above: A line-up of sevenTu-16s at Akhtoobinsk.Tu-16KSR-2-5'14 Red' (c/n6401208) in the foreground

I has been modified for some' sort of development work, as

evidenced by the non-standardaerials on the centre luselage.Yefim Gordon

Left: A prototype example ofthe KSR-2 anti-shippingmissile (cin 4750612) underthe port wing ol the lirstoperational Tu-1 6KSR-2s,'65 Red' (c I n 7 2O382O l'7 1 64').The red colour and thechequerboard markingsidentify the missile as aninstrumented test round.The dielectric radome hasbeen detached, €xposing the

I KS-PM terminal guidanceI radar. Note the manually] driu"n missile lifting hoist.

Tupolev JSC

148 Tupolev Tu 16

A blue-coded Tu'16K-11'16 moments before

:ouchdown. Yelim Gordon archive

A Tu-1 6KSR-2 at Akhtoobinsk in 1993 with every

:ngine cowling panel open for inspection'

='m Gordon

Tu-16K-26'53 Red' (c/n 4201004) at the Central

Russian Air Force Museum in Monino'Unlortunately the museum people have a habit

ol painting the exhibits in non'authentic colours{in order to fool gullible Western intelligenceagencies, no doubt); this aircraft was in realitycoded '53 Blue'. Yefim Gordon

A Kazan'-built Tu-'l6K'10 adorned with

the 'Excellent Aircraft' badge taxies at

Severomorsk-1 AB near Murmansk'refim Gordon archive

I

.*

Tupolev Tu-16 1 49

Above: Coded'17 Black'on the nose gear doors and'17 Red'on lhe tail'the Tu-l6P Rezeda ECM aircralt (cin 5202907) shows obvious signs otbeing converted from a Tu-16KSR-2; the missile pylons are still there.Yefim Gordon

Centre left and r ght: Three-quarters rear views of the Tu'16P Rezeda at

Akhtoobinsk in 1993, showing the UKhO ECM fairing supplanting the tailturret. This aircraft later underwent yet another conversion, ending itsdays as an M-16-3 target drone. Ye{im Gordon

Bottom lefi: Close-up of the tail unit and UKhO tail fairing of the Tu'16PBezeda. Note that the dielectric cap concealing the actual emitter antennais localed at the alt extremity of the fairing, unlike some other versionswhere two antennas were placed laterally. The c/n and tactical code have

been all but obliterated by the elements. Yef m Gordon

Bottom right: The nose of Tu-16K-26'20 Red' (cln7203620), showing theassorted electronic appendages the aircraft has gained in the course of itslong service career. The nose cannon is gone and its tairing is damaged'Yefim Gordon

I

-{i

*

\*\\

*"#.,trrtF

1 50 Tupole,,t Tu-16

: --:iri; Another view of Tu'16K'26zo n"O' 1"/n 7203620)" Yef m Gor.don

l: r'."r: Ttt-l5R'12 Red'(c/n1 881809) is readied for a test:rission at Akhtoobinsk in 1992'

Note the small fighter"type iet blast

Ceileclors at the edge of the flightiine. Yeiim Gordon

:::::rr l:fi arrd r ght: The same

3ircraft a year later. All almanrenthas been removed and the aircrafts earmarked for conversion as an

',1.16 target drone' YeJim Gorclon

-*ilp*

.a *,iib"

...

$,,'::.,j,:t.,::.li4t..,i.r i

e

1:'

./'

Tupolet,Tu ie i5

Close-up of the forward fuselage of Tu-16R

'12 Red' in 1992 (note that the cannon are stillin place). The hardstands at Akhtoobinsk areequipped with a centralised power supplysystem obviating the need for ground powerunits, and one ot the ground power outlets (thelittle pale green enclosure) is visible betweenthe aircraft and the other Tu-16 parked next to it.Yefim Gordon

Tu-l6R'18 Red'(c/n 1883701), pictured hereat Akhtoobinsk in 1993, features unusuallysmall ventral blister fairings of equal size. Thenose-mounted ECM antenna pods have beenremoved, leaving only the pylons. Yefim Gordon

Tu-16R'10 Red'(c/n 1883711) in 1993; theaircraft exhibils rather more wear and tear thana year earlier and the cannon are gone, Notethe two small blister fairings side by side inline with the engine nozzles (no commentsplease...). Yefirn Gordon

Ti,I **r.gh_r.*n *F

L#84'i\,'' ;

\gti-T-. t**

,€.IlU.il

\

h*:j.4nia*j*;sEA'

s.\

152 Tupolev Tu-16

*ril{1"-::'a +.e

,* 4?:?.:--

All of these Badgers eventually ended up asCrones and were shot down in the course of liver/eapons trials. Yefim Gordon

The forward luselage of Tu'16KSR-2'5 '14 Red'

tc n 64012OB); in addition to the dorsal aerials, Umore non-standard aerials ol the same type are

installed ventrally and on the sides ol theertreme nose. Yefim Gordon

Tu-16'15 Red' (cin 5202506) was another one ofGK Nll WS's testbeds, leaturing highly unusualf airings under lhe wings which resemble missilepylons at first glance. Quite possibly it was yetanother variation on the drone theme.leirm Gordon

,. ;, a

t"ryiI

i,4rl!r&

I UpOleV t LJ' t ta : j

$\

Acove: Close-up ol the underwingtairings on Tu-16'15 Red'(c/n5202506). The fairings featurehingecl access panels. Yefrm Gordon

Left and below: This M-16-2 droneat was converted from a Tu'16EAzaliya ECM aircralt with anUKhO tail fairing ('77 Bed"formerly '90 Bed', cln a2o42o3)'The characteristic forward andaft probe aerials of the radiocontrol syslem are clearly visible.Yefim Gordon

s

is"

n'aff

sr'?.

t,' 4i

154 Tupalev Tu-16

,&,.+#i

Above and right: Tu-16LL'41 Blue'

(c/n 6401410) languishes at

Zhukovskiy minus develoPmentengine in the early 1990s'

Yeiim Gordon

Tu-l6LL'05 Blue' (c/n 8204105) -also minus develoPment engine

and looking lor employment -at Zhukovskiy in 1 995'Yefim Gordon

Tu-16 Tsiklon-NM CGCP-42355 No 1

sits forlorn at Chkalovskaya AB on

15th August 1999 during that Year'sAviation DaY disPlaY.Mikhail Yevdokimov

Tupolev Tu'i 6

.

**q

\\

x*.*-***"r*fffi,&

Above and right: A retired Tu-16coded'29 Black'lies on thescrap dump at Ostrov AB, seatof the Russian Navy's 33rdcombat & ConversionTraining Centre. The airlramehas been dismembered intothree large portions andawaits lurther demolition.Victor Drushlyakov

Below: Stripped of all usableitems, Tu- 16 '69 Red' (c/n1883601) languishes on thescrap dump at ZhukovskiY inAugust 1995, with an equallydead Tu-22M2 visible beyond.Both aircraft were broken uP

by August 1999. Yefim Gordon

156 Tupolev Tu'16

..J lrt'-*g

f *.,:

'-

I

tl..:t

-laarft.,-:ul i i

-cove: Eight H'6As, including '30211 Blue', '30310 Blue' and

'30218 Blue', bask in the sun at a Chinese airbase, with two

more examples in a remote dispersal area visible beyond'

The aircralt wear low'visibility national insignia' Chtna Arrcraft

3ight: A squadron of H'6As taxies out during an exercise as

anolher squadron stands by, with a power cart in lront ol

each aircraft, The parking area in the background withindividual'parkways' makes an interesting comparison with

the'solid' apron in the foreground.China Aircraft

3eLow: The bomb bay ot an H-5A with free-lall high'explosivebombs suspended on cassette'type racks on the sidewalls'China Aircraft

- -'{..1S! r fl*

r{r r{rLr;ql,rr$--'

raqnr*.fi{'l*L

_,v*l

'* a<*Jt .: x'rlrt--*

.̂F-I

I rJ*r-

This H-6 represents an ELINT version with underwing pods and a hemispherical

dielectric blister ahead of the bomb bay. The pods are slightly smaller than those of the

SRs-3equippedTu.l6Randleatureasmallbulgeundertherearend.ChjnaAircrall

F,i

l--:

A trio of H-6As dropping HE bombs during anexercise. China Ai rcraft

An almost complete H-6D in the final assemblyshop of the Xian Aircraft Company, with asubstantially complete HY-6 tanker andfuselage/wing subassemblies for a third H-6 inthe background. The nose radome of the HY-6 isclearly visible but the navigator's stationwindows are papered over to preventscratching, creating the lalse impression of a

completely solid nose. Note how the enginehousings are built integrally with the innerwings. Note also the two Y7H (An-26) transportsat the lar end of the building. China Aircraft

A brand-new H-6D in green naval camouflage onthe Xian Aircralt Company apron, China Aircraft

1 58 Tupolev Tu-16

{r*;1";*..**

rr1re:

:cil air: TuJc Shenyang J'B IV lleai,.ry fish!c:'i.caeh cerrvinE tlrrec drop tanks and i.v,r'o Pl-'t !91-

homing AAtuls (a llcence 'built version of ihcScviet K-13A. itself a revers.'eng!neered A[\{'9Sidewinder), {ormatc vriih an HY'6 tanker.Cli[,a Aitcrafl

Tcp il!i.ri: Close-up of the KS'1 on ihe starbo:rdpylon of Tu-16KS'ffi 1625'. The nuntbcr 63427 i3

visible on the aircraft's tail: this nlight b3 :nabbreviated eln (62A3427) but. accoiciing icavailable 6ouises, the 27th aiicrsit :n Kazsl'l -

built Batch 34 was rnanufactured ln F3Drurry1957 ancl is cln72g3427l P.:- t-,. :- -

Above: !ndonesian Air Force Tu'16KS l'1 1625 -probably the last of 25 delive red - vriilr tr,'ro KS-1

rnissiles sits preserved ai Jakarta-Halim. A roofhas treen built over the aircraft io proieci it iromthe rain. Piiie l'Davisolr

Hi3ni: Tu-16KSR'2-1 1 "44a7' siiows thesand/green/brown camouf lage applie<j ioEgyptian Air Force Badge/s. The camoi:tl35cpattern looks almost decorative. FAfi i.

?

Tty:ci:., T:, ' i

We hope you enjoyed

lhis book. . .

lVlidland Publishing titles are edited

and designed by an experienced and

enthusiastic team of specialists.

Further titles are in preparati0n but we

always welcome ideas from authors or

readers for books they would like to seepublished.

ln addition, our associate, Midland

Counties Publications, ollers an

exceptionally wide range of aviation,

military, naval and transport books and

vide0s for sale by mail-order around

the world.

For a copy 0l the appropriate catalogue,

0r to 0rder further copies o{ this book,

and any of many other lvlidland

Publishing titles, please write,

telephone, fax or e-mail to:

Midland Counties Publications4 Watling Drive, Hinckley,Leics, LE10 3EY, England

Tel: (+44) 01455254450Fax: (+44) 01455233737E-mail: [email protected]

US distribution by Specialty Press -see page 2.

Red Star Volume 9

TUPOLEV Tu-160 BLACKJACKRussia's Answer to the B-1

t-.Yetim G0rd0n

How the Soviet Union's most polent

strategic bomber was designed, builtand put into service. C0mparison is

made between the Tu-1 60 and the

Sukhoi T-4 ('aircraft 1 00', a bomberwhich was ahead ol its time), the

variable-geometry'aircraft 200' -and the Myasishchev M-1 8 and M-20.

lncluded are copies of originalfactory drawings of the Tu-1 60, M-l B,

M-20 and several other intriguingprojects. Richly illustrated in colour,many shols taken at Engels.

Sbk, 280 x 21 5 mm, 1 28pp, 1 93 col &

b/w photos, dwgs, colour side views

1 85780 147 4 t18.99

Red Star volume 11

MYASISHCHEV M-4 and 3MThe First Soviet Strategic Jet Bomber

Yefim Gordon

The story oJ the Soviet Union's firstintercontinental jet bomber, the Sovietanswer to the Boeing B-52. The new

bomber had many innovative features(including a bicycle landing gea0 and

was created within an unprecedentedlyshod period 0f just one year; observers

were stunned when the aircraft was

formally unveiled at the 1953 l\4ay

Day parade. The IM-4 and the much-

improved 3M remained in service Ior40 years.

Softback, 280 x215 mm, 1 28 pages,

1 85 b/w, 1 4pp ol colour photographs,

plus line drawings1 85780 152 0 t18.S9

Red Star Volume 17EARLY SOVIET JET BOMBERSThe 1 940s and Early 1 950s

Yefim bordon

After WW2 the Soviet Union benef ited

from German technology and the men

behind it. Thus, the first jet bomber tofly in the USSR was the Junkers EF1 3 1 ,

followed by the EF1 40 and the equallyunusual T{ailed, bicycle-gear'aircraft1 50' lrom Brunolf Baade. The firstwholly indigenous Soviet jet bomberwas the lL-22 of 1 947. Otherexperimental llyushin bombers - thelL-30, lL-46 and lL-54 are described,as are the Tupolev'aircraft 77','aircrafr B2 and the 72l73l78 series.

Sbk, 280 x 215 mm, 128pp, 116 b/wphotos, 57 biw illustrations, 1 4pp dwgs

1 85780 181 4 t18.9S

AerofaxTUPOLEV Tu-134The USSR's Short-Range Jet Airliner

Dmitriy Komissarov

fre USSR'6 ShorlRango J€lAklin.t

The Tu-1 34 has seen passenger service

for 0ver 35 years in 42 countries. lts

multifarious other activities include VIP

transportation, support of Air Force,

Army and Navy headquarters and

research and test work. The type has

helped train th0usands ot military pilots

and navigators for the Soviet Air Forces'

tactical and long-range b0mber forces.

Compiled from lirst-hand Russian

sources, the book gives a full account

of the Tu-134 and the type's design,

tesl and operational hislory.

Sbk, 280 x 21 5 mm, 1 B4pp, 204 col,

95 b/w photos, Spp of drawings

1 85780 159 B f19.S9

AerofaxBELL BOEING V.22 OSPREYlvlulti-Service Tiltrotor

Bill Norton

AerofaxILYUSHIN IL-TA/2O/22A Versatile Turboprop Transport

Yefim Gordon and Dmitriy Komissarov

llyushin1L.18,1.201.22

AerofaxTUPOLEV Tu-95/Tu-142.BEAR'

irrir e oroon ino vrioirir nig;rnt

Y.tld Oordon.nd fr dlnr. ilgn.nl

During the 'Cold War' Tupolev's Tu-95'Beaf strategic bomber provided an awe-

some spectacle. lt was the mainstay ofthe USSR's strike force, a reliable and

adaptable weapons platform. Additi0nal

roles included electronic/photographicrec0nnaissance and maritime patrol,

AEW and command and control.

The author has had unparalleled

access to the Tupolev 0KB archives.

taking the lid off a story previously full

ol speculation to produce the most

comprehensive study to date.

Softback, 280 x 21 6 mm, 1 28 pagss

236b|w,24 col photos, 12 diagrams

1 85780 046 X t1 4.95

Bellv-22

BoeingOsprey

a V.rs.!le T!rboprop Tr.nspod

- >lr. l

-qrf€ -.

Iha-{xr IAilrNotton

-

/€!F\

This technol0gically challenging tiltrotorprolect established in 1 982. A transp0rtaircraft style fuselage, able to carry 24

troops, is topped by a wing with twoswivelling pods housing Rolls-Royce

engines, each driving three-bladedprop-r0t0rs, The USAF should receive

the CV-228 for special missions, the

US Marines the l\4V-228 assault

transports and the Navy the HV-228

CSAHifleet logistics versi0n, but theprogram suffered setbacks, with initial

0perating capability now set Jor 2005.

Softback, 280 x 215 mm, 1 28 pages.1

74 colour, 60 b/w photos, 33 dwgs1 8s780 165 2 t16.S9

The lL-1 B four-turboprop airliner firstflew in 1957 and was supplied t0 many'friendly nations' in Eastern Europe, Asia,

Africa, N4iddle East and the Caribbean,

Its uses included passenger and cargo,

VIP transp0rtation, supp0rt oi Antarctic

research stations, electronic espionage

and various research programmes, All

versions are described, as are many test

and development aircraft, the lL-20MELINT, lL-20RT space tracker, lL-22airborne command post, lL-24N for ice

reconnaissance and lL-38 ASW aircrafi

Softback, 280 x215 mm, 160 pages

1 84 b/w, 67 colour photos, 1 6pp dwgsI 85780 157 1 t1S.99

Tupolev Tu-134 Tupolev1:,:3""?*1f3:*B*?#'

Top: This Tu-16P Rezeda ECM alrcralt (c/n 5202907) showsobvlous signs of being converted from a Tu'16KSR-2; themissile pylons are still there. Yelim Gordon

Above: Tu-l6LL'01 Blue' (c/n 6401401) at zhukovskiy in1991. Yefim Gordon

Front cover illustration:

'06 Red', a Soviet Air Force Tu-l6KS' llies with a singleKS-i missile on the port pylon. The bright red colour of themisslle identifles it as an inert round. Av,atsiya i Kosmonavtika

ISBN 1-85780-177-6

ililrilililllilil1ililtilIllllg tt781g57rrg0 177111

usA $36.95 UK €19.99

Made in England